If there is anything crystal clear about the situation in Bangladesh, it is that the Muhammad Yunus government is unelected and brought to power undemocratically, with military support in a coup backed by the United States. This can be said without indulging in any whataboutery about the Hasina government. Even if Hasina is branded a dictator, nothing changes the fact that the Yunus government is illegitimate and unconstitutional.
According to the Bangladeshi Constitution, electing a new government must take place inside three months inside the fall of a government—three months that are long gone, since Hasina had stepped down on 5 August. Ever since Yunus has been installed in Dhaka by the Americans—he has the backing of Democrats such as Bill and Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama—there has been talk of reforming the electoral system and then holding election. But as it is becoming increasingly apparent, there is no deadline for reforming that system, notwithstanding Yunus’ vague promise of holding the elections perhaps towards the end of 2025 or 2026.
It’s possibly fearing rising criticism that the US has helped install an illegitimate government in Dhaka that the White House decided to speak with Yunus this week. However, the readout of the phone call between NSA Jake Sullivan and Yunus is hypocritical, because it mentions democracy, no sign of which is there in Bangladesh, and this in spite of the spin given about a students’ revolution unshackling the country from the grip of a dictator. “Sullivan re-iterated the United States’ support for a prosperous, stable, and democratic Bangladesh”, says the readout.
Unless of course it was a signal to Yunus that he should start the process of holding elections. Also significant was the mention of human rights in the readout: “Both leaders expressed their commitment to respecting and protecting the human rights of all people, regardless of religion.” It seems news about the widespread persecution of the minorities in Bangladesh has started trickling into the ears of even a tone deaf Biden White House.
However, given the Jamaat’s hold over the Yunus government, chances are some token directives will be passed off as ensuring the rights of minorities, but the persecution will continue—because such is the nature of the Jamaat and its allied groups As for the elections, moves are afoot to ensure that the Awami League is delegitimised and barred from participating in the elections, which will be terribly undemocratic if it materialises.
Amid this what is particularly concerning for India is the hostility of the Bangladesh government towards this country. In spite of constant provocation through word and deed by Bangladesh, India was gracious enough to send its foreign secretary, Vikram Misri, to speak to the Yunus government, including Yunus himself. The message was given that India was willing to work with Bangladesh to stabilise relations. But soon after Misri’s visit, Bangladesh named India as being involved “in Bangladesh’s system of enforced disappearances,” during Hasina’s rule—a case of casting baseless aspersions. Dhaka then followed it up with a note verbale—an unsigned diplomatic note—to India’s Ministry of External Affairs that Hasina should be handed over under an extradition treaty signed by the two countries in 2013.
Bangladesh knows full well that India will not hand over Hasina and that there are enough provisions in the 2013 treaty to overturn Dhaka’s request, including terminating the treaty by giving a notice through diplomatic channels. But in spite of that it decided to needle India. Bangladesh says Hasina will face a “fair trial” once she returns. But how can a country where there is a complete breakdown of the justice system, conduct a trial of a leader it has branded as a public enemy? What are the guarantees that Hasina would not face mob violence if she is sent back to Dhaka? Hasina has been India’s friend. What message will India give to the world if it does not stand by its friend?
The other matter that is worrying India is the rise of Islamist radicalism in Bangladesh—Islamists who are not only targeting the minorities but also doing a lot of sabre rattling against India. The threat of terrorism emanating from Bangladesh is real, given Yunus’ closeness to Pakistan and willingness to take a leaf out of Rawalpindi’s anti-India playbook. Yunus has released several anti-India terrorists whom Hasina had put in jail. There is speculation that Pakistan is transporting containers full of arms by ship to Bangladesh.
Additionally, there is the possibility of Bangladeshi Jamaat and other radicals activating the innumerable sleeper cells it has in this country to cause mayhem. In recent weeks, India has been witnessing several arrests of Bangladeshis with links to extremist groups. All this has the potential to make India’s eastern borders extremely volatile. So it’s time to read the riot act to Yunus, to remind him that a country surrounded on three sides by India, cannot afford to indulge in anti-India activities. He should be told that there are several means of bringing Bangladesh to its knees and any attempt to promote chaos in India will have serious consequences that may be difficult for his country to bear.
