A policy of candour – Dhaka Tribune

Recently, a US congressman issued statements and letters citing concerns regarding Bangladesh’s election slated to occur in January of next year — exaggerating human rights issues in Dhaka and overblowing the political crisis that bogs the country. Bangladesh’s foreign minister, however, dispelled the misconceptions and clarified the stance to said congressman. This is a positive gesture, deviating from the tendencies of other countries who show knee-jerk reactions of rancour after sensitive measures by the US. 

In its relation to the US Bangladesh struck a policy of candor, owning up to its shortcomings, pointing out the lapses in US utterances and recognition of US policies in Bangladesh. This has been a welcome development in bilateral relations, one that has recently experienced much strain. Historically, the show of interference by the US in other countries has drawn reprisals and backlash, and has even driven wedges between the US and other countries. In stark contrast, Bangladesh chose not to burn diplomatic channels. 

The approach of Bangladesh inspires hope and sets a positive tenor for bilateral ties rather than resorting to denial and stubborn refusal. The smooth and honest communication between the two parties is welcoming, at a period when relations had gone downhill, misperception and non-communication can further cloud judgments and inject adversarial dynamics in bilateral relations.

Despite repeated hostile policy signals expressed by the US, Bangladesh remained stuck to its diplomatic guns and maintained diplomatic course and propriety in settling the sudden crisis situation in its deteriorating ties with the US.

In the traditional geo-political scene, when great powers pressure relatively smaller states, the latter pairs with the other power contenders and chalk strategies to undermine the ones who pressure. The instances abound in modern diplomatic history. For Bangladesh, the China linkage could be leveraged to temper US pressures. However, Bangladesh was consistent in its policy positions and did not embroil itself in the complexity of greater power struggles. 

At a period when the notion of a “geo-political swing state” prevails, Bangladesh is provided with myriad options to navigate the strategic hot waters allying with any particular power based on cost-benefit calculi. However, Bangladesh eschewed such swinging behaviour and maintained a measured distance from polarization in its external relations. In an international environment marked by complex polarization, when the pressure from a certain pole reaches a threshold level, Dhaka might be compelled to change course and might gear to other poles. 

In contrast, Bangladesh had been heedful of US suggestions and effected course corrections based on the inadequacies identified by the US. After the US imposed sanctions on Bangladesh’s Rapid Action Battalion, the country revamped the paramilitary organization and accusations against RAB, as a result, drastically dwindled. US Assistant Secretary of State Donald Lu, in his visit, appreciated the progress made by RAB for its compliance to human rights whilst discharging its duties. The US delegation also lauded corrective measures geared towards restoring the legitimacy of RAB.

This shows that Bangladesh follows US signals and unlike rogue regimes, Bangladesh does not fly into the face of the US’s admonishment.

However, sensitivity in bilateral relations is sorely lacking. Recently, six US congressmen railed against Bangladesh in stark terms while addressing US President Joe Biden in a joint letter. Fabrications and falsehoods were mixed with the apparent note of objectivity. The sensitive and emotive cards had been deliberately played out to put Bangladesh in an awkward position. 

The regime headed by Sheikh Hasina is deemed as more hospitable to minorities in Bangladesh — a fact evident from the secular credo laboriously promoted by the party in the struggle against radicalism. In Bangladesh, the religious balance is lopsided with Muslims remaining a disproportionate majority, and the tense relationship along religious lines in neighbouring countries was likely to spill over to Bangladesh.

However, while the religious right in Bangladesh pandered to majority religious sentiments to secure constituencies while inflaming religious tensions, the ruling government crushed such budding radical movements with unforgiving swiftness. In fact, Bangladesh has become the paradigm for other South Asian countries in managing religious rifts and curbing radical politics — notwithstanding the letter issued by the US congressmen, which cast Bangladesh in a negative light and assigned blame to the present regime for attacks against minority communities. 

The letter dispatched by the US congressmen holds the current Bangladeshi regime accountable for “persecuting” religious and ethnic minorities. Such statements have been rebuffed by religious minorities in Bangladesh. Civil society experts suggest that Bangladesh is the epitome of communal harmony — stating that minorities are no longer tortured and harassed in Bangladesh.

The US seems to play out the religious card to taint the image of the present regime — however, it appears as an ill-advised tactic as such strategies are based on scant political prudence. In South Asian geo-politics, the religion issue touches so many chords, but such ploys are relics of the colonial strategy of “divide-and-rule.” Such designs will fail miserably as the religious fabric of Bangladesh had never been as intact as it is now. 

As the stakes of bilateral ties between Bangladesh and the US are on a high note, despite bilateral diplomacy being in rough waters, lobbyist groups are incessantly peddling propaganda and serving the biddings of vested interests to sway the minds of US-based policy-makers. The misinformation fueled by the propaganda machines, if taken seriously by the policy-makers, can significantly deteriorate Bangladesh’s ties with the US. This would be at the detriment of both Bangladesh and the US. Besides, the utterances and statements coming from the US hold distinctive weight, thus such flagrant falsehoods packaged with the veneer of objectivity will erode trust. 

Nanziba Mahmood is a graduate of international studies, University of Delaware.