While nobody doubts Sheikh Hasina's commitment to halt the march of Islamism, one can’t afford to gloss over the Islamisation of Bangladesh. Sheikh Hasina has responded with a carrot and a stick, and the carrot should worry us
Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to Bangladesh can be called historic for more than one reason. If official visits were to be solely judged by the number of agreements, memoranda of understanding, declaratory statements and photo-ops, then every visit by the Prime Minister to a foreign land that is well-planned and well-rehearsed could be labelled as ‘historic’. Modi’s Bangladesh sojourn was no doubt marked by an extraordinary number of agreements, MOUs, declaratory statements and picture-perfect photo-ops, but that’s not the reason why it qualifies as ‘historic’.
This is not to suggest that the agreements and MOUs that were signed are insignificant or the declaratory statements were insincere. You can fake the smile and the handshake, but even the most consummate politician would find it tough to fake his or her body language. Both Modi and Sheikh Hasina oozed sincerity and their body language showed it. It was a meeting of friends, of like-minded friends, if I may posit.
As for the agreements and MOUs, and the eloquent joint statement, each of them is worthy of separate analysis. Collectively they define a new willingness and a keenness of intent to strategically raise the level of India’s engagement with Bangladesh and vice-versa. Good politics requires that Sheikh Hasina refrain from telling it as it is; had it not been so, she would have been unrestrained in pointing out the wasted decade of UPA rule when engagement was sporadic and responses episodic.
The land Boundary Agreement is easily the most important one in recent times. It has settled the unsettled bits of Partition. Modi has demonstrated enormous farsightedness and maturity by dropping the BJP’s political opposition to this agreement. linked to it is the shared agreement for better border management which, at the moment, leaves a lot to be desired. Human trafficking of women and children is one of the problems arising out of lax border management. The other is to do with crimes like cattle-smuggling.
There is also the problem, growing daily, of cross-border movement by criminals, especially thugs of the Jamaat and its offshoots who have set up and operate bomb factories this side of the Padma. Their deadly arsenal, of which we have had a glimpse in Burdwan district of West Bengal, is aimed at hobbling Sheikh Hasina’s Government as well as for creating communal discord in India.
That trafficking and smuggling happen despite the presence of our Border Security Force tells a disquieting story. It is our mess and we have to clean it. There is no percentage in blaming Bangladesh —either for illegal immigration or for human trafficking, or, for that matter, cattle-smuggling and the virtually unfettered movement of Jamaatis. Had our side been impenetrable, these issues would not have been relevant for debate or discussion.
What was most noticeable during Modi’s visit is that Sheikh Hasina, unlike in the past and definitely unlike Khaleda Zia when she was Prime Minister, did not speak in a measured voice. Nor did she cut deals away from public glare. It was not closet diplomacy we witnessed but robust engagement and unabashed acknowledgement of why India is special for Bangladesh. It would be difficult to recall the last time a Bangladeshi leader admitted, without bothering about ruffling the sentiments, such as they are, of ultra-nationalists and Islamists, India’s role in the 1971 liberation war.
Yet, there are issues that remain unaddressed and unresolved, issues that directly impinge on India-Bangladesh relations and mark the many creases in the fabric of friendship. For instance, the increasing attacks on Hindus and their temples by Islamic fanatics. The plight of Hindus in Bangladesh may not be as bad as that of Hindus in Pakistan, but unless the attacks are checked and stopped, there would be little to distinguish the fate ofkafirs in Pakistan from that in Bangladesh.
Nobody doubts Sheikh Hasina’s commitment to halt the march of Islamism and take the fight to the doors of the Jamaat-e-Islami and its many offshoots. The 1971 War Crimes Trial bears testimony to that. At the same time, no purpose would be served by glossing over the inexorable Islamisation of Bangladeshi society and polity. Sheikh Hasina has responded with both a carrot and a stick, but it is the carrot which should worry us.
There are enough reasons to believe that the Awami league regime, even while going after the Jamaatis and neo-Islamists who are perversely charmed by the hideous crimes of the Islamic State (a senior executive of Coca-Cola was recently arrested for preaching the gospel of hate penned by Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi and recruiting foot soldiers for the Caliphate) is not averse to the idea of shaping an Islamic identity for Bangladesh. Sheikh Mujibur Rahman’s Constitution was never restored.
The ghastly killing of three bloggers who were ‘punished’ for being atheists and their non-conformist views that harked back to the early days of newly-liberated Bangladesh underscores the reality that prevails today. Unfortunately, the Government’s response has left much to be desired. If death-threats by fanatics is a stark feature of life in Bangladesh, so also is the increasing adherence to the accoutrements of Islamism. Men have taken to sporting beards, women have started hiding behind burqas, and ‘Islamic music’ is seeking to replace Rabindrasangeet and Bangla band.
Just how far Bangladesh has moved away from its Bengali moorings and identity was reflected in the menu for the banquet hosted by Sheikh Hasina for Modi. Bengalis aware of Bangladesh’s rich cuisine, bothaamish and niraamish, and culinary heritage, would have baulked at the choice of food. Just when did Hyderabadi biriyani replace pulaoIJ
(The writer is a current affairs analyst based in NCR)