Wednesday, November 13, 2013

Looking East, seriously

Judging from the recent stormy exchange between Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina and her predecessor Khaleda Zia there is little chance that the deep animus between the two will ever disappear. Ultimately, Khaleda Zia declined to attend the all-party meeting to discuss the arrangements for the next parliamentary elections nor agree to call off the hartal demanding a caretaker government for the elections. This hostility does not augur well for Bangladesh as it goes to polls early next year — and for India too, should Sheikh Hasina and her 14-party alliance lose. A Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) victory win would almost certainly mean a setback in India-Bangladesh relations.

Political Game: The hostility between Bangladesh PM Sheikh Hasina and her predecessor Khaleda Zia does not augur well for Bangladesh as it goes to polls early next year — and for India too, should Hasina and her 14-party alliance lose. File pic

The Awami League government has been far more understanding and co-operative with India’s security interests than the previous Khaleda Zia’s BNP-led right wing combine. Her government had refused to accept that there were camps of India’s North East insurgent groups like the United Liberation Front of Asom in Bangladesh. It was Sheikh Hasina in her second coming who showed courage, understood that harbouring terrorists and insurgents could hurt her own government and people, and therefore necessary for her government to put a stop to these unfriendly practices. Sheikh Hasina did not follow Khaleda Zia’s policy of trying to use India’s logistic vulnerability in the North East by trying to destabilise the region, with assistance from Pakistan.

Internally, Sheikh Hasina’s most significant achievement has been the strengthening of the judicial system in the country through the war criminal trials by collaborating with Pakistan in the Bangladesh war of independence including many Jamaat-e-Islami luminaries who had been sheltered by the BNP.
Hasina has pursued the trial of the killers of Sheikh Mujib ending in the death penalty to five conspirators. Finally, the Bangladesh courts have sentenced 152 soldiers and handed down life sentences to several others for their revolt against the BDR (since renamed Border Guard Bangladesh) in February 2009. The Jamaat-e-Islami has been declared ineligible for the next general elections by the Bangladesh Election Commission following a High Court decision that its registration was illegal.

Faced with several setbacks to its prospects and its ideology, the BNP and its allies which includes the fundamentalist conglomerate the Taliban-like Hefazat-e-Islam, have been leading a campaign of hartals in which at least 18 have died and scores injured. At the same time, despite an overwhelming majority in the last elections in 2008 the Hasina government has been subjected to allegations of incompetence and corruption. As against this, people have not forgotten the predatory corruption of the BNP regime, the anti-Hindu and Awami league campaigns of the BNP and thus fear retrogression to medieval practices should the BNP win the next elections.

Sheikh Hasina realises that pandering to the right wing and encouraging terrorism in the neighbourhood would lead to the kind of disaster that Pakistan faces today and that dealing with India would be beneficial for both countries. An effective judiciary and a disciplined uniformed force under civilian control have been her achievements. Surely, Indians would also realise that with Pakistan lurching towards instability and under increasing thrall of the fundamentalists, we cannot have another neighbour to our east with whom our land border is longer than even with China, similarly succumbing to fundamentalism and anti-India sentiments. Will we see renewed influx of refugees from the Awami League, both Hindus and Muslims, into states bordering Bangladesh? Will we see renewed attempts at fomenting insurgencies in India?

It is therefore in India’s national interest to ensure that there is a friendly stable government in Dhaka which is not swayed by fundamentalist interests. This is not to be done by engineering regime changes and clumsy internal interference. It had to be more subtle where friendship with India is seen as beneficial by the average person in Bangladesh.

Small steps like the proposal to sign the motor vehicles agreement are encouraging but bigger steps have to be taken by India. A deal on the Teesta Waters and the Land Border Agreement would have helped India Bangladesh relations but our compulsions of coalition and electoral interests of different political parties have prevented fruition of both. It may still not be too late to attempt something along these lines because a change of government in Dhaka may not be good news for New Delhi.

If we are prepared to make all sorts of concessions to Pakistan without awaiting action on terrorism, why are we hesitant to help Bangladesh? It is time our famous Look East policy looked at Bangladesh, seriously.

Source : Mid Day , 14th November 2013 

Wednesday, November 6, 2013

Nepal's democratic hopes, Indian and Chinese interests

Nepal’s efforts to establish a parliamentary democracy have had their difficult and almost hopeless phases for the last decade where political fault lines accentuated since the assassination of King Birendra. The country will hold elections on November 19 if all goes well.

There is still some bad news with threats of boycotts and an armed struggle by breakaway elements of the Maoist hardliner camps. In reality, these groups may just be hoping to scuttle the elections, and chances of political stability in Nepal remain low. Nepalese politicians, with some gentle nudges from India may be able to find their way but what should worry India is the growing presence of China in Nepal.


Between Borders: China and India signed an agreement on October 23 on border defence cooperation after a stand-off along their disputed frontier in April fuelled fears of conflict between the Asian giants. Pic/AFP
 
Chinese long-term planning for its periphery is different. In Nepal, it leaves the political wrangling and sorting out to India. Their suggestion to Nepal that it should consult India and rely on it for economic development is a smart move. Indian involvement, however restrained and subtle to the point of non-existence at times, gives India the role of a marriage counsellor where one of the two parties is always less happy than the other. The Chinese approach in Nepal is similar to theirs in Pakistan. It preserves its ‘higher than the mountains deeper than the oceans’ friendship with Pakistan by playing on that leadership’s fears of India, provides vital military and nuclear assistance and invests in infrastructure projects that benefit China first. The Chinese leave political wrangling and manoeuvring to the Americans who remain prime targets for Pakistani anger and perfidy despite all the assistance they give.

For the present, China may be unable to match India’s economic and political profile in Nepal. It will thus lie low as it gradually builds its capacities over the years. China thus concentrates on strengthening its strategic position by being equidistant from all parties and offering assistance for infrastructure and economic development of the country. China has now become a reliable partner in Nepal’s development, in the areas of infrastructure and human resources development, education, health and food assistance. Tourism and the volume of Nepal-China trade have grown along with the remarkably wide trade imbalance. China has sought to push its business and strategic interests by developing road networks across the Himalayas from Tibet.

China has also successfully sought a thrust towards India’s Gangetic heartland by pushing into Nepal. It took 22 years to construct the Qinghai-Lhasa railway, accompanied by massive infrastructure development in Tibet of highways, airports and military bases. Now China plans to extend the railway from Lhasa to Yadong and Zhangmu on two flanks of the Nepalese border after extending the rail link to Xigatse in Tibet close to the Nepal border. Nepal wants that this link be eventually connected to Lumbini on the Indian border. In response to this, India has proposed six rail links with Nepal in Birgunj, Biratnagar, Bardibas, Nautanwa, Nepalgunj and Kakarbhitta.

In addition to the Lhasa-Kathmandu road link, the Chinese have built a four-lane concrete highway through Eastern Nepal, terminating close to the Siliguri corridor. Nepal too has sought Chinese support to construct four highways on Nepal-China border. While the Indian requests for opening consulates at Biratgunj and Nepalgunj await Nepalese approval, the Chinese will open a consulate in Pokhara in exchange for a Nepalese consulate in Guangzhou. In exchange for all this, the Chinese have succeeded in a change in Nepalese policy towards Tibetans fleeing from Tibet. On a visit to China in July this year, the Nepalese Army Chief, General Gaurav Shamsher Rana, promised that Nepal would take strong action against any ‘anti-Chinese’ (short hand for Tibetan) activities in Nepal. China and Nepal agreed to widen their defence and security ties including training cooperation.

The Chinese have been establishing a number of private language institutions and one Confucius centre in Kathmandu University to “spread Chinese language and culture.” Apart from one such language centre in Pokhara, other centres are along the Nepal-India border

While the Chinese have kept us embroiled with their visa tactics in Arunachal, intrusions in Ladakh as part of an unsettled boundary issue, and nuclear plants to Pakistan they have long endeavoured to seek access and presence south of the Himalayas. They appear to be succeeding in Nepal. India and China signed various bilateral agreements during Prime Minister Man Mohan Singh’s recent visit to Beijing. This should not detract from the fact that an enhanced Chinese presence in Nepal will mean increased vulnerability of our northern states from Himachal to West Bengal.

Source : Mid Day , 31st October 2013