Strategic implications of Bangladesh's regime change

This is the first in a two-part series. Listen to part two here.

Transcript

Manjeet Kripalani: What led to Sheikh Hasina’s ouster?

Lt Gen S L Narasimhan: Most people are thinking the student protests that started in early-July was the reason for this. But my own reading is that this has been building over a period of time. The discontentment with Sheikh Hasina’s regime has been slowly building up and the students protest was the tipping point. I also base this on the fact that the Supreme Court overruled the reservation quota. So, it’s obvious that the protests aren’t the only reason. The irony is how the Sri Lanka ouster and the Bangladesh regime change are similar. The people went to the presidential palace in Sri Lanka and in Bangladesh, they went to the Ganabhaban. There is a lot of similarity. Notwithstanding that, the killing of 300 people in the protests is the tipping point. The army coming forward and saying no more lives will be lost is something we need to be looking at. The problem is that many of the senior leaders in the Awami League have been killed. So, it is going to take some more time for peace to return to Bangladesh because all these things have to settle down. The point here is that Sheikh Hasina’s regime has been running into trouble much earlier, the protests were the tipping point, and the army stepped in to relieve her of her prime ministership. That is one way to look at this

MK: What role did the army actually play? They’ve been very visible in the ouster.

SLN: Yes, it has been very visible. It appears that the Chief of Army Staff of the Bangladesh army was in the armed forces staff earlier in Sheikh Hasina’s administration. He did his staff college in Mirpur and his education in the UK. He seems to be a kind of moderate person, which is the feedback you’d get from this type of gentleman. The reason I think he stepped in is that, as he mentioned in his speech, the killings were getting out of hand and the repressive behaviour of the government was what motivated them to step in. This is what is being talked about. Now, we know that it is the army that requested Hasina to leave, she accepted the request and left. The army has also been talking to the president of Bangladesh. Today, I believe, they had a meeting with the student protestors in the president’s house and they agreed to appoint Muhammad Yunus as the interim government head. That process will take place soon. But many leaders of the Awami League have been killed. This is not going to settle down any time soon and it will take more time for things to stabilize. The interim government has its hands full. The army will give support to the interim government because it is at their behest they’ve been created. We’ll have to wait and see.

MK: Going forward, what can we expect from the army? Bangladesh has seen so much army rule. The problematic part of army rule is that you don’t get IMF funding.

SLN: Democratic governments will shy away from interacting with dictatorships. We have seen this kind of dictatorship in Pakistan, for many numbers of years. We’ve seen this kind of rule in Myanmar for the past three years. The army will not hold power because the interim government has been placed there. However, the army will keep a close watch on the functioning, and they will give whatever backing is needed by the interim government. That is how I believe the army will behave because Bangladesh, for all the economic growth it was projecting earlier, is now in trouble. The economy is not doing well, the garment industry is suffering. If they want to bring those problems up, then a dictatorship will not work. The army will therefore help the interim government to bring some semblance of law and order in the country.

MK: Given the bloodletting and revenge against the previous government, and we’re told, against Hindus and other minorities and even communists, the situation seems perilous, especially for India. What are the repercussions for India not just in terms of security but strategically because there are so many players?

SLN: One good thing Sheikh Hasina did for India during her tenure was the handover of many Northeastern insurgents back to India. They were all previously residing in Bangladesh. After he regime came into power, she handed over most of them back to India. Today, Northeast India is stable except for Manipur. That is a different issue but excluding Manipur the Northeast is by and large peaceful. This situation is what we need to be careful about. With the new regime coming into power, if some elements of insurgency move back to Bangladesh and start operating from there, then it will be a setback for us. Next is radicalism. There is a Jamaat which is operating and spreading its roots in Bangladesh. So, radicalism is also something we need to be aware about. The other thing is the safety of our Hindu minorities in Bangladesh, and they should have our support. The illegal migration of Rohingyas is also a problem because the issue of repatriation needs to be handled. In addition to that, if there is any influx of migrants from Bangladesh into India, it will be a problem. Our BSF guards have been on overwatch, but there have been instances of infiltration of Bangladesh into India and if that happens, it will create further problems for us. If there is any involvement of ISI or Pakistan in this whole thing, they will build up over time. We know that, earlier, ISI was active in Bangladesh and that is how in 2004 the arms were captured. If these issues are the ones going to trouble us, in addition to having, I wouldn’t say unfriendly regime, but a regime little reticent to us, then we will have to handle it strategically. We have already evacuated all non-essential staff from Dhaka. Only the high commissioner is there and a few other staff. Regional stability is also what we need to be looking into. SAARC Is not functional because of our issue with Pakistan. But, if Bangladesh leaves, SAARC will have an issue of surviving. Khaleda Zia said all decisions taken by Sheikh Hasina will be reviewed. But we don’t know which all decisions. For example, will it be our small amount of access and transportation that get stopped, we don’t know. At the moment, it is too early to predict anything. But a number of these issues affecting our security will need to be watched and I’m sure the government is doing it.

MK: The last question is what are the role of the great powers in what is happening in Bangladesh?

SLN: The U.S. and other countries criticised Sheikh Hasina for the fourth time since coming into power. Opposition parties boycotted the elections. We really don’t know if they had a role but there is a possibility. Not only the great powers, but I’m also sure many countries were looking at Bangladesh with a different view. We are not sure what happened behind the scenes. I don’t think we can rule out anything at this point of time, unless get some clear proof of what happened.

Lt Gen S L Narasimhan is the Adjunct Distinguished Fellow for China and National Security Studies at Gateway House.

Manjeet Kripalani is Executive Director, Gateway House.

Podcast produced by Charuta Ghadyalpatil.

This podcast was exclusively recorded for Gateway House: Indian Council on Global Relations. You can explore more exclusive content here.

Support our work here.

For permission to republish, please contact outreach@gatewayhouse.in