Through India's looking glass

The question, however, remains to be answered as to why should Bangladesh, surrounded on three sides by India and having a robust trade (both formal and informal) from Indian point of view, added with the fact that Indian intervention had hastened Bangladesh independence, would feel inclined to harm India and that too with the help of the bitterest erstwhile enemy?

In a speech last month to the French Institute for International Relations Indian Foreign Secretary speaking on terrorism said, " Virtually all our neighbours, by choice or by default, by acts of commission or omission, compulsions of geography or terrain, have been or are involved in receiving, sheltering, overlooking or tolerating terrorist activities from their soil directed against India". Given the centrality of terrorism in the international matrix of the day, one would have looked forward to some explanation of the alleged enmity, either wittingly or unwittingly, towards India by all her neighbours. After all none of the surrounding states are failing or failed states though each has her own unique domestic difficulties which but for Pakistan should not have external dimension. Relating to Bangladesh he alleged that the country " has long been used as a sanctuary for insurgent groups engaged in violence against India, especially in the North East. Bangladesh effectively refuses to recognize that this problem exists, as some lobbies in that country want to use it as a pressure group". A few days back Chief Minister of Tripura said that his government had definite information, which has been corroborated by reports from Delhi of the existence of fifty-one anti-India bases in Bangladesh funded by Inter Services Intelligence (ISI). Since it is an inter-state matter he has requested Delhi to take up the matter with Bangladesh in order to dismantle these "anti-Indian terrorist infrastructures" through joint operations. He, however, admitted that immediately after October general elections in Bangladesh some opposition politicians who also allegedly were criminals had taken refuge in Tripura and have now vanished from his state. The significance of this statement is to display the porosity of Bangladesh-Tripura border as Tripura is hemmed on three sides by Bangladesh. The added significance of this statement is that it is a reiteration of the same allegation made earlier by Home Minister L.K.Advani, Foreign Minister Jaswant Sinha and former West Bengal Chief Minister Joyti Basu. Predictably Bangladesh has totally denied both the existence of the bases and ISI funding. But denial alone does no more do the Houdini trick of disappearance of a problem. Unless faced up front and with transparency suspicions will remain.

Indian ascription has acquired sinister deportment because of the improvident nature of this stratagem, which has become choric at the cusp of the millennium. Some Indian agencies have also been accusing Bangladesh of leaning towards Islamic fundamentalism (totally refuted by the US ambassador at Dhaka) and that after the fall of Kandahar in late 2001 several hundred Taliban and Al-Qaida fighters escaped by ship from Karachi to Chittagong. South Asian Intelligence Review (16.12.02 no. 1.22) interpreted the recently held Biswa Ijtema at Tongi, the second largest congregation of Muslims from 52 countries as emphasizing " the role the country has come to play in the context of Islamic brotherhood. Although the government in Dhaka has reacted fiercely to any suggestion that the country is becoming a haven for Islamic extremists, reports from Asian and Western intelligence services suggest otherwise". One would have wished that India had provided irrefutable evidence to back up its allegations unless these are for domestic consumption. Encouraged by Gujarat victory extremist elements in BJP may see Hindutva in its intolerant form that alleged sustenance of anti-Indian elements almost totally believed in the case of Pakistan can also be used in the case of Bangladesh by projecting that Hinduism is in danger not only on the western front but on the eastern front as well. The question, however, remains to be answered as to why should Bangladesh, surrounded on three sides by India and having a robust trade (both formal and informal) from Indian point of view, added with the fact that Indian intervention had hastened Bangladesh independence, would feel inclined to harm India and that too with the help of the bitterest erstwhile enemy? If the containing canard against Bangladesh is for domestic politics (with presumed credibility given due to the fact that two Islamic parties are coalition partners in the government) then Indian secular parties would be well advised to be on guard in order to resist communalisation of politics.

In his Autobiography Pandit Nehru expressed his horror of "the spectacle of what is called religion or at any rate organised religion in India.... Almost always it seems to stand for blind faith and reaction, dogma and bigotry, superstition and exploitation, and preservation of vested interests". He felt that "religious outlook does not help and even hinders the moral and spiritual progress of a people, if morality and spirituality are to be judged by this world's standard and not by the hereafter". If it is to be believed that a racially, culturally, linguistically and by religion a diverse India is unified by the thread of Indianism, an intangible yet an unbroken bond, then sacrifice of secularism at the alter of expedient politics could lead to eventual Balkanisation of one of the greatest civilizations of the world. One should remind oneself that an estimated twelve percent of thirty-nine million people in the seven North Eastern states are Christians and they dominate the states completely. Christians account for nearly 90 percent of Nagaland's population; about 65 percent in Meghalaya; and over 85 percent in Mizoram. Christian church plays the most important role as an intermediary between the Naga insurgents and the Indian government. Church reportedly helped in the removal of 12-year-long ban on National Social Council of Nagalim (NSCN-IM) by the Indian government in November last. Church's role can also be gauged by the code of conduct issued by the church for the forthcoming elections in Nagaland and Meghalaya. Last month the Archbishop of Shillong declared the church's Ten Commandments for enforcing discipline in the forthcoming elections. Such pro-active role by the religious leaders has to be seen in the light of the separatists' refusal of 'Indian electoral system' in Assam, Nagaland, Manipur, Arunachal and Meghalaya.

In recent months outlawed United Liberation Front of Asom(ULFA) has intensified terrorist activities despite its desire for a political settlement on pre-conditions that (a)the talks be held outside India,(b) talks should include issue of sovereignty, and (c) there should be UN supervision. The question which now arises is the efficacy of carrying on Hindutva as a militant social movement within the orbit of BJP which would like to project itself as a moderate political party capable of ensuring political stability in an era of short lived minority governments (Amrita Basu-The dialectics of Hindu nationalism). Since there is generally an inverse relationship between a political party and a movement because political parties want large number of supporters to win elections while movements are issue-specific, BJP's increasing support to RSS and VHP programme of Hindu nationalism could be translated into declining number of votes throughout the country though it may win popular support in the heartland of Hindi belt of some north Indian states. India's "strained relationship" with Bangladesh can also be seen in this light in addition to the unresolved bilateral issues. Indian Foreign Secretary, however, in his Paris speech expressed India's readiness to move with Bangladesh through a free trade area as India has done with Sri Lanka and reiterated India's support for sub-regional organisations like BIMSTEC and Growth Quadrangle to compensate for the failure of SAARC in developing into meaningful regional organisation.

India's worry about the situation in Nepal can be seen from India's almost hegemonic relationship with that country. From early fifties Nepal acted as a buffer state between communist China and India and the West. Prime minister Nehru virtually declared his version of Monroe doctrine when in 1950 he said, "a threat to Nepal is a threat to India". King Gayenendra's first visit abroad was to Delhi to seek Bajpayee's support and assistance to combat the Maoists rebels. Referring to Maoists insurgency Indian Foreign Secretary in his Paris speech expressed India's belief that both constitutional monarchy and multi-party democracy were essential for Nepal's stability and neither should be weakened in favour of the other. Effectively he served notice on the Nepalese King to mend his authoritarian ways in dismissing the former Prime Minister and appointing one of the King's choice and listen to street and politicians' protests in favour of reinstating the Parliament. At the same time he cautioned western powers against giving "excessive military assistance" to Nepal to fight Maoist insurgency to avoid further lethality as well as possible leakage of the arms to the rebels. In case of Sri Lanka, India welcomes the peace process currently under way though she is acutely aware of the differences between President Kumaratunga and Prime Minister Wickremansinghe. However, Sri Lankan Prime Minister in his address to the people on S5th 5th January praised President Kumaratunga's key role in promoting a political solution of the conflict and for extension of her party's support to UNF government. Both agreed to act in close cooperation and solve all issues through negotiation. India still remains to be convinced of LTTE's real intentions, their respect for democracy and pluralism, and political rights of non-LTTE Tamils and the Muslims.

India's main problem remains Pakistan stalking her like an evil shadow ever since her birth more than fifty years ago. India describes Pakistan as "the epicentre of terrorism in our region". Refusal by the US to acknowledge the fact that Pakistan had been the mainstay of Taliban and Al-Qaida and the main contributor to its potency has goaded India into accusing the West of "double standard or making distinction between terrorism that must not be tolerated and that can be". India apprehends that political vacuum in Pashtun areas in Afghanistan could again be filled up by Pakistan backed pro-Taliban Pashtuns -- a fear that may not be misplaced in the light of the report in The Guardian (11.12.02) under the caption " Pakistan is being slowly Talibanised". In support of its theory the paper reports on the latest edicts of the newly appointed Chief Minister of NWFP and the release from detention of suspected Taliban by the newly elected Chief Minister of Baluchistan. It has also been alleged that President Musharraf engineered the unprecedented success of the religious parties in the elections both at the centre and the two provinces bordering Afghanistan to retain his relevance to the US which otherwise would have been eroded if Benazir Bhutto with tolerable secular credentials had been allowed to participate in the polls.

In this South Asian imbroglio India has embarked upon "Look East Policy" exploring possibilities of inclusion in APEC and ASEM constructs; India's membership of ASEAN Regional Forum and now an ASEAN Summit partner (recently held in Cambodia); stronger relationship with Myanmar, Thailand and Vietnam; and its intent to realise full potentials in her relations with China. Even if India's Look East Policy were to succeed fully, Pakistan's adamantine policy that a broader security and political agenda must embrace Kashmir has found favour with Colin Powell who after G-8 meeting in Canada last June conceded that Indo-Pak " dialogue must ultimately lead to a discussion on Kashmir and find a solution to Kashmir". An unnamed senior US official told the Financial Times "We are defacto mediators on the Kashmir dispute and there is a recognition that this time we stay involved". Regardless of the US claims it is difficult to visualise any Indian government which could let Kashmir secede from India. Since people and not minorities have a right to self-determination under international law it would serve the cause of peace in South Asia if Pakistan were to abandon its barren policy on Kashmir and India could give autonomy to the disputed land. It would be further helpful if both countries were to recognise the actual Line of Control as the de jure international boundary between India and Pakistan.

Kazi Anwarul Masud is retired Secretary to the Bangladesh government and former ambassador.