The case for holding back the chips

The twice-postponed visit of Bangladesh's Prime Minister to India has been set to take place from April 7 to 10. If media reports are anything to go by then one can assume that the much anticipated Teesta water deal would not be formalised even during this visit. While Bangladesh is made to wait on the Teesta accord, diplomatic sources inform that in preparation for the visit, more than two dozen agreements, MoUs and documents have been finalised for signing at the summit level meeting between the two prime ministers. Included among them are agreements for use of Chittagong and Mongla seaports "as part of greater connectivity under which India will get transit-transhipment facilities for transportation of goods through Bangladesh". 

There is a perception among policy analysts of both Bangladesh and India that since 2007, in the stride to improve bilateral relations, Bangladesh has been responsive in addressing India's concerns more than that was reciprocated by its neighbour. The current Bangladesh government's all-out effort to mitigate India's security concerns, particularly those that had ramifications for the north-east Indian states, has been publicly acknowledged by the Indian officials. Likewise, the opening up of riverine and land routes to establish better connectivity between the mainland and north-east India has been a significant breakthrough in enhancing Indian national interest. 

Despite such major steps from Bangladesh's side, India is yet to meet some of the major concerns of Bangladesh. Border killings continue; little tangible progress has been made in sharing the waters of scores of common rivers including that of Teesta; and bilateral trade facilitation remains way below the desired level. Although the much celebrated swapping of enclaves in July 2015 has been presented as a testimony of goodwill of current Indian leadership, history notes that Bangladesh had delivered on its commitment on the deal more than four decades ago, immediately after amending the country's Constitution in November 1974. It is also pertinent to recall that despite the 1974 summit level agreement between the two countries that the Farakka barrage would not be put into operation before an agreement was reached on sharing the dry season flow, India commissioned the barrage and continued unilateral withdrawal after Bangladesh allowed India to test the feeder canal of the barrage for only a 10-day period. 

Bangladesh's recent procurement of two submarines from China has added interesting dimension to the conversation around the prime ministerial visit. The first ever visit by the Indian defence minister along with a battery of senior military officials to Bangladesh and the eagerness of the South Block of committing Bangladesh to a long-term multi-sectoral defence agreement only reflect how deeply perturbed India is by what it views to be a Chinese foray in its backyard.

Bangladesh's naval procurement has brought into the open the views of some influential quarters in Delhi. At a recent Rajya Sabha TV show, fittingly titled India's World, Ambassador Kanwal Sibal observed that India is faced with China's strategic challenge of obtaining footholds in key countries in the neighbourhood and found it surprising that "Bangladesh under Sheikh Hasina should have given into this". He also went to offer the advice that instead of China, Bangladesh could have procured the submarines from Russia "as that would pose much less problems for India". Explicit in his statement was Bangladesh should have prioritised India's interest over its own in deciding where to source its submarines. 

Participants at the talk wondered why Bangladesh ventured into procuring the submarines when "it has solved all its maritime boundary problems". One wonders if India would ever dispose of its own aircraft carrier and submarines if and when its own maritime boundary problems are settled. 

Veena Sikri, the diplomat turned academic, went a step further and made the claim that over the last five to six years "under Sheikh Hasina, there has been gradual reinforcement of pro-Chinese bureaucrats"! She asserted "there is a lot of talk on that in Bangladesh". It will be interesting to know the source of such information. Ambassador Sikri further thought it would be appropriate that the Bangladesh Prime Minister be reminded that China opposed Bangladesh's Liberation War and did not support "her father". In arguing the case for people-to-people contact between Bangladesh and India, the retired diplomat stated that ministers who make decisions could be "bought off and be put in pockets". She reminded the audience that the Chinese do have deep pockets. 

As Bangladesh's Prime Minister plans her visit, it is incumbent on her advisers to take due note of the prevailing mood in New Delhi. The people of Bangladesh are deeply wary about the lack of reciprocity in the bilateral relations with India. It is time the Bangladesh government seriously reviews the whole gamut of our bilateral relationship and uses the issues of transit-transhipment to build a relationship of genuine reciprocity and not the variety that we had so far.

The writer teaches International Relations at the University of Dhaka.