Trinamool-Jamaat nexus: A puzzle and a worry

EVERY action, apart from initiating an equal and opposite reaction also demands a loss and benefit estimation. One may argue that Jamaat might gain by funding Trinamool Congress (TMC), as was reportedly done before 2011 assembly and 2014 Lok Sabha polls. But one is still at a loss to figure out what exactly the TMC and its leader Mamata Banerjee wanted to gain out of the Jamaat's destructive politics in Bangladesh funded by TMC, which it has allegedly done. Or is it that Ahmed Hassan Imran is the maverick in the party who played it singly to orchestrate an anti-AL movement to facilitate a political changeover through violence? Both aspects need deep deliberation, since we are faced with a situation never before encountered.

It was only after the Ananda Bazar Patrika's revelation quoting the CBI, that the TMC had siphoned off a sizeable amount of the chit fund scam money of Saradha Group to fund agitation to destabilise Hasina government, that we have become aware of the matter. In fact it was Bangladesh intelligence that had passed on the information to its Indian counterpart some while back regarding the TMC – Jamaat link.

Tap Here to Add The Daily Star As A Trusted Source

Two things become very clear from this. Firstly, we can assume that our intelligence is reasonably sanguine about the fact that a political party in Bangladesh had received money from across the border; were it not so it would not have shared the information with its Indian counterpart. Secondly, subject to further investigation, it would be a fair guess that the State government in Paschim Banga was actively involved in the internal politics of Bangladesh in a very detrimental way. And, interestingly, that action was innately linked with the politics, more specifically vote politics, of Paschim Banga.   

The matter has turned the tables on India. All these years we have been heaped with accusations by our neighbour, mostly unfounded, about how India has been saturated by religious extremists, working on the behest of a third country and out of the soil of Bangladesh, to destabilise India. And after every unfortunate incident of terrorist action in India the fingers were pointed at Bangladesh, without any substantive evidence to support the claim. Well, we have a situation where an Indian state government is suspected of sponsoring a political party in Bangladesh whose acts of violence, in the past one year in particular, to destabilise the country, add substance to the suspected TMC-Jamat link. The charges are serious and circumstantial evidence suggests that there may be substance in the allegations which warrants a thorough investigation in both the countries on the matter.  

One may brush off the allegations against TMC on the grounds that there are no real gains for TMC to support Jamaat's violence inside Bangladesh. Indeed what does TMC gain with an unstable Bangladesh where Jamaat is suspected of not only being a party of terrorist sympathisers but also one that harbours terrorists within its ranks. And why would TMC have sought Jamaat's support to guarantee Muslim votes for it in the last elections? Was Mamata not already guaranteed minority vote given the poor performance of the CPI (M) in Paschim Bangla in the 28 years of its rule vis-à-vis the state of Muslim minority in that state? The Sachar Commission report has vividly brough out the state of the Muslims in that province, as being the worst than the other States of India. That notwithstanding, would the Muslims in Paschim Banga want an unstable Bangladesh? Isn't Mamata aware of the fallout of instability in Bangladesh on her own State? And why would Saradha fund Jamat in Bangladesh? These are all relevant issues which, if factorised in evaluating the situation, would militate strongly against the policy of sponsoring an anti-government party in Bangladesh for the purpose of destabilising the government.

At this stage it is difficult to draw any rational conclusion from a mental exercise on the issue. Saradha money is reported to have gone to the West and the Middle East also. Imran was a member of SIMI that has been proscribed in India since 2001. But he continues to be member of Students Islamic Organisation, the students' wing of Jamaat-e-Islami Hind. Does his commitment to his politico-religious beliefs go beyond that of his party's? At the same time it is difficult to believe that Saradha would dole out huge sums individually to a party member unbeknownst to the party leadership. These are questions that we must seek answers to, particularly in view of the recent statement of Al Zawahiri regarding shifting al-Qaeda's focus on India and Bangladesh.  

The writer is, Editor Op-Ed and Defence & Strategic Affairs, The Daily Star