Bangladesh-India relations: Need to move forward

This is particularly unfortunate, given the fact that we have had only a few weeks ago, at Dhaka, the latest round of border talks between senior officials of the BDR and the BSF.

Reports published at the end of the meeting indicated that there had been intensive discussion on many subjects. Regrettably, however, very little consensus emerged on most issues. Rigidity rather than flexibility dominated the scene.

Tap here to add The Daily Star as a trusted source

India reiterated its decision to go ahead with its programme of constructing barbed wire fences. This was explained by BSF Director General RS Mooshahary as a continuous process that began 18 years ago. He also stressed that such fencing was "neither an offensive nor a defensive step but a preventive measure to stop the movement of the cross-border criminals." He also indicated that India would continue the construction of a barbed wire fence outside of 150 yards of the zero point of the international border line. It was also stated that if there was any particular necessity, due to unavoidable circumstances, such compulsion might require fencing to be constructed within 150 yards of the border. The Bangladesh side was however reassured that such action would be undertaken after keeping it informed. There was nothing new in the Indian position.

India's seriousness about this has been reflected by the fact that they have spent Indian Rs 2404.7 million for fencing on the Bangladesh border during 2004-5. This was stated recently in the Indian Lok Sabha by their State Minister for Home Affairs Mr S Raghupathy.

The Bangladesh side, principally reiterated that it did not agree with India's construction of fences, at less than 150 yards from the zero line. This, they felt, was in clear violation of the India-Bangladesh Guidelines for Border Authorities, 1975.

They also used this opportunity to hand over to the Director-General of the BSF many booklets and documents containing information about anti-Bangladesh insurgent camps in India alongwith their locations and even in some cases, telephone numbers. The lists also included information about 'nine Swadhin Bangabhumi Movement Organisations and other terrorist outfits, 90 anti-Bangladesh camps, 30 terrorist leaders (including representatives from the Shaniti Bahini) and 444 miscreants residing in the bordering regions of India, 21 drug traders, 19 phensydyl factories (operating from near the border) and 10 notorious illegal arms traders'. Concern was also expressed about continued anti-Bangladesh propaganda in the Indian press.

In addition, the BDR Chief suggested that outstanding irritations could be settled between the two countries 'through diplomatic levels'. The Indian side apparently (according to newspapers) did not accept this suggestion. They want settlement of border problems at border security sector commander levels. That, according to them, is a more practical method.

Nevertheless, despite the views of the Indian officials, one feels that the serious charges brought up by the Bangladeshi side, should be raised by us also through the diplomatic channel -- with the Indian Mission in Dhaka and the Indian Foreign Office in New Delhi. This will enable the Indian authorities to carry out necessary inquiry and take steps to stop such anti-Bangladesh activities.

In similar vein, we should also carry out intensive inquiry about allegations of anti-Indian terrorist outfits (as raised by the BSF) operating from within Bangladesh.

Both sides need to take such allegations with greater seriousness. It is not enough to just state that such charges are incorrect. It is imperative that we approach this issue in the spirit of South Asian unity and good neighbourliness. This will ensure greater security for States in our region. If necessary, journalists from other South Asian countries and representatives of civil society, could also be invited or allowed access to the alleged sites where terrorist camps are supposedly based, both in Bangladesh and India. This will assist in creating credibility with regard to the respective inquiries.

If India and Pakistan can start an 'irreversible' peace process, then there is no reason for us to have a steady deterioration in bilateral relations. We do not have a sensitive issue like Kashmir with its multi-factor ramifications. It should therefore be that much easier for us to tackle our border problem.

Indian border guards may also like to exercise some restraint in shooting at people near the border. In this regard, they might like to replicate what has been initiated on the Indian border with Pakistan. It may be recalled that the AFP reported a few days ago that border officials of India and Pakistan have agreed to arrest people crossing borders inadvertently and return them swiftly to their respective country. Such as step may also be agreed upon with us. If any one is found crossing into India illegally, that person or persons should be arrested, questioned and then returned to the respective state. Firing to kill is a step of last resort, and should in principle, be avoided by both sides. Shedding blood only exacerbates a situation, affects public perception and creates unnecessary misunderstanding.

In this context, it might also be advisable for both countries to complete urgently demarcation of the remaining 6.5 kilometers of their border. This will assist in the implementation of the Land Boundary Agreement, 1974. Both sides can also facilitate coordinated patrolling of the border. These steps will build confidence in the right direction. Political will must be found for this purpose.

In this regard it would be useful to understand the significance of the assertion made by Foreign Ministry M Morshed Khan on 20 April in the 'Prothom Alo'. He said, 'What's the problem if anyone wants to surround his house with boundary wall?' He was commenting on the news that India was setting up a barbed wire fence in the border. His view as Foreign Minister is very revealing in terms of potential flexibility of the Bangladesh position.

Let us try to assess the importance of a good, working relationship with India. I am not being sentimental about India's role in 1971. I am referring here to the possibilities that exist not only in terms of bilateral trade, but also in prospective foreign investment from India.

The interest shown by Tata and some other Indian companies in coming to Bangladesh can encourage growth and economic partnership. This will result in movement forward in sectors like energy, steel, cement, fertilizers, pharmaceuticals and also in some backward and forward linkage areas in telecommunications and electronics. There is also bound to be a spill-over effect in information technology activities. Such investment will help to strengthen the formal sector of our trade relationship.

We have to move forward. We have to take steps which can create confidence. In this age of globalisation, we must prioritise our economic agenda and see how we can gain from the emerging economic prowess of India. In view of India's location and market potential, Bangladesh should look at India as a long-term strategic and economic partner. If the Japanese and the Chinese can think on these lines, why cannot we?

For example, the other day, during a seminar organised by ICC, Bangladesh to formulate a plan of action to be mooted in the Asia-Pacific Business Forum to be held in Bangkok, an interesting prospect of trade with India emerged. It was pointed out that there was a huge possibility of exporting Bangladeshi medicines to the Indian market. The Indian Parliament apparently has already moved a step closer to banning domestic firms from manufacturing low-cost generic copies of patented drugs. This Indian measure has been taken to meet WTO requirements. This would leave Bangladesh with an excellent opportunity to enter the Indian market as Bangladesh can continue to produce drugs outside the WTO patent regime until January 1, 2016.

I now return to the question of building of fences. Why are we so averse to this arrangement on already agreed and demarcated borders? Do we not realise that such an obstacle might help to reduce smuggling of our scarce resources, work against human trafficking, seeking of shelter in India by some of our criminal elements, stop smuggling of phensydyl from India into Bangladesh, reduce the possibility of clandestine smuggling in of weapons and the surreptitious entry of anti-Bangladesh elements into our territory? Are these not positive points?

I am an optimist and have always believed in constructive engagement and the need for dialogue. This will facilitate the reduction of border tension and strengthen bilateral relations.

One such hopeful sign has already arrived. Our foreign minister has had meetings with both the Indian prime minister and the Indian foreign minister during the recently concluded Afro-Asian Solidarity Summit in Indonesia. The Indian prime minister has stressed on the need for a meeting between the two foreign ministers to resolve bilateral irritants. The Indian side has also expressed its willingness to come to Dhaka for the next SAARC Summit. Such a meeting could take place at that time. Meanwhile, hopefully, the overdue consultation at the level of Foreign Secretaries of the two countries schedule in mid-June in New Delhi, will lay the groundwork for discussion at ministerial level and removal of unnecessary communication gaps, suspicion and mutual recrimination.

Our Parliamentary Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs met on 27 April and reportedly observed that at a time when India has started a process of normalising relations with its other neighbours, China and Pakistan, its relations with Bangladesh has continued to deteriorate. This is a significant comment. Neither India nor Bangladesh can afford it. May I, in this context, point out that the visit of Mr Dinesh Nandan, Governor of the State of Tripura to the Akhaura border check-post on 2 May was indeed a positive gesture. It will help to ease tension and strengthen bilateral relations.

Muhammad Zamir is a former Secretary and Ambassador -- any response to mzamir@dhaka.net.