Indo-Bangladesh confidence building measures?

The two-day meeting in New Delhi was held in the backdrop of deterioration of relations between the two countries for sometime. What has been worrying for Bangladesh is the unstable security situation at the border and it has been reported that since 2000, 394 Bangladeshi nationals were killed. This is unacceptable, given the 1974 Mujib-Indira Land Boundary Demarcation Agreement and the 1975 Indo-Bangladesh Border Guidelines.

The outcome of the talks seems to be positive and forward-looking. It has hopefully brought back to enhanced momentum to bilateral ties in almost all fronts. Dhaka and Delhi agreed to cooperate in security, peaceful border management, sharing of waters of common rivers and economic exchange. The statement reported in the media contains 26-agreed plan of action that needs to be implemented. Time will only tell how soon and to what extent proposed actions are put in place on the ground.

Tap here to add The Daily Star as a trusted source

Need for frequent meetings
In inter-state relations, political and economic relations cannot be separated because they are intertwined. Most often good political relations lead to sound economic relations. What to be recognised is that suspicious relations have their own momentum to the detriment of interests of both countries, unless intervened.

Continuing good relations are not taken for granted and need to be sustained constantly. Relations are compared to nurturing a plant that needs regular attention and if left unattended, it will either not grow or wither away.

It is not understood why a long interval of two years has elapsed before the senior officials met. Whatever the state of relations, good or strained, between neighbouring countries, at least annual, if not six monthly meeting at Foreign Secretary level ought to be routinely held.

In Europe, the frequent meetings of the heads of state/government are routine, despite their major differences on many issues. Likewise, the need of the regularity of meetings between Bangladesh and India at a Foreign Secretary level is imperative.

Why stalemate on bilateral issues
It is reported that on May 30, India's Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh, while talking with foreign journalists said that India has "emotional ties" with Bangladesh and reiterated his desire to work out solutions to all outstanding bilateral issues. By referring to "emotional ties", it is believed that he was referring to India's material and diplomatic support to the 1971 Liberation War of Bangladesh.

If there exists good will at the highest political level, why have relations worsened at a time when India's profile in the world is on the rise? Given the changed global political and economic environment, whatever "local difficulties" in the region exist need to be resolved and there is no adequate reason why Indo-Bangladesh relations cannot but be friendly, given the common platform of raising quality of life of vast majority of people of both countries.

Indo-Bangladesh relations cannot be isolated from the past history. Bangladesh was a part of Pakistan for 24 years and it fought two wars with India. It seems the mindset inherited from the past seems not to have been totally jettisoned. It appears past history casts a long shadow on bilateral relations.

Furthermore, most young people (born after 1975) in Bangladesh have witnessed "big brotherly" attitude from India, whether in the matter of sharing waters of common rivers or in the border areas or in economic matters. They have perceived India, often dictating to Bangladesh what needs to be done and what India wants from Bangladesh. This perception among majority of young people regrettably lingers on.

There is also a big picture here. India has certain strategic and security interests in South Asia and wants that all the smaller neighbours should not only appreciate but also share India's perception. The difficulty is that India perceives China's military power as a threat to its security while other smaller neighbours of India do not share the same perception. In fact India's position is so central and dominant in South Asia, some of the neighbouring states perceive China as a counter-weight to India in the region.

India is a rising regional, if not a global power within decades. India thinks that Bangladesh has not been playing a constructive role in maintaining their security interests within South Asia. India holds the view that to maintain cooperative and mutually supportive bilateral relations, Bangladesh needs to be anchored within a broad framework of strategic and security relationship with India.

On 14th February of this year, India's current Foreign Secretary was candid about India's security perception while addressing at the India International Centre. He said, in part:

" The countries of South Asia, while occupying the same geographical space, do not have a shared security perception and hence a common security doctrine.. …In security, at least some of the states perceive security threats as arising from within the region…

.. Do countries in our neighbourhood envisage their own security and development in cooperation with India or hostility to India or by seeking to isolate themselves from India against the logic of our geography?"

Although the Foreign Secretary did not name the countries of South Asia, it is not difficult to say that reference to "some states" certainly means Pakistan and may possibly include Bangladesh.

This implies that Bangladesh does not have the same security perception as that of India. Unless the big picture is sorted out, it seems Bangladesh's relations with India are likely to be difficult.

Another factor in bilateral relations appears to be that India wants to link various bilateral issues with one another. This means, for example, that if Bangladesh wants sharing of waters of common rivers, in return Bangladesh should provide transit facilities to northeastern states. This is based on India's doctrine of reciprocity. That implies if Bangladesh wants anything from India, India should receive in return something.

Bangladesh does not perceive in the way India chooses to link bilateral issues. The sharing of waters of common rivers, according to Bangladesh, stands on its own legitimate right not only under rules of international law but also in terms of the 1996 Indo-Bangladesh Ganges Water Treaty (Article 9 of the Treaty). Furthermore Bangladesh perceives linking issues as an unfair and unequal bargain advantage on the part of India.

Is India's concern justified?
It is not understood why India has insisted during the talks on the requirement for border fencing within and up to 150 yards of the international border of Bangladesh (20% of the 4,000-long kilometer border has already been fenced by India).

Generally border fencing has been erected for illegal infiltration from the other country that poses threat to its security. Has India done border fencing with Pakistan in the Punjab and Sindh or with lower terrain in Nepal? The insistence of India does not seem to be a friendly gesture towards Bangladesh and is likely to be misunderstood by people of Bangladesh.

Although India expressed satisfaction over the commencement of coordinated patrolling by the border forces of the two countries during the talks, India suspects presence of anti-Indian militant groups in Bangladesh territory, increased suspected activities of Pakistani intelligence on border areas and smuggling of weapons across common borders to northeastern states.

While Bangladesh has consistently denied presence of anti-Indian militants in the country and other allegations, India is not impressed by the denials. Bangladesh on the other hand complained about providing "safe haven" to criminals from Bangladesh and not returning them to Bangladesh authorities. It is hoped that allegations and counter-allegations will now stop between the two countries.

One prickly issue arises out of Anup Chetia, a separatist leader of United Liberation Front of Assam, who was arrested in Bangladesh in 1997 and has been serving a jail sentence for seven years since 2002 in a separate criminal case. It is reported that Chetia sought political asylum or safe passage to a third country. India wants him to be handed over. If Bangladesh does not, India thinks that Bangladesh ignores about its security.

Underpinnings of Bilateral Relations
It has to be recognised that Indo-Bangladesh bilateral relations are essentially of asymmetrical nature because they involve between a large country and a small country

( India is 23 times larger than the area of Bangladesh). This is not something new in inter-state relationship. The relations of Brazil, Nigeria, and the US with their small and economically weak neighbours stand on the same footing.

Furthermore, Bangladesh is surrounded by India on three sides and on the fourth open side to the Bay of Bengal, Bangladesh faces a strong and powerful India navy. It requires any small country in such geographical situation to make efforts in developing stable bilateral relations unless the big neighbour appreciates the reality of situation of small neighbours. Bangladesh perceives that India with its dominant position tends to extract unfair concessions from Bangladesh. Whether the perception is right or wrong, that may be a debatable proposition.

India needs to recognise that reciprocity is not always possible for a small country and as a big neighbour it has certain responsibility towards its smaller neighbours. Power and responsibility go together. It is in the interests of both countries outstanding relations need to be resolved with fairness and justice. Good relations cannot be imposed because they are based on principles of mutual respect and equality.

Former Indian Prime Minister I.K.Gujral appeared to have recognised the sensitivity of small countries when he stated that "First with neighbours like Bangladesh, Bhutan, Maldives, Nepal and Sri Lanka, we do not ask for reciprocity but give what we can in good faith" (He did not mention Pakistan).

Conclusion
Bangladesh and India are neighbours and they are destined to live as neighbours. No one can change the fundamental reality. If Bangladesh is prosperous, it is good for India as it provides good market for India. Bangladesh has no competition with India but at the same time no country including Bangladesh appreciates being pushed around by a big neighbour.

Another question that looms large is: why security concern should be overblown by India with its sizeable military power when economic cooperation may open a new vista in Indo-Bangladesh relations?. At the dawn of the 21st century, the prime consideration for India is to build regional economic blocs within South Asia to enhance their economic gains in the competitive globalised world.

Barrister Harun ur Rashid is a former Bangladesh Ambassador to the UN, Geneva.