Behind Diplomatic Niceties In Bangkok, India Draws Clear Red Lines for Bangladesh

India has drawn out a few red lines for Bangladesh, warning the backward South Asian nation that crossing them would not be acceptable to India.

The 38-minute meeting between Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Bangladesh’s Mohammad Yunus on the sidelines of the 6th BIMSTEC summit in Bangkok late last week was cordial. But it was at some other interactions between the Indian and Bangladeshi delegations that the tough message was delivered.

The primary among these interactions was one between India’s National Security Advisor (NSA) Ajit Doval and Yunus’ ‘high representative’ Khalilur Rahman.

Doval and Rahman, sitting at the same table during the BIMSTEC official dinner Thursday evening, spoke to each other for a long time.

“NSA Doval had a frank discussion with Rahman and told the latter what all is completely unacceptable to India. The most important among them is disregarding India’s security concerns and allowing agencies and elements to carry out anti-Indian activities from Bangladesh,” a senior officer of the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) told Swarajya.

Doval, it is learnt, spoke of the close ties that Bangladesh is forging with Pakistan and said that India is wary of Pakistan using Bangladesh for carrying out “activities inimical to India’s interests.”

The Bangladesh interim government’s efforts to fashion close links between the militaries of Bangladesh and Pakistan is of particular concern for India, Doval told Rahman.

When Rahman tried to assure Doval that close ties between Bangladesh and Pakistan would not be detrimental to India’s interests, Doval reportedly pointed out that Pakistan’s ISI had, in league with the powerful entities in Bangladesh, trained and armed cadres of various militant groups of Northeast India in the past.

Doval reminded Rahman, a career diplomat who had also worked in various United Nations agencies, that Bangladesh had in the past provided refuge to leaders and cadres of these NE militant outfits.

Bangladesh was told in unequivocal terms that India will not put up with a repeat of the past, and any attempts to foment trouble in India will meet with very strong and punitive action on the guilty agencies, organisations, and elements.

Rahman, it is learnt, assured Doval that Dhaka would always keep India’s interests in mind and would never allow Bangladeshi soil to be used for anti-India activities.

Doval then dwelt on the free rein given to radical Islamist organisations and terror outfits by the new regime in Bangladesh. These organisations and outfits, Doval asserted, are anti-Indian and have been caught attempting to foment trouble in India.

When Rahman tried to counter Doval’s contention about the Yunus government encouraging or giving a free hand to radical Islamists, Doval pointed out that soon after assuming office, Yunus had set free convicted Islamist terrorists and, over the past eight months, had done nothing to rein in the country’s Islamists.

Doval cited specific instances of Islamists being given a free hand in Bangladesh and the strong Islamist credentials of many people close to the current regime. Doval also cited specific instances of organisations like the Jamaat-e-Islami, Islami Oikya Jote, and Hefazat-e-Islam, among others, indulging in anti-Indian activities.

Doval also pointed out that the ugly anti-Indian rhetoric of these Islamists, including some ‘advisors’ (de facto ministers), is unacceptable to India. Bangladesh cannot expect good ties with India if members of the government and parties or bodies closely associated with the government indulge in such rhetoric, said Doval.

Another red line drawn by Doval was the continuing persecution of Hindus in Bangladesh. Here, too, Rahman tried to refute the charge and said that most reports of such persecution were false or vastly exaggerated.

Rahman also repeated the dubious explanation that Hindus were not attacked on grounds of religion, but for their strong association with the earlier Awami League government and party.

But Doval, once again, cited specific instances of attacks on Hindus who were even members of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP). He dwelt on the strong anti-Hindu rhetoric of many Islamist preachers and senior figures of organisations like the Jamaat-e-Islami and Hefazat-e-Islam that were closely aligned with the current government in Bangladesh.

Doval told Rahman that Bangladesh needs to rein in the Islamists of the country before they become too powerful and Frankenstein’s monsters. India-Bangladesh ties cannot be normal if ‘rabid mullahs’ are allowed to spread hatred against Hindus and India.

Doval also wanted to know about Yunus’ statement made in China about Northeast India being a landlocked country. Rahman said that Yunus’ statement had been misread and he had actually meant that Northeast India could benefit from Chinese investments in Bangladesh.

Doval did not comment any further on this issue, but it is learnt that Foreign Minister S. Jaishankar told Bangladesh’s Foreign Affairs Advisor Touhid Hossain during a chat after the BIMSTEC ministerial meeting Thursday afternoon that the explanation about Yunus’ statement in China was not really credible.

Jaishankar had also touched on some of the issues that figured later that evening in the Doval-Rahman interaction during his chat with Hossain.

But, said MEA officials who had travelled to Bangkok, Jaishankar did not have the time to raise all bilateral issues during his brief chat with Hossain.

It was left to Doval to haul Rahman over the coals and lay down the red lines that Dhaka should not cross.

Rahman raised the issue of Sheikh Hasina’s extradition to Bangladesh and her statements criticising Yunus which were triggering anger and protests in Bangladesh.

This issue also cropped up in the meeting between Modi and Yunus. The latter requested Modi to ask Hasina to stop issuing statements and also to consider her extradition.

Modi brushed off Yunus’ request and said wrong interpretations of Sheikh Hasina’s statements by some persons and parties on social media were responsible for the tensions that Hasina’s statements triggered.

Other Indian officials who were in Bangkok told the Bangladeshi delegation that Hasina’s extradition is out of the question and she will remain India’s guest.

As for the statements that had been made by Sheikh Hasina which the current government in Bangladesh had a problem with, the Bangladeshi officials were told that New Delhi had found nothing wrong or offensive in those statements.

Another MEA official who spoke to Swarajya pointed out that the biggest snub in this regard was delivered by Modi to Yunus Friday afternoon.

Modi told Yunus that India supports a “democratic, stable, peaceful, progressive and inclusive Bangladesh.”

“As in all such high-level interactions between leaders of two countries, a lot ought to be read between the lines. So what Modi essentially said was India would like to see Bangladesh’s quick transition to democracy with free, fair and inclusive parliamentary elections held as soon as possible,” the MEA official explained.

India has, thus, made it obliquely clear to Yunus that he is not a democratically elected leader. The term ‘inclusive’ should be interpreted to mean that India wants polls to be inclusive with the participation of all political parties, including the Awami League.

“India has, therefore, made it very clear that it would like to see Awami League’s participation in the elections that should be held at the earliest. India is opposed to demands being made by some in the present government as well as a new political party formed by the leaders of the student-led uprising in Bangladesh last July-August for banning the Awami League,” said the MEA official.

Modi also alluded to the anti-Indian rhetoric by some people in the current government, as well as organisations which are close to the current regime. Modi told Yunus that such rhetoric vitiates the environment and Yunus should take steps to stop people under him or close to his government from speaking out against India.

Rahman, during his interaction with Doval Thursday evening, raised another pet peeve of Bangladesh: punitive action taken by the BSF against Bangladeshi smugglers, traffickers, and intruders.

Doval told Rahman that the border is sacrosanct and anyone breaching the border would be dealt with sternly. The BSF, he said, only fires on intruders in self-defence.

Doval told Rahman that the Border Guards Bangladesh (BGB) as well as the Bangladeshi police and other agencies should ensure that no Bangladeshi tries to cross the border illegally.

Yunus also raised this issue with Modi. The MEA readout of the Modi-Yunus meeting said Modi told Yunus that “strict enforcement of the law and prevention of illegal border crossings, especially at night, are necessary for maintaining border security and stability.”

MEA officials told Swarajya that in fact, Modi told Yunus that “Bangladeshi intruders die or are injured on the Indian side of the border.” “What Modi meant was that Bangladeshis breach the border knowingly with foul intent and attack the BSF when confronted, and this leads to BSF firing on the intruders in self-defence,” said the MEA officials.

Doval, it is learnt, told Rahman that India expects Bangladesh to honour in letter and spirit the transit agreements signed between the two countries when Sheikh Hasina was in power. Dishonouring these agreements which facilitate faster access to Northeast India would be unacceptable to India.

The Indian NSA referenced statements made by some in the present government, as well as by some people close to the present government, that the transit agreements would be reviewed and scrapped if necessary.

That’s another red line that should not be crossed, India has told Bangladesh. A veiled warning was issued to Dhaka: any move to review the agreements or dishonour them would invite very stern retaliatory measures from New Delhi.

In effect, Bangladesh was told that any move that hurts India’s interests would invite strong reaction from India. And that would hurt Bangladesh much more. So, it is in Bangladesh’s interests to tone down the (anti-India) rhetoric and keep India’s interests in mind.

That India’s interests are closely linked to that of Hindus and other religious minorities in Bangladesh was also made very clear to Dhaka.

Also read:

No More Games: What PM Modi’s Stern Warnings To Oli And Yunus At BIMSTEC Will Sound Like