“India needs clear security assurance from Bangladesh.”

India-Bangladesh relations experienced some tensions following the collapse of the Awami League and Sheikh Hasina’s refuge in India. Professor Sreeradha Dattaa South Asian expert who teaches international affairs at OP Jindal Global University in Hariyana, shared her views on the future of Bangladesh-India relations with Daily Star. Diplomatic correspondent Porimol Palma.

How does India look at Bangladesh after the recent political changes in Bangladesh?

We have historically supported the Awami League (AL). We see the possibility of an Islamist party taking over in Bangladesh if the AL is not in power. However, this is not the current reality in Bangladesh. It is true that India has cooperated extensively with the PLA, which has increased bilateral trade volume and benefited Bangladesh. However, India has no policy that would prevent it from working with any other government in Bangladesh.
Relations with a sovereign state must be based on the principle of equality. This principle has been repeatedly emphasized by the current leadership of Bangladesh. Nevertheless, claims that India was responsible for the recent floods in the southeastern region of Bangladesh are baseless. Additionally, some senior Indian leaders made remarks that were unnecessary and did not benefit either side.

What should be the immediate steps to improve the relationship?

I believe Dhaka and New Delhi are already in contact. I propose that the two countries hold a formal dialogue at the earliest opportunity to resolve any outstanding issues. India needs a clear assurance that no anti-India actions will be taken from Bangladesh. The fundamental problem is that India believes that only the AL can address its security concerns, which I believe is a misconception. If Dhaka assures Delhi that it will address India’s security concerns, it could serve as the basis for a strong relationship. At the same time, the caretaker government can also communicate to India what issues it needs to urgently address regarding Bangladesh.

The caretaker government did not say anything that would create this perceived threat to India. So why is India worried about this?

Recently, there have been attacks on Hindus in Bangladesh and we understand the reasons behind these incidents. However, many other events take place that do not receive enough attention. We see that the BNP seems to be getting louder and louder. Although the BNP is separate from the interim government, the party appears to be gaining strength. The caretaker government should have the power to manage any aggressive rhetoric because it sends the wrong message. Some experts say that religious fundamentalism does not play a big role in Bangladesh, and I share this belief.

Dhaka said Indian media had exaggerated incidents related to attacks on minorities. What is the understanding of Delhi?

I agree there is a lot of misinformation out there. However, there is a belief in India that Hindus in Bangladesh are under attack because Hasina is not in power. Even though we know that such incidents are not as common as the media portrays, there is a negative public perception. On August 15, Prime Minister Narendra Modi spoke about the persecution of Hindu minorities in Bangladesh, but did not mention that others had also been killed. He could comment on this issue. We must understand that this matter has to do with our internal politics. What I am saying is that negative perceptions are cultivated. Therefore, the leaders should meet and issue a joint statement confirming that relations between the two sovereign states will continue as they should.

Border killings and water problems have been a thorn in the relationship. How do you see it?

Border killings can be stopped if both countries cooperate. Even if the number of killings is small, they should not take place between two friendly nations. In 2010, we said we would enter into an agreement to manage our transboundary rivers across the basin and address the problems of other rivers, if not the Teesta. Why hasn’t this been implemented? India must solve the water problem. Just as security is important for India, water is equally important for Bangladesh. Even if there were an interim water-sharing agreement, the typical anti-India sentiment would not be as strong as it is today. Considering that the issue of water sharing has always been an emotive one in Bangladesh, India must do the right thing.
There is a belief that India has benefited more from the agreements or MoUs signed during the AL regime. There is an ongoing discussion that you can review.

It may not look good for India, but Bangladesh can certainly review these agreements. I know that many MoUs may not have been discussed in Parliament. I believe that the connectivity projects completed so far are bringing benefits to both countries. However, if Bangladesh wants to review any agreement, such as the one on transit, it has the right to do so. India has not behaved in an opaque manner. In fact, I think it would be beneficial to re-examine the Memorandums of Understanding. This will clarify whether MoUs are useful or not.

Work on some projects under the Line of Credit remains suspended as Indian contractors have not yet resumed work. Why?

I think it’s because of a lingering sense of fear. While we’re not sure yet, the information we’re getting is a bit disturbing. If Bangladeshi authorities assure India that they have no security concerns, the cases will continue.

The caretaker government said it may take steps to bring back Sheikh Hasina for legal reasons. Will this cause any friction in the relationship?

I believe that various aspects need to be taken into account – both from a legal and technical point of view. Bangladesh must take this into consideration. Sheikh Hasina will not be extradited just because Bangladesh wants it. We cannot ignore India’s relationship with the AL or Sheikh Hasina. Nevertheless, we would like to cooperate with Bangladesh.
Our foreign advisor said that India must maintain relations with the people of Bangladesh and not just the AL. What are your thoughts?

I agree 100 percent. India should cooperate with any government in power in Bangladesh. The problem arose in the government that was in power between 2001 and 2006, which soured relations. We later discovered that AL was friendly towards India. In a multi-party system, any government can be elected to office. Why shouldn’t India cooperate with this?
Unfortunately, it was the BNP that fueled anti-India sentiments in Bangladesh between 2001 and 2006. During the BNP-Jamaat regime, a large quantity of arms and ammunition, allegedly intended for the Indian separatist organization ULFA (United Liberation Front of Assam), was seized in Chattogram in 2004.

The caretaker government wants to revive SAARC. What is your view?

SAARC is important for cooperation in South Asia, but Pakistan must change its behavior. We always said we were ready to cooperate with Pakistan if that happened, but that didn’t happen.