Latest move for transit to India raises familiar questions
THE apparent eagerness of the Awami League-led government to allow India transit to its north-eastern provinces through Bangladesh, especially in view of New Delhi’s persistent refusal to address Dhaka’s legitimate demands, e.g. fair share of Teesta and other trans-boundary rivers, and implementation of the land boundary agreement, and genuine grievances, e.g. continued killing of Bangladeshis by the Border Security Force, is quite disturbing. According to a report published in New Age on Wednesday, an inter-ministerial meeting, chaired by the finance minister, endorsed a proposal by the Bangladesh high commissioner to India for resolution of the outstanding bilateral issues that hinder realisation of the long-standing demand of the Congress-led Indian government. Not surprisingly, the proponents of the latest move have hammered on the familiar theme of ‘bilateral cooperation’ and ‘regional connectivity’ as the rationale for granting transit to India. Suffice to say, for the AL-led government, ‘bilateral cooperation’ has seemingly come to mean unilateral concession to New Delhi and ‘regional connectivity’ link between Indian provinces.
A section of the AL-led ruling elite has persistently sought to establish a flawed correlation between what Bangladesh rightfully deserves and what India wants, as a privilege. It goes without saying that sharing of Teesta and other trans-boundary rivers cannot, and must not, be tagged with India’s transit to its north-eastern state through Bangladesh.
Moreover, the proposed transit, as many experts have pointed out, will primarily serve India’s interest and hardly facilitate Bangladesh’s connectivity with other countries in Asia. As such, the eagerness of this particular section of the ruling elite speaks of their indifference to national interest. A less damning explanation of such eagerness could be their gratitude to India; after all, New Delhi extended its explicit support as the Awami League pushed through the uncontested and non-participatory general elections to the tenth Jatiya Sangsad in the face of strong opposition from the opposition political camp on the one hand and the rest of the world on the other, and was also the first to congratulate the politically legitimate AL-led government.
Be that as it may, any bilateral agreement with any country must be on the basis of mutual benefits. However, giving transit to India does not seem to meet such a standard. Moreover, as indicated before, the AL-led government must not allow India to tag its request for transit with what Bangladesh rightfully deserves. Besides, the government of the day does not actually have adequate political legitimacy to make such a decision of crucial national interest. Even if they had, they would still have been required to initiate debates and discussion in the national parliament, with a genuine opposition bench there, and outside before making any decision in this regard.
In any case, it cannot be left up to the ruling elite, which have often displayed their penchant for ceding to New Delhi’s whims and wishes, to make the call in this regard. It is imperative for the conscious sections of society to be vigilant and vocal so that a few individuals of questionable motive, if not allegiance, do not undermine the interest of the country; after all, Bangladesh belongs to the people, not to a few individuals in the corridors of power.
Latest move for transit to India raises familiar questions
THE apparent eagerness of the Awami League-led government to allow India transit to its north-eastern provinces through Bangladesh, especially in view of New Delhi’s persistent refusal to address Dhaka’s legitimate demands, e.g. fair share of Teesta and other trans-boundary rivers, and implementation of the land boundary agreement, and genuine grievances, e.g. continued killing of Bangladeshis by the Border Security Force, is quite disturbing. According to a report published in New Age on Wednesday, an inter-ministerial meeting, chaired by the finance minister, endorsed a proposal by the Bangladesh high commissioner to India for resolution of the outstanding bilateral issues that hinder realisation of the long-standing demand of the Congress-led Indian government. Not surprisingly, the proponents of the latest move have hammered on the familiar theme of ‘bilateral cooperation’ and ‘regional connectivity’ as the rationale for granting transit to India. Suffice to say, for the AL-led government, ‘bilateral cooperation’ has seemingly come to mean unilateral concession to New Delhi and ‘regional connectivity’ link between Indian provinces.
A section of the AL-led ruling elite has persistently sought to establish a flawed correlation between what Bangladesh rightfully deserves and what India wants, as a privilege. It goes without saying that sharing of Teesta and other trans-boundary rivers cannot, and must not, be tagged with India’s transit to its north-eastern state through Bangladesh.
Moreover, the proposed transit, as many experts have pointed out, will primarily serve India’s interest and hardly facilitate Bangladesh’s connectivity with other countries in Asia. As such, the eagerness of this particular section of the ruling elite speaks of their indifference to national interest. A less damning explanation of such eagerness could be their gratitude to India; after all, New Delhi extended its explicit support as the Awami League pushed through the uncontested and non-participatory general elections to the tenth Jatiya Sangsad in the face of strong opposition from the opposition political camp on the one hand and the rest of the world on the other, and was also the first to congratulate the politically legitimate AL-led government.
Be that as it may, any bilateral agreement with any country must be on the basis of mutual benefits. However, giving transit to India does not seem to meet such a standard. Moreover, as indicated before, the AL-led government must not allow India to tag its request for transit with what Bangladesh rightfully deserves. Besides, the government of the day does not actually have adequate political legitimacy to make such a decision of crucial national interest. Even if they had, they would still have been required to initiate debates and discussion in the national parliament, with a genuine opposition bench there, and outside before making any decision in this regard.
In any case, it cannot be left up to the ruling elite, which have often displayed their penchant for ceding to New Delhi’s whims and wishes, to make the call in this regard. It is imperative for the conscious sections of society to be vigilant and vocal so that a few individuals of questionable motive, if not allegiance, do not undermine the interest of the country; after all, Bangladesh belongs to the people, not to a few individuals in the corridors of power.
Latest move for transit to India raises familiar questions
