top of page
Writer's pictureGautam Sen

The Price Of Bangladesh’s US Vassalage

Militaristic belligerence from a Bangladeshi point of view is mere bluster as the beleaguered country cannot pay for its electricity bills, and has been reduced to desperately importing eggs.


Dhaka's Tribune newspaper has published an over-anxious tirade promising to convert the country of 200 million into a 'poison pill' if India attacked Bangladesh. But throwing in the metaphorical kitchen sink to excoriate India was a case of overegging the pudding. It is unlikely to be the unaided effort of a humble Ph.D. candidate though it needed the authorial stamp of a Bangladeshi to obscure its actual inspiration and origins.


The author accuses India of interfering in Bangladesh ever since its inception but without even a passing reference to the murder of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and his entire family including a newly-wed teenage bride. This was the 1975 coup d’état allegedly sponsored by the CIA with their ever-faithful vassal, the UK, playing a role too. One coup plotter allegedly found employment with the BBC World Service and requests for his extradition were haughtily ignored. US interference to sponsor the murder of the founder of the nation and his entire family is evidently a legitimate activity and not worth mentioning especially since Bangladesh is a fully paid-up US vassal now.


All of this is on the public record and indiscreet triumphalism in Washington in the wake of the recent regime change it sponsored gives the burgeoning narrative ample credence. In the eyes of this pretentious and novitiate instrumentality, the overthrow of the elected government of Sheikh Hasina was evidently justified because she sought some Indian succor to survive the foreign interference that finally succeeded in overthrowing her. No comment on the totally illegitimate imposter Muhammad Yunus’s takeover but then he has long been a US asset. But it is to be anticipated he too, like the pathetic Muizzu of the Maldives, will appear meekly in Delhi to plead for sustenance.


The one highly pertinent term, which is “Bangladeshi interests”, is only mentioned once, and no logical attempt is made to specify them. Apart from the long-established national sport of murdering, abducting, raping and seizing the property of its own Hindu citizens, the original inhabitants of the benighted land of Bangladesh, you might imagine some obvious goals might be identified for the country. But the goal, enjoying most public support, seems to be the expulsion of the remaining 17 million Hindus and other minorities, reduced from 25% in 1947 to 7.5% today and Bangladeshi demographers predict it will reach nil by 20250. As we speak, Hindus are being murdered, Hindu women beaten, abducted and raped, their places of worship destroyed and outrageous prohibitions imposed on their religious festivals. All these gross human rights violence is being enabled with the complicity of the Nobel Peace prize winner, Muhammad Yunus. The egregious violence apparently enjoys the unashamed support of his Anglo American sponsors of the coup against Sheikh Hasina who perceive Bangladesh’s religious fundamentalists as their most reliable anti-Indian allies.


It might have been concluded that the first goal of Bangladesh is to achieve economic growth to ensure the survival of its impoverished citizens, 40 million of whom have infiltrated India illegally, in search of a better life. Sheikh Hasina was making a go of it despite catastrophic errors of policy, compounded by ongoing political chaos that is now demolishing Bangladesh’s economy. The second was to reach a reasonable and durable arrangement on sharing river waters originating in India and cooperation to manage flooding. Both these goals were achieved with India’s generous cooperation except for one vital agreement, thwarted by the Islamic party ruling West Bengal, apparently unconcerned with the fate of their Bangladeshi co-religionists. The third goal would have been to plan for the inevitable worsening of widespread inundation, already a grim reality in Bangladesh, which will intensify with global warming. These three existential issues of survival for Bangladesh depend on amicable relations with India. But they find no mention in the juvenile animus expressed by the author framed by his intellectually challenged American mentors towards all things India.


Instead the author, incited, no doubt, by his Americas interlocutors waves the supposed prowess of Bangladesh’s military manhood. It is argued that Bangladesh has a huge population that will rise to the challenge of any Indian threat, presumably because they are Islamic warriors who the author doesn’t fail to highlight once ruled India. This is also a Pakistani boast that ended with Lt. Gen. A. A. K. Niazi bawling inconsolably when berated by India’s brilliant Jewish General. Lt. General JFR Jacob, once greeted as a hero at Bangladesh’s annual independence day celebrations. Pakistan is the other alleged strategic weapon in Bangladesh’s geopolitical arsenal and a nuclear power in the bargain.


The two bankrupt countries surely deserve each in their present shape of hopeless degradation though Bangladesh’s travails have only just begun. The author also throws in an irrelevancy about Bangladesh’s strategic depth as if anyone would venture into the human and natural swamp that is the country. The author is also confident that China will come to Bangladesh’s aid in the event of war with India, along will Pakistan, which will open a third front. It seems their paramount interest, regardless of their own calculations, will be to protect Bangladesh from an unlikely invasion by India.  Finally, the chicken's neck issue is mentioned as a dire threat to cut India off from its five northeastern states.


So, it might be appropriate to remind the authors of that this braggadocio is a bit amusing coming from a country which cannot pay electricity bills and has to urgently import eggs from India to feed demand at home. It will come as a mighty surprise for them to know that India has had reason and decades to ponder this chicken's neck conundrum and how it will respond to this threat. India will invade in force to secure the appropriate depth of territory to forestall this fully recognised eventuality. In addition, it will be an occasion to slice off sufficient depth of Bangladeshi territory on India’s eastern borders to secure a safe haven for its beleaguered minorities, exposed to unending genocide.


This was first proposed by India’s iron man, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel and Bengal’s great hero, Shyama Prasad Mukherjee, in the aftermath of the murder of 1 million Hindus in East Pakistan during 1949-50. As far the prowess of Bangladeshis, led by priapic Jamaat members, it would be farsighted of them to store knives and swords for weaponry because any serious provocation and India will launch 200 Brahmos missiles to destroy every air and naval base as well as military encampments and arms depots in Bangladesh. No surprise to know India is aware exactly where they are located. The cost of the disabling blow will be approximately US $2 billion and India’s foreign exchange reserves stand at over US $600 billion at present.


Beyond speculation, what is the reality of India’s expectations from Bangladesh. It only wished that Bangladesh would not be the second Pakistani front that it was before 1971. In return, India would shower the country with largesse, with over US $1 billion still owed in unpaid power supplies alone. It fervently wished Bangladesh economic prosperity that would benefit both countries through trade and curb the inflow of illegal entrants into India. Many projects in Bangladesh have been funded by outright Indian grants and its citizens throng Kolkata for decent medical care. Improved connectivity also allowed Bangladeshis to easily enter India.


To its enormous detriment, India took no action to expel the millions of illegal Bangladeshis living openly in India. But there is no gratitude and totally fabricated accusations have been advanced that India was responsible for Bangladesh’s once in century flood although its own leading expert has disavowed the claim. Bangladesh, like Nepal, was also a priority object of Indian help in the event of need. Nevertheless, Indian policy makers have erred in allowing India to become predominantly associated with the Awami League. It would have been wiser to have an arms-length and formal cordial engagement with Bangladesh, accompanied by muted political engagement, beyond indicating its inviolable red lines. These would have included absence of assisting Pakistan and China against India, red lines Bangladesh has lost no time in breaching triumphantly. As India’s External Affairs Minister has said in another context, “there will be consequences”.


In conclusion, one might pause to assess what could become of Bangladesh under Anglo-American tutelage, a US vassal for all effective purposes. US vassalage has not ended well for all its client states, not least its British kith and kin whose support for the insane attack on Russia, by mobilizing Ukraine, has all but destroyed its economy and brought political chaos on it. The fate of Germany is even more shocking, falling from great heights of economic success to its parlous present condition of de-industrialization. Ukraine has been permanently destroyed territorially, biologically and as an economy. This recalls the fate of Laos and Kampuchea during the Vietnam War when the US used their territory. It is also worth bearing in mind the US is close to bankruptcy itself and could not conceivably meet the vast financial needs of a large tottering economy like Bangladesh.


The US has installed its Bangladeshi Zelenskyy, Muhammad Yunus, and its citizens will weep without respite if Bangladesh was to become a base for military action against China. Sheikh Hasina, sought to avert this unfolding tragedy and India also did not wish the US to use the subcontinent for its sordid military games. India has done nothing against Bangladeshi interests though over eager involvement with the Awami League has turned out to be a blunder. Yet, Bangladesh cannot survive without India and even the traitorous Muhammad Yunus has now reached out to it. Bangladeshis should now watch carefully because India will not extract a pound of flesh for any help it extends to Bangladesh. For all their faults and missteps, Indian policymakers are never intemperate. However, if relations breakdown India might be tempted to boycott Bangladesh completely, as it has done with Pakistan and seal the border in the way it has in the west.

Comments


bottom of page