Bangladesh media questions India’s insistence on defence pact

Even as Prime Minister Narendra Modi walked the extra mile, turning up at the airport to receive Sheikh Hasina on Friday and India rolled out the red carpet, agreement on water sharing of the river Teesta remains ‘a work in progress’, acknowledged MEA Joint Secretary in the Bangladesh-Myanmar Division Sripriya Ranganathan.

Bangladeshi newspapers, however, struck a note of caution and wanted Sheikh Hasina to keep national interest above all.

Serajul Islam, a former Bangladeshi diplomat, told Voice of America (VoA), “Bangladesh does not need a defence pact with India, or for that matter with any other country, because it does not face any threat of external aggression from any of its neighbours; with China, a sworn enemy of India, Bangladesh has been in a defence-related cooperation for decades. If Bangladesh signs such a defence pact (with India), it would be viewed by Beijing as a deal directed against it.”

The Daily Star columnist Mahfuz Anam says that India should be grateful to the Sheikh Hasina government: “India truly needs to be grateful to Sheikh Hasina for her determined and successful effort to dismantle all the camps of insurgents from the Northeast that Khaleda Zia's government had allowed in a mistaken policy to keep “pressure” on India. Sheikh Hasina's government has changed the narrative from “India, the hegemonic oppressor” to “India, the development partner” ever since she came to power in 2009.

Anam further points out that while Bangladesh is frustrated over the delay on a pact for water sharing of Teesta, India’s concern has been about “China being the biggest source of defence purchase” for Bangladesh.

“All of Sheikh Hasina's efforts appear to be now in jeopardy as India seems to be quite concerned about her China policy which resulted in the latter's increasing presence not only in Bangladesh's development projects but also in the sensitive area of military equipment purchase.”

Brig Gen Shahedul Anam Khan of The Daily Star writes that Bangladeshi government is “not in sync with the sentiments of the people when it comes to the issue of water sharing with India…” He further writes, “It must be unequivocally stated that our equation with India and the tone and tenor of the bilateral relationship will be patently of a different nature from that with any other country because of our historical association with it. What that means is that we should be prepared to go the extra mile but not at the expense of our national interest. The online formula for a sustained relation with India is win-win for both sides.”

Towheed Feroz of Dhaka Tribune writes that relations between the two countries should evolve in a balanced manner, by efforts from both sides, “Concessions must be made on both sides. Otherwise, it’s just a party for one side and a tedious serving for the other.”

He raised certain important issues about Rohingya Muslims, Teesta and broadcast of Bangladeshi TV in India. “Reportedly, on the Rohingya issue, at a recent UN meet, India refrained from voting against Myanmar… The practical point is that Bangladesh cannot but maintain a solid relation with her mighty neighbour, irrespective of which party is in power. But, sometimes, India seems to be a vacillating friend, not taking into serious considerations as to what aggrieves Bangladeshis. If Bangladesh needs her neighbour, then her neighbour also needs us, simply because of the vast growing market we have to offer.”

Protham Alo also speaks strongly against defence deals and quotes experts.

In an editorial, Ayesha Kabir quotes ANM Muniruzzaman, “It is not clear why there is a need for military cooperation or why India is so insistent about this proposal. The Indian media is speaking about joint manufacture. That means certain restrictions will be placed on our procurement. As it is, small states always have certain limitations. We must take this into consideration and keep national interests in mind when we take any steps.”