The Indians must have regretted the timing of the visit of the Indian Foreign Secretary to Dhaka in their debriefing in South Block (the seat of the Indian Foreign Ministry), after the conclusion of the visit. In particular, they must have regretted her meeting with the former president HM Ershad. Most analysis on the visit in Bangladesh was that it was a failure. That conclusion has been based without any information about what transpired in Sujata Singh's most important meeting in Dhaka with the Prime Minister as no side released/revealed any information on this meeting.
Therefore any conclusion on the visit without knowledge about that important meeting would be incomplete. Nevertheless, from what came to the media about Sujata Singh's other important engagements in Dhaka do shed some light towards a negative conclusion on the visit's outcome. That said, the visit was undertaken with Bangladesh at a dangerous crossroad. The fight between the Awami League (AL) and the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) has brought governance to a standstill and Dhaka has been severed from the rest of the country by the opposition's programme of blockade. Acts of terror and destruction are suggesting that the country is breaking at the seams.
Therefore no one believed that the Indian Foreign Secretary came to Dhaka on a routine visit as she mentioned upon her arrival. She arrived in Dhaka amidst speculations and expectations given India's acknowledged ability in influencing politics in Bangladesh, particularly with the ruling Awami League. Those who are close to the AL or support its present course of action for going to the elections without the BNP that has pushed the country to the brink expected that Sujata Singh would carry a message of New Delhi's support for the ruling party's position openly to send the message that with India backing the ruling party, the opposition would fail in its movement. Those who thought otherwise - and in this group were many who have nothing to do with the BNP- expected that India, based on its democratic convictions and excellence in diplomacy, would support "inclusive" elections and find a way to encourage the AL in this regard.
Sujata Singh made the reason for her visit clear in her meeting with HM Ershad, albeit unexpectedly. She requested the Jatiya Party that had by then decided to make a volte-face on an earlier decision to take part in the elections, to withdraw that decision. She reasoned with the former president that elections the AL way were necessary to save Bangladesh from extremists led by the Jamaat. Almost immediately after she left, HM Ershad went before the media and spilled the beans. HM Ershad said that he declined the Indian request and instead told the Indian foreign secretary that Indian fear about Jamaat would become a reality if the ruling party pursued its decision to go for one-party elections. He said he told Sujata Singh categorically that the existing conditions did not favour elections the Awami League way.
HM Ershad completed the cup of disappointment of the Indians and the Al by stating in the same media briefing that the JP Ministers would resign from the controversial all-party government. He also reiterated a statement he had made earlier that the JP candidates who had submitted nominations for contesting in the elections would withdraw. That was not all that the Indian foreign secretary must have found disappointing in her meeting with HM Ershad. As she went to meet him, a big crowd there chanted slogans that must have left the Indian foreign secretary with the feeling that either she had gone to a wrong appointment or there must have been a major slip in the intelligence that went to her from the Indian High Commission in Dhaka.
Nothing unexpected happened in Sujata Singh's meeting with Begum Khaleda Zia. She said, what was quite appropriate, that India wanted a politically stable Bangladesh and the strengthening of democratic institutions in the country. She also recalled the visit of the BNP leader to New Delhi last year and mentioned about the visit in positive terms.
In her meeting with the media, the Indian Foreign Secretary went a step further and mentioned that India wanted the elections to be held in Bangladesh in a peaceful manner and participated by the "maximum number" of political parties, a stand that may have been influenced by the surprise served by HM Ershad. At the event, Sujata Singh showed a lack of cool that gave the impression that the Indians were not ready to endorse an "inclusive" election in Bangladesh but also not totally sure that without JP and the BNP, the country could have credible elections.
When a journalist asked whether an election without the major political party could be called "inclusive", Sujata Singh responded that there was no "set definition" for democracy. Quite evidently, the journalist was seeking a response from the Indian foreign secretary to reveal Indian stand, whether India supported the AL position or the BNP's demand for elections under a non-party caretaker government. Sujata Singh's response was closer to the stand of the ruling party but not entirely because even if the JP were to participate eventually, the elections would still then not be participated by the "maximum number of political parties" of the country. It was also not in line with the stand of USA/EU/China/Canada and the UN either. In other words, thanks to HM Ershad, the Indians have been pushed into a grey area of uncertainty.
This response together with what HM Ershad leaked to the media suggests the following. First, the Indian foreign secretary has not shown the usual high qualities that go with someone from the Indian Foreign Service holding such a high position. If the Indians had decided to back the AL-led government in what in Bangladesh is opposed by the majority of the people, then it should have been stated differently and in response to an inquisitive question of a journalist. Second, the Indians played into the hands of HM Ershad who knew how the public would react if they heard about what transpired in his meeting with Sujata Singh.
In fact, HM Ershad did more damage to the Indians. He exposed India for not just backing the AL; he also exposed India working against the BNP by requesting his party to participate in the elections knowing fully well that the main opposition party would not be taking part in those elections. That was poor diplomacy on India's part. HM Ershad has exposed India blatantly interfering in Bangladesh's politics in violation of diplomatic norms. In fact, HM Ershad has exposed much more - that India was involved in luring the JP to join the elections so that the BNP would not be able to come to power in Bangladesh. India has done so at a time when its standing in Bangladesh is at an all-time low owing to its failure to deliver the Teesta and the LBA deals together with killing Bangladeshis indiscriminately at the border. With the AL's acceptance in Bangladesh also on the decline, Sujata Singh has enhanced the damaging prospects of the "India card" falling on the ruling party by some unbelievably poor diplomacy.
By the visit, New Delhi has disappointed a large number of the people of Bangladesh who had expected that it would use its friendship with the ruling party to encourage it to settle its differences with the BNP and go for "inclusive" national elections as is the demand of the majority of the people of the country as well as of the international community. It would be very surprising if Sujata Singh failed to gather some first-hand information about the political weather in Bangladesh with the wind clearly blowing in favour of elections under the non-party caretaker government. She would do both India and Bangladesh and the future of India-Bangladesh relations a favour if she would faithfully report one observation to her political masters in New Delhi, that it is through "inclusive" elections only that the dangers of Jamaat could be contained.
All the above notwithstanding, there was a demeaning aspect of Sujata Singh's visit. She could at best have been an agent carrying a message from her government that she should have placed with Shahidul Huq, her Bangladesh counterpart. Instead such is the sad predicament of our politics that she was elevated to a position befitting someone way above her league that humiliated the nation and its people. We are indeed living in times that are surreal!
The writer is a retired career Ambassador. [email protected]
© 2024 - All Rights with The Financial Express
