Deterring democracy

Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to Dhaka was mistimed. It looked as if he had gone to shore up the sagging image of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina. He has only heightened the anti-India feeling graph. New Delhi is not seen neutral.

I do not know why and for how long have we to support the authoritarian rule by Hasina in Bangladesh. True, she is the daughter of Sheikh Mujib-ur Rehman, who liberated East Pakistan from distant and oppressive West Pakistan. But that does not give her the right to flout the constitution and the accepted norms.

Take for example, the recent municipal polls in Dhaka and Chittagong. Ballot papers in favour of the candidates of the ruling Awami League were shoved into the ballot boxes to the horror of voters and others. Mujib must be turning in his grave. He had restored the people’s right to express themselves against the military junta ruling from Rawalpindi.

No doubt, Modi’s visit has given a shot in the arm of secular forces against the burgeoning influence of the fundamentalists, led by the Jammiat-e-Islam. Hasina would still have her way. In fact, the cavalier manner in which she has suppressed the dissent arouses doubts about her credentials. Did she ever have conviction about a free state and the democratic way of governance?

The most glaring example is the manner in which she humiliated Bangladesh’s first foreign minister Kamal Hasan. He is a colleague of her father Sheikh Mujib and is a legend in his lifetime for adhering to the values. The boycott of elections by the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) was an unthinking act.

True, Hasina made it obvious that she would go to any extent to win at the polls. Yet, if the BNP had participated, a few of its candidates would have been returned and opposed Hasina’s point of view before the people.

Undoubtedly, general elections decide the fate of rulers. But the municipal vote is important to assess whether the party, which won, has fulfilled through governance the promises made during the poll campaign. India is lucky that the path on which the first prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru put the country—democratic and secular—is being followed diligently. His daughter Indira Gandhi derailed democracy and not only gagged the press but suspended the fundamental rights. But people did not take things lying down. They ventilated their pent-up anger when elections were announced. It is unimaginable that the even the mighty Indira Gandhi could be defeated.

It is another matter that when she returned to power in 1980, she went out of the way to punish even those bureaucrats who carried out their duties. But it is a pity that she took revenge against those whom she suspected though they were nowhere near the Janata Party government.

The Congress, the author of the Emergency, has learnt its lesson. The party has regretted its misdoings. I wish the party had apologised to the nation.  Unfortunately Bangladesh, a product of the people’s right to say, has lost the vigour of expression which the nation once had. Such a happening is a sad development by itself. But it becomes all the more poignant when the person changing it is from the family which liberated the people from the clutches of West Pakistan.

No one else is to blame except Hasina. She is herself extinguishing the flame of democracy.  True, that it should be done by the daughter of Mujib is not only disappointing but also disconcerting. She can shackle the nation still further is a harrowing thought. But it can happen since she has effaced the line between right and wrong, moral and immoral.

Placating Hasina

In this atmosphere of Hasina representing a dictatorial figure, Modi’s visit was all the more unfortunate. He should have said somewhere while in Bangladesh that the country was a product of revolution and it should continue to radiate the same kind of thoughts.
But he preferred to placate her even though the people of Bangladesh were disappointed because they expected India to give some sign that it is not happy with the way Hasina was functioning.

True, Modi was able to implement a long-standing agreement on the exchange of enclaves. But this understanding had the support of all parties when the matter was discussed in parliament. Of course, the credit for implementing the accord goes to him. But he should have used the opportunity to thank all the political parties in supporting the accord with a useful and endearing neighbour. For him to take the credit of demolishing the “Berlin Wall” is churlish. 

I wish he had refrained from criticising Pakistan. Not that the criticism was uncalled for but on a foreign soil when he was talking about amity in South Asia, he should have avoided singling out Islamabad. He should realise, as his predecessors have, that the countries in South Asia someday must have a common market and lend a helping hand to each other in business, trade and development.

The people of Bangladesh were expecting some agreement on the Teesta water. But Foreign Minister Sushma Swaraj’s statement was unhelpful because even before undertaking the journey to Dhaka, she said that the Teesta water was not on the agenda during the Modi visit.

West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee’s visit along with Modi was an important development. It should indicate to Dhaka that New Delhi is serious about settling the problems of the Teesta waters. That it did not happen during Modi’s visit should not be taken as if India was adamant in having its own way.  In fact, Mamata’s visit should please Dhaka that the settlement is may take some time but the process has started.