Diplomacy: Myanmar has outsmarted Bangladesh
Dr. Dilara Choudhury
Entry of as many as four hundred thousand Rohingya refugees, following an attack on Myanmar’s security forces by Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army (ARSA) on August 28, 2017, and consequent genocide of Rohingyas by its security forces, Bangladesh is confronted with serious and numerous non-traditional security threats to its territorial integrity and sovereignty, and has become involved in global politics.
Naturally, questions abound about Government’s non-awareness of a calamity of such magnitude as well as its policies which could have prevented the country’s gargantuan security risks.
Dhaka’s obliviousness
Usually a given country’s security risks are tackled by being vigilant about international political development, especially the ones which may threaten its security, and thereby, undertaking a pro-active diplomacy, so that the conflict may be avoided. In case of Rohingya problem with Myanmar, Dhaka adopted none of the above, though the warning signals rang since late 1970s.
Dhaka fumbled twice in the 1970s and in the 1990s as it agreed to Myanmar’s conditional acceptance of their nationals without addressing the core issue, i.e. determining the criteria for Rohingya identity. Country with foresight and sagacity would have taken a note of it, especially in the 1990s, as the Rohingyas’ by then, had lost their Burmese nationality and basic rights through its reformed 1982 citizenship law and became virtually stateless.
It was not realized that if they are driven out of their country of residence as stateless Bengali illegal immigrants, their natural destination would be Bangladesh. However, till then Myanmar’s intransient attitude about Rohingya issue, though visible, had not yet become rigid. As evidenced now, Myanmar was simply buying time and an opportune time to deal with the Rohingya issue in their own way.
What perplexes us is Dhaka’s obliviousness even when UN and Human Rights Organizations were criticizing Myanmar’s Rohingya atrocities and predicting that an ‘ethnic cleansing’ was on the way following the renewed violence against the Rohingyas by Myanmar’s security forces in 2012.
It is really mindboggling that even then Dhaka did not internationalize the issue by raising it in various regional forums like SAARC, ASEAN, BIMSTEC, and keep our friendly and powerful regional countries such as China, India and Russia informed.
Lack of pro-active diplomacy
While continuing bilaterally with Myanmar, Dhaka’s foremost strategy should have been to undertake a vibrant, pro-active and preventive diplomacy, and convince the world that Rohingyas and Bangladeshis may have similar ethnic identity and religion but they are not Bengali immigrants as they have been living in Rakhine state (Arakan) since 9th century, and highlight its concerns about its potential destabilization, probably triggering a regional one, due to Myanmar’s actions against the Rohingyas.
Instead Dhaka has been all through and till recently was mostly busy with the repatriation procedure (Prothom Alo, Sept. 17, 2017).
Obviously, it is understood that the tremendous outcry in national and international arenas for Rohingya genocide in Myanmar and immediate support by the Islamic countries such as Indonesia, Malaysia, Turkey and Maldives, which emanated due to emotional bond of a common religion, and those from the U.S. and European countries arising mostly for their humanitarian concerns and, cynical as it may be, lack of strategic and economic interest in Myanmar, especially after the U.S. withdrawal from TPP, and not due to Dhaka’s pro-active diplomacy.
Needless to say that Dhaka’s lack of diplomatic capacity has been responsible for the situation the country faces today. Bangladesh is friendless due to the way its foreign policy has been conducted. After years of diplomacy, how is it possible that Dhaka has no support on Rohingya issue, which is threatening its state security, by none of the powerful regional countries such as China, India and Russia?
Stand taken by these regional powers has glaringly highlighted Dhaka’s diplomatic debacle. It is, thus, crystal clear that none considered Bangladesh worth supporting for its inherent strategic and economic values, which would have served their own national interest –strategic and economic. That was not to be, especially in case of India and China.
Dhaka’s ‘India first’ policy
The fact of the matter is that Dhaka has been unsuccessful in maintaining a policy of equidistance from India and China, like that of Myanmar, which was possible due to its geo-strategic location. Bangladesh’s geo-strategic location is crucial for both the regional powers, no less than Myanmar, for their ambition to dominate Indian Ocean and become a world power. In that quest, both India and China need to have a foothold in Dhaka as Dhaka sits centrally along India initiated BCIM corridor and in a strategic position along China’s 21st century Maritime Silk Road.
By maximizing Dhaka’s geostrategic location through diplomatic endeavours, Bangladesh should have wooed both so that one would vie other in order to get Dhaka’s favour. Instead, Dhaka tilted heavily towards Delhi, especially since 2014, with its informal “India first” policy initiated by Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina to take care of India’s core security and economic interests (Xiar, Carnegie, New Delhi), that alienated China as its security interest was ignored.
China’s stand on Rohingya is, thus, understandable. But the people of Bangladesh are exacerbated by India’s role as there seems to be no quid pro quo in India-Bangladesh bilateral relations. As a result, Bangladesh find itself helpless as it has no leverage on its most trusted friend.
Myanmar and Rohingya Issue
While Dhaka was grappling with Rohingya problem, Myanmar, on the other hand, has been perusing its objective of Rohingya annihilation by taking systematic steps bilaterally and globally. Bilaterally, while dealing with Rohingyas’ identity issue, Myanmar satisfied Bangladesh by mutually agreeing that the refugees would be called neither Bengalis nor Rohingyas implicitly denying their historical claim, which kept Bangladesh at bay. Subsequently by emphasizing on their Muslim identity by Suu Kyi helped Myanmar to convince the world that Rohingyas are terrorists – a ploy, which would be bought by all – the West, China, India, and Russia as well, all of whom are tackling Islamic insurgencies in their own countries. The reason de tre, thus, was in place so that in the name of curbing terrorism Myanmar could wage genocide of Rohingyas.
However, China, India and Russia did not fall in line with Myanmar only due to their own insurgency problems as the military junta of Myanmar, demonstrating its extraordinary capacity in conducting global politics, embarked on a pro-active diplomacy. Sensing the emergence of a world order, not in place yet, in the form of China-Russia axis vis-a-vis India-Japan axis backed by a retreating pivotal power, the US, Myanmar’s policy of non-alignment, in this regard, prompted it to keep close ties with all major Asian powers.
Its dramatic success in wooing both China and India by accommodating strategic and economic interest of both is discernable as both are trying to please Myanmar in order to curb the influence of the other. Russia, too, became an ally as a potential partner of the possible emerging world order. Myanmar’s confidence in China and Russia has been well founded as both are supporting Myanmar all the way to UN Security Council, a body that has the power to punish Myanmar. Myanmar, thus, by setting the stage both bilaterally and internationally, lashed out with full vigour.
A friendless Bangladesh
As a friendless country, Bangladesh now will have to deal with this calamity, most probably, on its own. Suu Kyi’s recent address to her nation does not augur well for Bangladesh. She has been ambivalent all throughout her speech including the implementation Koffe Anan report as she is trying to dilute it by appointing a national Commission to look into the matter.
Bangladesh now needs to come together, evaluate its national politics as well as its foreign policy if it wants to live as a sovereign and independent country.
Professor Dilara Chowdhury is former faculty member of Jahangir Nagar University, Department of Government and politics and a political analyst
http://www.weeklyholiday.net/Homepage/Pages/UserHome.aspx
