[Note from Hindu Vivek Kendra: See note at the end.]
"You have come from India, perhaps that is why all these things are happening here now," said Bangladesh's law minister, barrister Maudud Ahmad, to The Asian Age. He was referring to the assassination attempt on former Prime Minister Hasina Wajed, and there was not a trace of a smile on his lips when he made what appeared to be an accusation. "Yes, we have carried the bombs with us," was a flippant reply that evoked only a grim stare as the minister moved away to speak to others not from India.
There is a strong anti-India sentiment running through Bangladesh that is apparent even to a casual visitor. Bangladeshis admit to this, with a senior journalist pointing out that India-Bangladesh relations "are today very bad, there is a lot of suspicion and no warmth at all." A non-functional government and a hyper Opposition might not see eye to eye on any issue, but are united in putting the blame on India for everything that goes wrong. A journalist told this correspondent almost within an hour of landing in Dhaka that the devastating floods that had covered two-thirds of Bangladesh took place because India had opened the Farakka reservoir gates and deliberately allowed the flooding.
New Delhi has allowed matters to slide to a point where Bangladesh is virtually ignored in its South Asian strategy. Indian officials point out that matters are sliding to a point of no return, with extremism taking on an active anti-India dimension - with the northeastern states being the direct target. One of the more serious charges levelled by Prime Minister Khaleda Zia and Awami League chief Sheikh Hasina against each other is of being pro-India. In a kind of schizophrenic response, both women leaders are also keen to demonstrate that they are close to New Delhi and at the same time use this to attack the other for "selling out" to India. For instance, the Bangladesh Prime Minister was among the first to send a special emissary to mend fences with the new UPA government within days of its assuming power. Sheikh Hasina followed later, and met Prime Minister Manmohan Singh before going on to Ajmer Sharif for pilgrimage. Both then attacked the other for currying favour with New Delhi.
Journalists pointed out that it was this kind of politics that had "unnecessarily politicised relations with India to a point where neither the BNP or the Awami League is leaving the other with the locus standi to mend fences with India." He said that in her last three years in power Sheikh Hasina had distanced herself from New Delhi because of the propaganda that "she is pro-India." When asked about this "pro-India" label, the former Prime Minister immediately pointed out that it was Begum Khaleda Zia who had sent an emissary to greet the new government first.
A senior editor known to have independent views said the anti-India sentiment arose out of acute poverty, frustration and growing anger. The government, he said, lost no time in diverting the anger towards India with the issues of illegal migrants, economic policies, river waters all melting into one anti-Indian pot. He said that New Delhi's "arrogance" also added to the sentiment. Indian high commissioners to Bangladesh in the past have pointed out the urgency for New Delhi to recognise the problem and evolve a strategy to deal with the issue. "The assassination attempt on Sheikh Hasina is a defining moment," sources said, pointing out that it was time India woke up to the growing security threats within Bangladesh.
At a cultural evening organised by a Bangladeshi businessman for the visiting South Asian journalists, tempers suddenly flared over a Pakistani colleague's ill-timed reference to Rabindranath Tagore. The duo on stage had just announced that they would be singing Nazrul Islam songs, to which the Pakistani journalist said: "Why don't you also sing Tagore songs?" Senior Bangladeshi intellectuals present at the gathering voiced their resentment. "This is not right at all, this is not any way to behave," they told the Indian journalists, who were quick to point out that the intervention had come from a Pakistani and not from them. It was clear at the very onset that the bonhomie was just surface deep, and that relations between India and Bangladesh need to be worked on, with the larger country taking the initiative.
[Note: So the smaller country can
create all sorts of problems for the larger country, but it is the larger
country that has to compromise. The only compromise is to give in to the
absurd demands of the smaller country, and in effect work against the interest
of the larger country. And this suggestion of compromise comes from a citizen
of the larger country!]