• Home
• Video
• Books by Ikram Sehgal
• About

Strangers when we meet

Despite the obvious warmth of the reception by the Bangladeshis to the Pakistan delegation to the Bangladesh-India-Pakistan Summit, the meeting on January 15, 1998 only underscored how far apart we were on substantive issues. For the record, a 15-point agenda to enhance business cooperation was adopted, it was heavy on substance but in the absence of addressing core issues like Kashmir, this excellent initiative will be still-born. The Indians did not want even to mention in the Dhaka Declaration that there were any problems, with that stance no Pakistani, let alone the PM, can go further than give lip-service to proposed trade initiatives. In that spirit, while Ms Hasina Wajed and IK Gujral made concrete proposals to make South Asia a viable economic one-unit on the pattern of other regional communities, Mian Nawaz Sharif spoke of the need for cooperation but in keeping with the Pakistani stance did not make a single proposal. In effect, he filibustered and very rightly so.

The Indians have a one-point agenda, how to cross the territory of Pakistan to Central Asia. As long as that land barrier remains, the rest of the world has a significant freight advantage over Indian goods and commodities, only land access can give India the opportunity to exploit the opportunities that this vast hinterland offers. Bangladesh also can benefit by getting its tea and jute products into Central Asia but only in a limited basis, relative to India. India can export almost anything to the countries on its periphery in South Asia while importing nothing in return. Pakistan will only benefit by making some toll tax for the use of its communications infrastructure, the traffic will far exceed the costs. With the making of the Islamabad-Peshawar Motorway, the Indians would be looking forward with glee to a Delhi-Dushanbe link-up. Since we stand to lose in free trade with India, the only bargaining chip we have in solving a number of problems between us, particularly the Kashmir issue, is the land access, that must be spelt out to India. While Bangladesh is certainly justified in seeking a no-tariff regime for its products vis-a-vis the rest of South Asia, Pakistan’s economic security will be compromised by free trade with India. As such, what Pakistan can propose to Bangladesh is a bilateral free trade on a no-tariff status between Pakistan and Bangladesh, giving Bangladeshi tea and jute goods access to the Pakistani market in return for a wide range of Pakistani products led by raw cotton, textiles, etc. A SUMMIT should have really been between Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh, three countries that can trade equitably without being overwhelmed by each other, which is the only one-way prospect if one allows free trade with India. The Indians very cleverly used the Bangladeshi enthusiasm to initiate the SUMMIT, they expected to be the biggest beneficiary by far. Unfortunately the rather blatant ploy did not work as Pakistan rolled with the punch.

There is no doubt that there is a far greater maturity in the Pakistani handling of an Awami League (AL) Government in Bangladesh. Historically we have had an automatic antipathy for the Awami League and it was believed that it was mutual for Pakistan. The Bangladeshi PM seems to have separated from historical bias in striking up a genuine rapport with the Pakistani PM and this is apparent in sincerely seeking Pakistan as a partner in economic and cultural cooperation. Whatever line Mian Nawaz Sharif has fed her, she seems to accept that it is sincere and is reflected in the toning down, or rather complete elimination, of her earlier anti-Pakistani rhetoric. That rapprochement is a major plus point. Clearly the Pakistan PM is in his elements in dealing with Ms Hasina Wajed. The PM came across as an assured national leader ready to fob off diplomatic lobs with confidence and without rancour. If the Indians were clearly using the apparent Bangladeshi enthusiasm at South Asia trade for their own ends, the Pakistan PM was not about to irritate his Bangladesh hostess by acting obdurate.

The State visit following the three nations Summit was a marked success but the icing on the cake was the obliteration of India in the second Final of the Jubilee Cricket Cup on January 16, 1998 in the presence of the PM and the Pakistan delegation. Almost 26 years to the day after late Indian PM Indira Gandhi with Shaikh Mujib beside her took the salute from the Indian Armed Forces in March 1972 to commemorate the new nation of Bangladesh in the Dhaka Stadium, the daughter of Shaikh Mujib sat next to the PM and watched Pakistanis give a drubbing to India. Guess who was the vast majority of the crowd supporting? The exercise in futility that was the Business Summit, the raison d’etre for visiting Bangladesh, was not a washout after all.

Pakistan has been very simplistic in its relations with Bangladesh. Prior to 1975, we had exceedingly bad relations. On the assassination of Shaikh Mujibur Rahman, we were among the first to recognize the short-lived Khandkhar Mushtaq Ahmad’s Islamic Republic of Bangladesh. Our relations came on an even keel with the advent of late Maj Gen Ziaur Rahman as President and CMLA in 1977. However his “freedom fighter” stigma as being anti-Pakistan stuck till “repatriate” (a term denoting those who did not rebel in 1971 and were repatriated from Pakistan in 1974) Lt Gen HM Ershad took over after his assassination, this despite the excellent personal rapport between late Gen Ziaul Haq of Pakistan and his Bangladeshi counterpart. Through the 80s Ershad maintained the love-fest with Pakistan, within the parameters that would not offend India deeply enough to intervene. With Begum Khaleda Zia, who followed Ershad’s downfall, Pakistan had a far better rapport than with her late husband! Thus it was to Pakistan’s disappointment to see Begum Hasina Wajed overcome both Khaleda Zia and Ershad in the 1996 elections. Since Ms Benazir tended to ignore all countries of South Asia (and indeed the Third World) except India, relations remained stagnant, rather they deteriorated as the Awami League Government was seen toeing the Indian line in its foreign relations. Most alarming was the Gujral Doctrine of regional sub-groupings excluding only Pakistan from the countries of South Asia. With the incumbency of Mian Nawaz Sharif as PM in Pakistan, a sea-change came into Pakistani relations with Bangladesh. During the Extraordinary OIC Summit in Pakistan in March, barely weeks after taking over in February 1997 he made a special effort vis-a-vis the Bangladeshi PM. Unencumbered by the baggage of yesteryear, Mian Nawaz Sharif candidly stated that “the history of the region would have been different had the mandate of the 1970 elections been accepted”, and reached the core of almost every Bangladeshi heart, manifest vocally in the very visible support to the Pakistan cricket team in Dhaka Stadium. Our bureaucratic tendency is to normally have a simplistic attitude that if a person is not pro-Pakistani he must be pro-Indian whereas we try our level best to project pro-Pakistanis as anti-Indians. Instead of following the safe course of making people anti-Indian, Mian Nawaz Sharif took the more difficult task of making them pro-Pakistani, his very visible sincerity has disarmed the normally pro-Indian Awami League Government and made them take another hard look at their available options.

Perhaps the greatest indication of things to come came from the normally vocal anti-Pakistani persona of Tofael Ahmad, BD Commerce Minister, who was keen on opening a bus-route to Ajmer Sharif but could not do so because of Indian restrictions of one kind or the other. How could they talk about linkages and associations, he stated, when the Indians do not allow the recently inaugurated Bangladesh-Nepal bus link to traverse the measly 10 miles of Indian territory? That about sums up the present state of projected commercial relations in South Asia. On the one hand is India, not ready to concede an inch but holding out for many concessions and on the other, the rest of the countries of South Asia, ready to concede many concessions but expecting something in return. In the present circumstances, whatever one may try and initiate, they will all flounder at the doorstep of India intransigence. A day may well come that because of this myopic self-centered policy South Asians may well be “strangers when we meet”.

Did you enjoy this post? Why not leave a comment below and continue the conversation, or subscribe to my feed and get articles like this delivered automatically to your feed reader.