Ever since August 5, 2024—when Sheikh Hasina was overthrown by a turbulent coup in the streets, with the Bangladesh Army looking on—it has been evident from the flow of events that Pakistan’s hand was behind it. Since then, I have not been alone in often saying that Pakistan never left Dhaka—not in 1971, not ever. It remained embedded in Bangladesh in different ways, cultivating its interests among radicals, various political parties, the army and even intellectuals.
Till Hasina ruled, there was no question of a Pakistani upper hand. In August 2024, the situation was created with the connivance of external elements, with Muhammad Yunus, a supposed liberal, leading the pack to bring about the meltdown. Perhaps Hasina erred in her dictatorial ways; perhaps she should have had her finger on the pulse of the nation. That is important, but currently insignificant.
Since that event, Yunus, who parachuted back from the US to his homeland to be chief advisor to the interim government, has never been in favour of India in any of his utterances. Prior to the illegal change of government, Yunus’s oft-expressed views never really targeted India. He spoke in favour of regional cooperation and connectivity between Bangladesh and India, seeing it as a mutual benefit for both. He often emphasised the importance of trade, economic ties, and collaboratively resolving regional issues. Now Yunus has made it a point to be unpleasant towards India in the post-August 5 configuration. He has also found time to pass remarks against his bête noire on India’s linkages with his country’s original ‘first family’.
It’s in this context that Yunus’s recent statement in China has drawn intense flak in India. The exact statement, as quoted in the media, was, “India’s northeast is completely landlocked, and its access to the ocean is completely controlled by Bangladesh. The Siliguri Corridor is the only route that connects the northeast with the rest of India, and this connection passes through Bangladesh.” During such a high-level meeting in China, Yunus urged Beijing to establish an economic foothold in Bangladesh by leveraging the latter’s strategic position as the “only guardian of the ocean” for the “landlocked” northeastern region.
The provocation through this statement perhaps surpasses that generated by Hasina’s overthrow. To many, this may be construed as a direct slur towards India’s sovereignty and national security. The interpretations can be many, but one thing is obvious—the fact that Yunus has chosen to use words and occasions that promote confusion and obfuscation.
Do I find anything wrong in the physical description of India’s northeast given by Yunus? None whatsoever. But I find everything wrong with the context in which Yunus offered this description and its follow-up connotation, as per his perception. This cannot be treated as a standalone statement.
Obviously, Yunus and the Chinese officials, initially led by President Xi Jinping, had discussions that underscore a concerted effort to deepen the strategic partnership between Bangladesh and China, focusing on economic development, regional stability and collaborative infrastructure projects. Yunus knows that the Chinese have a deep interest in the Bay of Bengal and do not get optimum choices.
The China-Myanmar Economic Corridor forms a part of the Belt and Road Initiative. It connects China’s Yunnan province to Myanmar and provides China with access to the Indian Ocean via Bay of Bengal. Several projects enhance the China-Myanmar-Thailand connection without being formally a part of the BRI. Yet, there is no link to or through it to Bangladesh. The Bangladesh-India-Myanmar-China corridor is a geopolitical disaster, leaving Bangladesh with no land link to the Chinese mainland. It appears obvious that Yunus, in his naiveté, was trying to draw the attention of the Chinese to the feasibility of a strategic Bangladesh-China linkage to offset India’s domination of the Bay of Bengal. However, in a ridiculous choice of words and objectives, he touched upon India’s sensitivity—the Siliguri Corridor.
The Siliguri Corridor, often called the ‘Chicken’s Neck’, is a narrow stretch of land in the state of West Bengal that connects mainland India to its northeastern states. It is a region of immense strategic importance due to its geographic, economic and security implications. It is bordered by Nepal, Bhutan and Bangladesh, and is very close to the Chinese border at Tibet. This makes it vulnerable to external threats, particularly from China, which claims parts of Arunachal Pradesh.
The corridor is near Doklam, where India and China had a 72-day-long military standoff in 2017. Any conflict in this region could cut off India’s northeast. The corridor is home to important railway lines, highways and oil pipelines that sustain the economy of the northeast and of India too. Thus, was Yunus’s deliberately-crafted statement a reminder to China and others of India’s vulnerability, and the force multiplication effect that Bangladesh’s border configuration could have for Sino-Bangladesh strategic advantage? This is how nations often project the worth of their geostrategic characteristics.
It is apparent that Bangladesh is not alone. It is abetted and advised by the Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), which is obviously licking its lips at the potential of an Indian strategic disadvantage being exploited. In the past six months, the ISI has gone to quite an extent to make known its interest. Visits by senior ISI officials with specific forays to areas of strategic significance were a way of conveying interest. It now seems to have gone beyond, with translation of the same into words uttered by none other than Bangladesh’s chief advisor.
Yunus is warming up to Pakistan because he probably perceives that the Pakistanis would be his best bet in the fight for survival, which may come faster than anyone thinks. The radical elements are already proliferating, but Yunus knows that his survival depends on the creation of an anti-minority sentiment and a pathetically skewed sense of Bangla nationalism—all of which will militate against India.
India’s response has indeed been mature all through the developments of the last few months. Let us hope the meeting of Prime Minister Narendra Modi with Yunus at the BIMSTEC summit brings a much-needed turn to the flow of Indo-Bangladesh relations.
Lt Gen Syed Ata Hasnain (Retd)
Former Commander, Srinagar-based 15 Corps; Chancellor, Central University of Kashmir
(Views are personal)