Pranab in Dhaka today: working with caretakers till parties return

For one, he will have to find a balance between India’s publicly expressed support to an early return of the democratic process in Dhaka and the importance of developing a working relationship with the caretaker government.

From all indications, the caretaker government led by President Iajuddin Ahmed has no intention to hold the general elections any time soon. Both President Iajuddin and the Army Chief Moyeen Ahmed have made it clear that the restoration of the political process must await sweeping reforms in the administration and the polity.

Mukherjee’s visit, in itself, will be interpreted as a wink and nod to the new government in Bangladesh, that India is prepared to hold its peace, at least for the moment.

Almost exactly two years ago, India had demanded and got a postponement of the 13th Summit of the South Asian Association of Regional Cooperation in Dhaka amidst what it considered unacceptable developments in the region. These included political violence in Bangladesh and a coup in Kathmandu by King Gyanendra.

In February 2005, the UPA government was not willing to let Gyanendra exploit the SAARC summit to earn political legitimacy. This time around New Delhi appears quite willing to cut a lot of political slack for the new leaders of Bangladesh and have them at the SAARC summit.

Having assessed that there is a lot positive in what the caretaker government has done so far, and recognising the widespread popular welcome to its moves in Bangladesh, New Delhi is quite happy to wait and see how the situation develops. Second, Mukherjee must find ways to deliver a consistent message to all sides in Dhaka. He needs to disabuse misperceptions on the part of the Awami League led by Sheikh Hasina and the Bangladesh Nationalist Party led by Khaleda Zia, that India will pressurise the new dispensation to hold immediate

elections.

At the same time, Mukherjee must also make it clear to the caretaker government, that it should not take for granted the current empathy from India and the international community with the new reformist agenda in Dhaka.

Advising restraint to the political parties, avoidance of an over-reach to the caretaker government, and a strong encouragement to the new forward looking political trends led by the likes of Muhammad Yunus, should be the essence of Mukherjee’s message in Dhaka.

Mukherjee surely recognises that Bangladesh today has an opportunity to reorganise the rules of the political game that had reached a dead-end earlier this year.

If that requires a temporary suspension of democracy and the marginalisation of traditional political actors, India should be prepared to give this scenario a chance.

The current tumultuous developments in Bangladesh offer India a rare opportunity to “de-personalise” its relationship with Bangladesh. Accused for years of preferring the Awami League over the BNP, India found it impossible to conduct normal relations with the governments of Bangladesh, irrespective of which of the parties headed it.

India’s long term interest lies in staying, and being seen as, neutral, within the domestic politics of Bangladesh. Mukherjee could use his consultations in Dhaka to signal clearly that India is prepared to review the entire gamut of bilateral relations and is open to constructing a relationship that is based on realism and mutual benefit and not on the basis of ideology or political

preference.

As the caretaker government and the Army in Dhaka send positive signals to India on range of issues, from trade and transit to terrorism, Mukherjee must reaffirm India’s own strong commitment to address the many grievances that Bangladesh has nurtured over the years. Put another way, there is a big moment in Dhaka that Mukherjee cannot afford to let slip by.