Bangladesh high commissioner to India Syed Muazzem Ali talks about the ‘all-pervasive’ India-Bangladesh relationship, insists that its ties with China are only ‘commercial’, calls for regional co-operation through SAARC, denies any IS base in Bangladesh, and admits to ‘threat’ of radicalisation in Rohingya refugees.
SHUBHAJIT ROY: It has been nearly two months since the Rohingya refugee crisis erupted; five years after the first exodus in 2012. What do you make of Bangladesh’s position on the crisis? Are you concerned about India’s position?
The core issue in the Rohingya crisis is the inability of the Myanmar government to recognise these people (Rohingya) as citizens of the country, although they have been living there for centuries. Prior to the (August 2017) mass exodus, there were already about 3,00,000 Rohingya refugees living in camps in Bangladesh since 1978. Bangladesh does not have any bilateral problems with Myanmar. After the August episode, which was termed as an ‘anti-terrorist’ operation (by Myanmar), suddenly hundreds of thousands of (Rohingya) people started to flee (and arrive in Bangladesh). I will be very frank — initially, we tried to stop it. But the influx was so huge that we could not resist it for too long. And as of today, nearly 5,82,000 refugees have taken shelter (in Bangladesh). The statistics claim that about 60% of the refugees who have taken shelter are women and children, and a large number of them are elderly people.
The UN secretary general has termed the crisis a disaster of catastrophic proportions. The UNHCR (United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees) has also called it a textbook case of ethnic cleansing. Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, when she went to the UN, suggested a five-point plan to (tackle the crisis). Firstly, all hostilities against all communities must be stopped. Secondly, she requested that a UN team must be allowed to visit the area and see for themselves the condition of the refugees.
Thirdly, she said that these people should be given an opportunity to live in a safe zone under UN supervision. And that they should be allowed to live with dignity and honour. Her fourth point was sustainable repatriation of the refugees and the fifth was implementation of the Kofi Annan Commission report. (Annan was appointed by state counsellor Aung San Suu Kyi to head a year-long commission tasked with healing long-simmering divisions between the Rohingya Muslims and Buddhists in Rakhine state).
The Kofi Annan Commission was not a UN Commission; it was set up by Myanmar. Kofi Annan was asked to chair the group to bring credibility to it and the report offers a solution to the Rohingya problem. It is not a comprehensive solution but it it is an interim one. It only talks about giving them a chance to live with dignity and honour and security and pave way for their eventual citizenship.
The UN team has not been allowed to visit (Rakhine state) and every day 15,000-20,000 people are coming to Bangladesh to take shelter. I recently saw some reports that another 30 (Rohingya) villages have been burnt down. The UN was telling us that another hundred thousand people are waiting to move to Bangladesh.
The Bangladesh-Myanmar border is tense. They (Myanmar) have heavily mined the entire border keeping only 40 miles open. There have been some serious accidents also. Myanmar has violated our airspace a number of times. Our Foreign Minister and Prime Minister have already expressed their concern and urged that the issue be resolved peacefully.
When Prime Minister Narendra Modi visited Myanmar, a joint declaration was adopted. After the visit, I met Foreign Secretary S Jaishankar. Since then, India has updated its position and a fresh statement was issued. India has also joined us, and all the members of UNHCR, in adopting a resolution to give a fresh mandate to a UN team to continue to pursue the human rights situation in Myanmar.
At the bilateral level, there have been discussions between our prime ministers and external affairs ministers, both in New York as well as over the telephone. When (External Affairs Minister) Sushma Swaraj comes to Dhaka, we will discuss all bilateral issues and also exchange views on Myanmar and the Rohingya refugee crisis.
Since India is the prime mover, and shares its borders with both Bangladesh and Myanmar, we expect India to play an important role in forcing the Myanmar government to accept its order. We do not want Myanmar to be isolated or ostracised. But we want them to understand that such an operation (against Rohingya) creates security problems for all of us.
The Rohingya people who have been uprooted are particularly vulnerable. The UN secretary general himself has said they can be victims of radicalisation. So it is better that we resolve this issue sooner than later. India and Bangladesh are frontline States. We have to coordinate with each other and put out the fire.
Jyoti Malhotra: Has Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina spoken to Prime Minister Modi about the Rohingya crisis?
The exchanges that take place between the two heads of State only they know about it, until of course they share the details with me. That does not necessarily mean that there has been no telephone call. There is exchange of information between the two governments at every level. We have been directly communicating with each other. Sushma Swaraj, in fact, travelled with my PM from Dubai or some place in the Middle-East all the way to New York, and then they were also together in New York for 10 days. There have been extensive consultations between the two sides at the highest level.
Shubhajit Roy: In September, during his visit to Myanmar, Prime Minister Modi said in a joint press statement with State Counsellor Aung San Suu Kyi that India shares the country’s concerns over “extremist violence” in Rakhine state. Sometime after that visit, you met the foreign secretary. Was Bangladesh disappointed with the statement and did you convey it to the foreign secretary?
The joint declarations are normally prepared before the visit. The declaration that was adopted following PM Modi’s visit (to Myanmar) was actually worked out before the mass exodus (of the Rohingyas) actually started. I met him (the foreign secretary) two-three days after PM Modi’s visit. By that time, we (Bangladesh) already had something like 3,00,000 Rohingya refugees. I updated him on how the situation had changed. Maybe, when PM Modi was there (in Myanmar), there was just an ‘anti-terrorist’ campaign and the mass exodus took place subsequently. Later, the Indian government updated its position on the Rohingya issue. They expressed concern over the human rights situation. So there was an update I would say.
Seema Chishti: The South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC), it seems, has become a hostage to India-Pakistan hostilities. Is it dead and how does that impact countries other than India and Pakistan? Could the Rohingya refugee crisis have been dealt with in the SAARC forum?
The SAARC initiative actually came from Bangladesh. It was in the 1980s. The advantage of SAARC is that it provided a good opportunity to our leaders to discuss bilateral issues on the sidelines of the summit meetings. In the past we have seen that these meetings have been very useful in the resolution of many of our bilateral problems. Unfortunately, prior to the summit in Islamabad last year, a series of terrorist attacks took place and Bangladesh (and other countries) also felt that holding the summit under the circumstances then may not have been conducive. The current chairman is holding consultations and I hope that we will be able to hold the summit next year. There is no alternative to regional cooperation. (In the wake of the September 18 terrorist attack in Uri in J&K, India decided against participating in the summit, which was followed by a boycott from Afghanistan, Bhutan and Bangladesh. The summit was eventually cancelled).
Shubhajit Roy: Does the SAARC summit not being held adversely impact other countries?
I can only speak for Bangladesh. There are some areas where we can make progress (through the summit) — hydro-electric projects, water-sharing etc. Where we are stuck is full implementation of softer South Asian free trade issues. We may have problems in terms of getting outside funds for major South Asian projects. So we may get stuck on these subjects, but the functional cooperation continues.
Sushant Singh: In the past couple of years, the countries in India’s neighbourhood have been virtually forced to make a choice between their two neighbours, India and China. Chinese investment has increased in Bangladesh in the past few years — the investment in Chittagong port and the belief that this could be the so-called ‘string of pearls’ which could be used by China to encircle India later. Also, Chinese defence equipment is being supplied to Bangladesh. How does Bangladesh perceive these developments?
There is no choice between India and China as far as Bangladesh is concerned. India-Bangladesh relationship is all-pervasive. It is comprehensive. When a Bangladeshi guy falls sick he never thinks of going to China, he comes to India. His extended family lives on the Indian side, not in China. My own maternal grandfather’s house is in Karimganj, which is on the Indian side. So, we are all products of a divided family. With India our relationship is more like family.
We see China as a potential investor, as a banker. We seek assistance from China because they are the only ones who can offer this kind of assistance to us. To develop Chittagong port, we need external assistance. PM Sheikh Hasina has been quite categorical about it. She has said that we would have a consortium agreement and she would not allow just one country to build this deep-sea port. And, in fact, if I’m not mistaken, it is the Netherlands which is coordinating for investments for the deep-sea port.
So, it is not going to be a Chinese-built port, like in Sri Lanka. No. Even India is a part of this particular project. In my PM’s view, this will be a regional port and will be used by all countries of the area. We have been quite categorical about these things. As far as the defence equipment is concerned, that is another treaty which has been continued from the past. Our military, from the Pakistani days, has been used to supply of equipments and other things from China. Now we are trying to make it more broad-based. But that doesn’t mean that Bangladesh is entirely dependent on the Chinese. The main equipment for our air force comes from Russia.
Let me make it quite clear, as far as China is concerned, we think of them as bank managers. Just because they give us money to buy a car, it doesn’t mean that the bank manager is going to replace my elder brother, who may not be in a position to give me the same money. PM Sheikh Hasina has all along maintained that we have a very special relationship with India and a straight, commercial, investment link with China.
Shailaja Bajpai: On the issue of undocumented immigrants — allegedly from Bangladesh — in Assam, there were meant to be some talks on how to resolve the issue. There has been a BJP government in the state for the past 18 months. Have there been any developments?
Both Bangladesh and India have an established deportation process and every time we have some undocumented crossings, we conduct interviews, and if we are satisfied we give these people documents and they travel back to their own country. It happens on both sides, India as well as Bangladesh. The previous Congress government in Assam also tried to hold a major exercise, but when I visited Guwahati after their tenure, the figure for undocumented residents was very small. I do not want to quote the figure because you’ll be surprised to know it. The new (BJP) government has also undertaken the project. They are free to do this project and at the end of the day if they identify those people (the illegal immigrants), we will undertake the verification process. When both sides are satisfied, the normal repatriation process will continue.
See, Bangladesh has fairly impressive records in terms of millennium development goals. As you know, our longevity etc… the figures are quite impressive. The per capita income in most of the states in the Northeast that adjoin us is far below (Bangladesh). In fact, if it was legal, I would head to Mumbai or Kolkata, there would be better job opportunities there perhaps. But to go to Guwahati will be quite a bitter exercise.
Ravish Tiwari: Since 2014, there have been reports of radical elements, such as the Islamic State (IS), making inroads into Bangladesh. What is the level of threat in the country now? Has it declined since 2014-15 or does the challenge persist in 2017?
We have not found any organised the IS base in Bangladesh. IS is trying to restore Sunni supremacy. So, ideologically, the IS doesn’t have a very strong position in our country because the Sunnis occupy all posts in Bangladesh. The Shia number is very small. It is much higher in Pakistan than in Bangladesh. But, yes, there are certain Islamic outfits, particularly those who had opposed the liberation of Bangladesh… The government has been very vigilant.
Ananthakrishnan G: The Indian government told the Supreme Court about Rohingya link to terror modules in Pakistan. Have you come across any such instance in your country?
Well, the threat of radicalisation is there. I have expressed my concern, which echoes the views of the UN secretary general himself. The threat of radicalisation is very strong. When so many people are uprooted from their homes… It is in our mutual interest to see to it that the Rohingyas are allowed to return to their country, where they can live freely as full citizens of the society.
Various English language magazines have been terming Rohingya people as future Palestinians. It is a very dangerous connotation and I don’t want such a thing to happen in our neighbourhood. So yes, they are a potential threat. We have to be very vigilant, we will continue to cooperate with the security apparatus. The sooner we can send them back to their country, the better it is for us.