How rational is BNP's opposition to India?

Since the formation of the Awami League government after 2008, the BNP has held press conferences every time the Prime Minister of Bangladesh has visited India, criticizing the visits. The BNP has consistently opposed the agreements and treaties made during these visits, presenting negative comments. Dear readers, do you think that all the memorandums of understanding and agreements with India since 2009 are unreasonable and anti-national? According to the BNP, they certainly seem to be. Is it possible that the BNP has reached a point where opposing the Awami League government means opposing India as well?

The opposition party BNP has labeled Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina's recent visit to India as "one-sided," claiming that the Awami League is conspiring to trap Bangladesh in long-term servitude to India, which could threaten the national security and sovereignty of Bangladesh. The people of Bangladesh are accustomed to such statements from the BNP since the daughter of Bangabandhu took office. This is why the general public does not take such statements from the BNP seriously.

At one point, BNP believed that due to the strong relationship between the Awami League and the Congress Party in India, a solid state-level relationship had developed. After the Congress government, the BNP celebrated the BJP coalition's victory, thinking that the Modi government would not develop a strong relationship with Sheikh Hasina's government and would instead support the BNP in various ways. However, it turned out that the relationship between the Awami League government and the Modi government became even stronger on paper compared to the previous government. Analysts and researchers have noted that the relationship between the Awami League and the Modi government has become more robust and solid.

In terms of bilateral issues, Bangladesh's interests have been more safeguarded under the Modi government. Recently, when the Modi government assumed power again, there was no significant enthusiasm within the BNP. Sheikh Hasina was present at Modi's swearing-in ceremony, and Bangladesh was the first country invited for an official state visit. Experts working in foreign affairs have pointed out that India places great importance on its relationship with Bangladesh. Maintaining cooperative relations with a neighboring state is crucial for border security.

Furthermore, due to Bangladesh's expansive foreign policy and diplomacy, India is also focusing on strengthening its mutual relationship with Bangladesh. Resolving unresolved issues through discussions is the goal of both neighboring countries. BNP Secretary General Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir stated at a press conference that the agreements and memorandums of understanding have turned Bangladesh's defense and national security into a part of India's national defense and security, which is dangerous for Bangladesh. The party claims that the new seven memorandums of understanding signed with India are mostly centered on the northern region of Bangladesh.

BNP has accused the government of conspiring to separate the Rangpur region from Bangladesh through these agreements. They have labeled Bangladesh's foreign policy as submissive, claiming that India wants to use Bangladesh's territory for military and civilian transportation, which is why it has taken rail transit. The BNP considers the failure to reach a Teesta agreement over the past decade and a half as a failure of the current government. However, reports suggest that the delay in the Teesta agreement is due to the opposition from both India's central and state governments.

Following the Bangladeshi Prime Minister's visit, the Chief Minister of West Bengal wrote to the central government objecting to the Teesta issue. This indicates that the issue was discussed between the prime ministers of the two countries. According to India's constitutional rules, the central government needs the written consent of the relevant state government to finalize an agreement with any state. The central government often takes initiatives to persuade the state government by providing subsidies. The Modi government is likely to follow this path to materialize the Teesta agreement, as the lack of an agreement has overshadowed many significant achievements.

Furthermore, India's cooperation is needed for the repatriation of Rohingyas. In the current global political scenario, the repatriation of Rohingyas requires the cooperation of both India and China. China has significant investments in Myanmar, and India is also investing there. China is reported to have relationships with both the Myanmar junta government and rebel groups. India also maintains contact with both parties. Therefore, both countries will play a role in the repatriation process.

The Bangladesh government is establishing diplomatic and commercial relations with both countries, considering all aspects. Meanwhile, the BNP continues to criticize. The party leaders are even claiming that the Bangladeshi Prime Minister is visiting China with India's permission. Can such a statement be acceptable in any way? The statement about visiting China with India's permission clearly reflects an anti-India stance. Before the 12th national parliamentary elections, the BNP leaders' rush to embassies highlights the party's reliance on foreign support. The people of Bangladesh did not expect such behavior from a political party. By claiming that the Prime Minister is visiting China with India's permission, the BNP has shown political imprudence.

As a political party, the BNP should aim to perform constructive criticism for the benefit of the government and the country. From 2009 to 2024, the BNP seems to believe that the government has done no good. They have seen every action as a sellout of the country and have brought corruption allegations. After the World Bank accused the government of corruption concerning the Padma Bridge, the BNP considered this their success and vociferously attacked the government in their speeches.

However, when it was proven that the government did not commit any corruption since the World Bank did not disburse any funds for the bridge, the BNP fell silent. The BNP should have admitted their mistake, but instead, they chose to find ways to demean the government through their rhetoric. The BNP needs to come out of this mindset and engage with the people with a firm commitment to working for the public good. If there is any agreement or memorandum with India, the BNP accuses the government of having a submissive foreign policy. Along with opposing the government, the BNP has now also started opposing India.

As a political party, the BNP should move away from this position. Additionally, the BNP is forming committees without new councils, leading to dissatisfaction within the party and creating a fear among leaders of losing their positions. The BNP should form committees through councils to establish transparent politics within the party.

Author: Assistant Professor and Chairman, Department of Criminology and Police Science, University of Chittagong.