5 February 1994, Daily Star
There is no denying the fact that the recent visit of Awami League president and Leader of the Opposition in Parliament Sheikh Hasina has drawn attention of different quarters including, obviously, the political circles in Bangladesh. Attempts have already been made by many to prove that the visit in reality has brought a positive feedback for AL, which was for a long time detached from this leading veto power of Asia. Some are still trying to draw a conclusion that in the backdrop of the demise of socialist empire, once led by undivided USSR, this visit perhaps met with a need of the time. Some tend to point out that the visit was a part of AL policy as an immediate response to the unfolding consequences of the changing relations between India and China. The most important and interesting thing is that some are even trying to brand the visit as China’s “green signal” to AL for its future role as a party in power. Why all these assumptions, conclusions and analyses? What is the real feedback even AL and Hasina can think of having obtained by a single tour?
Yes, Hasina visited China at the invitation of the Communist Party of China in November 1993 and with this very visit the Communist Party of China officially claimed that it had reached the point of destination in establishing formal ties almost all the political parties in Bangladesh in particular..
Without focusing on the ongoing national, regional and international scenarios in their multi-dimensional perspectives, it would not be wise to willy-nilly pass comments on the visit of AL high-powered delegation headed by the party chief and leader of the opposition in parliament, Sheikh Hasina.
Political atmosphere in the world and that of the sub-continent has drastically taken a new shape and course after the final exit of the USSR-led socialist empire form the international stage and the onset of the phenomenon reducing the former Soviet Union into an entity dependent on the capitalist West headed by the unipolar supreme power, the United States of America. In the absence of a unified USSR it has now become very difficult and challenging for India’s foreign trade losing out, to a large extent, on her diversified markets of commodities and goods. More than a dozen of Republics of former Soviet Union will take time to fill in the gaps or may not finally be in a position to replace all of India’s lost market, which has already started yielding a negative signal for the India economy. On the other hand, growing relations between the USA and Pakistan are going to stand as Alps for India. USA-China relations on the question of human rights and democracy seem to have gone awry in spite of a series of attempts and dialogues at various levels to clear the air.
India once tried her level best to convince USA to list Pakistan as a terrorist state and all sorts of diplomatic steps, maneuverings and media publicity were geared up to this end. Even a year ago, Pakistan’s tensions and anxieties were exposed like anything at different bilateral regional and international forums. Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif was finally compelled by the rapidly developing circumstances to request then leader of the opposition in Parliament, Benazir Bhutto to negotiate the issue with USA, which Benazir readily accepted. She rushed to USA, had talks with officials and leaders at different strata and for the time being broke the ice making the US leaders understand that no quick stance should be adopted by Washington considering the overall situation prevailing in the sub-continent.
With the assumption of power by PPP headed by Benazir Bhutto, the relations between USA and Pakistan have been developing so dramatically that the USA’s stand on Kashmir has made another big problem for India. The USA has officially made it clear that ‘Kashmir is a disputed area’ and hence, the problem has to be solved politically through negotiations instead of use of military force. Premier Benazir openly lauded the USA’s role in the sub-continent with special reference to India and Pakistan.
Benazir understands well that Islamic Bomb is not only a nuclear bomb to the people of Pakistan, it is also a symbol of their existence against the mightier nuclear power neighbor India. That’s why India apprehends that Pakistan will go on with this very programme. To India’s utter surprise, the generalized conclusion that Pakistan’s importance to USA has lessened as the Afghan issue is no more there, has itself now been in question.
So, the basic issues of India’s concern- enlistment of Pakistan as a terrorist state, pressure on Pakistan otherwise to give up the program for a nuclear bomb and ensure the determination of the rights of India over Kashmir now seem to be tangled for reasons, known or unknown, obvious or remote.
The very roots of the tense relations between China and India go back to the boarder incidents of 1954. Attempts were made to soften relations. Premier Chou En Lai came to India in 1954 and 1956, had a wide range of talks with the Indian counterpart but no positive results were to follow mainly because of their strict adherence to national interests in their own perspectives. This was partly due to India’s increasing inclination towards USSR, the then ideological arch rival of China, and partly due to china’s growing propensity to friendship with Pakistan, India’s arch enemy since the Partition of the subcontinent in 1947.
It was premier Rajiv Gandhi, a forward-looking, successor of the great Nehru family of India, who took a historic initiative to break the stalemate or isolation of long 34 years; went to china on an official visit in December 1988 that formally paved broader avenues for multifarious cooperation between these two big neighbors of Asia. The historic declaration of the joint communiqué at the end of the official talks between Rajiv and Li Peng is considered to be the real basis of future course of actions and discussion between china and India. They had an understanding for strengthening further relations without putting any more fuel to the burning issues existing between china and India. Rajiv’s visit was reciprocated by the visit of Chinese premier Li Peng to India in 1992. Premier PV Narasimha Rao visited china very recently and both china and India now seem to be of the same opinion for feeling that “under the changed circumstances, past hostilities backed by uncompromising approach of arrogance and caprice should have their own peaceful ways to die down or cool down’.
Pakistan fought three wars with India, two on the issue of Kashmir and one relating to the liberation war of Bangladesh. What was the extent of china’s promises to stand by Pakistan in times of her crises and wars with India? The war of 1962 between India and Pakistan was limited and short-lived while the wars of1965 and 1971 had their own proliferations and peculiarities that continued for some time. In 1965 Pakistan thought something very big would be done by her mighty ally china, but china only confined herself to paper statements, continuous propaganda through media, print and electronic, and limited supply of light weapons. USA stopped supply of arms and ammunitions to both India and Pakistan, which put Pakistan into further imbalance in term of stocks of weapons and India got upper hand consequently. The war of 1965 had to be mediated by USSR and was settled through signing of ‘Tashkhant Agreement’ in 1966.
The war of 1971 between India and Pakistan was the most important one on question of the territorial integrity of Pakistan that was lost through the creation of Bangladesh. Zulfikar Ali Bhutto paid an official visit to China and what type of discussions took place between Bhutto and his Chinese counterpart remained shrouded in mystery and secrecy. However, everybody noticed that it was the first time in the diplomatic history between the two states that no ‘joint communiqué’ was issued after the talks. It might have indicated that China asked Pakistan to go for a political settlement of the problem. But Pakistan mysteriously played the same music, of course, with a renewed assertion that “china is always with Pakistan and it would come forward militarily, if need arises”. Records show that Pakistan’s claims about china’s promises were either not corrects or china deviated from her stand in reality. At any rate Pakistan’s use of “china card” did not produce any clearest positive results for her at least in her crises and wars with India.
China did not recognize Bangladesh till the changeover of august 15, 1975. This was not because of Pakistan rather it was due to china’s conviction that Bangladesh had, in fact, become a satellite of India backed by USSR. Bangladesh’s relations with China have their own logic and reasons based on national, bilateral, regional and international considerations. It was General Ziaur Rahman, then Deputy Chief Martial Law Administrator, who visited China in 1976 and formally started cementing the process of bilateral ties between Bangladesh and China. Hasina might have her own sufferings and mathematics about China.
Therefore, it is against the backdrop of USA-Pakistan relations, China-Pakistan relations, China-USA relations and, above all, growing China-India relations that China’s invitation to Sheikh Hasina deserved to be considered.
One has to agree that AL carrying a tradition of long 42 years is the most organized, well-founded, goal and program oriented political party with very broad-based grassroots units. With the demise of socialist USSR, India itself is going to renew relations with China and China’s long-held conception of AL’s blind inclination towards its rival is no more strongly in existence.AL should not be in isolation from China when China has been maintaining relations with a number of political parties including BNP and JP. AL was also trying or waiting for a good ground to have a formal connection with China through its Communist Party. AL’s political and diplomatic moves to build up ties with almost all the major political parties in the western countries covering USA have meanwhile reached a point from where it only looked to be in the fitness of things in the change global atmosphere that AL has a rapport with the Communist Party of China.
But Hasina should not come to a quick conclusion that her talks with the Chinese leaders will be remembered for all times to come. Chinese leaders are basically less emotional and very much practical, pragmatic and careful about national, bi-lateral, regional and international phenomena depending on time, space and dimension. Their discussion process is also interesting. They first invite the guest to speak phase-wise on national, bilateral, regional and international matters. After having learnt the guest’s views they present their own analysis, interpretations and understanding on the very matters. Here reference may be made to the great experience of former US Secretary of State Dr Henry Kissinger, widely known as the monarch of diplomats of his time. After his formal talks with Chairman Mao, Dr Kissinger come out and faced a group of journalists standing outside. One of them asked him, what are your impressions about Chairman Mao? Dr Kissinger Quickly responded, ‘Chinese Leaders are very cautious of using their words and sentences. Each and every word and sentence of Mao can be measured and weighed’. What Dr Kissinger said about Mao twenty years ago, I believe the sense and mode hold good in continuity even today also in a formidable and formative manner in the succeeding Chinese leaders as I tasted and experienced it a little bit when I had a chance to visit China in November, 1987 as a member-secretary of the high powered delegation of Jatiya Party headed by the then secretary general and deputy Prime Minister Shah Moazzam Hossain at the invitation of the Communist Party of China
Sheikh Hasina being the political successor of Bangabandhu has some plus points. She has also learnt a lot over time as the president of AL and the leader of the opposition in parliament. She has to go a long way if she wants to have a footing internationally. She appears to be keen on strengthening AL’s image outside for which the party’s sub-committee on international affairs headed by deputy leader of the opposition in parliament and former foreign minister Mr. Abdus Samad Azad MP is looking for experts and veteran ex diplomats who have understanding of international affairs.
But whatever links lobbies and bases AL may/have, it is Hasina who is to prove her own excellence with a grasp and understanding of national, bi-lateral, regional and international issues, politics and happenings--- past, present and future. Hasina while moving with her mission from country to country, forum to forum and party to party needs to take into serious consideration with a sense of caution and guard what Benazir has achieved within a short period of time, what Nobel prize winner Suki of Burma earned within her limited span of political life, what Corazon of Philippines showed surprisingly within the time she got, even what Khaleda Zia has demonstrated promisingly by this time with her own style and understanding despite limitations therein.
Growing importance of Asia to the West and USA is at present a reality. Asian economy particularly the economies of Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Singapore etc. Japan besides; have been booming so promisingly that even President Clinton had to take note of the surge. His seriousness for APEC is a direct sign of USA’s concern. Clinton administration has also opened a new section at the State department. to deal with the countries in the sub-continent.
We remember Hasina’s guarded remarks “China can play a positive role in Asia” made during her press briefing at the Zia International Airport immediately after her return from China. Diplomatically and politically, Hasina shall have to ensure that AL-China relations are not disturbed or influenced or jeopardized by AL’s relations with India and USA. She must also be watching how India-China relations and/ or China-USA relations shape up in the future.
No comments:
Post a Comment