In the court of Mr. Panni: Taking about the Foreign policy of Bangladesh

[This was published in Dhaka Courier on 05 July 2013]

Mr. Wajid Ali Khan Panni, former Deputy Foreign Minister(1988-1990) and High Commissioner of Bangladesh(1996-2000), was talking to a group of students who called on him at his residence at Gulshan with a view to understanding his mind  and learning something about the foreign policy of Bangladesh. Mr. Panni is a well-mannered, well brought-up, friendly, accommodative, educated, fair and straightforward personality on all counts. Both as foreign minister and High Commissioner he showed his excellence courageously to handle the issues before him.

‘I am really happy to welcome and see you all. It’s my further pleasure that you have decided to talk to me on the issues and problems in the foreign policy of Bangladesh. In fact, I am neither so much in touch with our foreign policy nowadays nor I am far away from it. But I find more interest in the subject than anything else. Why does it happen to me I do not know?  May be it was my area in the immediate past or may be that I feel that foreign policy is the most delicate and sensitive area for Bangladesh’ told Mr. Panni.

‘Sir, there are lot of controversies and debates about the foreign policy of Bangladesh. Even some critics hold the view strongly that, truly speaking, Bangladesh has no foreign policy. What she follows and maintains should rather be termed as foreign relations, which are by and large decided provisionally depending on opportunistic and strategic standpoints wherein the very concept of national interest is not taken into account as expected. All these took place in the past and the same are being repeated more aggressively by the incumbent Hasina led Grand alliance government. It’s a baffling message indeed. Why does it happen? put forward Hauzzaman Miah, a student of General History. ‘Sir, is it true that our foreign policy is mostly influenced by our big neighbor state India?‘ articulated Shirin Sultana, a student of Physics. ‘Sir is it true that diplomacy now is not being played courageously, melodiously because of lack of vision and mission. Sycophancies, politicization and political interference in the foreign ministry overshadowed merit and quality and as a result areas of high profile in our foreign policy have been made subservient to those who do grapple with the issue before them’ added Yasmin Jagirdar, a student of Journalism and Mass Communication. ‘Yes, I am enjoying your questions, asking and queries on our foreign policy. Please go on, go on. Open your mind freely without hesitation and laxity’ sounded Mr. Panni in a very encouraging mood and mode.

‘Thank you sir for your open-mindedness’ uttered all in a body. ‘Sir is it really possible and viable for a small state like Bangladesh to voice loudly and stand against India on question of her legitimate rights and national interests’ asked Jafar, a student of geography. ‘This not a question at all’ said Nazibur Rahaman, a student of History. ‘Certainly it’s a pertinent and good question’ refuted Sheikh Saber, a student of International Relations. ‘What is good or bad that should not be decided by any of us at this juncture rather let the matter be dealt pragmatically and judiciously by Panni Sir’ added Kablu, a student of political science. ‘But you should not stop us from raising and passing questions and queries, which, I feel important for understanding the matter in question’ roared Raffin Ahmed, a student of philosophy. ‘I am of the same mind with you’ said Yakub Ali, a student of Theology. ‘Our overall understanding about the matter should better be exposed after Panni Sir’s explanation and narration’ asserted Fouzia Khan, a student of English literature. ‘Well, then it is better to listen to what our well-known celebrity says’ articulated Jassimuddin Mondal, a student of sociology. ‘Yes Sir, would you kindly now start enlightening us with your knowledge and experience on the foreign policy of Bangladesh’ expressed Kasem Chowdhury, a student of peace and conflict.

‘Well, listen to me very carefully’ told Mr. Panni adding ‘Today there we meet with an adage that Bangladesh has become a hinterland and model for her being interfered by foreign powers covering big states such as USA, India, China, Saudi Arabia, UK in particular and international bodies like UN and EU. How far it is true is a matter of research and actuality. But one thing I understand very plainly that such straightforward conclusion is not befitting in all cases. In the continuing uni-polar world under the umbrella of USA more or less every state rotates around USA, which has again been branded as hyper state having all hyper tensions alone. There is no denying the fact that the overall external standing of Bangladesh as a member of developing countries is well-understood. Concept of limited sovereignty is now a certainty for the developing courtiers in meticulous and, ironically enough, this has been sharpened, extended and tightened by the concept and emergence of uni-centric world.

In fact, foreign policy is a kind of manifestation of a state’s on the whole national power linked predominately with geo-politics, defense and economic entities. Article 45 of the Constitution of Bangladesh holds pointedly the policy of ‘friendship to all, malice to none’ Here important is to decide, first of all, the areas of national interests, which constitute the basis of foreign policy of a free and independent country. That’s why the article 45 at the same time impliedly asserts that on question of national interest and territorial integrity there shall be no compromise and here lies the root of disagreement leading to confrontation and animosity that denotes and tells that Bangladesh shall be friendly with those countries which believe the same towards her and, therefore, reverse shall be the case if the state of relations is soured and strained because of resolute stickiness to national interests. Foreign policy of a free country is usually modeled in the contest of national, bi-lateral, regional and international perspectives. One of the real challenges for Bangladesh is to strike a sustainable balance in this regard.

Internationally we have to be tactful, diplomatic and friendly to all the powers, big or rising, and regionally we should be responsive and responsible to our regional power which is India in our context. India is also our bordering neighbor that makes further compulsion for Bangladesh in bi-lateral state of affairs. Big reality is that India is surrounding us on the three fronts with its negative and positive characteristics. In fact, our foreign policy is largely shaped and reshaped in the contest of our issues and problems, standing or emerging, with India since almost all our big problems remain and continue with India. Some are historical while others are created after the birth of Bangladesh. Many critic say that India views the countries in the region in the light of India doctrine (Supremacy of India in the region) while others feel this should be replaced with Guzral’s doctrine [With a view to creating confidence in the mind of small states a big neighbor state should be more responsive and responsible to its small neighbor(s)]. What I feel Bangladesh first of all needs a common approach (bi-partisan) to her foreign policy, which USA and the countries in EU and India have been maintaining for a long. This common approach is the understanding and consensus between the party/alliance in power and the opposition/alliance in the opposition in parliament. Without such broad-based national consensus it is really the most challenging task for any government in Bangladesh to deal with India in particular. Hence, let us all have a ground work at home at the outset. Therefore, further truth is that until and unless politics at home stands on a viable footing, no better result should be expected in bi-lateral, regional and global fields. So, viable national politics is a condition precedent to our attempt to strengthen and consolidate our standing outside Bangladesh, which means that only a democratic, viable and less confrontational political atmosphere with national consensus on major national issues can ensure and uphold our national interests externally under all the circumstances’.

NGO leader Shamim Ashan, who was invited by Mr. Panni to enjoy such free and frank discussions, then opined professedly that ‘I agree with Mr. Panni that no initiative on the matters of foreign policy shall be effective as per expectations if it is not backed by consensus approach. Imposition of smear of recapitualistic foreign policy by one party on the other will then routinely wither away. We should not forget that foreign powers will continue playing, necessarily or unnecessarily, if our political parties remain divided into so many diametrically opposed camps. Therefore, before blaming any other country say India, USA and so forth let us blame our political leaders at home who have miserably failed to show statesmanship in our foreign policy also’.