Disturbing Decline Of Diplomacy Across South Asia Bodes Ill For All

Within the South Asian context, a noticeable coarsening of diplomatic discourse among four countries has occurred, following the violent regime change in Bangladesh, a brief encounter involving India and Pakistan and sporadic skirmishes between Pakistan and Afghanistan. A new political alignment, whose contours will be clearer after the Bangladesh general elections, is gradually emerging in the region.

Whether the assumption of power in Bangladesh by a new, elected government in 2026 will lead to lasting political stability and consolidation of democratic forces in South Asia, remains to be seen. Much will depend on the resolution of the emergent Pak-Afghan conflict and within Pakistan, the Baluchi struggle for independence.

Since the Northwest Pakistan-Central Asia zone has been witness to prolonged historical conflict and power struggles involving numerous warring tribes and major foreign powers, it may not be advisable to rush to a definite conclusion regarding future peace or stability.

The recent dust-up between India and Pakistan remains an unfinished business, as far as India is concerned. A fresh flare-up in the short/medium term cannot be ruled out.

Given this backdrop, the present acrimonious exchange of statements between India and Bangladesh concerning their respective poor record of human rights violations can be expected to continue. The greater responsibility for tensions affecting bilateral Indo-Bangla relations lies with Bangladesh. Its new unelected ruling elite, apparently oblivious of its own limitations as an interim authority, even, launched a provocative campaign in China to promote the secession of India’s Northeastern states.

Since there was no reaction from China on the matter, nor the slightest interest shown by the Indian northeastern states themselves, even the relatively thick-skinned temporary leaders of Bangladesh, have been reduced to silence. India, in contrast, has shown commendable restraint by ignoring the amateurish efforts made by the present rulers of Bangladesh, apparently to invite Chinese intervention within the ambit of Indo-Bangla relations.

The abject diplomatic failure of the Yunus-led government to play off China against India led to derisory comments from established political parties within Bangladesh itself. Senior Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) leaders reminded Dr Yunus in a press statement that there were unwritten conventions/guidelines that should not be violated by either side in any government-to-government communication. Not that this public rebuke had made much difference to Dr Yunus’s functioning.

As a new year begins the bigger countries in the region find themselves impacted by an acute political turmoil that, in the absence of collective statesmanship among current regional leaders currently, in power, may keep future generations engaged for years in their pursuit of peace and order.

India, the automatic regional leader thanks to its size, population and growing economy, finds itself struggling to stave off three hostile neighbours on its East and West. Relations with China and Pakistan remain as uneasy as ever. Now Bangladesh seems keen to join their ranks. Few observers accept at its face value the official stand on foreign relations announced by Bangladesh: It would try to expand its diplomatic outreach in South Asia and beyond, reversing its earlier India-centric thrust in foreign policy matters.

In concrete terms, this has meant developing closer ties with Pakistan, Turkiye and the Islamic countries in general, avoiding Russia, and India in particular.

There are not too many positive elements that India can look forward to, except the possibility of a slight relaxation in its tensions with China, courtesy their membership in the BRICS forum. Also, the possibility of some improvement in Indo-Bangla bilateral relations in the medium term cannot be ruled out, in case the Jamaat-e-Islami and its associates fail to win power in the general elections.

However, India may have ensured some gains in terms of diplomacy and influence in its ‘Near West’ neighbourhood. By establishing good relations with the ruling Taliban government in Afghanistan, India has effectively offset much of Pakistan’s benefits accruing from its new found bonhomie with Bangladesh.

The symbiotic nature of Indo-Afghan ties at present seems to be working well. India is helping Afghanistan in developing its domestic health and education-related infrastructure, powering its overall socio-economic progress. In return, India will find it easier to access the markets of the CIS states, through Afghan territory if necessary. This should also help India to offset some of the disadvantages in the transportation of its export items by using the Chabahar port, because of continuing US-led West’s tensions with Iran.

Contrast this with the position of Bangladesh. Thanks to its stress on developing closer economic links with Pakistan, Bangladesh may find itself blindsided on its west, as its earlier access through India by rail, road and air may well be reduced, especially in the event of a victory for a JEI-run coalition in the coming elections.

In domestic politics too, India despite its own serious problems of a struggling economy, growing unemployment and the worrisome divide between rich and poor, shows up relatively better than either Pakistan or Bangladesh, in terms of social development.

Unlike Delhi, Islamabad will remain dependant on Beijing and Washington for years to come. Its economy has gone from bad to worse. Its image of a terror sponsor internationally remains as negative as ever. This is a major handicap for its future generations.

And now it has to contend with the serious challenge posed by the strong Baluchi movement for freedom. Even the financial relief it is seeking from Bangladesh by increasing its exports is not working out well. To settle its international debts, the country is not too far from resorting to assets-selling to the donor countries, as Sri Lanka has been forced to do vis-a-vis China.

As for Bangladesh, it has won some respite financially with Dr Yunus wrangling some relief from various Western financial banks, and institutions. But Dhaka is finding it extremely difficult to check growing double-digit inflation, which is already the highest in the region.

Further, by antagonising India unnecessarily, it is already facing a grim situation is meeting its growing demand for power, and sourcing its crucial raw material supplies (like yarn for its garments production). Already its food imports have become costlier and ditto the transportation of its export goods, as India has withdrawn certain facilities. Several major India-aided infra railway projects etc have been stalled.

For average Bangladeshi citizens, basic medical expenses and cost of essential treatment for the elderly people have increased majorly. Facilities they earlier enjoyed by travelling to India are not available as before. Those who can afford it are accessing health-related facilities in China or Singapore, but it does involve increased costs and time consuming preparations.

The younger generation has been hit hard as scholarships and other facilities Delhi had offered for Bangladeshis to get accommodation in India’s well-known institutions will not be available as before.

“By any simple cost-benefit analysis, the withdrawal of facilities earlier provided by India is going to cost Bangladesh heavily”, according to Shounak Mukherjee, Kolkata-based economist.

Even strategically, Bangladesh will now have to deal with two unfriendly, if not hostile neighbours, Myanmar and India, which surrounds it to its north, west and south side. Earlier, it had only Myanmar to contend with.

As stated before, the outcome of the Feb 2026 elections would be significant for South Asia as a whole for various reasons. For now, a win for the BNP-led coalition may suit India’s interests more favourably, now that the Awami League has been banned. In case, a pro Jamaat government is elected with Dr Yunus doing some backseat driving politically, India should be prepared to face hard time on its East. (IPA Service)