Sheikh Hasina’s sudden removal from power in Bangladesh has sparked suspicions of international meddling, particularly from the US and China. Hasina’s leadership had strengthened ties with India and brought stability to the region, which some foreign powers may have viewed as a threat. The US, displeased with India’s warm relationship with Russia, and China, unhappy with Hasina’s reluctance to align with its strategic plans, are believed to be involved in her ouster. With Pakistan also unhappy about Hasina’s crackdown on terrorism, the intricate web of geopolitical interests suggests a possible covert operation to destabilize Bangladesh and shift regional dynamics.
In a region known for its conflicts, Bangladesh, led by Sheikh Hasina, stood out as a symbol of stability. Her leadership not only strengthened the relationship between Bangladesh and India but also helped bring some peace to South Asia. However, now that she has been violently toppled in a US led Color Revolution, there is concern that the peace and stability achieved might be at risk.
Sheikh Hasina’s time in power was marked by strong ties with India, which helped reduce insurgency and terrorism in the region and boosted economic growth. Her leadership was not always welcomed by some international players. For example, her close relationship with India might have made her enemies, especially since the United States, which has had its own issues with Russia, recently voiced frustration with India’s continued ties to Russia.
Eric Garcetti, the U.S. Ambassador to India, threatened India for its friendly approach to Russia, saying that in today’s world, no conflict is far away and both the U.S. and India need to work together more closely. The U.S. and India have been working together against the Chinese influence in the Indian Ocean and the Indo-Pacific region, but they have different views on Russia. The U.S. sees Russia as a major threat, while India values its relationship with Russia for energy and arms supplies.
Some people believe that foreign interference might be behind Hasina’s potential removal. The U.S. has long been interested in having a military presence in Bangladesh. During Bangladesh’s struggle for independence, the U.S. had tried to negotiate for a military base in the region, but Bangladesh declined. Recently, Hasina revealed that the U.S. had approached her again with a proposal for a military base, which she refused. She has been firm about not compromising her country’s sovereignty. Regular readers of GreatGameInternational, may remember there is such a plan to have an Anglo-American Air Base even in Kashmir.
At the same time, the U.S. has been working to integrate Bangladesh into its broader Indo-Pacific strategy, aiming to strengthen defense ties and sell military equipment. Although Bangladesh showed interest in U.S. weapons, it hesitated to make purchases through this framework to avoid upsetting its main military supplier, China. Bangladesh chose instead to develop its own approach to the Indo-Pacific, focusing on trade and economic ties without forming military alliances.
China also had its own reasons to be dissatisfied with Hasina’s government. Despite a complex relationship with Bangladesh, China was not happy with the growing bond between India and Bangladesh. During Hasina’s recent visit to China, she was disappointed when China only offered a small loan and did not give her the expected diplomatic treatment. This left her feeling snubbed, and some speculate that China might have played a role in her potential removal from power.
Pakistan, a close ally of China in South Asia, was also unhappy with the stronger ties between India and Bangladesh. Before Hasina’s leadership, Pakistani terror groups operated relatively freely in Bangladesh, but Hasina took steps to curb this. There were even attempts to destabilize her government shortly after she took office.
Recently, student protests in Bangladesh are believed to be influenced by the BNP (Bangladesh Nationalist Party) and Jamaat-e-Islami, a group that opposed Bangladesh’s independence in 1971. Allegations suggest that Tarique Rahman, a key figure in the opposition and son of the former leader Khaleda Zia, might be working with Pakistani intelligence (ISI) to use these protests for political gain.
A book on the ISI, by Julian Richards, highlights that the ISI, a key intelligence agency, has historically worked with various international partners and supported militants in its rivalry with India. This ongoing relationship suggests that there could be a connection between the ISI and other international players in the current situation in Bangladesh.
In summary, Sheikh Hasina’s removal from power appears to be entangled with a web of international and regional politics. While proving direct foreign involvement is difficult, it is clear that multiple actors are taking advantage of the situation for their own interests. This complex scenario indicates that Hasina is a casualty of the intricate geopolitical dynamics in South Asia.
