Arrest this drift in ties with Bangladesh

The story goes that in 2012, when World Bank pulled out of the $3 billion Padma Bridge project, the Sheikh Hasina government in Bangladesh expected India to cash in on the opportunity. Bilateral relations were on a roll since 2010. India had already offered $1 billion assistance including $200 million aid to kickstart the bridge construction, and promised more assistance.

Naturally, Hasina was hopeful of Indian support in fulfilling her key electoral promise. But Delhi dragged its feet on Bangladeshi proposal.

China lapped up the opportunity by agreeing to complete the project on BOT basis with 70 per cent ($2 billion) supplier’s credit.

What happened next is history. With China in, India extended another $2 billion fresh line of credit and nearly $1.6 billion cheap suppliers’ credit at to a joint venture electricity generation project in 2015. Asian Development Bank (ADB) recently granted $8 billion for infrastructure creation in Bangladesh to promote sub-regional cooperation.

Japan that sides with the US and India on South Asian geopolitics offered $6 billion. World Bank is back in Dhaka with fresh offers.

And to up the stake, Chinese President Chinese President Xi Jinping in a stopover in Dhaka, on the way to BRICS summit in Goa last week, offered $24 billion fresh assistance in 27 projects.

Opportunity loss With competition hotting up, availability of funds is no longer an issue with Bangladesh. Good for them, unless they make a mess in fund utilisation. But India has lost a major competitive edge in Bangladesh.

Hasina’s hands are now tied. She cannot offer India control over key projects, like a deep-sea port that is of geo-strategic importance to us, on quid pro quo basis. Bangladesh is a crucial piece in the geopolitical jigsaw and, it is important for India to keep it in good humour.

Not that we are unaware of it or the Hasina government had fallen out with India. But our fumbling and mumblings had cost us opportunity to create a wider political space in Bangladesh to step up cooperation.

Take a look at Bangladeshi media and social media; allegations are common that Indian assistance is to too little or too slow to come by — compared to China — and, Bangladesh is playing a good neighbour without getting much in return.

No doubt that part of such criticism is driven by common anti-India sentiments, nurtured and curated by Bangladeshi rulers for greater part of the country’s 45-year history.

But it is also true that Hasina is trying to change the domestic political narrative from one built on non-cooperation and hate, to collaborative growth. And, we are probably failing her.

No mechanism As a democracy India is at a disadvantage when compared to a single-party ruled China, in decision making. But we cannot use it as an excuse any more.

We are yet to invest enough in creating a robust mechanism to cash in on the evolving opportunities in the neighbourhood. Pity we don’t even have adequate officers at the ministry of external affairs to handle such responsibilities.

It is beyond comprehension why India cannot create a transparent visa system in Bangladesh and keep earning public wrath. India grants visas for free. But, intermediaries charge ₹5,000 for generating the e-token for appointment with the visa officer.

India may not match China in money-bag politics; but can’t it be tidier in delivering promises? Take the case of $1 billion assistance, announced in 2010, that took five long years to be utilised.

Top Bangladeshi policy makers do not hide their share of inabilities. But they also point out that the UPA government took nearly a year since its announcement to finalise the guidelines for utilisation. Ideally, guidelines should be ready before announcement.

This is just one example. The UPA-II rule that took much credit in improving ties with Bangladesh is full with such instances.

It failed to take West Bengal on its side and over-promised on Teesta water sharing that continues to be a sore point.

It started the electricity trade through the West Bengal border in 2013, but delayed allowing similar trade through Tripura despite a strong recommendation from the State government.

The issue was touchy because Bangladesh went out of its way in allowing transport of equipment for setting up a large power station in Tripura in the hope of getting a share of the electricity.

This allowed anti-India sentiments to gain ground, blocking Hasina’s way to grant India transit to its North East through Bangladesh till last year, when the Prime Minister Narendra Modi started taking prompt measures.

It is a pity that we even dragged our feet on developing the 86 km road link from Tripura to Chittagong port that costs a fraction of Padma Bridge but is crucial for the prosperity of our North Eastern region.

Transit issues The Modi government is surely doing a better job. But it should be more careful in not repeating the mistakes of the UPA.

A case in point is the raging debate in Dhaka about the proposed sub-regional transit treaty. Bangladeshis fear that it will clog their road infrastructure without much economic gain. The treaty will allow India key access to its North East through Bangladesh.

The source of the criticism is a recently concluded bilateral deal for inland water transit to reach Tripura through Asugunj in Bangladesh. The transit fee is set at $2.5 a tonne against the Hasina government’s proposal of $4.4 a tonne.

According to Asjadul Kibria, planning editor of the Dhaka based The Financial Express , Dhaka agreed to the reduced fees at the insistence of Delhi.

The business-minded would say, it’s a sham argument. Lower transit fee ensures competitiveness of the river transport facility vis-à-vis India’s broad-gauge rail connectivity to Tripura. Also, every rupee earned through transit is a gain to Bangladesh.

Right indeed. But what stopped us from being more magnanimous? We could have routed the dialogue through a multilateral forum to add to the transparency or offered developing a related project — may be Ashuguj terminal — at our cost, to send home the right messages.

Let’s not forget that the region has little history of putting business ahead of politics. It’s a painstakingly slow process in reversing the trend.

COMMENT NOW