More than most countries, Bangladesh can claim its foreign policy and commitments to UN peacekeeping missions are fully in line with the goals of peaceful multilateral co-operation.
While both the UK and Bangladesh took part in successful UN missions in Bosnia and Sierra Leone, Bangladesh’s reputation is not sullied by a controversy such as the UK’s involvement in the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
To take another example, for decades the Tatmadaw’s violent conflicts against Myanmar’s ethnic minorities have included the mass displacement of Rohingya people from their homeland. Bangladesh has steadfastly sought peaceful resolutions and given humanitarian refuge. While Pakistan has hosted even larger numbers of refugees from Afghanistan’s successive wars, its army intelligence service, ISI, has a controversial history of interference in the internal affairs of its less populated neighbour, long predating the 1978 Soviet invasion.
Both India and Pakistan have historically been, and remain, among the biggest contributors of personnel to UN peacekeeping missions, but their national policies include bloated military budgets to sustain a costly “forever war” stance over Kashmir — not to mention a Strangelovian nuclear standoff (all sides, not least Kashmiris themselves, might prefer to look more closely at the actions of the late Earl Louis Mountbatten, last viceroy of the Raj and great-uncle and favoured mentor of King Charles III, when not pointing the blame at each other).
Bangladesh’s foreign policy, by contrast, remains firmly rooted in Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman’s maxim of “friendship to all, malice to none.” The post-liberation national consensus that Bangladesh should be non-aligned has been a constant through many political upheavals and is worth recalling when examining deficiencies in its practice.
Clearly, Bangladesh has too few diplomatic missions and ambassadors abroad and has been fatefully slow to pursue trade agreements beyond SAARC. Despite the neighbouring ASEAN, Bangladesh is not even one of ASEAN’s 10 dialogue partners (which include Pakistan and India), which might have helped it leverage its diplomatic efforts on the Rohingya.
When it comes to navigating Bangladesh amid the competing interests of China and India, the policy often comes under strain and falls short of delivering the optimum national benefit. Above all, compared to the size of its population, Bangladesh remains relatively overlooked with little influence on the world stage.
Nonetheless, Bangladesh’s foreign policy deserves to be valued. As Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina prepares to speak at the UN General Assembly in New York after attending the funeral of Queen Elizabeth II in London, its ethos resonates strongly with the UN’s ideals.
At a moment when the impact of the war in Ukraine on fossil fuel prices and inflation is being weaponized by powerful companies and wealthy countries seeking to further backtrack from multilateral commitments towards developing nations on climate change, anything that adds weight to the voice of nations like Bangladesh really does matter.
Of all the ideals Bangladesh championed during its early years of independence, its foreign policy seems to have endured the strongest. The constitution upholds many vital ideals like equality and secularism.
But not a day goes by when principles seem hollow in practice.
For all the nation’s achievements in encouraging women’s empowerment and strong female role models across public life, inequality in inheritance rights remains the norm, and the actual average age of marriage is still under the minimum legal age of 18 for girls. Patriarchy and prejudice don’t just persist but prosper in the age of social media.
For all Bangladesh’s progress in improving the pace of development and GDP growth, social and economic inequalities have widened. Exploitation and abuse of workers are rife.
Improvements in literacy and communications have neither curbed bigotry nor prevented violent attacks on minority communities. A sad state for a nation whose freedom is the hard-won legacy of people of every background uniting to oppose communalism, support equality, and fight for liberation.
Bangladesh’s foreign policy has historically had broad support across the nation’s political spectrum, so it may not stray far from its roots. Similar confidence seems significantly harder to express for domestic policies, however.
Yet to achieve any of the aspirations Bangladeshis look for through foreign policy -- be it more global economic influence, a bigger footprint and global reach for its culture, more soft power, a more powerful passport -- the country needs to make many more successful strides at home.
Independence is the supreme achievement and legacy of Bangladesh’s greatest generation.
If Bangladesh is to progress as much as its people need over its second half century, its people need to do more than live up to the ideals of 1971, they must improve upon them.
We’re not in 1972 anymore.
Niaz Alam is London Bureau Chief of the Dhaka Tribune.
