Bangladesh has, in recent months, signalled a softening of its diplomatic position toward Pakistan. This has triggered an unease within the domestic audience and become a cause for concern for its friends abroad.
For over five decades after its liberation from Pakistan in 1971 through a bloody war, the present perception of a tilt toward Pakistan is seen as not only a foreign policy calibration, but as striking at the roots of Bangladesh’s national identity itself.
The costs of such a shift are felt both within Bangladesh and outside. This tilt strikes at the root of Bangladesh’s social cohesion and national interests. The casualty is both its short-term tactical gains and long-term strategic interests. These are costlier than the benefits that accrue through this foreign policy shift.
A Historical Wound Reopened
For the people of Bangladesh, the relations with Pakistan are always equated with the events of 1971 that triggered the freedom movement, leading to the liberation war.
Pakistan had inflicted genocide, mass migration, and systematic human rights violations on the people of Bangladesh in 1971. This is now part of the collective memory of Bangladeshis.
Any new position of the Muhammed Yunus-led interim government that signals a departure from its decades-old stand on Pakistan is a death blow to the Bangladeshis.
This means letting off Pakistan without any accountability for the war crimes and setting aside the suffering of the millions of Bangla-speaking people of Bangladesh, who endured these atrocities. This, actually, undermines Bangladesh’s national interests and hard-won independence from Pakistan.
The policy shift, even if perceived, is about history being forgotten, not just revisited. It relativises the unforgotten experiences of Bangladeshis under Pakistan’s iron-handed rule between 1947 and 1971.
This also glosses over the unresolved issues between the two nations: a formal apology for the genocide, delivering justice to the victims of the war crimes, and meaningful reconciliation with history.
If not rectified, the policy shift sends a message that expediency trumps principle. But for the survivors of 1971, the freedom fighters, and the youth of today who had learned hard about the Liberation War in history books, it triggers anger and disillusionment with the state.
Erosion of Domestic Unity
The adverse impact of this foreign policy shift and softening toward Pakistan is already visible inside Bangladesh in the polarised political and public debates. Most Bangladeshis see Pakistan as “an external oppressor” even today.
Pakistan, for them, is a symbol of denial, impunity, suppression of rights, and historical injustice. Thus, the policy shift alienates these citizens and deepens the ideological and generational gaps.
Bangladeshis have painstakingly built national cohesion around their shared memory and principles of liberation from Pakistan. The Pakistan tilt of the present rulers of Bangladesh weakens and compromises the state’s founding narrative.
This portends danger for a nation that is already fighting political fragmentation, economic downturn, and social unrest. The interim government, instead of bringing together the people on issues of development and democratic reforms, is vehemently shifting its focus to building ties with Pakistan. This tilt distracts and divides the nation, turning its foreign policy into a domestic fault line.
Diplomatic Credibility at Stake
At the global stage, Bangladesh has been for decades seen as a principled, pragmatic player, strengthened by its values such as self-determination, secularism, stability, and economic progress. This image now stands damaged by the tilt in favour of Pakistan.
Pakistan, on the other hand, has been globally isolated due to its history of military dominance in the polity, being a haven for internationally wanted terrorists, and by its fraught ties with other key global players. This has limited Bangladesh’s strategic dividends that it can realistically expect from this relationship.
What is significant for Bangladesh is that this policy shift toward Pakistan undermines its established and potentially far more beneficial partnerships with other nations.
Several nations, far and near, have contributed to Bangladesh’s economic growth, helped in development funding, provided market access, and enhanced its global standing. These nations may now have doubts over Dhaka’s geopolitical trajectory.
As the world knows, perception is the key to diplomatic success, and any symbolism involving Pakistan could seriously damage Bangladesh’s long-earned goodwill through its alignment and priorities.
Squandered Economic Opportunities
For Bangladesh, aligning with Pakistan comes with a huge opportunity cost from an economic standpoint. Dhaka’s constructive ties with key partners helped its growth trajectory through investments, technology sharing, supply-chain integration, and unbridled market access.
Deeply engaging with Pakistan, a country perpetually deep in economic trouble, offers no tangible upside for Bangladesh’s economy. Whereas, by strengthening its relationship with dynamic economies and stable states would bring about real development partners for Dhaka.
If Bangladesh continues to grapple with foreign policy uncertainties, it dampens investor confidence in its market. And, if Dhaka drifts towards a religiously charged, ideologically fundamentalist, and historically contentious alignment, it is a risk that can complicate its global narratives of stability, modernity, and a forward-moving destination for global capital.
The Path Forward: Cohesion and Constructive Partnerships
The lesson Bangladesh can learn from global experience on such matters is that it need not pursue hostility or isolation. Normalisation without justice or clarity on the historical hurts of its people would certainly come at unbearable costs.
For rebuilding national cohesion and bringing stability to its turbulent polity, the interim government must reaffirm its commitment to the principles of the 1971 liberation war. The state should ensure its foreign policy choices do not come against the people’s sentiments of independence, historical wounds, and their yearning for justice, all based on historical truths.
