The United States, known for championing democracy and human rights, has been notably silent on the violence against minorities in Bangladesh, particularly Hindus. This silence was highlighted by the omission of Bangladesh-related issues from the readout of a recent conversation between Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and US President Joe Biden. Experts suggest that this reflects a deeper strategic divergence between India and the US regarding Bangladesh.
Historically, the US has not always aligned with India on Bangladesh issues. During the 1971 liberation of Bangladesh, the US opposed its separation from Pakistan and has since maintained ties with pro-Pakistan political entities, such as the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP). The US has often undermined the Awami League, led by Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, who has been a strong advocate for secularism and India-friendly policies.
Recent events have seen Sheikh Hasina’s regime weakened, partly due to US actions. In 2021, US sanctions on Bangladesh’s Rapid Action Battalion (RAB) significantly reduced the government’s capacity for crackdowns, thereby emboldening Hasina’s critics. The US has consistently highlighted human rights abuses under Hasina’s rule, contrasting its silence on the current chaos and minority attacks in Bangladesh, especially under the military-backed caretaker government led by Muhammad Yunus.
When US President Joe Biden and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi discussed the situation in Bangladesh during a call, the Indian readout mentioned concerns over minority safety. In contrast, the US readout omitted any reference to Bangladesh, focusing solely on the Ukraine crisis. This selective silence has raised eyebrows among experts, who believe the US is avoiding acknowledging the deteriorating situation in Bangladesh to avoid criticizing the new regime aligned with its interests.
The post-Hasina era in Bangladesh has seen significant unrest, with reports of targeted attacks on Hindu minorities. Muhammad Yunus, now at the helm of the caretaker government, has admitted to these attacks and attempted to reassure the Hindu community. However, the situation remains tense, with violent clashes and civil unrest evident.
Analysts point out that the US’s reluctance to comment on the turmoil in Bangladesh might be strategic, given its historical role in weakening Hasina’s government. The US is perceived to have supported efforts that led to regime change, aligning with forces that could potentially serve its interests better in the region. This stance has led to concerns about how the US might handle similar situations in other parts of South Asia, where its interests might not align with those of local allies like India.
India, therefore, needs to be cautious about its strategic alliances and the shifting dynamics in its neighborhood, especially as the US continues to exert influence in South Asia in ways that may not always support India’s core interests.
