By Taj Hashmi 30 August 2023
Despite the claims of Sheikh Hasina, her Foreign Minister, and supporters of the autocratic regime in the recent past, it appears that the BRICS authorities’ supposed eagerness to include Bangladesh is nothing more than exaggerated statements or unrealistic hope. Inductions of six new members occurred on 24 August within the BRICS club, including Argentina, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates. Bangladesh has remained outside the edifice’s corridors, to the dismay and embarrassment of the Hasina government.
It is a matter of debate whether Bangladesh’s exclusion from BRICS is positive or negative. However, we view it as a positive development for the country, despite the fact that it may be detrimental to the ruling party and its leader, Hasina, who had expressed interest in joining. Our analysis suggests that India, as a significant member of BRICS, a group with anti-Western economic and political agendas, may have blocked Bangladesh’s entry under pressure from the US, which still has an impact on India’s foreign policy decisions.
What various reliable and not-so-reliable sources reveal, and analysts and experts have been theorizing since Bangladesh was “unceremoniously” excluded from its “assured membership” of BRICS, the quasi-economic and quasi-political conglomerate, are least palatable for the Hasina Regime. China expressed interest in Bangladesh becoming a member of BRICS, but India objected due to Modi’s alleged stance against BRICS membership for countries that may face sanctions from the West. However, Modi did not mention Bangladesh specifically in his opposition.
Collective wisdom suggests that India’s veto sealed Bangladesh’s fate. Notably, while Xi Jinping could allocate a slot for an in-camera meeting with Hasina at the BRICS gathering in Johannesburg, Modi did not go beyond saying a quick hello to Hasina at the banquet. He is said to have remarked that while India and UAE were strategic partners, Bangladesh was nothing more than a friendly neighbour. So much so for the Hasina Regime’s bending backwards to please the “great friend India”! It goes without saying that as Bangladesh’s corruption-ridden and inefficient domestic policy is anything to be proud of for the nation, so is its abysmal foreign policy, which has already brought the country to the brink of socio-economic and political disaster. Additionally, the country is likely to encounter Western sanctions similar to those imposed on Iran, Russia, Cuba, and North Korea.
It is important to understand why India opposed Bangladesh’s entry into BRICS, of which India is a member. According to Subir Bhaumik, both the US and India aim to curb China’s growing influence in Bangladesh. However, the US wants free and fair elections without any bias towards any political party or group, while India wants the same but without any violent overthrow of the current Hasina regime. India also wants to prevent an “Islamist takeover” of the country by parties such as the Jamaat-e-Islami through elections [“India, US narrow differences over Bangladesh ahead of its elections”]. Bhaumik’s statement echoes the official stance of the Indian government. It sheds light on the mindset of the ruling elites who justify their involvement in Bangladesh politics to protect India’s interests from the perceived threat of Islamist extremism. However, this threat does not exist in Bangladesh. It is worth noting that the Jamaat-e-Islami has never been associated with anti-Hindu communal politics or Islamist militancy in any form or under any guise. The Jamaat, as of today, is not even registered as a political party in Bangladesh. However, Indian politicians, analysts, and media are hell-bent on projecting Bangladesh under Hasina as a blessing for India and all her opponents, especially BNP and Jamaat-e-Islami, as anti-Indian and anti-Hindu, having connections with known or clandestine Islamist terrorist organizations!
In order to truly understand the intentions of the BRICS organization, it is important to consider its origins and the motivations of its sponsors. We need to understand why India chose to join the organisation in 2009 despite China’s significant influence as a founding member. During Manmohan Singh’s leadership of the Congress Party in India, the government distanced itself from Nehruvian socialism domestically and nonalignment or positive neutrality in foreign affairs. However, they still had a strong commitment to promoting the interests of the underprivileged Third World. The US and Western powers’ “neo-colonial” and hegemonic behaviour in the Third World, particularly after the US-led invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, may have influenced the Singh Government to align with the BRICS proponents. The BRICS members aimed to curb and contain American predominance in the global economy, which may have led the Indian Government to support introducing gold-backed currency for BRICS nations and doing away with petro-dollar dominance.
In recent years, India under Modi has become an intolerant and illiberal democracy, where the rich have become richer and the poor poorer compared to the time of Nehru and his successors up until the early 1990s. It is evident that Modi and his party are transforming India into a Hindu Rashtra or a fascistic Hindu State. This would result in non-Hindus, particularly the 20% Muslim population, living as subjugated nations with lesser status and rights. There is a possibility that if Modi succeeds in the upcoming parliamentary elections in 2024, India may become more authoritarian than it has been since 2014. If Modi is re-elected (he is likely to win with a big margin) it is not totally out of place to speculate that he may eventually align with Xi and Putin to form the Xi-Putin-Modi triumvirate, after yet another victory for the BJP. While it is not a certain prediction, a similar scenario may arise in the next decade or two.
It should be noted that Modi has not yet abandoned the West and aligned with Xi from any stretch of the imagination. Many believe that Modi still harbours suspicions towards China’s long-term plans for India. The question remains: Will China be willing to coexist with India as a friendly neighbour? Time will tell. China still considers Arunachal Pradesh to be an integral part of their country. Modi is currently seeking investment and support from the United States to counter China’s unpredictable behavior in South Asia. It is no surprise that he stopped Bangladesh from joining BRICS, using subtle excuses and arguments to appease America, which aims to limit China’s growing influence in Bangladesh. Therefore, Modi is currently acting in accordance with America’s wishes. The question remains: Will he continue to appease the West in the future, especially as more authoritarian nations like North Korea, Iran, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Belarus, UAE, and Ethiopia join BRICS, potentially transforming the organization into a club of anti-Western autocracies? It is a fact that Hindu nationalists who envision the Hindu Rashtra or Greater India as a real entity desire to include multiple countries in South and Southeast Asia. These countries include Afghanistan, Pakistan, Nepal, Bhutan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Myanmar, and Thailand. Some Hindu nationalists believe that Greater India, a mythical region, encompasses Malaysia, Singapore, Laos, Cambodia, and Indonesia. A mural at the new Parliament Building of India in Delhi depicts a map of ancient India, which includes Afghanistan, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, Bhutan, Myanmar, and Sri Lanka as integral parts of India. This reflects the ideology of Hindu Nationalism.
To comprehend why India, under Modi/BJP, is becoming a potential threat to global peace, it is crucial to understand the underlying ideology of Hindu Nationalism. This ideology is inherently expansionist and fascist. It is important to note that the growth of Hindutva, which means Hinduness or Hindu Nationalism, is also a strategy by affluent and high-caste Hindus to unite all Hindus, regardless of their class and caste, against non-Hindus, particularly Muslims. This is aimed at reducing inter-caste and inter-varna conflicts within the Hindu community. The popularity of the Hindutva ideology has surged since 1990 when upper-caste Hindus felt threatened by the possibility of losing their power and privileges to the Dalit or “Untouchable” Hindus. This followed the publication of the Mandal Commission Report by Prime Minister V.P. Singh, which sought to reserve special quotas for Dalits in public sector jobs across India.
The unclear statements regarding the goals and requirements for BRICS membership are confusing. While Modi prefers countries that are not at risk of being sanctioned by the West, Cyril Ramaphosa of South Africa believes that BRICS represents a “democratic global order.” It is worth noting that the majority of its members are not known for their support of any form of democratic global order, nor are they democratic themselves. The US National Security Advisor, Jacob Sullivan, recently claimed that BRICS does not pose a threat to Western global interests. However, this statement is confusing as BRICS has been known to challenge Western economic interests and methods of exerting economic dominance worldwide. Additionally, it is important to note that BRICS, which was established to counter Western hegemony and neo-colonialism in the Post-9/11 World, now appears to be a club of dictators.
There are concerns that some autocratic nations, such as Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt – who are now part of the BRICS group – may increase their anti-Western movements, which are gaining momentum globally. Even countries like India, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and UAE, who were once allied with the West, may no longer remain so, as the West now values democracy and respect for human rights in its allies. Since the start of the Syrian Civil War in 2011 and the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022, Iran has established closer strategic and military ties with Russia. Additionally, it has embarked on massive infrastructure development projects with China valued at hundreds of billions of dollars. Iran is totally out of the US orbit since the Islamic Revolution in 1979. Some BRICS members, old and new, are also divesting from US Treasury Bonds. BRICS is also working towards creating their own gold-backed currency to decrease the dominance of the petro-dollar, which will have a negative impact on the US economy. Notably, India has started purchasing Russian oil in Chinese Yuan instead of US dollars. Additionally, China, Saudi Arabia, UAE, and Brazil have divested a significant amount of their US Treasury Bonds. China alone divested over $400 billion worth of US Bonds recently.
It is impractical and illogical for Bangladesh to consider becoming a member of BRICS due to its large population and limited resources. Bangladesh is ranked among the least developed countries in the world. While other BRICS members may be able to challenge the West for their survival, Bangladesh is reliant on the West, particularly the US, for its economy and sustenance. The West has invested significantly in Bangladesh, provided grants and remittances for Bangladeshi workers, and has been the primary buyer of Bangladesh’s primary export, apparel, for the last 30 years. Therefore, it is not feasible for Bangladesh to pursue membership in BRICS. Bangladesh’s recent dealings with China may have already caused some unease in the West, but now the country is considering joining the BRICS – a group of countries that are known for being anti-Western and not very reliable allies. This decision could potentially worsen tensions with the West.
There are certain Bangladeshi politicians and bureaucrats who may not have a strong understanding of geopolitical matters and the potential economic and socio-political risks associated with joining the BRICS. Their lack of knowledge and understanding could make them politically inexperienced and lacking in intellectual insight. Without the support of the ADB, EU, IMF, Japan, UK, US and Canada, and World Bank, Bangladesh could be vulnerable. It is important to carefully consider whether joining a group of illiberal democracies and corrupt autocracies such as the BRICS would truly benefit the country and provide stability in times of potential turbulence. This question should be examined thoroughly before making any decisions.
Taj Hashmi, Ph.D., FRAS is a historian-cum-cultural anthropologist, and is a retired professor of Security Studies at the APCSS, US. Author of five books, hundreds of journal articles, and newspaper op-eds, he is an analyst of current affairs. As a human rights activist, he regularly appears on talk shows about Bangladesh, South Asia, and World affairs on various TV and YouTube channels. His latest book, Fifty Years of Bangladesh, 1971-2021: Crises of Culture, Development, Governance, and Identity, was published by Palgrave-Macmillan in May 2022. He lives in Toronto, Canada. Telephone: 1 647 447 2609 — Email: [email protected]
