Should India Intervene in the Internal Affairs of Bangladesh in View of the Present Hindu Crisis?
– ANUBHAV ANAND
(HRDI INTERN)
The increasing violence targeting Hindus in Bangladesh has reopened discussions about whether India should take a more proactive stance. Given India’s historical, cultural, and religious ties to Bangladesh, the issue is not only about bilateral relations but also about India’s moral and strategic responsibilities. At the same time, intervention in the internal affairs of another country is a sensitive matter, with risks of diplomatic fallout and regional instability. This article seeks to provide an in-depth exploration of the situation, analysing India’s role in addressing the Hindu crisis in Bangladesh while respecting international norms and balancing its own strategic interests.
Understanding the Hindu Crisis in Bangladesh
The Hindu minority in Bangladesh, constituting less than 8% of the population today, has faced persistent challenges over the decades. Acts of violence, vandalism of temples, and harassment during religious festivals have become alarmingly frequent in recent years. Such incidents are often fueled by extremist ideologies, social discrimination, and communal propaganda. Hindus in Bangladesh frequently express fears of being culturally erased and economically marginalised.
The crisis is further worsened by demographic shifts. The Hindu population in Bangladesh has declined from over 22% during the country’s independence in 1971 to its current level. While migration to India for better opportunities is one reason, the exodus is also driven by safety concerns and systematic marginalisation.
Despite its constitutional commitment to secularism, Bangladesh has struggled to protect minorities from radical elements. While Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina’s government has made some efforts to address these issues, such as condemning attacks on temples and strengthening security during festivals, critics argue that these responses have been insufficient. The lack of preventive measures and the growing influence of extremist groups point to systemic challenges in safeguarding minorities.
India’s Historical Role
India and Bangladesh share a deep historical connection, rooted in shared cultural, linguistic, and political ties. During Bangladesh’s liberation war in 1971, India played a decisive role by providing military, logistical, and humanitarian support. This intervention was instrumental in helping Bangladesh break free from Pakistan’s oppressive regime, which was accused of genocide against Bengali Hindus and Muslims.
In the decades that followed, India has still been a key partner to Bangladesh, supporting its economic development and regional integration. However, the nature of the relationship has evolved. While India was seen as a liberator in 1971, any perceived interference in Bangladesh’s internal affairs today could be viewed as an infringement on its sovereignty.
Despite this, India’s proximity to Bangladesh and its position as a regional power mean that it cannot entirely detach itself from developments in its neighbour. India’s historical role in the creation of Bangladesh adds a layer of moral responsibility, particularly when the principles of secularism and inclusivity—key to Bangladesh’s founding—are under threat.
Arguments for Indian Intervention
· Moral Responsibility: India’s identity as a pluralistic democracy and its role as the world’s largest Hindu-majority country give it a unique moral responsibility to protect the rights of Hindus globally. The principle of Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam—the belief that the entire world is one family—has long guided India’s foreign policy and humanitarian actions. Ignoring the plight of Hindus in Bangladesh would not only undermine India’s values but also erode its credibility as a defender of human rights.
· Humanitarian Grounds: Systematic persecution of minorities, including violence, forced conversions, and destruction of cultural symbols, qualifies as gross human rights violations under international law. The Responsibility to Protect (R2P) doctrine, endorsed by the United Nations, provides a framework for intervention in cases where states fail to protect their populations from atrocities. While military intervention is an extreme step, India could invoke R2P to justify diplomatic or humanitarian actions aimed at safeguarding the Hindu minority in Bangladesh.
· Strategic Interests: A stable and inclusive Bangladesh is critical for India’s regional security. Continued persecution of Hindus could lead to a refugee crisis, with large numbers of displaced individuals crossing into India’s eastern states. Such an influx would strain local resources, exacerbate communal tensions, and create administrative challenges. Moreover, fostering secularism and curbing extremism in Bangladesh aligns with India’s broader strategy of promoting stability in South Asia and countering radical influences from groups supported by Pakistan or other external actors.
Risks of Intervention
· Sovereignty Concerns: Intervention in Bangladesh’s internal affairs could be perceived as a violation of its sovereignty, a principle upheld by the United Nations and international law. Such actions, even if well-intentioned, might weaken bilateral trust and provoke anti-India sentiments in Bangladesh. This could harm the strong relationship that India and Bangladesh have built over the years, especially under the leadership of Sheikh Hasina.
· Risk of Escalation: Any overt action by India, whether military or economic, could escalate tensions in the region. It might push Bangladesh closer to countries like China or Pakistan, which are eager to expand their influence in South Asia. China’s growing economic investments in Bangladesh, coupled with its strategic ambitions, make this a particularly sensitive issue. An alienated Bangladesh could disrupt India’s regional plans and weaken its influence in the Bay of Bengal.
· Internal Ramifications: India itself faces communal challenges, with periodic incidents of violence against minorities. Any intervention in Bangladesh could invite criticism of India’s domestic record, weakening its moral authority. It could also polarise public opinion within India, potentially leading to political and social unrest. The risks of setting a double standard are significant and could undermine India’s diplomatic stance globally.
Lessons from Historical Contexts
India’s past experiences with intervention offer valuable lessons. During the Sri Lankan civil war, India’s involvement to support Tamil minorities was initially seen as a moral and humanitarian act. However, the subsequent military engagement, coupled with political missteps, led to significant backlash and strained relations with Sri Lanka.
Similarly, India’s perceived interference in Nepal’s constitutional and political crises has occasionally been criticised as overreach, affecting bilateral ties. These examples highlight the importance of using soft power and multilateral approaches rather than unilateral actions when dealing with sensitive issues in neighbouring countries.
Potential Pathways for India
To address the Hindu crisis in Bangladesh without jeopardising its relationship with the country, India can explore several alternative strategies:
· Diplomatic Engagement: India’s strong ties with the Bangladeshi government provide an opportunity for quiet diplomacy. By engaging in constructive dialogue with Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina’s administration, India can push for stricter measures to protect minorities and hold perpetrators accountable. Such efforts, conducted behind closed doors, can help avoid public backlash and maintain trust between the two nations.
· International Advocacy: India can raise the issue of minority persecution in Bangladesh at global forums like the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC). By highlighting the crisis as a human rights concern, India can pressure Bangladesh to take proactive steps while gaining international support for its stance.
· Strengthening Cultural Ties: Promoting cultural exchanges, interfaith dialogue, and educational programs can help counter radical ideologies in Bangladesh. Collaborative initiatives that emphasise shared values of secularism and inclusivity can foster goodwill and strengthen social cohesion.
· Economic Incentives: India can use economic tools to influence Bangladesh’s policies. Conditional aid packages, trade concessions, or infrastructure collaborations could incentivise the Bangladeshi government to prioritise minority protection. These measures would allow India to address the crisis without overt political interference.
· Humanitarian Assistance: Providing direct aid to affected Hindu communities in Bangladesh can help alleviate their suffering while avoiding political complications. This could include financial help, legal aid, and support for rebuilding temples and cultural sites damaged during communal violence.
· Border Management: To prepare for potential refugee inflows, India should invest in better border management systems. This includes providing temporary shelter and aid to refugees while engaging diplomatically with Bangladesh to address the root causes of migration.
The Role of Civil Society and Media
Indian civil society organisations, along with media outlets, can play a critical role in addressing the Hindu crisis. By documenting and publicising incidents of violence, they can generate awareness and create international pressure on Bangladesh to act. NGOs from both countries can collaborate to provide support to minority communities and promote interfaith harmony.
India’s Image as a Regional Power: India’s handling of the Hindu crisis in Bangladesh will have far-reaching implications for its image as a regional leader. A thoughtful, balanced approach that respects Bangladesh’s sovereignty while addressing the concerns of Hindus can reinforce India’s reputation as a responsible and compassionate power. Conversely, hasty or aggressive actions could damage India’s credibility and strain its relations with neighbouring countries.
Conclusion
The Hindu crisis in Bangladesh presents India with a profound challenge that demands both moral clarity and strategic caution. While India has a historical and cultural connection to Bangladesh, as well as a responsibility to advocate for the rights of Hindus, direct intervention could undermine regional stability and strain diplomatic ties. Instead, India must strike a balance between protecting vulnerable communities and respecting the sovereignty of its neighbour.
India’s approach should focus on leveraging its strong bilateral relations with Bangladesh to engage in quiet diplomacy, urging the Bangladeshi government to take proactive measures to protect minorities. Using international forums like the United Nations to highlight these concerns can further reinforce global accountability. Simultaneously, India must explore economic and cultural collaborations that promote inclusivity and counter radicalism, while also providing humanitarian support to affected communities without overt interference.
Addressing this crisis also aligns with India’s strategic interests. A stable and inclusive Bangladesh is critical for regional peace and for preventing a potential refugee influx into India. Strengthening border management and preparing for humanitarian contingencies will ensure India is ready to handle any fallout.
India’s actions must also reflect its commitment to justice and inclusivity within its borders, ensuring its global advocacy for minority rights is consistent with its domestic practices. By adopting a nuanced, collaborative approach, India can safeguard its regional influence while upholding its values.
India’s response to this crisis will shape its reputation as a responsible global leader and regional power. A balanced approach – rooted in diplomacy, humanitarianism, and respect for international norm – will not only address the immediate crisis but also foster long-term stability and harmony in South Asia.
