Emilia Fernandez

The United States and Bangladesh have close, long-standing relations that have their roots in history. Friendships between the two countries have grown over the past fifty years, increasing cooperation in fields like economic development, environmental preservation, counterterrorism, democratic government, and human rights defense. However, the recent acts of the US government and President Joe Biden have strained bilateral ties. The strong ties between the US and Bangladesh have experienced considerable turbulence as a result of the United States’ poor policy choices.

The policy of penalizing RAB people in 2021 signaled the beginning of the split in US-Bangladesh relations. High-ranking RAB officials were sanctioned by the US without any thought given to the controversial and, most crucially, home issues of Bangladesh. Accusations of election fraud in Bangladesh were made in 2022 by the US ambassador in Dhaka, Hass, which was not his diplomatic duty. But he hardly ever mentioned opposing party-political violence, which included petrol bombers, national terrorism, and significant vandalism in 2014. Derek Chollet, a counselor with the US State Department, expressed his worries about Bangladesh’s waning democracy again in February 2023 and cautioned that this would limit US collaboration with Bangladesh.

Prior to the general elections in May 2023, the new US visa policy was unveiled. US Secretary Antony Blinken made a comment that read more like a threat from Washington, suggesting that it might impose visa restrictions on Bangladeshi nationals who interfere with the democratic electoral process, which is never within the scope of an outside authority. Six members of Congress issued a letter to the US President after the occurrence pleading with him to take action to ensure free and fair elections in Bangladesh. Do these activities adhere to any diplomatic norms? one could inquire.

Is Bangladesh a republic governed by the US? Are the citizens of Bangladesh so naive as to not comprehend the geopolitics and diplomacy underlying US actions? Bangladesh’s political system and dynamics are challenging. It’s nothing new. Why is the US attempting to influence Bangladesh’s political landscape?

It is obvious that the US is committing multiple policy blunders regarding Bangladesh in the name of democracy and human rights. Numerous reasons influence this US decision, but these aspects also have global implications. First, in the wake of the Taiwan dispute and the Russia-Ukraine conflict, the US wants Bangladesh to join bloc politics.

Bangladesh has consistently followed neutrality in foreign policy decisions, maintained a non-aligned stance in world politics, and made choices based on multipolarity. Bangladesh and other South Asian countries boycotted twice at the UN while the war was still going on to criticize Russia. Bangladesh, on the other hand, voted in support of Ukraine on the issue of human rights.

Bangladesh has reaffirmed its support for the “One China Policy” even on the Taiwan issue. The US and its Western allies continue to place a high priority on the Taiwan issue, and South Asian allies want the US to change its stance on Taiwan. Second, the Indo-Pacific area is where the US has the most interests.

The US desired Bangladesh to join programs like QUAD or IPS in order to corner China from all angles.

Bangladesh vehemently refused joining any security alliance and gave economic diplomacy top priority for any attempts because of the country’s generally non-militaristic foreign policy, which is frequently encouraged by the constitution. Bangladesh released its Indo-Pacific Outlook in December 2022, reiterating the value of a secure and tranquil area while also highlighting China’s significance in it.

Third, the US has violated Bangladesh’s sovereignty by attempting to influence in its internal affairs. It is using democracy and human rights as a tool to meddle in Bangladeshi domestic issues and put tremendous pressure on the nation to adopt a foreign policy that is dominated by the west. Such restrictions have drawn harsh criticism from Bangladeshi residents. When the United States supports authoritarian regimes in some regions of the world while promoting democracy and human rights in other regions, it raises questions about the consistency and integrity of its commitment to democratic values.

Third, the US has violated Bangladesh’s sovereignty by attempting to influence in its internal affairs. It is using democracy and human rights as a tool to meddle in Bangladeshi domestic issues and put tremendous pressure on the nation to adopt a foreign policy that is dominated by the west. Such restrictions have drawn harsh criticism from Bangladeshi residents. When the United States supports authoritarian regimes in some regions of the world while promoting democracy and human rights in other regions, it raises questions about the consistency and integrity of its commitment to democratic values.

Such a paradox runs the risk of undermining the democratic agenda in the United States and raising accusations of unfairness.

Fourth, the US has grown concerned about Bangladesh and China’s close economic ties. 99% of Chinese markets are duty-free for Bangladeshi goods. Bangladesh also joined BRI to secure the growth of its infrastructure. China has made almost $39 billion in investments through BRI. The completion of the Bangabandhu Karnaphuli Tunnel and the Padma Multipurpose Bridge has also signaled a strong bilateral relationship between these two states. Bangladesh is also keeping a sizeable foreign exchange reserve and avoiding the “debt trap” that the west has warned about.

Bangladesh has resorted to paying in Chinese RMB even when it is difficult to do so in US dollars. Bangladesh is requesting China’s assistance in mediating the return of the Rohingyas from Myanmar. In each of these situations, the US has been unable to provide Bangladesh a meaningful policy.

Additionally, on May 26, 2023, during a period of heightened tension in relations between the United States and Bangladesh, Sun Weidong, China’s vice minister of foreign affairs, paid a three-day visit to Dhaka. Bangladesh is thinking about joining China’s Global Development Initiative. The US did not agree with this choice. Fifth, the US is even less optimistic about the developing ties between Russia and Bangladesh.

Continuous friendship was depicted by the Rooppur Power nuclear reactor. Bangladesh is working toward its objectives of having a developed economy by 2050 and a high-income nation by 2041. Energy sustainability is a priority for Bangladesh, and Russia is helping Bangladesh achieve this objective.

The internal component of the US policy error, however, cannot be disregarded. First, the US is concentrating on the opposition parties’ narrative, which is frequently unsupported by facts. The assertions of the opposition have received backing among non-resident followers of the Bangladeshi opposition party in the US. Such lobby dynamics are not understood by US leaders, who frequently choose poorly. There is no specific election platform or vision for Bangladesh held by the political party that the US is stressing.

Those parties, who were in favor of it, were quite appreciative of the idea of enacting visa limitations in Bangladesh. The present administration ran on election platforms such as “Digital Bangladesh” in 2008, “Development” in 2014 and 2018, and “Smart Bangladesh” in 2023.

The US, on the other hand, is not going back in time. When such opposition groups were in power, Bangladesh rose to the top of the corruption ranking, and the government there actively encouraged and even supported terrorism. Even historical evidence suggests that the US regime change in Bangladesh may not provide the specific gains the US is hoping for.

Given that South Asia is heavily influenced by the bureaucratic style of foreign policy, the party may support the current policies of the ruling coalition. The opposition party does not have a stance on the Ukraine issue, the Rohingya issue, or the Taiwan issue, which is another error the US is making with this approach. The US’s coercive plot and attempt to overthrow the government in Bangladesh could backfire because the people of Bangladesh would not alter their views on China, Russia, or Ukraine.

Second, US policy is slightly skewed since print, electronic, and online media outlets broadcast news stories with deceptive headlines about Bangladesh’s democratic process, creating a fictitious justification for US interference. However, by meddling in domestic politics, the US is weakening Bangladesh’s democratic process and free and fair elections. The US is losing its reputation as a trustworthy global force with this attitude. Thirdly, the US is increasing its pressure on European countries to meddle in Bangladesh’s domestic politics. Bangladesh is concentrating on joining programs like BRICS and diversifying its RMG exports, especially to Middle Eastern nations, while the US launches similar initiatives to isolate Bangladesh.

Bangladesh’s strategic importance in world politics has increased as a result of its geographic location and expanding economy. Furthermore, the EU is rightfully unwilling to penalise Bangladesh in accordance with US demands.

In conclusion, it should be emphasized that implementing a “selective and humiliating visa policy” for Bangladesh, a friendly partner and an emerging economy with 170 million people, is a terrible policy decision in terms of both diplomacy and international relations in general.  From all considerations and historical facts, it is harmful to try to influence Bangladesh’s electoral process through immigration policy and a few undiplomatic and forceful actions. Bangladesh is not the same as Egypt, Tunisia, or Ukraine. It is a nation with a rich history of individual sacrifices made during the Liberation, strong leadership provided by the oldest and most well supported ruling political party, and the fastest-growing economy.

Emilia Fernandez, a security and political analyst with a particular focus on South Asian geopolitics, is a Ph.D. researcher at the University of Lucerne, Switzerland.