See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/335975448

FOREIGN POLICY OF BANGLADESH: THE DILEMMAS OF WEAK STATE

Article · September 2019

CITATION READS

1 3,005

1 author:

Kent Bob Huzen

University of Canterbury
67 PUBLICATIONS   3 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Jihad in Islam View project

Islam in India View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Kent Bob Huzen on 23 September 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 FOREIGN POLICY OF BANGLADESH:
THE DILEMMAS OF WEAK STATE
Dr. Kent Bob Huzen (1992-3)

4.1 The Conceptual Framework and Legal

Basis of Bangladesh Foreign Policy

In this world of interdependence, no country however large or small, powerful or

weak, can afford to live in isolation. In the course of interaction the nations and states are

constantly being influenced by each other. Through such interactions each state tries to

protect its perceived national interests by pursuing a broad range of policy in order to create

a favourable environment where such interests can be preserved. Such a pursuance of policy

to influence the external behaviour of another country in its favour is termed as foreign

policy.

It seems obvious that foreign policy is not formulated or executed in a vacuum. A

country has to develop its foreign policy in the light of certain basic criteria or factor such as

the geopolitical realities of the region it is located in, its search for security, its needs and

urges for economic development, its ideological and historical background, its religious

affinities and so on. The policy-makers, thus, need to conduct foreign relations vis-a-vis

other states in terms of such independent variables conceptualized as policy inputs or the

flow of actions coming from the community.

In a resource deficient country like Bangladesh with illusions cloud realities, there is

a need to liberate foreign policy goals from them. Policy objectives must not exceed the
 89

limits of its capabilities. What the country supports as just position internally, has to be

vindicated by diplomatic moves externally. This has often not been possible, mainly because

ends did not correspond to the means.

In very general and theoretical terms, the basis of Bangladesh foreign policy was laid

down in articles 25(1) and (2), 63 and 145A of the Constitution of Bangladesh. The articles

are reproduced below:

Article 25(1)1:"The state shall base its international relations on the principles of

respect for national sovereignty and equality, non-interference in the internal affairs of other

countries, peaceful settlement of international disputes, and respect for international law and

the principles enunciated in the United Nations Charter, and on the basis of those principles

shall:

(a) Strive for the renunciation of the use of force in international relations and

for general and complete disarmanent;

(b) Uphold the right of every people freely to determine and build up its own

social, economic and political system by ways and means of its own free

choice; and

(c) Support oppressed people throughout the world waging a just struggle against

imperialism, colonialism or racialism."

Article 25(2): "The state shall endeavour to consolidate, preserve and strengthen

fraternal relations among Muslim countries based on Islamic solidarity."

 90

Article 63: "War shall not be declared and republic shall not perticipate in any war

except the assent of parliament."

Article 145A: "All treaties with foreign countries shall be submitted to the President,

who shall cause them to be laid before Parliament unless the President considers it to be

against national interest so to do."

Conceptually, the principle embodied in Clause 25(1) of the Constitution of

Bangladesh should be viewed as the foundation of Bangladesh foreign policy planning.

These principles conform in essence to the UN Charter and are similar to those inspiring the

foreign policy objectives of other states, small or big, weak or strong. But the interpretation

and application of these principles appear to very widely reflecting the wide divergence in

the national interest and security perceptions of the various states. These states are as diverse

in their historical, geographical, ethnic, linguistic, religious and cultural background, as they

are disparate in size, population resources, economic and military strength.

In theory and law all states are sovereign and equal. In practice, they are unequal in

all respects. The founding fathers of the United Nations were deeply moved by the ravages

of World War II. In their commendable endeavour to create a new world order based on

freedom, justice and basic human rights for all peoples as envisioned in the UN Charter, they

were successful, except for a new vestiges, in eliminating colonialism. The political map of

the world was transformed with the emergence of the new sovereign nation-states. Except in

a few cases, the territorial boundaries of these states remained co-terminous with those

arbitrarily determined during the colonial era and did not in all cases truly reflect their
 91

national aspirations and political and economic viability.

4.2 The Dilemmas and Paradoxes of Foreign

Policy: Some Notes on the Pitfalls

and Paths to Reality

The founding fathers of the United Nations left unresolved many paradoxes within

the international system which subsequently posed serious dilemmas and problems for the

weak states in terms of their political and economic security. Notable among them are:

(1) The paradox arising from the concept of sovereignty and the need for a

system of organized and enforceable restraints for ensuring sovereign equality among highly

disparate states.

The great asymmetry among some 160 nation-states presented not only a paradox but

also a dilemma for the economically and militarily weak nations with the power rivalry

nolonger confined to the two power blocks. Historically, inter-state relations were

profoundly influenced by the security perceptions of different states.

The prevailing power structure still remains essentially bipolar in character,2 with the

two power blocs generally known as East and West. This power structure and the underlying

doctrine of balance of power reflect the historical experiences of Europe and North

America, profoundly influenced by their security perceptions. The balance of power equation

and polarisation among states based on adversarial relations are central to the security

doctrine determining their national security and foreign policy. The enormous literature that
 92

has accumulated on the doctrine and structure of security principally centre on this balance

of power doctrine and its inevitable offspring, the military alliances and spheres of influence.

This bi-polar power structure was unacceptable to the leaders of the Third World.

The Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) was a response to this scenario and justified not only

on the grounds of the incompatibility of the bipolar power structure with the independent

existence of the new nation-states but also on that of the growing interdependence of the

nations as an inexorable trend rendering the old and time honoured doctrine of balance of

power obsolescent. Such a positive world would act with respect from all over the world.3

Nehru of India stressed that,

... if all the world were to be divided up between these blocs

... the inevitable result would be war. Therefore, every step

that takes place in reducing that area in the world which may

be called the unaligned area is a dangerous step and leads to

war. It reduces that objective, that balance, that outlook which

other countries without military might perhaps exercise.4

(2) The newly-emergent independent sovereign states naturally valued their hard-own

independence and viewed its consolidation as a national objective of the highest priority. But

they did not have the human and material resources needed to make their nations politically

and economically viable. As a result, right from their inception some of them were heavily

dependent economically on their erstwhile colonial rulers or affluent neighbours for their
 93

very survival. Even among those rich in human and material resources many lacked the

technological know how to develop these resources. Thus, most of them relied on the flow of

resource and technology from the industrially advanced countries for their economic and

social development, and imperative for raising the quality of life of their people.

(3) It is a paradox that both the militarily strong countries with their deadly nuclear

weapons and the militarily weak countries without such weapons share one thing in

common. Both live in fear. In such an international setting, an inevitable consequence was

the spawning of military ambitions among some of the Third World countries. They were

gripped in a dilemma. On the one hand, they vigorously denounced the bipolar structure and

advocated non-use of force and non-alignment and, on the other, they became involved in an

arms race themselves, some emerging as threshold nuclear powers. In the region of South

Asia, India and Pakistan are notable examples.

(4) Again, safeguarding national sovereignty and territorial integrity is a shared

foreign policy objective of all nation-states. But, the prevailing world power structure left the

overwhelming majority of the nation-states highly vulnerable to external threats. The

situation was further compounded by another paradox and dilemma. In the newly emergent

states, while external threats warranted the strengthening of the defence forces, some of them

showed a prowess to grow into regional powers with the rapid escalation of military

expenditure. As a result, the inherited international security doctrines gave rise to a new

power structure pyramidic in character, with the one super power at the apex who appeared

to accept this change in power configuration and the role of the regional powers within their

respective regions. Such a security burden sharing seemed to fit neatly with the superpower's
 94

perception of their geopolitical interests. The new pyramidic power configuration thus added

a new dimension to the security perceptions of the weak states. Military power overshadows

the rule of law in inter-state relations.

The East-West polarisation and consequent power rivalry in establishing and

extending their respective spheres of influence rendered regions perceived by them to be of

strategic importance, highly vulnerable to super power intrusion in one from another. The

regional geopolitical and strategic situation is complicated by the emerging nuclear power in

the Third World. A number of them have acquired, or are likely to acquire, nuclear

capability. This compounds the existing global nuclear threat. It adds a new dimension to the

nuclear proliferation already caused by the two power blocs, both horizontally and vertically,

and sets into motion a trend towards multipolar power configuration.

The emergence of threshold nuclear powers is naturally a matter of grave security

concern to their neighbours unable to match the former in military power and intensifies the

security dilemma already facing them. The theory of balance of power continues to hold its

sway, under one name or another, as the dominant security doctrine, influencing security

perceptions and policies of the great powers. Paradoxically enough, though denounced and

rejected by the Third World leaders as obsolete and neocolonialistic, this doctrine also

profoundly influenced the security policies and perceptions of many of them. The evidence is

provided by the power aspiration observed in some of the Third World countries. In this

global political scenario the UN Charter, by all accounts, the best document ever drawn up

on the rights of the nation-states, international peace and security and inter-state relations are

relegated to the background and involved only when the super powers are not interested in a
 95

crisis or find it too costly to manage it by their own direct intervention.

The above-mentioned dilemmas are bound to spawn many other dilemmas for the

weak states in specific situations. They are placed in perspective if viewed within the frame

of the present world political order. A closer look at these dilemmas and paradoxes will show

that they are essentially the product of the inherited international order shaped by history,

asymmetry and geopolitics, sustained and embellished by the doctrines of universal state and

balance of power as the basis of global security.

Historically, the emergence of the universal state was an epoch-making development

in terms of social and political advance for mankind through the marging and integratation of

sub-national groups. Military power was used as the principal instrument by a universal state

in securing foreign policy objectives giving rise geo-politically to power rivalry and a

security structure based on the doctrine of balance of power. If a state by itself did not

command enough power to match his adversary, alliance with other states was sought to

achieve a balance of power. This struggle for security and power was ceaseless and led to the

shifting of the centre of power from time to time.

4.3 Calculus of Global Changes

In the calculus of global changes, the balance of power equation has beyond doubt

played a crucial role for many countries, but failed to secure a lasting peace. In recent history

also, the power game proved to be much too costly. This was clearly demonstrated in

contemporary history in the American military intervention in Vietnam and the Russian

intervention in Afganistan, bringing into sharp focus the limits to the use of military power in
 96

achieving foreign policy objectives.

Another historic reality is the emergence of a deeper and wider equation of power

moving mankind slowly but surely towards a new and rational world order. This power

flowed from the undying fire in the minds of men to explore and discover new frontiers of

knowledge and cooperation in the service of mankind and in defence of human values of

freedom, democracy and justice, transcending the borders of national sovereign states, and

rendering the old power equation untenable and obsolescent. This inexorable trend is

reinforced by the dawn of a new era of knowledge-based prosperity with far-reaching and

phenomenal developments in international relations embracing the whole gamut of politics,

economics and environment.

Firstly, the advent of the nuclear age has brought the power game to a self-defeating

and preposterous point. The huge stock-pile of nuclear weapons, being replenished by new

generation weapons, has only a psychological value, namely, to act as a deterance to the

adversary as an instrument of terror. Hence, the two super powers were gradually led to build

a deterrence regime though maintaining a parity in the power to destroy. The intended

balance of terror can be achieved by parity of nuclear weapons of a much lower intensity

level - as a matter of fact, of a tiny fraction of the present stock-pile. This is one reason

actuating other states also to aspire and strive for becoming a nuclear power. Geopolitically,

the bipolar power structure based on the nuclear stockpiles of the two power blocs has lost

much of its relevance with the disintegration of the Soviet Union.

Secondly, the bipolar power structure involves an enormous cost burden of

 97

maintaining the huge military apparatus which has been seriously telling on the economies of

the powers though in varying degrees, with its inevitable repercussion on the economy of the

world as a whole. In the meantime, a shift in the economy power configuration is visible.

Japan, which scrupulously stayed outside the power game, has emerged as the world's

leading economic power. China is also concentrating on her programme of modernisation. A

number of other Asian countries are also moving fast along the path of industrialisation with

spectacular results. Bangladesh also noted that even militarily powerful nations were

increasingly placing greater reliance on non-military options such as dialogue, detente and

the pressure on them for avoiding costly military options.

Thirdly, an increasing range and degree of economic cooperation among nations

through the association of nation-states, is a new emerging reality with enormous political

implications. An apt example is the rapidly growing integration among the members of the

European community. A military confrontation among them is unthinkable even if the

canopy of NATO is withdrawn. On the other hand, this phenomenon in international

relations is all the more striking for the reason that it underlines the role of cooperation as an

alternative to military options in promoting both economic and political security and,

therefore, as a strategy in achieving foreign policy objectives, both economic and political.

Fourthly, an increasing awareness of the interdependence of nations has also been

brought into sharp focus by the revolution in communications, the advent of the nuclear era

and the shared concern for the protection of the environment. The advances in

communications have linked the nations of the world closer than ever. In like manner,

international cooperation is viewed as imperative to combat the new problems of

 98

international terrorism and international traffic in drugs -- both seriously menacing national

security.

4.4 Major Trends in International Relations

In the changing dynamics of international relations, three major trends are thus

discernible:

i) the collapse of the Soviet Union demonstrating the diminishing strategic

value of military power as an instrument of diplomacy,

ii) the growing interdependence of the nations rendered imperative by the needs

of economic and political security in a world changing rapidly with advances

in science and technology, and

iii) demonstrated benefits from international cooperation in raising the quality of

life and protecting the environment globally.

Third world countries aspiring to regional leadership have, of course, an alternative

option, namely, of viewing such a leadership role not in terms of military power beyond the

level of defensive requirements, but as spokesmen of the mainstream of the world nations

committed to the UN Charter and Non-Alignment in promoting international cooperation for

peace and development. Such an option is evidently much less costly and more viable in

political and economic terms. The rationale and urgency for such a strategy stem from the

structural changes in power configuration caused by the dawn of the new era of democracy

and knowledge-based prosperity.

 99

The prevailing geopolitical scenario clearly indicates the wisdom of limiting military

strength to a level considered as absolutely necessary for national security. Additionally, the

trumatic experience of Bangladesh demonstrated the threats to her national security being

predominantly domestic in character. This harsh reality has to be borne in mind in evolving a

balance between defence and development. National cohesion stood out clearly as the

paramount need for her national security. Building stable political institutions and

accelerating the peace of social and economic development were indicated as deserving the

highest priority. The cohesion and unity among the people of Bangladesh was the best

bulwark of national defence since her huge population could render any aggressive act much

too costly.

4.5 The Primacy of Security and Development

The primacy of security interests is universally recognized. The security interests of a

nation are central to its nation building efforts and are invariably reflected in its domestic and

foreign policy concerns. We strongly felt that the security interests of Bangladesh warranted

the acceleration of the pace of consolidation of the hard-won independence. Hence the

highest priority must be assigned to reconstruction and development. The foreign policy

thrust of Bangladesh should, therefore, be in the direction of securing the political and

economic cooperation of the international community toward achieving this central goal as

speedily as possible. Thus, advancing the process of national development was central

among Bangladesh foreign policy objectives. Wide-ranging factors, both internal and

external, some intangible and imponderable, influence the dynamics of a nation's perception

of its security interests. Notable among the internal factors are history, geography, the size
 100

and ethnic composition of the people, their language, religion, resource endowment, and

social, political and economic systems. Important among the external factors are the structure

of inter-state relations, and the regional and global geopolitical environment. Regio-

politically, Bangladesh's choice for a purely defensive capability appeared to have several

foreign policy implications.

In the South Asian scenario we find these factors forming a complex, interacting and

interlocking web, with history, asymmetry and geopolitics occupying a central place. The

seven member states of South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC),

though young as nation states, share a rare cultural heritage steeped in history. The

emergence of these nation-states was the culmination of a long, complex and trumatic

historical process. It marked, on the one hand, the end of the colonial era and the fulfilment

of the political aspirations of the peoples; and it was marked on the other hand by the

wounds and scars left by the struggle for independence.

The major consequences were: (i) inter-state relations entered a state of flux, tension,

distrust, discord and were sometimes marked even by armed conflict; (ii) the political

climate of the region became far from conducive to the growth of wholesome and stable

good neighbourly relations, or for healthy and stable bilateral relations; (iii) these countries

lost sight of the reality that they shared many values, goals and aspirations and that their

shared heritage could be a source of enormous strength to them in their nation building

efforts; (iv) distortions in inter-country relations created by mutual suspicion, distrust and

fear, became one of the most serious impediments to mutual cooperations for the fulfilment

of the political and economic aspirations of these nation states.

 101

The South Asian political environment has been further vitiated by geopolitical

factors which have unleasted an arms build-up in India with aid from Soviet Russia, and in

Pakistan with aid from the United States; they have deepened the fear psychosis in mutual

relations. Though till now the region as such has been spared of direct super power intrusion.

Apparently the strategic interest of each super power is to see a balance of power in the

region which at least would not be more favourable to its adversary.

History, asymmetry and geopolitics have combined to produce some awesome

contradictions. As members of the UN and the non-aligned movement, the countries of the

region are committed to goals and principles which are directly antithetical to the

anachronistic security doctrines as a legacy of the colonial era -- which underly the present

bi-polar power configuration with all its frightening implications.

One is continuing great power domination. A modern variant is the extension of the

concept of the sphere of influence. Side by side with their own spheres of influence

commanding strategic areas and materials, the super powers find it an expedient strategy to

boost selected countries as regional powers under one name or the other. India has the

unique privilege of being treated as one of them by both super powers.5 Though India has

been prudent and cautious and has not claimed such a status for itself, the mini arms race

between India and Pakistan, with its nuclear undertone,6 increasing expenditure on arms by

both and allegations and counter allegations against each other, naturally have the effect of

deepening the distrust, fear and suspicion that already vitiate the South Asian political

environment and distort inter-state relations.

 102

Geopolitically, non-alignment to which Bangladesh is committed should remain the

cornerstone of her foreign policy. During peace time, the interest of two super powers in

Bangladesh in military-strategic terms could not but be rather peripheral. But politically, as

the eighth largest nation of the world, Bangladesh's role in international politics could not be

underestimated by either. In this respect a special concern of foreign policy of Bangladesh

would be to intensify efforts progressively so as to take maximum advantage of the

possibilities in this regard.

The harsh geopolitical realities cannot but have their impact on the developing

countries including countries in the South Asia. In all likelihood each of them will try to

increase its defence capability as much as its resources permit. To the extent the South Asian

countries have to depend on external aid in building up such defence capability, this region

will become further polarised between the two power blocs. This will particularly affect

relations between India and Pakistan.

As the foregoing analysis shows, the security perceptions of the countries in the

region are currently focused almost entirely or preeminently on external threats as perceived

by them. Threats to the national security of a developing country which are rooted in

domestic causes, like the problems of national cohesion, poverty, disease, illiteracy, are not

adequately reflected in their security and strategic concerns.

In sculpting Bangladesh's foreign policy special attention must be paid to the

potential role of Bangladesh as an actor on the international scene. This role can be vastly

enhanced in significance if Bangladesh as the eighth largest nation can stay in the
 103

mainstream of the nations committed to the UN Charter, the principles of NAM, OIC and

Group of 77.

In order to achieve a better balance in her external relations, a dynamic approach to

her relations with the Islamic countries is was clearly warranted. The OIC, though

established in 1969, showed an enormous potential both as a political and an economic force.

The oil boom during the early 1970s had vastly enchanced the political clout of the Islamic

West,East and South-East Asia. Additionally,as the Islamic countries represented a fifth of

the world's population, we can expect an important role for Bangladesh as the second largest

Islamic country within the frame of OIC with its beneficial impact on her bilateral and

multilateral relations.

4.6 Shift in Power Structure

As already observed, the bipolar power structure which emerged in the wake of

World War II is changing. It is changing at least in three important ways. Firstly, there is a

gradual but visible shift from a bipolar to a multipolar power configuration. Examples of

new power centres are EEC, Japan, China, India, Brazil, Egypt, Israel, South Africa,

Indonesia and Nigeria. Their relative influence as international actors seems to depend on the

pace of their economic development. Events during the last few decades have abundantly

demonstrated how the shift in political strength has been spearheaded by a shift in economic

rather than military strength. Japan and EEC are now well-anchored as future centres of

power.

Secondly, the doctrine of power is also going through a conceptual change. The use
 104

of military power as an instrument of arranging and influencing external relations to the

advantage of the superior military power has proved, by and large, to be cost ineffective, not

only in terms of economic cost but also social costs, both nationally and internationally. The

most conspicuous examples are the American military intervention in Vietnam and Lebanon,

the Soviet military intervention in Afganistan and the Iran-Iraq war.

Thirdly, the advent of the nuclear age has radically altered the strategy of war. No

nuclear war can be fought without mutual destruction. What is tenuously and delicately

holding global peace is not the size of the stockpile of sophisticated nuclear weapons, but the

deterrence regime that the two super powers have been able to build by ensuring a level of

parity in nuclear arms, and thus creating a balance of terror. It will be sometime before the

world is completely rid of the present obsolescent, irrational and undemocratic power

structure. States that have emerged as regional powers or have aspiration to rise as regional

power would be prudent to take note of these new emerging realities.

Unfortunately, the South Asian region is still groping for sound moorings in inter-

state relations. The impediment obviously lies in the unhappy memories of the turbulent

historical process leading to the emergence of the new states, shrouding their shared rich

cultural heritage. The challenge before them is to dispel the mist of mutual distrust, suspicion

and fear and build inter-state relations on the rational basis of mutually beneficial

cooperation.

Peace in the region is the most essential prerequisite for the countries in the region to

accelerate the pace of their national development -- an imperative for internal stability and
 105

national cohesion, both of which are of the highest importance to national security. For all

the countries in the region, the most serious threats to their national security are domestic in

nature and stem from the problems of poverty, illiteracy, disease and social and economic

inequalities. The possibilities of cooperation in addressing these common problems are

enormous with an urgency added for the protection of the physical environment which they

all share. What is needed is the political will informed by a new creative approach to inter-

state relations in the region on the basis of an unswerving adherence to the principles

enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations.

4.7 Foreign Policy Objectives of Bangladesh:

The Regional and International Context

South Asia, comprising seven nations -- including three core countries, India,

Pakistan and Bangladesh, has been of intense extraneous interest and target of rivalry for

influence by superpowers. Home of one-fifth of worlds population its size, population, its

military and scientific establishment and its geographic position between the oil-rich Persian

Gulf and dynamic economics of East and Southeast Asia give the area great geo-political

importance.7 By virtue of its location, population, "combinations of actual weakness and

potential strength and efforts of nation-building",8 South Asia is an important region of

shifting struggle for influence.

The emergence of a bipolar world following World War II and the atmosphere of

intense cold war had profound impact on the young nations of Asia and Africa. Both super

powers were then engaged in an intense rivalry for sphere of influence all over the world.
 106

The two major independent countries of South Asia, India and Pakistan, soon became targets

of each super power's wooing effort, as each sought to have influence in the sub-continent.

The impact of bi-polar international politics was soon felt in the regional politics of South

Asia.

The emergence of People's Republic of China (PRC) in world politics and its

assertion as an independent centre of power, specially after the Sino-Indian border war of

1962, added a new dimension to international politics. It involved South Asia, a region

always considered by China as its natural and cultural domain of influence because of her

physical proximity. China soon joined the Soviet Union and the U.S. for the scrumble of

influence in South Asia. On the part of China, the region became imperative for its national

security in the context of bitter and acrimonious relation with USSR following the great

schism between the two communist giants.

From then onward South Asian subcontinent became an area of active diplomatic

competition involving the three major powers. "Rivalry among the great powers for

influence and military strategic parity or superiority is so intense that each one is compelled

to seek the support of smaller nations containing the spreading in influence of its major

competitors, or in spreading its own influence further."9

As such, the task before Bangladesh foreign policy makers were complex in nature. It

emerged from the ashes of destruction in a subsystem which was already beleagured with

pulls and pushes from the major power as well as from the dominant regional power. The

regional order was still in being, perhaps even anachronistic, presenting enormous
 107

difficulties for the newly emerged South Asian country. The interplay of forces during

Bangladesh's birth had already under-scored the compulsions in her dealings with external

relations. The political and economic constraints facing the new nation were enormous.

Dhaka, however, started fashioning her foreign policy in the backdrop of such complex

scenario. Before discussing the operational aspects of the external policy of Bangladesh in

such a complex setting, it would be appropriate to underline the main foreign policy

objectives of the country.

An analysis of Bangladesh's foreign policy will indicate certain objectives which

have governed her regional and international behaviour from the time of her very inception.

There have been change of governments in Bangladesh through military coups -- sometimes

accompanied by violence -- causing political instability at home and bewilderment abroad.

Nevertheless,the foreign policy of Bangladesh has shown certain consistent features. The

technique and modus operandi for attaining those objectives, however, varied from time to

time in accordance with the changing circumstances both at home and abroad. The attitude of

the super powers, pattern of alignment in the subcontinent, inter-state relations in South Asia,

historical experience and the trauma of her birth, the political and economic structures of the

international system as well as the regional setting -- all have profoundly affected foreign

policy dicisionmaking in Dhaka. In course of time, through three successive regimes, the

consistent features which have emerged in Bangladesh's foreign policy are: (a) national

security and territorial integrity; (b) good neighbourly relations - conditioned by a

geopolitical reality seeking closer ties with India, Pakistan, China as well as with the

countries of South East Asia; (c) promotion and maintenance of fraternal ties with the
 108

Muslim countries, including Pakistan, an objective which was conditioned by religious

feelings and cultural affinities of the Bangladeshi Muslims; (d) seeking stability and peace to

promote international cooperation so that there is uninterrupted flow of financial assistance,

considered very vital for Bangladesh's economic development; (e) support for a New

International Economic Order, which would be beneficial for a developing country like

Bangladesh.

It is appropriate to deal firstly with the quest for security, which is a universal foreign

policy requirement of all states, including the super powers, though in varying degrees such a

requirement corresponds to the particular circumstances of each. By most canons or

definitions, Bangladesh is a small country. Its lack of resources and poor state of economic

development, weak military capability and its foreign policy considerations being regional

rather than international-squarely rank Bangladesh in the category of a small power. As a

result, the predominant part of Bangladesh's external policy (apart from a limited number of

regional or area issues) "consists of generalized objectives, for example statements

expressing a belief in International peace and security, verbal support for universal human

rights and condemnation of aggrassion."10 In the context of conducting the foreign policy in

the minimal sense, how does a small state like Bangladesh try to preserve the core values,

i.e., national security and territorial integrity? As pointed out earlier, lack of a number of pre-

requisites circumbscribed Dhaka's options to ably pursue an active foreign policy strategy.

Rather, in order to achieve the above mentioned objectives, she relies on diplomacy; as such

she pursues non-aligned foreign policy which is the cornerstone of the country's external

policy.
 109

Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, after being released from the Pakistani captivity, in his

maiden news conference in London, declared, "We are a small country. We want friendship

with all and malice towards none."11 Dr. Kamal Hossain, the then Foreign Minister,

reiterated Bangladesh's faith in non-aligned foreign policy in his speech delivered at the UN

General Assembly on 17 September 1974. To quote him: "Bangladesh has consistently

pursued an independent non-aligned foreign policy promoting friendship with all countries

of the world on the basis of mutual respect for sovereignty, equality, territorial integrity and

non-interference in the internal affairs of other states."12 Time and again succesive

governments of Bangladesh declared unequivocally the same theme, making non-alignment

the very foundation of its external relations.

The concept of non-alignment has now new meaning and connotations and does not

apply to the initial concept of steering one's way out of the power-bloc politics of cold war

days. The policy of non-alignment in a bipolar world was aptly explained in the following

words by Ghana's President Nkrumah:"Our policy is not negative one. Positive neutralism

and non-alignment does not mean keeping aloof from burning international issues. On the

contrary it means a positive stand based on our own convictions completely uninfluenced by

any of the power blocs."13 It has become easier to practice positive neutralism in the existing

multipolar world. The new nations of Africa and Asia, through the practice of non-

alignment, want to pursue their own independent course and manage their own affairs

without being influenced by any outside power.

For Bangladesh the policy of non-alignment is vitalfor its national security, both

political and economic. The option has been conditioned by Dhaka's historical experiences.
 110

During pre-independence days, there was extreme polarisation in the sub-continent due to

Pakistan's alliances with the west and India's informal links to the Soviet Union. For Dhaka,

it was a historic lesson, as

... at the foreign policy level, too the forces of the past and
those of the present can conflict, co-exist or synthesize the
choices and activities of foreign policy decision makers [who]
can be guided by the cultural norms and historical precedents
that governed the behaviour of their predecessors; or the
choices and activities can be guided by the changing demands
that estimate from the international system or from the
decision makers.14

As such the changed sub continental setting and conflicting perceptions of the past and

present demanded the course of nonalignment which also alluded the extreme ideological

polarization of politically conscious people within its polity.

Economic development, was therefore, top priority for Bangladesh where about

three-fourth of the population lived below poverty line. Bangladesh's economic situation was

desperate and the need for economic development of the country was urgent. Lacking the

resources to generate rapid growth of dire socio-economic development, Bangladesh, from

the outset, sought large-scale economic assistance from the developed countries. Foreign

aid, therefore, greatly influenced Dhaka's foreign policy. The policy of nonalignment was

therefore, essential for a country like Bangladesh. It allowed Bangladesh's access to

development assistance from any country which would offer such assistance without any

political strings attached.

Another important factor which demanded a non-alignment foreign policy posture for
 111

Bangladesh was geopolitical realities facing the country. The country is almost surrounded

by India, excepting an outlet through Bay of Bengal in the south and a flank of common

border with Burma in the east. Historically, the Awami League leaders, who initially

fashioned Bangladesh's foreign policy, were infavour of good-neighbourly relations with

India and peaceful coexistence with that country even during the Pakistani days. Another

geopolitical option for Dhaka is to seek closer ties with China -- a country which is located

only 120 kilometers from the Bangladesh frontier and hence the developing Sino-Bangladesh

relation could be viewed as being one of major geo-strategic importance.

Being a dominantly Muslim populated country, Bangladesh from the outset tried to

cultivate good relationship with the countries of the Islamic world. It is one of the

fundamental foreign policy objectives of Dhaka, as it stems from shared history and a

commitment to common cultural and religious values. The inherently strong urge to serve the

causes of Muslim Ummah has been part of Bangladeshi culture which she desires to achieve

through her links with the Islamic nations.

Lastly, Bangladesh like any other developing nations, is interested in a New

International Economic Order and seeks closer cooperation with all industrialized countries

without being aligned with any bloc. The policy of nonalignment clearly helps her in

achieving such goal.

4.8 Some Theoretical Conclusions

As observed in the foregoing analysis, economically and militarily weak states face

many challenges and dilemmas. One of the most formidable among these challanges is,
 112

however, internal in character and stems from the lack of national cohesion. The roots of a

nation's foreign policy lie within the nation. No foreign policy, however, carefully planned,

can be stronger than the inner strength of a nation. The success of a nation's foreign policy

depends pre-eminently on the strength of its foundation. National unity and national

concensus on basic national issues from the cornerstones of this foundation.

Violence and instability, observed to bedevil Bangladesh during the post-

independence period hampering the growth of the democratic process and, for that matter,

the overall nation building efforts were an inevitable outcome of the unresolved conflicts

among the sub-groups representing the major power centres. The resolution of the internal

conflicts leading to national cohesion and harmony embracing all the sub-groups, political

and economic, civil and military, warrants the urgent attention of the national leaders. The

first essential step towards harmony between a nation and her neighbours, is harmony among

the various sub-groups within the nation itself. The impact of inner conflicts tends to linger

on through continuing instability. Internal disharmony during one regime is a threat not only

to that regime but also to future regimes.

Some theoretical conclusions seem to flow from the above analysis of Bangladesh's

experiences in external relations:

oo The geo-political position of Bangladesh renders it imperative on her part to

develop, sustain and promote friendly relations and cooperation with all her

neighbours and near neighbours;

oo Bangladesh's experience shows that a weak state may be more vulneable but
 113

not totally helpless. In the case of Bangladesh, its large population with its

homogeneous composition and fiercely nationalistic fervour can be

transformed through national cohesion into a powerful force and a deterrent;

oo The vulnerability of the weak Third World countries can largely be checked

by strengthening regional and international organizations;

oo The objective conditions of Bangladesh also render it imperative to accelerate

the pace of development essential for her economic and political security.

Ensuring an adequate flow of external resources for achieving self-reliance in

national development should be integral to her foreign policy strategy;

oo Geo-politically, Bangladesh's position is placed in a correct perspective when

it is viewed from both national and international angles. As a nation she may

appear to be a lone and weak actor. But this role can be significantly changed

by acting together with other nations within an international system (e.g.

U.N., G-77, NAM, OIC, etc.)

A small country like Bangladesh with gigantic economic and political problems

would remain susceptible to external strategic manoeuvre and foreign influence. Her heavy

dependence on external aid had somewhat circumscribed her desire to follow a truly

independent and non-aligned foreign policy. In the meantime, in the complex environment of

South Asian regional and international systems, Bangladesh remains committed to the

formulation of her foreign policy in order to safeguard her national interests. The ruling

regimes since 1973 have realised the necessity of co-operation not only with neighbouring
 114

India and its ally the erstwhile USSR but also subsequently felt an urge to develop ties with

the US and China and the Muslim countries. Economic as well as security compulsions

necessitated the pursuance of such foreign policy objectives. As long as the system in which

Bangladesh lives and operates,tension and conflict-ridden-Dhaka's future foreign policy

would remain more or less oriented towards the same pattern. However, a firm commitment

to evolve a stable political system in a democratic setting and a sustained economic growth

internally can help the country to project a better image and provide her greater

respectability in the pursuit of foreign policy objectives regionally and internationally.

By- Kent Bob Huzen (Visiting Fellow JNU 1993)

View publication stats

115

END NOTES

1. Article 25 of the Constitution of 1972 was renumbered as clause (1) of the article by the
Proclamation Order No. 1 of 1977, and clause (2) was added by the Proclamation Order No.
1 of 1977, finally incorporated in the Constitution of 1977 as Articles 25 (1) and (2).

2. The dramatic development in Europe and the rise of Japan and the EEC as new centres of
economic power have heralded a new trend in power configuration.

3. Nasser's Speeches vol. II, Cairo, Information Deptt., n.d. 133-34.

4. Bahgat Korany, Social Change, Crisis and International Behaviour, Leiden: Sijithoff,
1976, pp. 104-5.

5. Vice-President Bush addressing the press of Delhi airport on 12th May, 1984, described
India's role as that of a major pivotal power in the region. Soviet Leader M. Gorvachev's
banquet speech during the Indian prime Minister's visit to Moscow on 21st May, 1985,
visualized India playing a key role in the Asian Forum, (the Asian Forum being a Soviet
concept).

6. Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi's interview published in Newsweek dated 3rd June, 1985.

7. South Asia and U.S. Foreign Policy, Bureau of Public Affairs, U.S. Department of State,
Washington, D.C. An address by Machael H. Armacost, Under Secretary of State, Political
Affairs (December 12, 1984).

8. William J. Barnds, India, Pakistan and the Great Powers, New York: Praeger, 1972, p. 3.

9. Shaheen Fatemah Dil, Great Power Interaction in Local Crisis: Soviet American-Chinese
Participation in South Asia, (Unpublished Thesis, Princeton University, 1970), p. 164.

10. August Schou and Arne Olav Brundtland, Small States in International Relations, New
York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1971, p. 40.

11. The New York Times, (January 10, 1972).

12. Speech delivered by Foreign Minister Kamal Hossain at the UN General Assembly on the
occasion of the entry of Bangladesh into the United Nations (September 17, 1974).

13. Nkanmah 1961:199 cited in Talukdar Maniruzzaman, The Security of Small States in the
Third World, Dhaka: Academic Publishers, 1989, p. 32.

14. James N. Rosenau, The Scientific Study of Foreign Policy, New York: Nichols Publishing
Company, 1970, p. 318.