When most democracies go through the process of elections, regardless of the apparent dominance of any one party, its people expect a contest between at least two players. Unfortunately, for Bangladesh, its incumbent Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina is set to retain power for a fourth consecutive term even before the 7 January polling date.
Why? Because even though polling is impending, a “legitimate election” is far from guaranteed.
Hasina and her Awami League (AL) government has refused to step down and appoint a caretaker government to oversee the election – a demand of the main opposition party Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) and its allies, who say that they have no faith that Hasina will hold “free and fair” elections.
This system was first successful in Bangladesh in 1991 following the country's transition from military rule and was written into the constitution in 1996 after, ironically, the then opposition leader Hasina’s two-year agitation demanding it. However, the system was abolished by an amendment passed by Hasina using her huge parliamentary majority.
But interestingly, unlike most democracies, the elections in Bangladesh are witnessing foreign players backing domestic parties, two of whom hit closer to home.
Geo-Political Soup: How India, China, & US Are Involved in Bangladesh Elections
1. India
For India, Bangladesh’s elections are an important event not only because Bangladesh shares borders with five Indian states and that it is an important diplomatic and security partner, but also because India and its allies, in this case, the US, are backing rival political parties.
A former Indian diplomat, under conditions of anonymity, told The Quint:
"I think India has clearly communicated to the US that our interests in Bangladesh are different from theirs, and between strategic partners, you can be frank and candid.”
Meanwhile, senior journalist SNM Abdi told The Quint, "The US will want a right of way in every country, and even if friendly power like India gets in the way, Washington expects it to make way for the US. Left to itself, India would like to be the dominant power in countries like Bangladesh, Nepal, and Sri Lanka with no competition from the US. But the US has its own agenda and India will have to live with it."
Bangladesh has played a pivotal role in India's strategic policies, transitioning from the "Look East" to "Act East" focus. These policies prioritise regional connectivity, digital integration, trade, investment, and energy collaboration. While India is concerned about issues like extremism and cross-border militancy stemming from Bangladesh, it views the ruling AL as an ally and prefers the current political landscape.
During Hasina's tenure, India has garnered substantial support from Bangladesh in addressing insurgency in India’s Northeast, facilitating transit, securing access to key ports in the Bay of Bengal, and finalising energy agreements. This includes Bangladesh purchasing electricity at a higher cost.
Hasina has also justified Dhaka’s rapport with New Delhi, underlining India’s efforts during the 1971 Bangladeshi Liberation War, apart from close cultural, ethnic and linguistic ties.
But regardless of India’s inclination towards Hasina, New Delhi has reiterated that it “respects the democratic process in Bangladesh”.
“When it comes to developments in Bangladesh, elections in Bangladesh, it is their domestic matter. It is for the people of Bangladesh to decide their future,” Foreign Secretary Vinay Kwatra had said. This is India’s most explicit stance on the election and contrasts their 2014 position, which saw New Delhi dispatch the then Indian foreign secretary Sujatha Singh to persuade opposition parties in Bangladesh to participate in elections.
But this position has also led to an overlap with an unlikely nation for New Delhi.
Expand2. China
Surprisingly, India’s other neighbour China, with whom its ties have remained tenuous, have similar perspectives on the Bangladesh election. Yao Wen, the Chinese Ambassador to Bangladesh, had reiterated that China’s position remains, "Election is completely an internal issue of Bangladesh. Any decision regarding this shall be taken by the Bangladeshis."
The position, concurrent with New Delhi’s, essentially goes in line with Hasina’s refusal to back down to calls for a caretaker government to take over.
Elections are not an issue where India and China usually find each other on the same side.
Just in the recent Maldives election, there was almost a competition between China and India in backing two candidates competing with each other. The victory of Mohamed Muizzu, who leans towards China, over Ibrahim Solih, seen as pro-Indian, was viewed as a win for Beijing. Following his win, Muizzu quickly went ahead with the withdrawal of Indian troops from the Maldives.
Under Hasina, China built closer relations with Bangladesh, which kicked off by fulfilling Dhaka’s desperate need for a line of credit to construct the Padma Bridge at a time when the World Bank, the Asian Developmental Bank, and the Islamic Development Bank decided to pull their financing commitments due to allegations of corruption.
Apart from Bangladesh being a part of China’s Belt & Road Initiative, Beijing has financed a number of large-scale infrastructure projects (roads, river tunnels, railways, and power plants) in the country, with Chinese President Xi Jinping committing $20 billion for key infrastructure-aimed loans and additional deals of over $13 billion.
China’s trade relationship with Dhaka has also acted as a gold standard in Beijing’s balance of payments with an annual value of $24 billion in exports from China to Bangladesh.
India has long been concerned about Dhaka's growing dependence on Chinese funding for its infrastructure ventures.
Of particular concern to India has been Dhaka's acquisition of two renovated Chinese submarines and the development of a billion-dollar base for these vessels in Kutubdia, in southeast Bangladesh.
But the former diplomat clarified to The Quint, “Bangladesh feels that they cannot get as much money as the Chinese are giving from anyone else. But PM Hasina has been careful unlike [leaders in] Pakistan, Maldives and Sri Lanka, and has kept a leash on the agreements they’ve signed with the Chinese to avoid another Hambantota.”
But here is where India and China’s positions differ.
While India is relatively cozier with the Hasina camp, China is set to reap the benefits regardless of who wins the election since it will continue to have economic and trade partners to work with. While New Delhi has reasonable doubt that the BNP returning to power will undercut its interests, Beijing’s friendship with the BNP presents nary a red flag for either side.
“China will deal with any government. Since they have the money, they can throw it at whichever government, as they do. While there is a growing pro-Chinese wave in Bangladeshi establishment, it is simply money-driven," the retired diplomat told The Quint.
But Manoj Joshi, distinguished journalist at ORF, told The Quint, "The same is the case with India, but it will have to work at it and there will be difficult history to overcome. Even the BNP knows that it cannot afford to deal with a hostile India. The problem is the Jamaat-e-Islami and the support it gives to Islamist elements in the country."
Many South Asian nations usually find themselves on one of three sides – the China camp, India camp, or swinging in between, but Bangladesh has remained adept at maintaining decent relations with both nations.
And then there were three...
Expand3. United States
While China and India seem to have picked Sheikh Hasina and the AL, the third and probably largest role to play in the upcoming polls is the US’.
The US led the clarion call, echoed by other Western nations, that insisted Bangladesh hold an inclusive, democratic election under a caretaker government.
In September 2023, the US initiated visa restrictions on Bangladeshi officials implicated in "undermining the democratic election process in Bangladesh." Although these restrictions targeted members of various sectors, including the opposition, law enforcement, judiciary, security services, and the ruling party, the AL perceived itself as the primary focus of these measures.
US Ambassador to Bangladesh Peter Haas actually went ahead and met with Bangladesh's Chief Election Commissioner and expressed interest in meeting leaders from the AL, the opposition BNP, and the Jamaat-e-Islami.
According to Haas, the aim was to facilitate peace talks and encourage opposition participation in the upcoming elections.
It remains to be seen, what US President Joe Biden has called, the US’ commitment to ensuring democracy and freedom around the world.
However, the diplomat told The Quint, “One must also look that the US is taking a particular view of Bangladesh but in the case of Pakistan, they have nothing to say. If democracy and human rights are so important, it should apply equally to all countries. Let us not give too much credence to the American position because it's an exercise in double standards."
Meanwhile, an American diplomat posted in South Asia told The Quint, "President Biden's concerns strongly revolved around avoiding a repetition of the two last elections, neither of which were free or fair. We were always vocal about our disappointment."
While the US’ response to election violence in Bangladesh has remained consistent, the scale of response has only increased this time around.
In Bangladesh's 2014 general elections, the majority of seats remained uncontested due to the BNP's boycott, leading to the AL’s victory. Following the elections, the US State Department openly pushed for fresh elections, calling for Dhaka to allow all citizens political freedom of speech.
Despite Hasina's refusal to engage in talks with the BNP, the US affirmed its commitment to collaborate with the Hasina government, despite reservations about the elections.
Similarly, in 2018, an election marred by violence resulted in the incumbent AL securing 90 percent of the seats. Both the US and the European Union raised concerns about election-day irregularities, voter intimidation, and harassment. Despite these concerns, the relationship between Bangladesh and the US continued on a largely positive trajectory.
Of course, the US’ economic ties with Dhaka have only gotten better, with the former becoming Bangladesh’s largest foreign investor, biggest investor in the country’s energy sector, third largest trading partner and the largest market for locally made ready-made garments.
According to SNM Abdi, "The US cannot stop Hasina from getting re-elected, but she might have to pay a price after she wins. There could be more sanctions, but they were not proactive enough for the opposition. They imposed a visa ban, but they never took any action against anyone, it was all talk."
(At The Quint, we question everything. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member today.)
Expand
India
For India, Bangladesh’s elections are an important event not only because Bangladesh shares borders with five Indian states and that it is an important diplomatic and security partner, but also because India and its allies, in this case, the US, are backing rival political parties.
A former Indian diplomat, under conditions of anonymity, told The Quint:
"I think India has clearly communicated to the US that our interests in Bangladesh are different from theirs, and between strategic partners, you can be frank and candid.”
Meanwhile, senior journalist SNM Abdi told The Quint, "The US will want a right of way in every country, and even if friendly power like India gets in the way, Washington expects it to make way for the US. Left to itself, India would like to be the dominant power in countries like Bangladesh, Nepal, and Sri Lanka with no competition from the US. But the US has its own agenda and India will have to live with it."
Bangladesh has played a pivotal role in India's strategic policies, transitioning from the "Look East" to "Act East" focus. These policies prioritise regional connectivity, digital integration, trade, investment, and energy collaboration. While India is concerned about issues like extremism and cross-border militancy stemming from Bangladesh, it views the ruling AL as an ally and prefers the current political landscape.
During Hasina's tenure, India has garnered substantial support from Bangladesh in addressing insurgency in India’s Northeast, facilitating transit, securing access to key ports in the Bay of Bengal, and finalising energy agreements. This includes Bangladesh purchasing electricity at a higher cost.
Hasina has also justified Dhaka’s rapport with New Delhi, underlining India’s efforts during the 1971 Bangladeshi Liberation War, apart from close cultural, ethnic and linguistic ties.
But regardless of India’s inclination towards Hasina, New Delhi has reiterated that it “respects the democratic process in Bangladesh”.
“When it comes to developments in Bangladesh, elections in Bangladesh, it is their domestic matter. It is for the people of Bangladesh to decide their future,” Foreign Secretary Vinay Kwatra had said. This is India’s most explicit stance on the election and contrasts their 2014 position, which saw New Delhi dispatch the then Indian foreign secretary Sujatha Singh to persuade opposition parties in Bangladesh to participate in elections.
But this position has also led to an overlap with an unlikely nation for New Delhi.
China
Surprisingly, India’s other neighbour China, with whom its ties have remained tenuous, have similar perspectives on the Bangladesh election. Yao Wen, the Chinese Ambassador to Bangladesh, had reiterated that China’s position remains, "Election is completely an internal issue of Bangladesh. Any decision regarding this shall be taken by the Bangladeshis."
The position, concurrent with New Delhi’s, essentially goes in line with Hasina’s refusal to back down to calls for a caretaker government to take over.
Elections are not an issue where India and China usually find each other on the same side.
Just in the recent Maldives election, there was almost a competition between China and India in backing two candidates competing with each other. The victory of Mohamed Muizzu, who leans towards China, over Ibrahim Solih, seen as pro-Indian, was viewed as a win for Beijing. Following his win, Muizzu quickly went ahead with the withdrawal of Indian troops from the Maldives.
Under Hasina, China built closer relations with Bangladesh, which kicked off by fulfilling Dhaka’s desperate need for a line of credit to construct the Padma Bridge at a time when the World Bank, the Asian Developmental Bank, and the Islamic Development Bank decided to pull their financing commitments due to allegations of corruption.
Apart from Bangladesh being a part of China’s Belt & Road Initiative, Beijing has financed a number of large-scale infrastructure projects (roads, river tunnels, railways, and power plants) in the country, with Chinese President Xi Jinping committing $20 billion for key infrastructure-aimed loans and additional deals of over $13 billion.
China’s trade relationship with Dhaka has also acted as a gold standard in Beijing’s balance of payments with an annual value of $24 billion in exports from China to Bangladesh.
India has long been concerned about Dhaka's growing dependence on Chinese funding for its infrastructure ventures.
Of particular concern to India has been Dhaka's acquisition of two renovated Chinese submarines and the development of a billion-dollar base for these vessels in Kutubdia, in southeast Bangladesh.
But the former diplomat clarified to The Quint, “Bangladesh feels that they cannot get as much money as the Chinese are giving from anyone else. But PM Hasina has been careful unlike [leaders in] Pakistan, Maldives and Sri Lanka, and has kept a leash on the agreements they’ve signed with the Chinese to avoid another Hambantota.”
But here is where India and China’s positions differ.
While India is relatively cozier with the Hasina camp, China is set to reap the benefits regardless of who wins the election since it will continue to have economic and trade partners to work with. While New Delhi has reasonable doubt that the BNP returning to power will undercut its interests, Beijing’s friendship with the BNP presents nary a red flag for either side.
“China will deal with any government. Since they have the money, they can throw it at whichever government, as they do. While there is a growing pro-Chinese wave in Bangladeshi establishment, it is simply money-driven," the retired diplomat told The Quint.
But Manoj Joshi, distinguished journalist at ORF, told The Quint, "The same is the case with India, but it will have to work at it and there will be difficult history to overcome. Even the BNP knows that it cannot afford to deal with a hostile India. The problem is the Jamaat-e-Islami and the support it gives to Islamist elements in the country."
Many South Asian nations usually find themselves on one of three sides – the China camp, India camp, or swinging in between, but Bangladesh has remained adept at maintaining decent relations with both nations.
And then there were three...
United States
While China and India seem to have picked Sheikh Hasina and the AL, the third and probably largest role to play in the upcoming polls is the US’.
The US led the clarion call, echoed by other Western nations, that insisted Bangladesh hold an inclusive, democratic election under a caretaker government.
In September 2023, the US initiated visa restrictions on Bangladeshi officials implicated in "undermining the democratic election process in Bangladesh." Although these restrictions targeted members of various sectors, including the opposition, law enforcement, judiciary, security services, and the ruling party, the AL perceived itself as the primary focus of these measures.
US Ambassador to Bangladesh Peter Haas actually went ahead and met with Bangladesh's Chief Election Commissioner and expressed interest in meeting leaders from the AL, the opposition BNP, and the Jamaat-e-Islami.
According to Haas, the aim was to facilitate peace talks and encourage opposition participation in the upcoming elections.
It remains to be seen, what US President Joe Biden has called, the US’ commitment to ensuring democracy and freedom around the world.
However, the diplomat told The Quint, “One must also look that the US is taking a particular view of Bangladesh but in the case of Pakistan, they have nothing to say. If democracy and human rights are so important, it should apply equally to all countries. Let us not give too much credence to the American position because it's an exercise in double standards."
Meanwhile, an American diplomat posted in South Asia told The Quint, "President Biden's concerns strongly revolved around avoiding a repetition of the two last elections, neither of which were free or fair. We were always vocal about our disappointment."
While the US’ response to election violence in Bangladesh has remained consistent, the scale of response has only increased this time around.
In Bangladesh's 2014 general elections, the majority of seats remained uncontested due to the BNP's boycott, leading to the AL’s victory. Following the elections, the US State Department openly pushed for fresh elections, calling for Dhaka to allow all citizens political freedom of speech.
Despite Hasina's refusal to engage in talks with the BNP, the US affirmed its commitment to collaborate with the Hasina government, despite reservations about the elections.
Similarly, in 2018, an election marred by violence resulted in the incumbent AL securing 90 percent of the seats. Both the US and the European Union raised concerns about election-day irregularities, voter intimidation, and harassment. Despite these concerns, the relationship between Bangladesh and the US continued on a largely positive trajectory.
Of course, the US’ economic ties with Dhaka have only gotten better, with the former becoming Bangladesh’s largest foreign investor, biggest investor in the country’s energy sector, third largest trading partner and the largest market for locally made ready-made garments.
According to SNM Abdi, "The US cannot stop Hasina from getting re-elected, but she might have to pay a price after she wins. There could be more sanctions, but they were not proactive enough for the opposition. They imposed a visa ban, but they never took any action against anyone, it was all talk."
(At The Quint, we question everything. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member today.)