For all latest news, follow the Daily Sun's Google News channel.
Earlier this year, Bangladesh witnessed an act of ineptitude in cricket. Bangladesh qualified for the final tournament of the T20 World Cup but boycotted the event, perhaps through the deliberate and purposeful swindle of a single individual. Unfortunately for Bangladesh, the ruling party does not want to be held accountable for its deed. For one and a half years, the interim government denied responsibility on many counts. The current government has investigated the issue of boycotting the T20 World Cup. But in many ways, for the sake of continuity, the current government may not bring up the misdeeds of the interim government and create a source of clash with it.
We have seen one more incident like that of the T20 World Cup boycott, unfortunately, during this government’s tenure. Bangladesh is the current president of the BIMSTEC regional alliance. As such, Tarique Rahman, prime minister of Bangladesh, was invited to attend the outreach event of the BRICS summit held in New Delhi. It was disclosed that the invitation came on 15 July of this year. The conference was held on 12-13 September. On 10 September, Bangladesh’s number one State Minister for Foreign Affairs said that no Bangladeshi representative is going to the BRICS summit because Tarique Rahman was not invited as the Prime Minister of Bangladesh, but as the chair of BIMSTEC.
Bangladesh is a founding member of BIMSTEC. BIMSTEC’s headquarters is located in Dhaka. Does Bangladesh have any responsibility towards BIMSTEC, or towards its member countries? Does the opportunity to represent BIMSTEC at the BRICS summit carry no weight? Has Bangladesh consulted any other BIMSTEC member country about this? Has Bangladesh talked to India or BRICS about whether someone else can represent BIMSTEC at that outreach event instead of Prime Minister Tarique Rahman? Has BIMSTEC not suffered from the strained bilateral relations between Bangladesh and India? If Bangladesh places the cost of the hostility in bilateral relations on a regional organisation, where will Bangladesh’s stature stand? Don’t we blame the strained bilateral relations between India and Pakistan for SAARC’s failure? Will the member states of BIMSTEC not blame the strained bilateral relations between Bangladesh and India for its non-representation?
If the invitation came in July, how could it take 55 days to realise that Prime Minister Tarique Rahman could not go to Delhi as BIMSTEC’s chair? Where exactly is the problem? Has Bangladesh forgotten the general diplomatic norms? Or has it abandoned those? When the head of state or the government of a country sends a letter or invitation to his or her counterpart, it has to be replied to in compliance with the existing diplomatic norms. In that reply, the letter or invitation has to be acknowledged. If the reply to the invitation is specific, there is no room for further confusion. Who is harmed by the confusion? In such a case, the one who creates the confusion suffers the most. Since Bangladesh’s participation was not confirmed until three days ago, no other heads of state or government prepared any brief or talking points for possible meetings or discussions with the Bangladeshi head of government. So, even if Bangladesh had participated in the BRICS summit at the last minute, only selfies could be added to its list of achievements, without any meaningful substance.
Many may not take my argument lightly. I have heard many say that addressing Tarique Rahman as the chair of BIMSTEC has damaged his reputation. He should have been addressed as the prime minister of Bangladesh. I have not seen the original letter or invitation. Therefore, I cannot make a final comment. Tarique Rahman was invited to visit India as the prime minister of Bangladesh in February. That invitation is still valid. If I were in the chair, I would try to kill two birds with one stone. And for this, I would work behind the scenes through diplomatic channels. I would approach to arrange the coveted bilateral visit immediately before the summit and then pave the way for attending the outreach event in a back-to-back manner. Even if a gap arose due to a schedule adjustment, an event like a visit to Ajmer Sharif could have been arranged as a cushion. In such a case, even the invitation letter could have been redrafted.
Looking at the behaviour of Bangladeshi policymakers, it appears that we take primary lessons in diplomacy. What prompted us to decide that Prime Minister Tarique Rahman should not participate in the outreach phase as BIMSTEC’s chair? Have we informed the same to the BIMSTEC member countries? Did we suggest that Bangladesh could send a ministerial-level representative? Did India show a negative attitude towards any such intention of Bangladesh?
BRICS has eleven member countries and ten partner countries. The heads of state or government from eight member countries participated in the outreach phase. The remaining three countries were represented at the ministerial level. Nine of the ten partner countries were represented by either heads of state or government, or by senior ministerial-level members. Many other world leaders, including the president of the Philippines and Burundi, and the foreign minister of Uruguay and Bahrain, participated in the outreach phase.
This time, let us look at the identities of those who participated in the outreach phase despite not being members. The president of the Philippines represented ASEAN. The president of Burundi represented the African Union. The foreign minister of Bahrain represented the Gulf Cooperation Council, and the foreign minister of Uruguay represented the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States. It is clear that if, for some reason, the prime minister of Bangladesh could not participate in the outreach phase, the foreign minister or the minister of state for Foreign Affairs could have participated. Did not Humayun Kabir miss a golden opportunity? Alas, alas! I heard him laughingly say, “The chair of BIMSTEC has been invited, so there is no opportunity to send anyone else there.” When a country becomes the chair of a regional organisation, officials of that country also represent that organisation in varying capacities. The foreign ministers of Bahrain or Uruguay did not have any difficulty in understanding that. Should Bangladesh now be taught the basics of diplomatic practice and norms? Should Bangladesh now be taught the process of representation?
_________________________________________
The write is a former Bangladeshi Ambassador