From historical grievance to pragmatic engagement: Can Bangladesh and Pakistan forge a new path?

After the fall of the Sheikh Hasina Regime on 5 August, it seems that the ice wall between Bangladesh and Pakistan that stood there for the last 15 years has started to thaw. 

Trade is increasing, direct shipping and flights are being established, the revival of Saarc is being discussed, and cultural and academic exchange are on the rise. It has elated some quarters while irking others. So, given the historical context, how will Bangladesh and Pakistan's bilateral relationship go in the future? 

This renewed focus comes after years of strained relations under Sheikh Hasina's administration, where issues from the 1971 Liberation War and differing political alignments hindered meaningful cooperation. With the change in leadership in Bangladesh, there is an opportunity to rewrite the narrative, moving beyond historical grievances towards pragmatic engagement.

Addressing 1971

Despite the focus on economic and regional collaboration, the shadow of 1971 looms large. Dr Yunus has made overtures to resolve long-standing issues related to the Liberation War, calling for a definitive settlement to pave the way for stronger bilateral relations.

This approach reflects Bangladesh's nuanced stance post-Sheikh Hasina: honouring the memory of 1971 while fostering constructive dialogue based on realpolitik. 

Dr Saimum Parvez, lecturer at the DW Academie, said, "Pakistan should formally apologise to Bangladesh for the genocide its military and policymakers perpetrated in 1971. After the fall of the fascist Hasina regime, the Yunus government has the opportunity to correct the course of history." 

"The AL government used animosity against Pakistan to get favours from India and was never actually serious about the actual war crimes committed by Pakistan's military in 1971. A formal apology would pave the way to establishing a healthy relationship between these two countries and look forward to developing fruitful trade and geopolitical relations," he added. 

However, here's a catch. Pakistan did technically apologise for 1971. Pakistan apologised in 1974 for its army's violence during the Liberation War. On 11 April 1974, a tripartite agreement signed by Foreign Ministers Swaran Singh of India, Kamal Hossain of Bangladesh, and Aziz Ahmed of Pakistan noted that the Pakistani government "condemned and deeply regretted any crimes that may have been committed." 

It added that Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto of Pakistan had "appealed to the people of Bangladesh to forgive and forget the mistakes of the past in order to promote reconciliation."

"Similarly, the Prime Minister of Bangladesh [Sheik Mujibur Rahman] had declared with regard to the atrocities and destruction committed in Bangladesh in 1971 that he wanted the people to forget the past and to make a fresh start," it said.

And Md Obaidul Haque, Associate Professor at the Department of International Relations at Dhaka University, pointed it out. 

"When Dr Yunus talked about resolving the issues from 1971, Shehbaz Sharif gave a very diplomatic answer. He said that he thinks that the issue was resolved in 1974 during the Shimla Agreement."

While Shehbaz Sharif acknowledged the tripartite agreement of 1974 as a settlement framework, he expressed willingness to address outstanding concerns, signalling a potential thaw in the diplomatic impasse.

And the young generation in Pakistan is well aware of the oppression and genocide caused by the Pakistan Army in 1971. They are opening up about Bangladesh, and after 5 August, they are adopting our slogans to voice their demands as well. 

Tanvir Habib Jewel, faculty at the Department of International Relations at Dhaka University, thinks that we should use this opportunity to bridge the gap and establish people-to-people relationships. 

"For a long time, our liberation war has been used as a political tool in both Bangladesh and Pakistan. The Pakistanis were fed propaganda about 1971. And they are breaking out of it," he said. 

The revival of Saarc

The emphasis on Saarc highlights the recognition of regional integration's potential to address shared challenges. Established in 1985, Saarc has struggled due to the rivalry between India and Pakistan, rendering it largely ineffective since the cancelled 2016 summit. 

Obaidul Haque thinks that not joining the 2016 Saarc Summit was a shameful moment for us. 

"Just because India had a problem with Pakistan, we decided not to go to the summit. When India decided not to join, they were followed by only Bhutan. We followed them blindly. It shows that Indian compulsion was at play here." 

Now, after 5 August, Dr Yunus has called for revitalising Saarc repeatedly. He first talked about it to the Pakistani PM on 25 September. Later, he reiterated it twice, on 2 December and 12 December, reflecting a strategic pivot to leverage regional cooperation and drawing parallels with the European Union's success in overcoming historical conflicts.

This interest aligns with Pakistan's broader foreign policy, which seeks to counterbalance India's dominance in South Asia and mitigate economic vulnerabilities. The interim Bangladeshi government appears to recognise this dynamic, advocating a pragmatic approach that prioritises regional cooperation over bilateral discord.

Obaidul Haque said, "If India is not interested, reviving Saarc will not be easy. But if other South Asian countries come together, we will be able to gain some leverage. And for this, we need good relations with Pakistan." 

Tanvir Habib Jewel, a lecturer at the Department of International Relations at Dhaka University, sounded more restrained about the prospect of revival: "Saarc works on consensus, so even one country being negative won't be helpful for the organisation."

Economic cooperation as a catalyst

Economic interests have emerged as a cornerstone of the renewed dialogue. Pakistan's interest in Bangladesh's textile and leather industries and its offer of technical expertise in managing sugar mills and combating dengue illustrate a shift towards pragmatic collaboration. 

For Bangladesh, this engagement offers an opportunity to diversify its economic partnerships. By collaborating with Pakistan, Dhaka can enhance its industrial capabilities and access new markets, contributing to its broader economic goals. The exchange of youth programs and cultural delegations further underscores the potential for fostering goodwill and mutual understanding.

Pakistan's High Commissioner to Bangladesh, Syed Ahmed Maroof, also emphasised that trade will be a cornerstone of future Pakistan-Bangladesh relations, saying, "Trade will not only strengthen our economic positions but will also contribute to greater political and cultural connections. Our trade relations will be a key pillar of Pakistan-Bangladesh diplomacy in the years to come." 

He also pointed out that the trade between the two countries is not as high as compared to the sizes of economies: ""In 2021, Pakistan-Bangladesh trade was valued at around $1 billion. However, given the combined economic size of the two nations, he believes this figure should be much higher." 

Dr Saimum Parvez said, "In this globalised world, Bangladesh should take all the opportunities to export its products to Pakistan and import necessary products from Pakistan. It will reduce the trade deficit and dependency on India. Besides Pakistan, Bangladesh should also explore new trade relations with China and Southeast Asia." 

Obaidul Haque emphasised starting direct flights between the two countries, saying that it will help trade relations. 

"There's no reason why Bangladesh-Pakistan trade will not be profitable. They have certain comparative advantages, so do we. And also, we need to increase people-to-people interaction as well." 

Tanvir Habib Jewel gave an example of such economic cooperation. 

"Pakistan can be our gateway to Central Asia. Pakistan produces high-quality cotton. We can import that cotton. Or we can import cotton from Uzbekistan or other central Asian countries to diversify our sources, since importing cotton from India is frequently marred by various factors. It will minimise risk for our RMG sector." 

At the same time, he thinks that restraints must be maintained and the interest of our country should be given priority. 

The elephant in the room

Let's talk about the elephant in the room now—India. The Indians have been peddling disinformation about Bangladesh and Pakistan on an industrial scale since 5 August. And in the past 15 years, the strained bilateral relationship between the two countries has been favourable to India. 

Obaidul Haque said, "It is natural to have a good relationship with Pakistan as our South Asian neighbour. What was unusual was the cold relationship between the two countries. And we understand that it was due to Indian influence. Now, since we have gotten a chance to improve it, we should take it." 

India's focus on bilateral relations and its rivalry with Pakistan pose significant challenges.

Dr Saimum Parvez said, "With all the rhetoric against Pakistan, India still maintains trade relations with it. In 2022, India exported $653 million to Pakistan, and Pakistan exported $18.1 million to India. If India can maintain trade relations with Pakistan, why can't Bangladesh?" 

He was hinting at the disinformation spread by the Indian media regarding the arrival of seven cargo vessels from Pakistan to Bangladesh. 

"I think Bangladesh should not head towards what India would perceive; rather, Bangladesh should make decisions for the benefit of its people and by taking into consideration its national interest," he added. 

Obaidul thinks that India has some genuine concerns about Bangladesh and Pakistan being too friendly: "India never preferred regional cooperation in South Asia. Since they are a regional power, they preferred bilateral relations with each country."

He added, "And they are more concerned about Bangladesh and Pakistan because we are bordering them, and the northeast insurgencies have remained a constant issue between India and Bangladesh. It is a permanent vulnerability for India, and to secure it, they needed a friendly Bangladesh. If Bangladesh becomes too close to Pakistan, then it may threaten northeast India." 

Challenges to overcome

Despite the optimism, several challenges persist. The legitimacy of Bangladesh's interim government remains a point of contention, potentially undermining its ability to sustain long-term diplomatic initiatives. Additionally, Pakistan's domestic political instability and economic challenges may limit its capacity to engage meaningfully with Bangladesh.

Dr Saimum Parvez asked the government and authorities to exercise caution about transnational terrorism, which may spill over from Pakistan as well. 

"The current interim government in Bangladesh and the next elected government should maintain a zero-tolerance policy against terrorism.  If the Bangladesh government and its law enforcement and intelligence agencies are alert and willing, then any radical force from Pakistan cannot be active in Bangladesh. I don't think maintaining effective trade relations with Pakistan would revive terrorism in Bangladesh." 

"We need a pragmatic approach, not an emotional one," Tanvir Habib said. 

"There should not be any iron-clad relationship, as despite being a nuclear country, Pakistan's economy is smaller than ours, and it's not doing well," he continued, "We know a certain quarter will try to overhype Bangladesh-Pakistan relations, but we must not lose sight of our national interest." 

The warming relations between Bangladesh and Pakistan signify a potential turning point in South Asian diplomacy. By prioritising regional cooperation, economic collaboration, and historical reconciliation, the two nations can set a precedent for constructive engagement.