Suhasini Haider reports in The Hindu: Doubts over India's support for Sheikh Hasina and its consequences

The Dhaka Times Desk No party, India has to speak for Bangladesh. India has to speak in a language that favors Bangladesh and Bengalis. Such news has come from India's famous The Hindu Online. The report expressed doubts about India's support to Sheikh Hasina and its consequences.

According to the news, India should not speak to any particular party on the Bangladesh question, but to Bangladesh and Bengalis. Currently, the new parliament elected in Bangladesh must be temporary. This parliament can remain in place until reunification and everyone goes to another election.

Such comments were made in the top commentary published in The Hindu newspaper of India. This commentary has come under the title 'Backing Bangladesh' written by Suhasini Haider. In it, he commented on the National Parliament elections held in Bangladesh, its acceptance, India's support to Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina and its consequences.

In that report, he wrote, 'In any sense, the elections held in Bangladesh on January 5 are very low in terms of democracy. For this, Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina has faced strong opposition not only from within the country, but also from the international community. India openly supported Sheikh Hasina in this election. This has become the biggest reason for criticism against the Hasina government.

He also wrote that there are allegations that Indians are carrying out secret operations inside Bangladesh wearing the clothes of members of Bangladeshi security agencies. India has sent a special team to Bangladesh to train Bangladeshis. On the other hand, India is lobbying the western countries to take the side of Sheikh Hasina government. However, no evidence was found for these allegations. But India has to avoid such a thing, in which it is seen that they are working only with a particular party or leader.'

Suhasini Haider also wrote, 'Sheikh Hasina's voice will echo in the parliament where she returned through the new elections. There his speech will be empty, as the victory he himself has won. He will get three-fourth majority of the National Parliament. But three-fourths of voters did not vote at all. In 1996, Hasina's rival Khaleda Zia achieved such a victory. Then Hasina was in the opposition party. Khaleda Zia was the Prime Minister. There was a lot of pressure for a second round of elections for Seva too. India has supported this election. It is worth noting. But equally important is that the United States has strongly criticized this election. They termed this election as disappointing. United Kingdom, Australia, European Union have called for another election as soon as possible. Sheikh Hasina was strongly criticized for keeping opposition leader Khaleda Zia under house arrest ahead of the elections. Khaleda Zia termed such a situation as 'death of democracy'. Bangladesh is heavily pressured by the international community. International human rights organizations also follow that path. But in spite of this, India sided with Bangladesh. Sheikh Hasina has no choice but to hold a new election. There are many reasons for this. If the elections were not held, Bangladesh would have fallen into a constitutional crisis. The Supreme Court has allowed such elections without a caretaker government. Sheikh Hasina could not be held responsible if more parties had boycotted the elections. In 1992, in terror-ridden Punjab, all parties except the Akali Dal boycotted the elections. At that time, Bayant Singh of the Congress was elected as the Chief Minister by getting 9 percent of the votes.

Suhasini Haider wrote in her report that the United States continues to make statements against the Sheikh Hasina government regarding war crimes trials. Organizations like the British Parliament, human rights group Amnesty International, and Human Rights Watch supported this initiative. Sheikh Hasina is completing this trial. In the meantime, they are trying to execute the leaders of Jamaat-e-Islami. He has taken action against several NGOs, including members of Jamaat-e-Islami, for allegedly funding jihadi activities. As a result, Sheikh Hasina is in danger of losing the support of Saudi Arabia, the biggest donor country of Bangladesh. In such a situation, many in India can call upon the South Block to play a defensive role for Sheikh Hasina and the Awami League. Sheikh Hasina can be asked to play a role in balancing the pressure she is facing. It can also be a wrong move. India is so strategically strong vis-à-vis the neighboring country that they can play a biased role in the interests of a particular group in Bangladesh.'

Suhasini Haider has openly written about India's open support in Bangladesh elections, India's initiative to bring back Ershad and many other issues. Many people think that this report can affect the current situation of Bangladesh to some extent. References: The Hindu