Originally published in Daily Asian Age, Dhaka
Concerns in Washington about Bangladesh have been building-from the South Asian nation's retreat from democracy to its increasing radicalization and the ongoing ethnic cleansing of Hindus and other minorities. On top of that, the current and widespread anti-Hindu pogroms have drawn a great deal of criticism from the United Nations and governments worldwide. Amnesty International said that these ongoing attacks "show that the state has failed in its duty to protect minorities," which reflects a general sense of where blame-and responsibility for fixing the situation-lay. Lawmakers on Capitol Hill, the State Department, and elsewhere in Washington have come to see just that point; and that trying to blame Bangladesh's communal violence on rogues and radicals no longer is acceptable. That can have serious consequences for the Bangladesh economy in particular-which brings us to the soon-to-be United States Ambassador to Bangladesh, Peter D. Haas.
When control of the United States (US) Presidency passes from one party to another, the new regime appoints a bunch of new ambassadors; even though most ambassadors are non-partisan career diplomats. Once nominated, prospective ambassadors have private conversations and public hearings with members of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations; and if they pass muster, the Committee recommends that the entire Senate approve the appointment. This year was no exception, and it included a newly nominated US ambassador to the People's Republic of Bangladesh.
Peter D. Haas had his public hearing on 20 October in an atmosphere dominated by concern over Bangladesh's anti-Hindu violence. Mr. Haas has represented the United States in Morocco, London, and Mumbai; and currently is the Assistant Secretary of State for Economic and Business Affairs. Throughout his tenure, he has shown an ability to negotiate trade deals between the US and other countries, understanding both the international financial and geopolitical implications. That's important because it reflects President Joe Biden's and Secretary of State Anthony Blinken's recognition that a trade agreement could be in the interests of both countries-though Bangladesh has more to gain from such an agreement, since its economy is heavily dependent on exports to the United States. In 2019, for instance, Bangladeshi exports to the US totaled almost three times as many dollars as US exports to Bangladesh. And while Americans are the world's biggest customers for Bangladeshi garments, Bangladesh hardly registers as a customer for US goods, accounting for only 0.14 percent of US exports. To put that in perspective, Canada, with but a fifth of Bangladesh's population is the largest importer of US goods, and spent almost a third of a trillion dollars on them in 2019; Bangladesh spent $2.3 billion. For those who might dismiss that because the US and Canada are neighbors, that same year, Japan, America's fourth largest trading partner with about three fourths the population of Bangladesh, spent more than three times as much on US imports than did Bangladesh.
Even if an agreement would be good business, however, there are formidable non-business obstacles to signing one, which were very prominent in those closed door sessions and other behind-the-scenes discussions. I worked extensively for weeks with both Majority (Democratic) and Minority (Republican) Senators and staff, as did the Hindu American Foundation. We did so as news of anti-Hindu pogroms in Cumilla, Rangpur, and elsewhere in Bangladesh shocked Americans. Many Senators and staff on the Committee have worked with me for years and recognized that these events were not exceptions, but more the rule for Hindus in Bangladesh. Even news that an unnamed number of people were arrested failed to gain traction in Washington, since decades-worth of evidence shows that, at best, Bangladesh arrests and later releases individual lawbreakers while providing immunity for those who incite and fund the anti-Hindu pogroms. This should not be taken to mean that these US power brokers do not want a trade agreement with Bangladesh; quite the contrary. It does mean, however, that it won't happen without those other issues being part of the negotiations.
In fact, the overall tenor of the public hearing expressed the importance of US-Bangladesh relations. In his statement to the Committee, Mr. Haas emphasized the strong ties between our two nations and our cooperation on a range of issues including "economic development, peacekeeping, tackling the climate crisis," and more. He also reiterated the US commitment to help Bangladesh recover from the COVID pandemic, which already has included the donation of "eleven and half million vaccine doses," and he pledged to get more to the Bangladeshi people. Haas trumpeted our two nations' shared democratic values and said he would work tirelessly to "broaden our partnership with Bangladesh." As someone who was involved in the hearing process, I can confirm that he will do precisely that to the benefit of both our countries.
After listing many of the practical elements of the US-Bangladesh relationship, Haas pivoted, "But for the people of Bangladesh to realize their full potential, they must also be free to express themselves." The United States is committed to "the free operation of media, civil society organizations, workers, and members of the opposition political parties in Bangladesh without fear of retribution or harm." Bangladesh's recent history tells us that this could become an issue, and Haas said he will "urge the government to protect human rights" and "respect for the rule of law." Where the rule of law exists, all persons regardless of position, relationships, or wealth receive the same treatment under the law; which unfortunately does not happen in Bangladesh. In fact, Bangladesh consistently ranks near the bottom in all accepted measures of the rule of law.
The big issue, however, was the persecution of Hindus in Bangladesh, and the government's role in it. Key Committee members and staff recognized the current violence as part of a larger pattern that, according to Dhaka University's Professor Abul Barkat, will find Bangladesh absent any Hindus before mid-century. The goodwill that Americans have toward Bangladesh has led many to look the other way as the unrelenting attack on Hindus proceeded, hoping that the Bangladeshi government will act to protect its Hindu citizens. That has not happened, as governments have rather encouraged the lawbreakers by rarely arresting the culprits and almost never prosecuting them. The current anti-Hindu pogroms, however, seem to be the straw that broke the camel's back. At a time when partisanship and lack of agreement often characterizes US politics, I was struck by the two parties' agreement as I worked with them. In those all-important closed door sessions, Senators and staff from both parties let Mr. Haas know that the stopping the persecution of Bangladesh's Hindus is a priority for them and for the American people.
So, what will this new era in US-Bangladesh relationships look like under Ambassador Haas? For one thing, Americans (not just our government) want to see more joint efforts with Bangladesh; and Haas's history is one that should encourage all of us. At the same time, this new era will be one in which Americans expect something better from Bangladesh in the way its Hindu citizens are treated. Blaming bad treatment on radicals is no longer persuasive. Rather, expect more focus on the Bangladeshi government's duty to protect all its citizens, including a commitment to democracy, equality, and religious freedom in deeds, not only in words.
In July 2016, I met with the then-Bangladeshi ambassador to the United States, along with Congressman Bob Dold in the anteroom of the House Committee on Ways and Means. Dold chose that location to emphasize its authority over trade and other financial matters pertinent to the US-Bangladesh relationship. In the course of our meeting, the Ambassador told us that his country's poverty prevented it from resolving this problem. Congressman Dold responded by saying, "we want to help you solve your problem." While no one took him up on his offer, there is no doubt that if the government and people of Bangladesh wants our assistance to stop the ethnic cleansing of Hindus; America will be anxious to provide it.
Dr Richard Benkin is an American scholar and a geopolitical analyst