Is the US looking for regime change in Bangladesh?

DR. MAHBUB ALAM PRODIP: Bangladesh has been the focus of the US’s current crusade to “ensure democracy” in South Asia. The US Secretary of State, Antony Blinken, recently said that anyone perceived to be sabotaging Bangladesh’s democratic election process would be subject to visa restrictions. Additionally, US Assistant Secretary Donald Lu of the Bureau of South and Central Asian Affairs reaffirmed the importance of the Biden administration’s “promotion of democracy across the world.” The US claims that all its activities and efforts are directed toward ensuring a peaceful election so that voters can choose their representatives in a free, fair, and credible election.

The US also argues that they do not support any particular political party gaining control of the government of Bangladesh. Sheikh Hasina, however, brought an allegation against the US and accused them of seeking ‘regime change’ in Bangladesh. The history of US interference across the world provides some evidence for the claim of Sheikh Hasina.

According to the Military Intervention Project (MIP), the United States has conducted nearly 400 military interventions since 1776, with half of these missions taking place between 1950 and 2019. Over a quarter of them took place after the Cold War. Military interventions in Bosnia, Kosovo, Libya, and Somalia, for example, all had some humanitarian rationales, but they all fell short in attaining their humanitarian and democratizing goals.

Based on this background, there is a question in my mind: Will the US intervention knock over the AL-led regime in Bangladesh? There is no straightforward answer to this question. We can bring up some US policies and tactics related to overthrowing regimes in a few nations, including Iraq and Pakistan, while emphasizing democracy, respect for human rights, and the destruction of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs).

The US and its allied militaries attacked Iraq and overthrew the regime of Saddam Hussein on March 20, 2003. During the Gulf War of 1990–1991, the US-led multinational alliance attacked Iraqi forces fleeing Kuwait. Later, the UN Security Council agreed to Resolution 697, which directed Iraq to destroy all its Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs), which include nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons, as well as long-range ballistic missiles. In contrast, Iraq suspended cooperation with UN weapons inspectors in 1998, prompting the US and UK to respond with air strikes. Following Al-Qaeda’s attacks on the Pentagon in Washington and the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001, President George W. Bush’s government began planning an invasion of Iraq. The US Congress legitimized the application of military force against Iraq in October 2002.

The UK, Australia, and Poland were three of the thirty coalition members who took part in the invasion. Poland committed 194 members of its special forces; Australia sent 2,000 troops; and the United Kingdom sent 45,000 soldiers. Kuwait permitted the invasion to begin on its soil. Together with several other East European countries in the “Vilnius Group,” Spain and Italy extended diplomatic support to the US-led coalition because they thought Iraq was in violation of UN resolutions and had a WMD program. On March 20, 2003, at the crack of dawn, 295,000 US troops and allies invaded Iraq by crossing the country’s border with Kuwait to launch Operation Iraqi Freedom. In the country’s north, 70,000 Kurdish Peshmerga militia fighters engaged in combat with Iraqi forces. Iraq’s army was routed, and its regime was toppled by May. Later, Saddam Hussein was apprehended, put on trial, and killed. An estimated $3 trillion was spent by the US on the war, and between 2003 and 2011, 461,000 people lost their lives due to war-related causes in Iraq. However, no WMDs were discovered in Iraq.

On April 10, 2022, a vote of no confidence resulted in Imran Khan’s resignation in Pakistan. He was the prime minister chosen by democratic means. What was then the rationale behind the fall of Imran’s Pakistani government? According to the Intercept, the US State Department met with key Pakistani government officials on March 7, 2022, and urged them to amputate Imran Khan since he maintained a neutral stance on the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Additionally, Imran Khan has often claimed that the United States ousted him as prime minister. However, the US government disagreed with the Intercept’s assertion. The US State Department Spokesman, Matthew Miller, said, “I don’t know how many times I can say it… The United States does not have a position on one political candidate or party versus another in Pakistan or any other country.”

Critics, however, discovered several explanations and proof that the US acted as a catalyst to overthrow Imran Khan’s administration in Pakistan, even though the US State Department refuted the notion that Imran Khan had been removed from state authority. The paper Intercept classified as “Secret” provides a record of a conversation between State Department officials, notably Assistant Secretary of State for the Bureau of South and Central Asian Affairs Donald Lu and Asad Majeed Khan, Pakistan’s ambassador to the United States at the time. Previously, Western ambassadors pressed Imran Khan to denounce Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. In response to European appeals, he addressed a rally and responded directly to a Western envoy who requested that Pakistan rally behind Ukraine. “Are we your slaves?” Khan thundered into the crowd. “What do you think of us? That we are your slaves and that we will do whatever you ask of us?” he asked. “We are friends of Russia, and we are also friends of the United States. We are friends of China and Europe. We are not part of any alliance.” In response to Khan’s speech, Donald Lu argued, “Prime Minister Khan has recently visited Moscow, and so I think we are trying to figure out how to engage specifically with the Prime Minister following that decision.” The subject of a no-confidence vote is further raised abruptly by Lu. “I think if the no-confidence vote against the Prime Minister succeeds, all will be forgiven in Washington because the Russia visit is being looked at as a decision by the Prime Minister.”

He further added, “Otherwise,” he continued, “I think it will be tough going ahead.” As a result, Imran Khan was discharged as Prime Minister of Pakistan, and he was eventually imprisoned on corruption charges. Although the Baiden Administration’s meddling helped the Pakistan Army remove democratically elected Prime Minister Imran Khan, the Bush administration spent nearly $30 billion on dictator Musharraf’s government to get their support to fight against Afghanistan. The US did not take any initiative to ensure the democratic transition during Musharraf’s era. History reveals that the US supported the military dictatorship of Pakistan, who was firmly responsible for genocide during the Bangladesh Liberation War in 1971.

How are these two examples relevant to the present US intervention in the politics of Bangladesh? The United States has announced that if the AL-led government fails to hold a free, fair, and credible election, sanctions will be imposed. Before this, on December 10, 2021, the Baiden government placed sanctions on both current and former six officials of the elite group known as the RAB (Rapid Action Battalion). They further stated that they have never supported any political party in Bangladesh. Rather, America wants to see a free and fair election held peacefully according to the desires of the Bangladeshi people.

Thus, the US Department of State moved to restrict visas for Bangladeshis who were involved in or culpable for subverting the country’s democratic election process in September 2022. These people encompassed members of the political opposition, the ruling party, and law enforcement. The United States argues that they are dedicated to assisting Bangladesh in holding peaceful, free, and fair elections. The AL-led administration, on the other hand, accused US Ambassador to Bangladesh Peter Haas of interference in internal issues for poll-bound Bangladesh. Recently, Russian Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Maria Zakharova has accused US Ambassador Peter Haas of assisting the opposition in Bangladesh to organize anti-government rallies. “At the end of October, US Ambassador to Bangladesh Peter Haas met with a member of the local opposition to discuss plans for organizing anti-government rallies,” Zakharova stated on November 22 during a press conference in Moscow, Russia. A US State Department official in Washington responded to her comments, saying, “We are aware of Zakharova’s deliberate mischaracterization of US foreign policy and Ambassador Haas’s meetings.”

The official further clarified that US Embassy staff have been and will be interacting with the government, opposition, civil society, and other relevant parties to encourage them to cooperate for the betterment of the Bangladeshi people by ensuring a free and fair election held peacefully. Although the US denied the allegation of the Russian Foreign Ministry Spokesperson, some evidence suggests that they have invested their efforts to topple the AL-led regime in Bangladesh.

Over the last 10 years, the BNP and its allies have lacked the strength to mount a full-scale campaign against the AL-led government, but suddenly, they have set a deadline of October 28 to topple the government. They assaulted journalists, set fire to and trashed buses, went to the Chief Justice’s home, and killed a police officer with great violence. Surprisingly, the US pays little attention to the terrorist operations carried out by the BNP and its affiliates. There are hints of a potential regime transition in Bangladesh due to the US’s silence over the terrorist actions of the BNP and its affiliates.

Aside from Iraq and Pakistan, the US invasions of Cuba, Libya, Hawaii, the Caribbean, Iran, Guatemala, and South Vietnam offered unwavering proof that their goal was regime change at the expense of human rights, democracy, and the protection of people. Despite claiming to be fighting terrorism, the US violated the human rights of many individuals, especially women and girls, when it invaded Afghanistan. The Middle Eastern population, particularly women and girls, cannot exercise and enjoy utilitarian rights. However, the US does not interfere with the democratic transition taking place in Middle Eastern nations such as Saudi Arabia to protect citizens’ fundamental rights, especially those of women and girls.

I argue that Sheikh Hasina should be aware of every action the US takes, based on past examples and experiences. This is due to the US’s assertion that it did not alter the regimes in other countries, like Libya, Pakistan, and Iraq. Regardless of whether these countries had an authoritarian or democratic political system, they nonetheless made every attempt to alter the government. Therefore, we are unable to refute Sheikh Hasina’s assertion that the US wants to see a regime transition in Bangladesh. The US may retaliate by using various strategies and instruments to overthrow Bangladesh’s existing political government. The date of the 2024 national election has already been chosen by the electoral commission: January 7, 2024. Following the election, they could impose some restrictions on economic activities to stymie Bangladesh’s rapid development. However, it is heartening to know that China, Russia, and India stand with Sheikh Hasina in her opposition to US intervention. The Bangladeshi government should carefully consider each step it takes, even though it appears that the US has not succeeded in changing the regime in that country.

The author is a Lecturer, Bachelor of Community Services, Acknowledge Education, Australia and Associate Professor, Department of Public Administration, University of Rajshahi, Bangladesh. Views are his personal. Zoombangla holds no responsibility for it.