Implications Of Western Foreign Policy Trends For Bangladesh
By Rumman Ahmed
13 June, 2010
Countercurrents.org
The future trend of British diplomacy is going to undergo profound changes due to Britain not being able to financially afford to "pull punches above its weight" for much longer. It is quite likely that Britain may undertake a Strategic Foreign Policy Review within the term of the next parliament i.e. before 2015. This will come soon after the Strategic Defence Policy Review which will start later this year as all the 3 major political parties in Britain have committed to it.
The Defence Review will, amongst others, demonstrate Britain's inability to fund costly, multiple and simultaneous overseas military interventions, like Iraq or Afghanistan, so following on it's heel the expected Foreign Policy Review may also prune down the foreign policy leftovers from the Raj days.
The annual House of Commons foreign affairs committee report on the Foreign Office, which was published in March 2010, on UK foreign policy and its strategic imperatives is also indicative of the financial constraints on UK diplomacy. The British daily The Independent says "The report devotes much space to what it called "finance-related issues" and the most dominant of these concerns the government's 2007 decision to remove the cushion that protected the Foreign Office from major exchange-rate fluctuations. The timing, as the report notes, could hardly have been worse. There followed what amounted to a double-digit devaluation of sterling against the euro and the US dollar. And because so much FCO spending - on embassies, locally recruited staff and operating costs - is conducted in foreign currency, British diplomacy, which was never lavishly funded in recent years, has felt a "disproportionate pinch". The Commons committee repeatedly regrets the lengths the FCO felt necessary to preserve its budget, and the knock-on effect of penury on British diplomacy. Other countries, it says, would "read messages into the cutbacks, both about the importance which the UK attributes to the relevant bilateral relationship and about the UK's capacity to support its global diplomatic work". The Independent comments: "To call for the protection of the Foreign Office is to perpetuate the illusion that Britain is more powerful, and can reach further, than its economic capacity actually allows. We are a medium-sized country, with a medium-sized economy that should content itself with medium-sized diplomacy. The sooner MPs and diplomats accept that, the more effective our foreign policy will be".
So what will Britain do? In terms of defence policy there will be more and greater defence integration between Britain and France reminiscent of the entente cordiale days, with eventual formation of and integration into an overall European Defence Force. And in context of foreign policy there will be greater dependence on joint European foreign policy initiatives over the next 5 years. And we will wait and watch what happens after the expected Strategic Foreign Policy Review.
In the context of the South Asian region, Britain's commercial interests and investment portfolio in today's Bangladesh is miniscule on global, or even regional, comparisons, and hence there is no inherent economic necessity to maintain its full panoply of diplomatic personnel in Dhaka. Having a Deputy High Commissioner in Dhaka, reporting to a High Commissioner in Delhi, is sufficient to cover Britain's overall interests.
As to USA foreign policy the time lag will perhaps be slightly longer. We are probably talking over next 5-15 years. The USA strategic military retrenchment from mainland, continental Asia will begin with troops withdrawal from Iraq this year and Afghanistan next year. Over the next 5 years more and more American bases in mainland Asia will start closing down due to financial considerations arising out of America's gargantuan debt, and also due to strategic enhancements and improvements of its conventional weapon systems. For example, the strategic nuclear arsenal is becoming obsolete, hence President Obama's recent signing with President Medvedev to reduce the strategic ICBMs (April, 2010). The conventional weapon systems can now do the work of the once strategic nuclear arsenal of the Cold War days. That is why so many retired Defence chiefs in the UK are up in arms against the very costly (up to £100 billion) UK's strategic nuclear deterrent Trident replacement programme. UK defence procurement cannot afford everything, there are trade-offs in the real world.
Once the USA starts partially withdrawing militarily from mainland Asia then the imperative for it to have a full service diplomatic presence everywhere will also lessen gradually. But because by 2020 Bangladesh will have a population base of over 200 million, the USA may still retain some interest on Bangladesh, though perhaps not as closely as it does today.
Of course, there is also the possibility of an alternative scenario. The "spectre of Islamic radicalism" will have receded from the USA, and British, foreign policy discourse by 2020 and actually USA foreign policy will make an about-turn to cosy upto the Muslim nations in Asia and Africa in order to contain China's emergence as a rival world super-power. This may then prolong USA's diplomatic presence in countries like Bangladesh and Pakistan in South Asia and Indonesia in South East Asia. If and when there is such a shift to 'warming up to' the Muslim majority states, there will be all the more logic to maintain, if not strengthen, their diplomatic representations in countries like Bangladesh. The role and relevance of the Bangladeshi diaspora in these two counties may also factor in ensuring the form and nature of their diplomatic representations. There will perhaps be too much at stake in a country like Bangladesh, 90% of whose 173 million, likely to reach 200 million in the next decade, population are Muslims.
The dilemma for Bangladesh
The ruling and political class of Bangladesh, over the next 5 years, may have to make some strategic choices and decisions. For Bangladesh, the key challenge will be to determine how to position itself between China on the one hand and India on the other. The USA, and probably UK too, will certainly favour a closer Indo-Bangla link as against a closer Sino-Bangla link. USA Ambassador to India Timothy Roemer's recent, and indeed mysterious, visit to Dhaka (April, 2010) was clearly an indication of that. He seemed to be over the top in his expression of love for India and the "very close and fruitful relations" between India and the present Bangladesh government. He was also most generous in his praise for "the regional leadership" of Sheikh Hasina in forming close cooperation with India on counter terrorism.
This is quite telling as Timothy Roemer is a politician, a former Congressman and reported to be very close to President Obama. His opinions could play a very decisive role in the White House forming its own position, and thus in the shaping of future Obama policy towards the region, especially the eastern rim of the South Asian sub-continent. Earlier in 2009 Timothy Roemer, then a newly arrived American ambassador to Delhi, had pledged "to 'rope' Indian political establishment for the USA (and the West) to exert pressure on the President Rajapaksa regime to implement what the West thinks is beneficial for Sri Lanka's long-term progress". Sri Lanka is astutely playing its own "China card".
However, USA Deputy Secretary of State Jim Steinberg's recent meetings with both Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina and the Opposition leader Begum Khaleda Zia (in April, 2010) were more equi-balanced. He was reported to have been generous in his praise for Begum Khaleda Zia's role in building up USA-Bangladesh relations, sharp improvement in areas like women empowerment, education and economic growth during her tenures in office as Prime Minister, in the early nineties and noughties.
There is thus an imperative for Bangladesh's ruling class to understand the deep implications of the global tectonic geo-strategic and political and economic power shifts now taking place. A recent Financial Express interview of a renowned American economist, Professor Gustav Papanek, an emeritus professor at the University of Boston, quoted him as saying that Bangladesh now has a chance of a lifetime opportunity of achieving 10 per cent growth. This growth, he said, is likely to come from the growing demand of the Chinese consumers, and not from the traditional consumers in the West.
Prof. Papanek said that due to increasing labour costs in China, production of labour-intensive consumer goods is no longer attractive to the Chinese manufacturers. Examples of these goods are toys, shoes, electrical, electronic, light engineering, etc. These sectors, according to him, have the potential of creating up to four million new jobs per year in Bangladesh (Weekly Holiday). With US$2.5 trillion in foreign exchange reserves, China can play a seminal role in Bangladesh's development.
Thus Bangladesh has to decide, sooner than later, how effectively and sagaciously it will manage its foreign policy towards India and China. It will probably try to maintain a policy of equi-distance, but the first priority will be to further its own national interests and national strategic objectives. Putting Bangladesh First is the new foreign policy paradigm.
Bangladesh cannot afford to sit on the fences anymore. As the choices and the decisions it makes now will determine the future trajectory of the country over the course of the 21st century. It has too much at stake.
Bangladesh, if it is strategic minded, and stradling South and South-East Asia, can certainly play a pivotal role, in moving the way forward for the SAARC and ASEAN countries, and their other Asian associates, to form an Asian Union of economic, political, and defence co-operation, with an eventual tariff-free trade zone and single currency. The pan-Asian dream of its National Poet Nazrul Islam, China's first president Sun Yat-sen and many others may yet come to fruition! Though it may take another 20 or 30 years!! Those who dare wins!!!
The writer is a strategy advisor based in in the UK. He was a Board Member of the London Development Agency (LDA) and has advisied three consecutive British Home Secretaries on diversity, equality and faith issues. He has had several books and monographs published in the UK.
