On January 8, the US State Department declared that the elections in Bangladesh held the previous day were "not free or fair," signaling a significant policy setback for the Biden administration. The administration had made Bangladesh a focal point for its values-based foreign policy, emphasizing human rights, democratic principles, and especially free and fair elections. Efforts included public messaging, meetings with political leaders, written appeals, and sanctions and visa restrictions.
This robust pursuit of a democracy agenda in Bangladesh, which continued from the Trump administration albeit less forcefully, might have been driven by an expectation of success. Bangladesh has a history of democratic institutions and achievements, suggesting that promoting democracy there might be less challenging than in other countries. Additionally, US officials were encouraged by the reductions in abuses by the Rapid Action Battalion (RAB) following US sanctions in 2021.
The US State Department's acknowledgment that the elections in Bangladesh were "not free or fair" despite extensive efforts highlights the challenges of influencing democratic processes in other nations. Several factors contributed to the failure:
1. **Limited US Leverage**: The US may not have enough influence to effect significant change in Bangladesh's political landscape.
2. **Resistance from Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina**: Historical grievances and concerns about a possible return of the BNP, which could result in retributive policies against her and other Awami League leaders, may have made Hasina resistant to US pressure.
3. **Insufficient Consequences**: Critics argue that the US did not impose strong enough measures, such as trade sanctions, which might have compelled the Bangladeshi government to adhere to democratic norms due to Bangladesh's economic dependence on the US market.
Moving forward, US policy could take several directions:
1. **Harsher Tactics**: Washington might consider imposing stronger measures, such as economic sanctions, to pressure Bangladesh's government to improve democratic practices.
2. **Softer Approach**: Alternatively, the US could dial down its democracy promotion efforts, opting for a less confrontational approach.
3. **Interests-Based Approach**: The US might abandon its values-based policy in favor of focusing on strategic interests, potentially sacrificing democratic advocacy for other geopolitical or economic goals.
4. **Balanced Strategy**: A middle-ground approach could involve balancing the promotion of democratic values with strategic interests, trying to advance both simultaneously without overly compromising on either front.
Washington's next steps will depend on its assessment of the Awami League's role in undermining free elections and its broader objectives in its relationship with Bangladesh.
The article discusses the complexities of the US-Bangladesh relationship, particularly in the context of election-related irregularities and political violence involving the Awami League (AL) and the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP). It explores the potential responses from the US, considering both the boycott by the BNP and the broader factors contributing to it, such as the alleged unlevel playing field and government crackdowns.
Washington's stance is influenced by its strategic interests and the growing importance of Bangladesh in the Indian Ocean Region, amidst the backdrop of increasing Chinese and Russian influence. The article notes that despite concerns over democratic backsliding, the US has deepened its ties with Bangladesh through economic, military, and humanitarian engagements.
Balancing the promotion of democracy and human rights with strategic and economic interests is highlighted as a delicate task for Washington. While the US may implement measures like visa restrictions against those undermining democracy, it also aims to avoid damaging the overall relationship, which is crucial for countering regional geopolitical challenges.
In essence, the article underscores the tension between advocating for democratic values and pursuing strategic interests in US foreign policy towards Bangladesh.