While lethal weapons are notably absent along the India-China border, such restraint is conspicuously missing along the India-Bangladesh frontier. This disparity stems from a complex interplay of historical, geopolitical, and military strategies. A comparative analysis of the India-China and India-Bangladesh border dynamics unravels the reasons behind this dual policy.
The 3,488-kilometer-long disputed boundary between China and India has been a theater of contention, with the 1962 war marking a significant flashpoint. However, subsequent decades have witnessed both nations adhering to strategic compromises to avoid direct confrontation. Why is this the case?
Both China and India are nuclear powers, a fact that renders any armed conflict catastrophic beyond their borders. Recognizing this, both nations have consistently contained their skirmishes to avoid escalation into full-scale warfare.
The towering Himalayan range acts as a natural deterrent, making military operations extraordinarily challenging and resource-intensive. Consequently, both countries have resorted to surveillance and the limited use of non-lethal weaponry to manage border disputes.
Economic interdependence and mutual participation in international coalitions like BRICS and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization exert political pressure to maintain peace. Such platforms incentivize diplomatic engagement over armed conflict.
The scenario along the India-Bangladesh border starkly contrasts with the India-China frontier. Here, the Indian Border Security Force (BSF) frequently employs lethal weapons, often violating human rights and straining bilateral relations. Why this divergence?
Unlike the natural fortifications along the India-China border, the India-Bangladesh border is characterized by open plains, rivers, and densely populated rural areas. This geography facilitates cross-border movements, prompting India to adopt a more aggressive stance to ensure security.
India views its eastern frontier as a “buffer zone” essential for securing its northeastern states. Issues like illegal immigration, smuggling, and insurgent activities dominate its security narrative. However, the use of lethal force as a deterrent raises critical ethical and strategic questions.
As a smaller, sovereign nation, Bangladesh has historically refrained from competing militarily with its larger neighbor. Successive governments have often maintained silence in the face of India’s aggressive border policies, inadvertently emboldening India’s hegemonic posture.
The Root of the Disparity
China-India relations operate within a framework of balanced power dynamics. In contrast, the asymmetry in India-Bangladesh relations enables India to assert dominance over its smaller neighbor. While a conflict with China would have severe repercussions for India’s economy and military capacity, Bangladesh's diplomatic strategy prioritizes peace and cooperation, avoiding provocations that could escalate tensions.
Human rights violations along the India-Bangladesh border remain underreported on the global stage, allowing India to perpetuate its draconian policies with minimal international scrutiny.
During the Sheikh Hasina administration, Bangladesh failed to strongly challenge India’s aggressive border tactics. Conversely, Indian policymakers often prioritized political gains over humanitarian considerations.
Enhancing International Pressure
The current interim government has adopted a robust stance against India’s border policies. Bangladesh must amplify its diplomatic efforts to highlight human rights violations on international platforms. Leveraging organizations like the United Nations and human rights watchdogs can create significant diplomatic pressure on India to revise its approach.
Bangladesh and India should establish a mutual agreement akin to the India-China border protocol that limits the use of lethal weapons. Such measures could foster trust and reduce the frequency of violent incidents.
Bangladesh must pursue military and economic self-reliance to counteract the power imbalance. A balanced relationship would compel India to adopt a more respectful and cooperative stance.
The use of lethal weapons along the India-Bangladesh border is not merely a political or military issue; it is a profound challenge to human rights and regional stability. Emulating the conciliatory framework of the India-China border is achievable, but it requires earnest efforts and a humane outlook from both sides.
Securing the safety of its citizens, protecting human rights, and fostering regional stability demand a synchronized approach involving diplomacy, politics, and international advocacy. This endeavor is not only vital for Bangladesh but also pivotal for establishing enduring peace in South Asia.
---
Author: A.K.M. Sayedad Hossain. Director, National Institute of Strategic Studies *(NISS)
1
2
3
4
.svg)
