Major General ANM Muniruzzaman (retd) is the president of Bangladesh Institute of Peace and Security Studies. In an interview with Prothom Alo’s AKM Zakaria and Rafsan Galib, he talks about the situation in Myanmar’s Rakhine state, the debate over a corridor to Rakhine, and the impact of the India-Pakistan war.
Prothom Alo: There has been plenty of debate over a humanitarian corridor to the Rakhine state in Myanmar. In the meantime, national security advisor Khalilur Rahman has said that Bangladesh will not be granting any such corridor. However, at the same time he said that the United Nations has made a request about sending relief to the Rakhine state through Bangladesh. What is the difference between the two, or is it the same thing?
ANM Muniruzzaman: Whether we call it a humanitarian corridor or the delivering relief, the issue is essentially the same. In this case, the national security advisor has simply resorted to semantics. Delivering relief means establishing a corridor. Since the word “corridor” has recently taken on negative connotations, he chose to avoid it and instead spoke of sending relief to Rakhine State. The national security advisor may have assumed that the people of Bangladesh wouldn’t understand, but it’s not right to take the public as fools. Let me make it clear: whether it’s called a corridor or relief delivery, both actions are essentially the same. Only the name is different. Just as a corridor poses risks for us, so does sending relief.
Prothom Alo: It is evident from the national security advisor’s words that talks and activities are on regarding a corridor to Rakhine or reaching relief there. Who are these talks being held with, and at what level, and how long have they been going on?
ANM MuniruzzamanThere is no transparency whatsoever in this entire process. We’ve heard conflicting statements from various responsible figures in the government. The national security adviser says one thing, the foreign affairs advisor another, and the chief advisor’s press secretary yet another. It is unclear wither the discussions are with any foreign state or with the United Nations, or at what level these discussions occurred.
What is clear, however, is that the relevant stakeholders were not consulted before making such a decision. If the parliament were in session, this matter would have required discussion before reaching a decision. Since there is no parliament, it would have been appropriate to consult with political parties and take their opinions into account. But that did not happen, and there is no sign of transparency in this matter.
Prothom Alo : The army chief General Waker-Uz-Zaman has made his stand against the corridor clear. He said that it is for an elected government to take a decision regarding the corridor. Does that indicate that the armed forced were not consulted or their views were not taken into cognizance about this issue?
ANM MuniruzzamanI believe that the military was not consulted or their opinion was not sought on this matter. As I mentioned earlier, there has been no transparency, nor any effort to engage stakeholders in discussion. Sending relief aid to a state in Myanmar carries significant security risks. Since security is a concern here, the position, opinion, and consent of the armed forces are extremely important. If we get involved in the process of sending relief, we could find ourselves in serious danger.
We don’t even know whether Myanmar has given its consent to the delivery of relief to the Rakhine State. We have diplomatic relations with Myanmar and recognise it as an independent and sovereign country. If Myanmar has not consented to the relief delivery in Rakhine, it could resist the move in the interest of its national security and territorial integrity. That could lead to loss of lives and property. Who will provide security in such a scenario? And who will take responsibility for this?
Even if aid is sent, there is no guarantee it will actually reach the people it is intended for. Past experiences suggest that in such situations, aid is often seized by separatist or armed groups that control the region, who then use it for their own purposes. The aid, in effect, becomes a tool of war.
The ongoing internal conflict in Rakhine poses a significant threat to our national security. Such conflicts tend to spill over into surrounding regions, and that has already begun to happen. We have seen Myanmar’s soldiers fleeing into Bangladesh.
Prothom Alo: Has any final decision been made regarding the reaching relief aid to Myanmar’s Rakhine State, or is the decision still pending? The national security advisor’s statement remains ambiguous.
ANM MuniruzzamanFrom the national security advisor’s statement, it appears that the government is, in principle, prepared to send relief to Rakhine. However, it is unclear how this will be implemented on the ground. Since the army chief does not agree with the plan, questions will also arise about how security in that region will be ensured. The area is highly sensitive, and if proper coordination is not maintained among the country’s state forces, national security could be put at risk.
Prothom Alo : Myanmar has historic ties with China and is ostensibly controlled by China. The Arakan Army which is engaged in an armed struggle against the Myanmar government, is in control of Rakhine. So isn’t it vital to understand China’s stance before Bangladesh decides to send relief to the Arakan Army-controlled Rakhine? What do you think China’s views will be about this?
ANM MuniruzzamanChina will not view the initiative to send relief to Rakhine favourably. The Chinese ambassador to Bangladesh recently voiced clear opposition to this initiative during a seminar organised by BIISS (Bangladesh Institute of International and Strategic Studies). If China considers Bangladesh’s initiative to be strategically against its interests, it will oppose it in various ways and attempt to block it.
Prothom Alo : What risks is the Myanmar situation creating for Bangladesh? What can Bangladesh do?
ANM MuniruzzamanThe ongoing internal conflict in Rakhine poses a significant threat to our national security. Such conflicts tend to spill over into surrounding regions, and that has already begun to happen. We have seen Myanmar’s soldiers fleeing into Bangladesh. At various times, the presence of the Arakan Army within Bangladesh’s territory has also been a topic of discussion. Bangladesh shares a 270 km border with Myanmar, and there is now a growing concern over the stability of that border.
Questions have been raised about how border security will be maintained, especially since the border with Myanmar is now under the control of the Arakan Army, which is not a state force. This has complicated efforts to ensure security along the border. Altogether, there is now a pressing need for increased surveillance and oversight in the border areas. When instability arises in these regions, incidents such as drugs and arms smuggling and human trafficking tend to increase. For this reason, border patrol must be further strengthened.
Prothom Alo: Coming to the India-Pakistan war, what was the consequence of this?
ANM MuniruzzamanIt is not possible to determine any military outcome from the India-Pakistan conflict. A ceasefire between the two countries was reached through US mediation before any military conclusion could be drawn. However, we must understand the threat this conflict poses to regional stability. The confrontation between these two countries highlights just how fragile the region’s stability has become. And such instability directly affects the economy and trade.
Both countries possess nuclear capabilities and have two of the world’s largest armed forces. As a result, if war breaks out between them, it will not remain confined to the regional level. It could have far-reaching international consequences.
Prothom Alo : What lessons can we learn from this war?
ANM MuniruzzamanSince both countries are our neighbors, we now need to reconsider all strategic aspects to help maintain regional stability. The areas of mutual cooperation that once existed within South Asia are barely functioning anymore. Everyone must now think about how a revival of SAARC.
For the first time, water has been used as a weapon of war in this region. The Indus Waters Treaty signed between the two countries in 1960 has effectively collapsed for the first time. From Pakistan, we heard that if India does not supply water as per the treaty, it would be considered a red line for them. Similarly, India has stated that if anyone is hostile toward them, they cannot guarantee water access.
This conflict, therefore, sends a strong signal to all downstream countries, and we must remain vigilant about this issue.
Prothom Alo : India has been continuously escalating its disputes with Bangladesh. What will be the outcome of this? What does India hope to gain from it?
ANM MuniruzzamanIt is clear that they want to exert pressure on Bangladesh in various ways. That is why we are seeing multiple restrictions on trade. They have also started pushing Indian citizens across different border points. India still cannot accept the 2024 mass uprising in Bangladesh and the subsequent events. In fact, they have yet to properly assess the changed situation in Bangladesh. For this reason, they are opposing us in various ways. These kinds of steps from India are a result of that opposition.
However, I want to say that, as a neighbouring country, we need to prioritise good relations with India. India should also focus on building effective and positive relations with us. Imports, exports, trade and commerce, visa procedures, and people-to-people contacts are breaking down. This will not bode well for either country. Instead of hostility, both countries must build neighbourly relations based on mutual respect.
Prothom Alo : Thank you.
ANM MuniruzzamanThank you too.
