Bangladesh may not be Pakistan, but it is another South Asian neighbour with whom India hasan uneasy blow-hot-blow-cold relationship, despite the extraordinary support extended during its fight forfreedom 32 years ago. And, with the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), which has always thrived on shrillanti-India rhetoric, leading the present coalition Government in Dhaka, any move that may have even a slightbearing on New Delhi is closely monitored, analyzed and dissected.
It is against this backdrop that the Bangladesh Government's decision on whether or not to grant politicalasylum to Anup Chetia alias Golap Barua is keenly awaited. Chetia is the detained general secretary of theoutlawed Northeast Indian separatist group, the United Liberation Front of Asom (ULFA). New Delhi and Dhaka donot have an extradition treaty in place yet, but India would expect Bangladesh to hand over the ULFA leader toit once he is released from jail.
Chetia completed his six-year jail term at the high-security central prison in Dhaka on Monday, August 25.Technically, he should have been a free man that day. But, his detention has been extended by another sixmonths, as he failed to pay a fine of Bangladesh Taka 10,000 ($172). This extension, in fact, has come as abreather to Premier Khaleda Zia's BNP government as the Bangladesh High Court had, on August 23, orderedauthorities in Dhaka to decide on Chetia's plea for political asylum within four weeks. The Bangladesh HighCourt's order came in response to a petition moved by the Bangladesh Society for the Enforcement of HumanRights (BSFEHR), a frontline rights group in that country, seeking the court's intervention on the asylumpleas by Chetia and 21 others belonging to countries ranging from Sri Lanka to South Africa.
Chetia, now 52, was arrested by Bangladesh immigration and security officials from downtown Dhaka's NorthAdabor locality on December 21, 1997. The main charges against the Indian separatist leader was illegal entryinto Bangladesh, possession of two forged Bangladeshi passports (No 0964185 and 0227883), possession of anunauthorized satellite telephone and illegal possession of foreign currency of countries as diverse as the US,UK, Switzerland, Thailand, Philippines, Spain, Nepal, Bhutan, Belgium, Singapore and others. Two of Chetia'saccomplices, Babul Sharma and Laxmi Prasad Goswami, were also arrested along with Chetia the same day. Chetiahad earlier pleaded guilty on the charge of illegal entry into Bangladesh, telling the court that he wasfighting a 'freedom struggle' in Assam and had to flee to that country to escape the Indian security forces.The ULFA, formed in April 1979, is fighting for a 'sovereign, socialist Assam' and is engaged in a bush-waragainst the Indian state. New Delhi has declared the group an outlawed organization.
Dhaka is indeed in a Catch 22 situation. Granting political asylum to Chetia, who still continues to be theULFA's General Secretary, would amount to openly facilitating this Indian rebel group to establish arepresentative in Bangladesh with Dhaka's consent. This would, once again, bring into sharp focus New Delhi'sauthoritative claim that top ULFA leaders, including the outfit's 'chief of staff', Paresh Barua, have beenoperating out of Bangladesh, and that the rebel group from Assam was receiving the backing of sections in theBangladeshi intelligence community, in collaboration with Pakistan's Inter Services Intelligence (ISI). On theother hand, refusal to grant political asylum to Chetia, from the BNP's point of view, would go against theparty's stated position on the ULFA and 'human rights'.
As Opposition leader in May 1998, within six months of Chetia's arrest, Ms. Khaleda Zia had told this writerduring an interview at the BNP headquarters in Dhaka, that her party regarded the ULFA cadres as 'freedomfighters', just as the Bangladeshi Mukti Bahini were freedom fighters. She had then also expressed hergratitude to the people of Assam and Meghalaya for sheltering the Mukti Bahini during the Bangladeshi freedomstruggle, indirectly implying that there was nothing wrong in some ULFA men taking shelter inside Bangladesh.That, obviously, may not be the BNP or Premier Zia's official position now, particularly after 9/11, when theworld has declared a 'global war' against terror.
Moreover, Dhaka's strong denials notwithstanding, international attention is certainly focused on Bangladeshfollowing western media reports that the country has become a new hub of Islamist terrorist groups andelements linked to Al Qaeda. Curiously enough, some of these reports had said that the ULFA, too, had sent itsrepresentatives to attend a meeting of radical Islamist outfits at a secret rendezvous in Bangladesh lastyear. Charges of the BNP being soft on some such forces or the ULFA attending such a meeting cannot bedefinitively confirmed or refuted. What cannot be ignored, however, are the discussions in intelligencecircles of a local terror group, the Harkat-ul-Jihad-al-Islami (HUJI), with an estimated strength of 2,000,currently active in Bangladesh, with direct links with Al Qaeda. When New Delhi raises its oft-repeated chargethat Dhaka was not doing much to halt Northeast Indian separatists from operating out of that country, ittouches a sympathetic cord among those who watch international terrorism and cross-border insurgencies.
Considering various aspects, Dhaka may finally reject Chetia's asylum plea, but is unlikely to hand the ULFAleader over to India. What happens then? In a conversation with this writer from Dhaka on August 29, SigmaHuda, secretary general of the BSFEHR, the rights group that has taken up Chetia's case from the beginning (ULFA'chairman' Arabinda Rajkhowa had, in fact, thanked BSFEHR for taking up the Chetia case through a letter datedFebruary 4, 1998), said that if the ULFA leader is denied asylum by Bangladesh, he has to be given a chance toopt for asylum in another country. "According to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (adopted bythe United Nations on December 10, 1948) and other conventions on political asylum seekers and refugees, Dhakais not supposed to send Chetia back to the country of his origin and, instead, let him give names of threeother countries of his choice before negotiations on those destinations could begin," Huda said.Bangladesh may not grant asylum to Chetia, but could well cite existing UN provisions to let him first try forshelter in a third country.
The ULFA too is expected to use all resources at its command to try and prevent Chetia from falling into thehands of Indian authorities. The outfit has faced some major reverses in recent months in the wake of asustained counter-insurgency offensive by Indian security forces, and with the Royal Bhutan Governmentmounting pressure for the ULFA to pull out its cadres from at least nine well-entrenched camps inside thekingdom in a peaceful manner or face 'military force. '
To add to its woes is the recent sentencing of two detained ULFA cadres to life imprisonment by a Guwahaticourt on charges of being involved in the kidnapping and murder of well-known social activist Sanjoy Ghose atthe eastern Assam river-island of Majuli in July 1997. The court, acting on submissions made after the probeinto the Ghose murder by the Central Bureau of Investigation, India's apex criminal investigative agency,found 11 ULFA cadres guilty of the crime. Significantly, this includes ULFA 'chief of staff' Paresh Barua, whoIndian authorities are convinced, is operating from within Bangladesh. Both Dhaka and the ULFA may deny thatthe rebels were operating out of bases inside Bangladesh. However, the Chetia case and the BNP-ledGovernment's handling of it in the days to come will once again inevitably shift the spotlight on the issue ofseparatists from Northeast India using Bangladesh as a secure staging arena for their campaigns of terror.
Advertisement
Wasbir Hussain is Associate Fellow, Institute for Conflict Management, New Delhi;Consulting Editor, The Sentinel, Guwahati. Courtesy, the South Asia Intelligence Review of theSouth Asia Terrorism Portal.
