Diplomacy and the Independence of Bangladesh

The following sections are included:

• Dedication
• Preface
• About the Author
• Contents
• List of Figures
• List of Tables
• Abbreviations

The introduction underscores investigative issues, relevant questions and objectives, and methodology used, besides analytical breaks, with added reflections on significance, alongside a macrocosmic view of the civilizational order. The investigative agendas and the objectives in tandem encompass an evolving framework of diplomacy worldwide to locate the civilizational pattern of power aspirations, with ramifications for the global order and for a people in a divided destiny as that in post-colonial Pakistan. The focus is then passed on to the present Bangladesh, formerly East Bengal/Pakistan, where Mujib emerged as leader, designed the stage for struggle, charted the course of diplomacy to rescue his people and led them to independence. In doing so he broke the asymmetric wheels of power drive via the symmetrical struggle for liberating Bangladesh and set a unique example of how to circumvent wheels of power asymmetry. The social science tools are used, combining timeline and system-structure frameworks, diplomacy trajectories and strategic analyses, with reflections on peacebuilding — the first of such kind in scholarly analytic portrayals.

The chapter uses twofold conceptual constructs to bring to light successive evolving legacies of diplomacy: a timeline framework, coupled with a circular system-structure model of diplomacy to present its macrocosmic direction over historical eras, how such processes impacted civilization and, finally, to suggest how Bangladesh unfolded its own brand of diplomacy. Historically, diplomacy opens up asymmetrical features in Euro-Asian-African continents, owing its origins to the Greco-Roman bullying; that moved through medieval Europe’s statebased diplomacy, passing on in sequence to modern-contemporary eras. Conceptually, all that progressively ushered in multilateral diplomacy, in a power drive frame for strategic dominance; it passed through system and structure processes, with variants of power, including bipolar, tripolar and multipolar diplomacy, besides détente and deterrent diplomacy. Asian/subcontinental diplomacy classically represented cultural mixes; asymmetric colonial diplomacy provoked sustained anti-colonial struggle, with blends of hard/soft power diplomacy. Yet, asymmetrical drives soon replaced post-colonial diplomatic fraternity. Diplomacy in Bengal/Bangladesh contexts seems a “notional complex,” because of the power image, legacies of tolerance, an infusion of external softer diplomatic variants, alongside diffusion of personalized and state-based diplomacy. East Pakistani modern era faced asymmetrical abuses. For its independence Bangladesh led by Mujib battled that asymmetric abuse via symmetrical varieties of struggle, combining hard/softer ideals of diplomacy, with motivations of setting man and nature in harmony and peace.

The chapter appraises Bangladesh’s diplomacy of liberation, focusing on the contextual tales of the country’s liberation war and Mujib’s advent in the diplomatic horizon as the lead role player. The subject of Pakistan’s destiny inevitably features as a contentious issue in this context, along with the circumstantial concerns that led to Bangladesh’s independence. Mujib’s appearance in the political scene was pertinent, as he had played a pioneering role in the creation of the new nation in the arena of regional and international diplomacy. A conceptual model of diplomacy combining politics, policy and power — with diplomacy as the centerpiece — has been used for analytical precision and reasoning. The findings suggest Mujib’s duteous commitment to politics was bound up with people’s well-being, along with fulfillment of their socioeconomic and political aspirations. Towards materializing such objectives, he often faced grim risks, which conditioned his changing policy dream and his judicious use of both power and strategy to reach the ends of his diplomacy, the nation-state he had envisioned for his people.

Chapter 4 unfolds the drama of struggle for Bangladesh’s independence where Mujib emerges as the designer. The milieus include stage-setting, coupled with conceptual ideas and the policy pursuits and action-planning required where both sides played competitive strategic gaming and worked toward favorable outcome. Mujib’s masterly planning of the strategic gambit and how it was set to attain the policy goals are underlined. In the tussle that followed Mujib paved the pathways for liberating Bangladesh, with art and audacity, preparing his people for struggle ahead, coupled with competitive mobilization of strategic resources, where strategy and diplomacy coincided, with supportive tactics, toward ensuring successful attainment of policy vision of an independent Bangladesh. The eventual outcome that followed, even in Mujib’s physical absence from the theater of war, being closed in enemy territory, was cataclysmic rout of the Pakistani army and dissolution of the Pakistani state, which showcased Bangladesh’s “finest hour”.

The chapter uses a trifocal analytical model to appraise the direction of Bangladesh’s war of independence. The provisional government, in Mujib’s absence, projected its legitimacy on the basis of 1970 elections, as Mujib was the mandated leader. It was set up, accordingly, with his trusted lieutenants, who named him as President, so was the name of provisional capital, Mujibnagar. The liberation war was based on the ideals, strategic blueprint and the ground rules, as per Mujib’s wishes. The entire milieu of leadership was set as he would have approved. The approaches of diplomacy adopted were inclusive of soft power ideals, defection of diplomats, both for publicity and public opinion mobilization nationally and internationally. As the occupation forces faced crushing defeat, Pakistan did play end-games yet found no option but to surrender, as of December 16, 1971, and released Bangladesh’s founder, incarcerated in Pakistan during the war period.

Chapter 6 focuses on diplomacy and role-playing by major powers. It appraises the key conceptual issues as they relate to the emerging empirical concerns during the Bangladesh war of independence. Pakistan chose China regionally as a geostrategic asset, together with the military-diplomatic deterrent support of Washington, its perceived enduring ally. Bangladesh liberation regime used Indo-Soviet alliance links as counter-deterrent asset for achieving its objectives of independence, alongside securing Mujib’s safe return. Pakistan promoted Sino-US rapprochement to counter Indo-Soviet bonding, seemingly supportive of Bangladesh’s independence; but it did not foresee the limits of doctrine of deterrence, which the US had activated. The counter-deterrence diplomacy triggered by Moscow, which was supporting Indo-Bangladesh position, simply neutralized US–China joint plan to come to Pakistan’s aid. That had left the Pakistani regime with no option but to surrender to the Indo-Bangladesh allied forces. Britain, though officially maintained a neutral stance, was nevertheless leaning toward Indo-Bangladesh position and worked toward harmonizing the divergent strategic situations that had emerged from deterrent diplomacy.

The conclusions sum up the findings and reappraise the issues raised, conceptual tracks followed and the book’s overall analytical direction. The perspectives offered include diplomacy variations since historical eras, a process that impacted the struggle for Bangladesh’s independence, Mujib’s advent, his setting of stage for Bangladesh’s struggle, and the diplomatic blueprint that pushed the course of struggle. The process materialized the dream of independence, despite the major role-players’ asymmetric power game, which merely abetted Bangladesh’s independence. Summative reflections added on diplomacy itself, civilizational journey and strategic imperatives affecting diplomacy, man and nature. The issues are revisited portraying the Bangladesh struggle that Mujib spearheaded. Ideas are floated toward policy re-thinking; suggest how to help recast both diplomacy and civilizational courses for a better human destiny. For such perspectives, the vistas of Mujib’s thinking, together with those of social thinkers and Bengal’s luminaries, are kept in view, alongside the changing courses of both diplomacy and degraded happenstances facing mankind, which include outbreak of worldwide COVID-19 pandemic and the more recent eruption of Russo-Ukraine war.

The following section is included:

• Index