Tariq A Karim is the founder director of the Centre for Bay of Bengal Studies at Independent University, Bangladesh. In his long diplomatic career, he has served as the ambassador of Bangladesh to the United States and Iran, High Commissioner to India and South Africa, and deputy chief of mission in Beijing and earlier in New Delhi. He believes that Bangladesh needs to pivot its focus more on the Bay of Bengal to face the challenges of the neo-supercolonial powers.

The 6th Indian Ocean conference was held in Dhaka on May 12-13. Representatives of many countries and organizations attended the conference, jointly organized by the government of Bangladesh and India. What was the significance and what was the outcome of the conference?

Our planet is an oceanic planet with five oceans and seven continents. More than 71% of the surface is covered by water. Geographers call the Indian Ocean the "great middle bay" due to its location. It is the third largest ocean. Over 80% of maritime oil trade passes through the Indian Ocean. And it goes to East Asia, Europe and North America. The Indian Ocean is also a valuable source of fisheries and mineral resources.

Bangladesh is a Bay of Bengal outward-facing country. It is the largest bay in the world and it lies at the centre of the Indian Ocean. So we are at the heart of the Bay of Bengal. I say we are at the epicentre not just of the Indo-Pacific, but also of this oceanic planet.

If you listen to the deliberations of all the delegates in the [Indian Ocean] conference, they finally understand that Bangladesh is here to stay. They all praised Bangladesh's strategic importance. And all of them praised Bangladesh's role in the Indian Ocean. I think it has brought us dividends, and true attention to us. How do we capitalize on it? We will have to see to that.

PM Sheikh Hasina put forth six proposals at the conference, which include fostering maritime diplomacy and partnership, and strengthening maritime security and mutual trust for prosperity for all. What do you think about those proposals? What else could/should she have focused on?

All proposals are absolutely appropriate. Nothing to add. Just take her one proposal which is related to cooperation to reduce the impact of climate change, and everything will be covered. We are very vulnerable to climate change and so we have to engage in proactive diplomacy to address issues of both mitigation and adaptation. I have identified three areas for cooperation to address the ecological and environmental problems of the Bay of Bengal.

First, mangrove forests, which are only largely in our Sundarbans. This is one integrated ecosystem. It has to be managed together. It's a shared ecosystem of Bangladesh and India. We need to take care of mangroves because the rest of South Asia does not have a significant expanse of that forestry. Mangroves absorb 3 to 4 times more carbon dioxide than normal trees. And it gives back two to three times more oxygen into the atmosphere than other trees. We have 70% plus ocean in the world. Just imagine what would happen if all the oceanic coastlines globally had this mangrove flourishing.

Second, in recent years we came to know that there is a 60,000 square kilometre dead zone area in the Bay of Bengal where living organisms cannot survive because of an imbalance between nitrogen and oxygen. We need collaborative studies to understand that and address the dangers that could emanate from that.

Third is managing marine plastics which come through drains and flow out to sea. In the Indian Ocean, plastic leaching is taking place from the Indian Ocean into the Bay of Bengal. This is not accumulating in the Arabian Sea or the Persian Gulf.

If the current rate of accumulation continues, in 50 years the entire Bay of Bengal could become a "plastic soup". The Bay of Bengal is an enclosed area. This is the most densely populated area, and we all depend on the Bay of Bengal for food resources and other things and services. Plastics do not degrade. It takes hundreds of years to start degrading. But it breaks up into nano-plastics which can get into the food chain in the marine habitat. It may get absorbed into the tissues of marine life. What will happen 20 years and 30 years later, we don't know. Maybe our children and grandchildren might eat fish composed partly of plastic. Bangladesh alone cannot stop it. We have to take collective measures with the other littoral countries.

Please explain a little how you see the possibilities of the Bay of Bengal maritime area in the context of the global economy and politics.

In the early 20th century, oil and gas reserves were discovered in the Arabian peninsula, which was full of many tribes, and the Persian Gulf region. During the first world war, the British occupied half of Iran and Russia the other half of Iran. The discovery of major hydrocarbon resources attracted global attention to this area. But that region and the larger Middle East region are in turmoil.

The focus has shifted to the Bay of Bengal area in the 21st century due to the discovery of hydrocarbon deposits. The neo-supercolonial powers have shifted their attention to this area. They want access to new hydrocarbon deposits in this region and secure supply chains and supply routes. Around 90% of global commerce takes place across ocean routes. Lots of it, now strategic goods, travel mostly across the Indian Ocean to countries hungry for this on the Pacific coast. Hence, the Indo-Pacific narrative comes in. This is where most of the strategic goods travel. For that, the Bay of Bengal suddenly leaps into prominence. The Bay of Bengal is also a region which is dispute-free.

We need to reconnect with our historical legacy of this region and seize the initiative of that. This is the time when we should take the lead and push for a larger Bay of Bengal Economic Cooperation, I call it BOBEC, with Sri Lanka, India, Myanmar, Thailand, Malaysia and Indonesia, all the littoral countries of the Bay of Bengal. We could draw in landlocked countries like Bhutan and Nepal and adjacent countries in the Asean and Saarc regions, which would derive benefits from cooperation within such a configuration.

There seems a complex rivalry in this region between the US, Russia, China, and India. How can Bangladesh protect and advance its own interests?

Yes, we are protecting our national interest. We are on the right track. We cannot deviate from this. We are like a very brittle walnut in the jaws of two nutcrackers - one nutcracker is India and China, the regional nutcracker, and the other is Indo-Pacific and the BRI narratives, the global nutcracker. We are at the centre. How do we resist it? We have to build our own internal resilience. We have to build our own society based on what Father of the Nation Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman had said. "We have to build our society and nation. We have to have discipline."

We may be India-locked (since India virtually surrounds us on three sides), but we are at the epicentre of the Bay of Bengal, which extends from our southern baseline. We need to reimagine ourselves from this perspective. Being at the epicentre of the Bay of Bengal, we are also subject to pressures from various sides. And since we are doing well economically and in human development and we have arrived at this stage (economically) after 50 years of struggle, we are getting more attention now than before. We are no longer an LDC. We are graduating to a middle-income developed country. In fact, I say we are an emerging middle power.

It is the control of the sea lanes that gives you the power. This is how the dominance of British power shot up so high that they outsmarted and overwhelmed the other European powers. We are a bridge between East and West. If we don't play the part of the bridge then we disrupt the supply chains and communication channels between East and West.

The US pursues its Indo-Pacific Strategy and the Bangladesh government has declared its own Indo-Pacific Outlook. The US says it welcomes it. What's your opinion on this?

We deliberately gave our own outlook on the Indo-Pacific. The US also accepted that. We are with the Indo-Pacific. We are also with the BRI. Either of them does not mean I am against the other. When I was High Commissioner in India, I used to say that you (India) have a relationship with China. Our friendship with you is not at the expense of the relationship we have with China. It is not directed against you or at your expense. You have a similar set of relationships with other countries which may not be on friendly terms with each other. Does that mean that you will not engage with them? They (India) are strategic partners of the USA. Can they throw Russia away? More than 70% of Indian defence is Russia-reliant. They are also getting oil from Russia.

We have to protect ourselves against the narrative of "you are with us or against us". That's what we do. We have adopted a middle path. Whoever gives me money, I am taking that and making the project because I have to develop economically. I cannot have political and other stability unless I first develop economically.

But once you have economic stability, the rising expectations of people will force you to address other issues such as governance and human rights. It's an organic process. You see the development of any society, this is how it goes.

And in that process, if you have to insert discipline, there will be a certain degree of authoritarianism, no alternative to it. Look at Singapore, look at South Korea...you have to pass through certain phases. There is no shortcut to this.

In the process of growing up, you cannot suddenly shoot up from being an 8-year-old to being an 18-year-old. You have to go through all the processes and the pains and joys that come in between. We are growing through that process.

The only way for us to survive is that we must have a Bay of Bengal-oriented strategy.

There's a perception that the Bangladesh government is trying to balance its relations with the big powers -- US, Russia, China, and India. Is this something that will continue to be possible in future?

Bangabandhu adopted the foreign policy - "friendship to all, malice towards none" - because he knew creating a state is not enough, the state has to first survive.

He understood China would rise and that's why he sent a Special Envoy to China in 1972 even when China did not recognise Bangladesh. He recognised that India would also have an ambition of rising. He understood the world is in turmoil with the two superpowers (the US and the Soviet Union) divided it into two camps with us sandwiched in between. Therefore, he took the strategy of non-alignment.

We (Bangladesh) are alive today because of that foreign policy. We have to continue this. It is necessary for our survival. We cannot afford to take sides with anybody. If we take a side with one, then the other will come and hit us. Therefore, our goal should be to try and achieve self-dependency as much as possible.

There is no such thing called friendship in international relations. It's all about national self-interest. What you can describe as friendship is when the national self-interest of two countries comes and meets at an equilibrium point relatively happily. Neither will be cent percent happy; if I am 90% happy and the other is 90% happy, that's friendship.

There are no permanent friends and or enemies between nations. It changes with national interests and perspectives. What will enable you to survive and prosper is how you will define your national interest and how you protect and project that. That is what diplomacy has to do.

Why is the Indo-Pacific or more specifically the Bay of Bengal region so important for the US?

It's important for everyone - the European Union, the US, China, Australia, Japan...everybody. See the trade flow. What's the demand and what are they getting? Japan and China are fuel-dependent countries...without fuel, your economic engine is not going to go anywhere.

The government has done a tremendous job in increasing electricity production. But now we have become hostage to sources of energy in the Gulf and the West. We could not diversify our sources. But we have the Bay of Bengal value chain in our own front yard- Indonesia, Thailand, Malaysia, and Brunei. But we always look to the West. We have to look East now.

With their growing interest, are they interfering too much in the internal affairs of a country? For example, the new visa policy for Bangladesh ahead of the general elections?

Big powers will do what big powers are made to do. A tiger is made to be a predator. It cannot survive without preying. How does the prey survive? By being agile, learning how to evade. Now we don't have a colonial power. It's a super-colonial power. I am not going to advocate that we take on super-colonial powers by the horns. They can do more damage to me than I can do to them or ever dream of doing to them. They will do what they want to do. We have to learn how to prevent that from hurting us. I have to develop my own health.

This interview was first published in the Dhaka Tribune on June 9, 2023.