US Ambassador to Bangladesh, Peter Haas’ recent incident of naked poking into Bangladesh internal politics has surprised all the conscious citizens.
While Bangladesh and the USA maintain broad bilateral relations, the US, along with some Western governments, has been exerting pressure by implementing visa restrictions and emphasizing human rights concerns ahead of the forthcoming election.
The US State Department has stated its neutrality in Bangladesh’s upcoming election, emphasizing that it doesn’t endorse any particular political party and seeks to avoid interfering with the election’s outcome. But Peter Haas, has recently taken a more assertive stance on internal matters of Bangladesh.
You can also read: US Ambassador Haas Promotes Democracy in Bangladesh: Talks with AL on Election Process
Peter Haas was nominated by President Joe Biden on July 9, 2021, to serve as the United States Ambassador to Bangladesh. Since his arrival, Peter Haas has been facing a lot of criticism from Bangladesh’s political and intellectual community for apparent negative biases towards the present government and the ruling party. Some of his controversial initiatives have been seen as getting cozy with the opposition parties’ agendas and the opposition parties have used those initiatives as propaganda tools for regime change.
In last month, Peter Haas attracted attention after saying that media in Bangladesh may also come under the purview of US visa policy though US State Department Spokesperson Matthew Miller repeatedly refrained from mentioning visa restrictions on Bangladeshi media.
The US Ambassador at another recent event said that Bangladeshi youths’ interest in politics has significantly declined due to the factors of political violence on university campuses, nepotism, corruption, a lack of confidence in political leadership, a culture that restricts them from casting their votes in elections, and limited freedom of speech.
Peter Haas expressed concern that a significant number of young people felt disillusioned with the current situation and called on politicians to address this issue by ensuring that youth voices are heard.
Such one-sided political statements clearly cross diplomatic lines that should not be violated in a sovereign country.
Such proactive statements have apparently cheered Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) as many of the party’s leaders praise US move to introduce visa ban.
BNP vice-chairman and former lawmaker Shahjahan Omar recently termed US Ambassador Peter D. Haas as the ‘God’, urging the ambassador to save the party.
He said, “Mr Peter D. Haas may be come (to us) as a god. O father, save us. We are with you.”
US Embassy in Dhaka also has a vibrant social media presence through its Facebook page. But a gross predisposition can be found with the circulation of its contents which can cause awkwardness for Bangladesh. A disparity in paid engagement and the reach of posts between those that portray Bangladesh in a negative manner and those which are generic or positive can be found. The opposition parties and anti-government activists are using these activities to create a propaganda mechanism to unstable the situation in Bangladesh.
Mayer Kanna Vs Mayer Daak
Mayer Kanna (Mother’s Cry) and Mayer Daak (Mother’s Call), are two activist groups calling for claims of justice for family members. Mayer Kanna is an organization of family members of the victims who received the death penalty during an uprising in 1977 against then-President Ziaur Rahman. The tragic event of 1977 is a documented mass execution where defendants were not given the right to defend themselves and many of the dead bodies were not returned to their families. On the other hand, Mayer Daak is a controversial organization that alleges that its family members were forcibly abducted by law enforcement agencies, though the government has refuted many of these claims. It is organized by the sister of BNP leader Sajedul Islam Sumon who had alleged terrorist ties.
Ambassador Haas has gone to meet with Mayer Daak members and US Embassy has held official talks with them. But there was an incident when Mayer Kanna members approached to provide Ambassador Haas with a manuscript of their urge, it was rejected. Many critics have pointed out the hypocritical approach of rejecting one human rights violation plea while taking another one with a political overtone.
Has Peter Haas violated internally acclaimed diplomatic norms?
The ‘Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations’ was formulated at a conference in Vienna in 1961.
All the countries that have ‘ratified’ the Convention including Bangladesh have enacted the necessary laws to make the provisions of the Convention enforceable in their respective countries.
Article III of the Convention recognizes 5 functions of embassies. These are- (a) Representing one’s country in the host country, (b) Acting within the boundaries of international law to protect the interests of the country and its citizens in the host country, (c) Negotiating with the government of the host country, (d) Within the ambit of law. From reviewing the status and development of the host country and reporting it to the home country, (e) trying to develop friendly relations with the host country. Which will include economic, cultural and scientific issues.
It is very strongly established in conventional international law that no ambassador meddles in the internal political affairs of the host country. They have the right to observe the events of the host country to transmit them to their own government. But of course, they have no right or power to be directly or indirectly involved in the politics of the host country or to speak or take a stand for or against any particular political party, or to inspire any of them.
Any ambassador or embassy doing this would be a clear breach of diplomatic dignity. It is unquestionable that a diplomat is doing this on his own initiative and not at the behest of his country’s government, and no state will tolerate such abuse of privileges and dignity by a foreign envoy and may even declare the envoy undesirable in extreme cases (persona non grata).
In light with this internationally acclaimed diplomatic norms, one can say that US Ambassador to Bangladesh Peter Haas clearly violating the diplomatic lines.
As the USA claimed itself as the lighthouse of protecting globally acclaimed norms, the controversial activities might bring shame for the USA.
