The Bangladesh-Pakistan Nuclearization Treaty: Strategic Posture or Catalyst for Regional Instability?

In a world that continues to become more multipolar as regional countries try to establish themselves, the importance of the notion of nuclear deterrence to the geopolitical context of South Asia is undeniable. In the given scenario, the presence of an agreement that sets the terms of a nuclear treaty between Bangladesh and Pakistan would be a very strong influence on the regional powers, with India being the principal focus. On the one hand, aligning with the target in question would be feasible due to the enhanced level of security and safety that it would offer as a tool to balance India’s power in the region. On the other hand, the accord in question is likely to become a precursor to a period of destabilization in the region, the sign therefore will be, primarily, the deterioration of the economic state of affairs and the rise in regional competition.

The Strategic Benefits of a Bangladesh-Pakistan Alliance

The combined effort of both countries against India is a logical decision since India endorses the insurgency and discreetly facilitates the escalation of militant activities in foreign lands. Moreover, since the threat of regional dominance is still on the table, the new government in Bangladesh pledged to reform the nation in every sector with defense as one of the main priorities that oppose Hasina’s attempt to control the military. The current government is now also in a position to meet people’s needs and achieve “strategic autonomy” to resist Indian dominance. India confidently asserts its military power over the Bangladeshi government, claiming the ability to occupy the entire country if necessary. As a result, a potential nuclearization treaty involving both Bangladesh and Pakistan would be a major implication and, possibly, a threat to India. From Bangladesh’s viewpoint, Pakistan is a reliable nation for treaty negotiations, as India has similarly not ratified the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) and Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT), whereas Pakistan has demonstrated its competence with the “nuclear triad.”  Initially, the potential unification of Bangladesh and Pakistan, both non-NPT states, would elicit existential concern and apprehension among Indian policymakers. Second, the decision to sign such a treaty is hardly reversible and makes an irreversible political statement India should be ready to respond in a similar radical way. Finally, the strategic reasoning beyond such a treaty is designed to make India abandon its current aggressive political and regional policy toward both invested parties, which means a more autonomous foreign policy.

A Stronger Strategic Posture and Its Impact on India

A stronger strategic posture, especially through a potential alliance like a Bangladesh-Pakistan nuclearization treaty, may cause India to reconsider and rebalance its relations with Bangladesh such that it will be used to ensure more equitable negotiations in critical matters. Bangladesh, with its more effective military and nuclear deterrence, and a robust “balance of power”, will prioritize achieving parity in talks, particularly on sensitive issues like brutal border killings, the water-sharing agreement with India as the Teesta River issue, and the trade imbalance. To avoid succumbing to Bangladesh’s strategy, India will need to engage in a rapprochement that fosters a more cooperative approach. Ultimately, a shift from the status quo may force India to have dialogues that are equitable, with the possibility of finding mutually acceptable solutions for the longest-running problems rather than continuously dominating the region and determining what is best for the two countries. This will undoubtedly foster more equitable relations between the nations, prioritizing Bangladesh’s sovereignty and resource access in negotiations.

Arms Race and Risk of Regional Destabilization.

The implementation of a Bangladesh-Pakistan nuclearization agreement entails significant risks of aggravating regional instability and, in fact, further exacerbating the weapons race in South Asia. Presumably, such an agreement may trigger an intense response from India, which, having had to face a substantially increased nuclear threat, would need to beef up its military and nuclear capacities. This phenomenon is often referred to as a “security dilemma”: while one country’s steps are defensive, another perceives them as threatening, and both resort to mutual measures that, instead of ensuring security, keep escalating the conflict. In this case, by seeking to have more nuclear armament and gain an advantage over the opponent, the nations may turn the process of competition for superiority in stock levels and arrays and deployment modes into a “spiral of unwanted expansion.” Therefore, the chances of unintended mismanaging, failures in communication, accidental collisions, and unintentional escalations to regional war, on the whole, would increase, creating an extremely unfavorable security environment and implying a significant threat to the stability, security, and peace of the whole region. Thus, the overall effects of such an agreement, in terms of their scope and nature, go beyond the “on-paper” strategic risks and advantages: they comprise complex risks of protracted and probably irreversible destabilization.

Economic Deprecation and Sanctions

Moreover, on the economic side, a treaty of such type would likely entail adverse punitive measures from the regional powers and the international community, which may effectively fortify the capacity for the economic development of Bangladesh and Pakistan in terms of sanctions and other measures, should their implementation be warranted. As such, the prospects of economic growth and solving social and infrastructure problems in both countries would be severely endangered.  Bangladesh has ratified both the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) and the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT). From a Bangladeshi perspective, promoting non-proliferation norms has helped the country to grow the economy as most of the import markets in the United States of America and the European Union. So, if Bangladesh joins any nuclear treaty with Pakistan by scrapping all previous ratification of NPT and CTBT then the adverse impact could affect the broader economic instability, manifesting in the disruption of trade relations and declines in investments which might be a “self-sabotaging act” keeping mind the rise of inflation of dollar against taka and current economic condition. Moreover, international trade restrictions would lead to significant economic impacts on both countries, exacerbated by reduced foreign direct investment.

If resources are spent on developing nuclearization in Bangladesh, then the country will shift away from much-needed developmental projects in terms of finance and technology. At present, such projects may concern the sphere of infrastructure, healthcare, and education or some poverty-alleviation programs. The share of the budget allocated to the military, which the country can least afford, will be even larger since Bangladesh’s economy already encounters a range of socio-economic problems. Thus, it is possible to assume that the financial demands of the aforementioned activities would place undue pressure on the national budget. The expenditure of these funds catalyzes the reduction of available resources and the subsequent fulfillment of the country’s diverse developmental goals. This is estimated to bring about the suspension of economic progress in these key developmental sectors, leading to enhancing public dissatisfaction, corruption, and socio-economic inequalities.

A Pragmatic Alternative

Whereas a treaty of nuclearization with Pakistan might help strengthen Bangladesh’s strategic posture and balance against India’s regional aggression, the wider consequences of such a deal pose grave dangers. The severe costs of economic deprecation through sanctions, diplomatic isolation, and increased regional instability outweigh the benefits accrued from an increase in deterrence and improved bargaining leverage. As Bangladesh relies on Indian raw materials like cotton, electricity, and fuel, any steps toward nuclearization may threaten these vital trade relations and weaken Bangladesh’s economy even more. Instead, Bangladesh should avoid a high-risk nuclear alliance and try to pursue “strategic autonomy” by strengthening diplomatic, economic, and military partnerships with Pakistan in a manner that ensures a balance of power against India but maintains regional peace and stability at the same time. It can protect the sovereignty of Bangladesh by engaging in constructive dialogues and making use of the already established relationships with countries around the globe in a way that no country is unnecessarily provoked and possibly compromises their long-term economic growth. Enhancing military capability through conventional means, and promotion of regional cooperation will allow Bangladesh to protect its interests without destabilization of the region or setting back its development goals.