Given that the Awami League (AL) was the main political force that led the liberation struggle of East Pakistan — now Bangladesh — from West Pakistan in 1971, it’s no surprise that relations between Pakistan and Bangladesh have been strained for decades, particularly when the AL was in power in Bangladesh. However, with the fall of the AL regime on August 5 last year, and the Muhammad Yunus-led interim government taking charge in Bangladesh, Bangladesh-Pakistan relations are warming. Even so, Pakistan has yet to officially apologize for the 1971 genocide, which has left lingering resentment among many in Bangladesh.
In an interview with The Diplomat’s Bangladesh correspondent Saqlain Rizve, Pakistan’s High Commissioner to Bangladesh Syed Ahmed Maroof examined the evolving Pakistan-Bangladesh bilateral relationship. On the question of Pakistan apologizing to Bangladesh for the horrific bloodshed of 1971, Maroof said that Pakistan is looking to move beyond the past. “We aim for a fresh start,” he said.
How are you finding the new environment in Bangladesh, given your experience with both the Awami League regime and the current one?
The first noticeable change is that I’ve become busier than before. In the context of the new Bangladesh, I see a significant difference: while we were engaging previously, it wasn’t as frequent or intense as it is now. Nowadays, it feels like we have a meeting every other day, we’re reaching out and actively engaging with the government. In both the short and long term, I believe this increased interaction is a positive sign for the bilateral relations between the two countries.
Do you feel there was any negligence from the Bangladesh government toward the Pakistan High Commission before August 5?
I wouldn’t describe it as negligence, as different governments have their own policies. We were less involved in their approach, which seemed to prioritize limited engagement with the High Commission of Pakistan in general. However, we maintained frequent and substantive interactions in international forums, such as the United Nations and other multilateral organizations, where we supported each other as needed.
We were never completely out of touch; wherever our interests aligned, we engaged. The key difference now is that more and more of our interests are converging.
Recently, cultural exchanges between Pakistan and Bangladesh, like Rahat Fateh Ali Khan’s packed Qawwali performance and frequent Qawwali concerts in educational institutions, have gained popularity. What are your thoughts?
Culture transcends boundaries; it cannot be stopped or restricted. People naturally enjoy and embrace elements of each other’s cultures, choosing what resonates with them and leaving aside what doesn’t. Qawwali and ghazals, for example, are deeply rooted in South Asian traditions, introduced by Sufis who came to the subcontinent from Central Asia. Unfortunately, these art forms were sidelined during certain past regimes. However, Pakistani artists have preserved and modernized them, blending traditional melodies with contemporary instruments to create new genres.
It’s no surprise that South Asians, especially those who understand the language, are drawn to and deeply appreciate these performances. This cultural exchange is not only natural but also a positive and enriching experience.
How will the improving Bangladesh-Pakistan relations and India’s growing tension with Bangladesh since Sheikh Hasina’s fall impact South Asia’s geopolitics?
I don’t think it’s very complicated. Countries develop their bilateral relations based on mutual interests, not at the expense of a third party. For example, in trade and economics, if Bangladesh finds it advantageous to import goods from India or Pakistan, it’s entirely Bangladesh’s choice. The decision should be guided by what makes the most business sense. If importing certain goods from India is beneficial, that’s fine, and Pakistan shouldn’t be concerned. Similarly, if Bangladesh and Pakistan identify areas of mutual benefit, it shouldn’t be an issue for India either.
Ultimately, the three countries should pursue their bilateral relations independently, without allowing them to harm or antagonize a third party. This approach fosters healthy competition, where each country focuses on maximizing mutual benefits rather than creating conflicts. If all three nations adhere to this philosophy, they can maintain constructive and independent relationships. In this way, we avoid conducting bilateral relations at the expense of others, which would ultimately benefit everyone involved.
With the new direct shipping route between Pakistan and Bangladesh and talks of a Dhaka-Islamabad direct flight, what potential do you see for boosting trade and economic ties?
Given the geographical distance between Pakistan and Bangladesh, a direct shipping line plays a crucial role in enhancing bilateral economic relations. For distant countries, sea routes are the most efficient and cost-effective way to transport bulk goods. The establishment of this direct sea route between Pakistan and Bangladesh marks a significant step forward in boosting trade ties.
Notably, the second ship, which arrived in the last week of December, carried more than double the weight of the first shipment, signaling growing momentum. Previously, shipments had to pass through third ports like Sri Lanka or Singapore, which was both time-consuming and costly, taking up to 40 days. Now, goods arrive in just 10 to 12 days, significantly reducing time and expenses.
This development benefits businesses, importers, and exporters alike by streamlining trade and making it more efficient. The direct shipping line is undoubtedly a game-changer for strengthening economic relations between the two nations.
Which specific goods do you think will see the most growth in trade between the two countries?
Commodities like rice, onions, potatoes, sugar, and wheat are expected to dominate in terms of quantity in the coming days. However, in terms of value, items like RMG (ready-made garment) inputs and manufactured goods, such as Pakistan’s well-known ceiling fans, could take precedence. Motorbikes may also become a significant export in the near future.
Additionally, inputs for cement manufacturing, such as dolomite and clinker, have already been part of recent shipments. Dolomite, essential for glass manufacturing, was included in the first ship’s cargo, as confirmed by a port authority report. In the future, we may also see the import of stones, given Bangladesh’s shortage and Pakistan’s abundant supply.
Since taking charge, Muhammad Yunus has been actively advocating for the revival of SAARC. Is Pakistan genuinely committed to supporting this effort?
As you know, SAARC was originally a Bangladeshi initiative — essentially, it’s like a baby of Bangladesh. So, it holds a special place in the heart of Dr. Muhammad Yunus, who is deeply committed to its revival. The entire SAARC region owes Bangladesh gratitude for this visionary idea.
SAARC’s charter and concept are remarkable, and if it were fully revived, its potential could mirror the evolution of the European Union. There’s no reason why SAARC couldn’t follow a similar trajectory, fostering regional integration and collaboration.
As for Pakistan, we fully support Muhammad Yunus’ efforts to rejuvenate SAARC. Whenever and wherever he seeks our assistance, we are committed to providing our full support to help realize this vision.
Then why hasn’t it happened yet? Is it due to the India-Pakistan bilateral relationship?
In my view, bilateral issues should not hinder a regional body; they should be addressed separately, independent of the multilateral process. For example, Pakistan and India have their own issues, which should be resolved bilaterally, without impacting the SAARC process. The process should continue without becoming hostage to bilateral disputes.
So, it is possible to separate the SAARC process from bilateral issues. The challenge is that while all the countries are interested, India is not fully on board and often introduces additional complexities. Otherwise, the rest of the countries in the region are ready to move forward.
Are there any prospects for defense cooperation or joint initiatives between Pakistan and Bangladesh in the near future?
Defense cooperation under any regime should not pose an issue.
As of now, we have good training exchanges between the Pakistani and Bangladeshi armed forces. Pakistani officers have been undergoing training in various institutions in Bangladesh for a long time. Similarly, Bangladeshi officers also participate in training programs in Pakistan, including mid-level and high-level training sessions. This exchange fosters mutual understanding and cooperation.
In the future, if Bangladesh expresses interest in further defense collaboration, we will certainly consider it.
Are you meeting with Bangladeshi political parties?
It is natural for any diplomat to interact with all political parties. We engage with them because, ultimately, these are the entities that will govern the country. As such, we regularly reach out and meet with them.
Many claim that Pakistan has a soft corner for Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami. Is that true?
The reality is that different political parties have their own philosophies and priorities. Some people also claim that Pakistan has a soft corner for the BNP, but the truth is more practical. When the interests of two countries align, cooperation naturally develops in areas like culture, politics, economics, and trade.
When bilateral relations thrive, it’s often perceived as favoritism toward the ruling party. However, this does not mean that Pakistan or its High Commission has a preference for any particular party. It’s simply a matter of which political party is in power at a given time. For example, before August 5, a different party was in power with which our interests didn’t align as much, so bilateral development was limited. It’s about shared interests, not favoritism.
Some believe that stronger relations between Bangladesh and Pakistan could increase the risk of terrorism in the region. What are your thoughts on this?
I’m not sure why but whenever people hear about Pakistan, their reactions are often negative. This is very unfortunate and largely the result of persistent propaganda over the years. Such narratives have been promoted day in and day out, creating misconceptions.
In light of the events of 1971, how do you view the apology issue and the differing perspectives of the people of Pakistan and Bangladesh?
The past is the past, and we don’t want to remain stuck there. We aim for a fresh start. As a result, both countries are discussing ways to address the issue, although no final decision has been made yet.
