Bay of Bengal: U.S. Strategic Interests, Bangladesh’s Political Changes, and the Global Pattern of Intervention

The Bay of Bengal has become a critical focus for U.S. geopolitical strategy, especially in its efforts to counterbalance China’s growing influence in the Indo-Pacific region. Bangladesh, with its strategic location along the Bay, has emerged as a crucial partner for the U.S. in securing trade routes, regional security, and military presence. However, recent political changes in Bangladesh, alongside former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina’s claims of U.S. involvement in her removal from power, have brought attention to the broader pattern of U.S. intervention in foreign governments.

Sheikh Hasina’s Claims: U.S. Involvement in Her Ouster

Sheikh Hasina, who resigned in August 2024 amid protests and political unrest, has accused the U.S. of playing a direct role in orchestrating her removal. According to her, the U.S. pressured her government to cede control of Saint Martin’s Island, located in the Bay of Bengal, for the establishment of a military base. She claimed that refusing to surrender the island’s sovereignty contributed to her ouster. While the U.S. has denied these allegations, Hasina's accusations have intensified speculation about U.S. intervention in the domestic politics of Bangladesh.

U.S. Involvement in Global Government Overthrows

The claim that the U.S. might have been involved in a regime change in Bangladesh is not isolated. There is a long history of U.S. involvement in the removal of foreign governments when its strategic or economic interests were at stake. Some notable examples include:

1. Iran (1953): The U.S. and U.K. orchestrated a coup to overthrow Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh after he nationalized Iran's oil industry, which threatened Western economic interests.
2. Chile (1973): The U.S. backed a military coup that led to the ousting of President Salvador Allende, resulting in General Augusto Pinochet's dictatorship.
3. Libya (2011): The U.S. and NATO allies intervened militarily in Libya, resulting in the overthrow and eventual death of Muammar Gaddafi. Initially framed as a humanitarian intervention to prevent a massacre, the intervention quickly shifted to regime change. Gaddafi’s fall plunged Libya into ongoing civil conflict, with competing factions vying for control and a fragile central government unable to maintain stability.
4. Guatemala (1954): The CIA played a central role in the coup that ousted President Jacobo Árbenz, primarily due to his land reforms that threatened U.S. corporate interests.

These examples highlight a pattern of U.S. involvement where regime change was used as a tool to protect or expand American influence, often under the guise of promoting democracy or human rights.

Human Rights and U.S. Foreign Policy: Selective Engagement

While the U.S. frequently emphasizes human rights in its foreign policy, critics argue that it is often selective in its approach. One prominent example is the U.S.'s stance on Palestine. For decades, Israel's military actions in the Palestinian territories have drawn international condemnation, with accusations of human rights violations. However, the U.S. has consistently supported Israel both diplomatically and militarily, often defending its actions at the United Nations and other global forums.

In contrast, the U.S. has been more vocal about human rights abuses in countries like Iran, Venezuela, and China, raising questions about the consistency of its policies. The selective application of human rights standards has led many to argue that U.S. foreign policy is driven more by strategic interests than by a genuine commitment to human rights.

Political Transition in Bangladesh and U.S. Relations

Following Sheikh Hasina’s resignation, Nobel laureate Dr. Muhammad Yunus leads an interim government tasked with stabilizing Bangladesh and preparing for future elections. This political transition has created uncertainties in U.S.-Bangladesh relations, particularly as the new government must navigate complex dynamics between China and the U.S.

Bangladesh remains a key component of U.S. strategy in the Indo-Pacific, especially in countering China’s expanding influence in South Asia. However, Hasina’s allegations and the broader history of U.S. involvement in regime changes complicate this relationship. The U.S. will need to carefully balance its strategic interests with its support for Bangladesh’s political stability and democratic governance.

Conclusion

The Bay of Bengal’s strategic significance makes Bangladesh a critical player in the Indo-Pacific region. The political changes in Bangladesh, along with Sheikh Hasina’s claims of U.S. involvement, underscore the complexities of global power dynamics. With a history of intervention in foreign governments, as seen in places like Iran, Chile, and Libya, the U.S.'s actions in Bangladesh invite further scrutiny. At the same time, its selective approach to human rights, particularly regarding Palestine, raises important questions about the consistency of U.S. foreign policy. As Bangladesh transitions politically, the U.S. will likely seek to maintain its influence while supporting the country’s democratic process.