Time to forge a strategic consensus on national interests
The mass uprising of 2024 marked a pivotal moment for us to forge a lasting consensus on national interest and security. Yet, this imperative remains marginal in public discourse, despite its foundational importance in today's shifting global and regional contexts. Throughout history, nations that have charted sustainable paths have done so by cultivating a strategic culture. In its absence, stability and developmental progress risk faltering.
Bangladesh has already missed at least two critical junctures to build such a consensus. The first came after the 1971 Liberation War, when the powerful unity of the time could have been harnessed to establish a robust national security framework grounded in the principles of sovereignty, equality, and justice. The second opportunity came in 1991, after the fall of dictatorship, when this crucial task was left unfinished despite the restoration of democracy.
For all latest news, follow The Daily Star's Google News channel. Now, a third window of opportunity has opened. It is incumbent upon our political parties to embrace and work on this vital agenda, grounding their approach in the principles of strategic autonomy (the capacity to make independent decisions) and developmental deterrence (the assurance of peace, stability, and rights) as the bedrock of progress.
The July Charter, therefore, must incorporate a clear commitment that, following the elections, all political parties will work collaboratively towards establishing a national consensus on our core interests, national security policies, and the institutional frameworks needed to uphold them—including the formation of a National Security Council. Consensus on national interests cannot remain abstract; it must be institutionalised through a strategic culture.
Strategic culture
Strategic cultures are not born of inertia. They are forged in moments of crisis, conflict, or transformation. After its 1962 defeat to China, India reorganised its defence posture, moving beyond a purely Gandhian ethos to a deterrence-based policy grounded in self-reliance. China, over decades, has defined its core interests with clarity: supremacy of the Communist Party, territorial integrity, sovereignty, and developmental continuity.
Across the Atlantic, the United States has consistently framed its national interest through strategic doctrines—from Monroe to Truman—tying economic prosperity to geopolitical dominance. After the trauma of 1940, France reasserted its sovereignty under de Gaulle, withdrawing from NATO's military command in 1966 while acquiring independent nuclear capability.
Post-Meiji Japan prioritised industrialisation and national consolidation. Vietnam, emerging from colonialism and war, placed reunification and socialist reconstruction at the heart of its strategic identity. Indonesia rooted its national security in the Pancasila, an indigenous philosophy integrating moral and ideological values.
These cases affirm that it is often moments of rupture that compel nations to define their interests, and that strategic culture must extend far beyond military doctrine, encompassing education, diplomacy, and development planning.
Strategic autonomy and developmental deterrence
For Bangladesh, the path forward lies in building a national security architecture grounded in strategic autonomy and developmental deterrence. This is not deterrence in the classical, militaristic sense, but a strategic doctrine that ensures stable conditions for unimpeded development. Singapore's modernisation of its defence capabilities—not for aggression, but to safeguard its economic trajectory—offers a telling example.
Bangladesh must capitalise on its demographic dividend and strategic location in the Bay of Bengal. A peaceful and prosperous Bay—the largest in the world—should be central to its foreign policy vision, while defence policy must ensure credible deterrence. Amid Indo-Pacific rivalries and regional instability (e.g. conflicts in Myanmar), strategic autonomy will help Bangladesh navigate such complexities without entanglement.
Four scenarios of engagement
Imagine four scenarios of engagement: aligning with a neighbour; leaning towards a superpower; pursuing a balancing act; and adopting an independent, mutually inclusive strategy.
The first—aligning with a neighbour—may bring tactical advantages but risks subordinating Bangladesh's long-term interests to the strategic calculus of a more powerful partner. Such an approach can quickly erode autonomy, especially if regional priorities shift or diverge.
The second—leaning towards a superpower—offers the allure of economic or security dividends but can entangle Bangladesh in geopolitical rivalries, compromising its ability to pursue independent goals.
The third—a balancing act—seeks to navigate among competing powers to extract benefits while avoiding full alignment. Though seemingly pragmatic, this approach requires agile and nuanced diplomacy. Without a coherent domestic strategic framework, it risks becoming reactive and inconsistent.
The fourth and most sustainable path is an independent, mutually inclusive strategy, one anchored in national priorities and the aspirations of the people. This approach fosters equitable, respectful relations with all nations while upholding sovereignty in domestic and foreign policies. It demands strong political consensus, normative legitimacy rooted in the ideals of the Liberation War, and a clearly articulated vision of Bangladesh's role in the world. A coherent framework could guide our actions in multilateral forums, trade negotiations, climate diplomacy, and global development partnerships, thus projecting a distinctive strategic identity.
Institutionalising national security
The July uprising reaffirmed the nation's agency, and to honour this moment, all political parties must commit, through the July Charter, to defining and institutionalising national interests. By doing so, Bangladesh can reconcile its past, stabilise its present, and secure its future.
History offers a compelling lesson: nations that clearly define their fundamental interests are more likely to survive and thrive; those that effectively institutionalise these interests are better positioned for sustained prosperity and global influence. A cohesive and inclusive national security framework, built on consensus and a clear understanding of our strategic destiny, is undoubtedly the way forward for Bangladesh.
Dr Rashed Al Mahmud Titumir is professor in the Department of Development Studies at the University of Dhaka.
Views expressed in this article are the author's own.
Follow The Daily Star Opinion on Facebook for the latest opinions, commentaries and analyses by experts and professionals. To contribute your article or letter to The Daily Star Opinion, see our guidelines for submission.
Comments