Ever since the signing of the West phalian Treaties of 1648, scholars have widely debated on what forms the basis of a modern nation or a nation-state. Comprising three distinct terms ‘nation’, ‘state’ and ‘nation-state’ with each term havingits own qualifying characteristics, analysis of whether a ‘nation’ qualifies as a ‘nation-state’ is an exciting multi-dimensional study of history, culture, politics, international-relations and their interplay in a complex geopolitical environment. 

Interestingly, amongst several contemporary definitions, the one defined by the Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin in his 1913 work Marxism and the National Question stands out wherein he defines a nation as a“historically constituted, stable community of people, formed on the basis of a common language, territory, economic life, and psychological make-up manifested in a common culture”. With the exception of government and capacity to enter into relations with other states, which are key constituents of what comprises a ‘State’ as per the 1933 Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States, Stalin’s idea of a ‘nation’ vividly describes the characteristics of present-day nation states, particularly those in the Asia-Pacific region.

While modern European countries are traditionally looked upon as model nation-states, they do not form an ideal case study for analysing their existence in their present form, particularly due to the fact that being the perpetrators of colonial rule, they have largely remained secure from the societal and cultural distortions caused by colonialism. 

Parallelly, the present nation-states of the larger Asia-Pacific region, and specifically in the Indian-subcontinent, with the exception of Pakistan, offer insights into their evolution into a modern-nation state combating the shackles of colonialism and at times extreme religious subjugation and economic disparities. Perhaps the best example is that of Bangladesh, a nation-state which has successfully triumphed colonial and religious persecution while maintaining its core ‘Bangla’ identity over a period spanning several centuries.

Historically, the ‘Bangla’ people have existed as a homogenous group from 8th – 5th century BC in the present region of what is now known as Bangladesh. However, the common nomenclature ‘Bangalah’ came into existence during the rule of Sultan Shamsuddin Ilyas Shah, who founded the Sultanate of Bengal in the 14th century AD. With several centuries of attempted cultural distortions and annexations, perhaps the darkest chapter in the history of the Bangla people was between 1947 to 1971 wherein the country was forced into political capitulation, cultural restrictions and religious radicalisation through overt military force by the dominant Punjabi-speaking Islamists of the erstwhile West Pakistan (present day Pakistan) rulers. 

As early as November 1947, as the population battled with vagaries of partition, the West Pakistan dominated polity imposed Urdu as the sole official language of Pakistan, marginalising the almost 56 percent Bengali speaking population of the erstwhile West and East Pakistan. The Urdu imposition marked the beginning of the Bengali Language Movement which unified the Bengalis into demanding an equal status for their mother-tongue, a demand finally consented to on 21 February 1956 (a day celebrated today as the UNESCO International Mother Language Day) by the West Pakistan government. 

This quest for preservation of Bengali language, an important attribute of a nation as per Stalin, set the stage for the Bangladesh Liberation movement which ultimately resulted in emergence of independent Bangladesh in 1971. The intertwining period was off-course marked by widespread economic and political discrimination of the Bengali people and the barbaric genocide unleashed by military oppressors such as Gen Tikka Khan. However, with strong ethnic and cultural bonds, the Bengali people did emerge victorious from the clutches of Islamic fundamentalists of the West Pakistan.

Since then, the idea of Bangla-desh has so far resonated in all sectors of what constitute the core of the gross National Power. Economically, Bangladesh has emerged as the second-largest economy in South Asia in terms of nominal GDP, trumpeting its erstwhile ruler Pakistan by a significant margin, and has been giving extremely tough competition to the dominant regional power India in sectors such as garment manufacturing and agriculture processing. In terms of per capita GDP, Bangladesh maintains fourth position in the region, behind Maldives, Bhutan and Sri Lanka, which when considered with the large variance in population with the top three countries, is a remarkable feat. Similarly, since its separation from Pakistan, the country has shown resilience in human development index and has steadily maintained above India, Pakistan, Myanmar and Nepal.

With all metrices indicating an overall optimal environment in its march towards a fully developed and prosperous nation, the recent overtures from the proxy military rulers of Pakistan towards Bangladesh must be viewed with caution by the Bengali people. Keeping in mind their previous association with the rogue nation driven by radical zealots, it would serve Bengalis well to maintain a ‘strategic distance’ from a country which has nothing much to offer considering its self-depilating status in all conceivable sectors of growth. 

With an economy running on world-aid and often financed by terror and drug money, Pakistan emerges as the last resort for any country looking for a credible ally in the Asia-Pacific region. In sharp contrast to the Bengali quest and belief in the ideas of freedom, justice and equality, a turn towards Islamic imposition enforced from Pakistan will jeopardise the efforts and sacrifice of over three-generations of Bengali citizens, who had the foresight to reject these ideas as hindrance to the growth of their nation. 

As the current trajectory of  Afghan – Pak relations demonstrate, any association with Pakistan, either diplomatically or militarily, even on terms of pure religious commonality, will only lead to a systemic rumination of the Bengali identity eventually culminating in a total collapse of the Bengali nation-state. Bangladesh thus must take cue from Stalin, and aim towards maintaining its nationhood and preserving the idea of Bangla-desh, amidst the unwarranted chaos likely to be unleashed from its erstwhile Western ruler, should it choose to ignore the ominous signs.

This image is taken from Al Jazeera.