A certain uniqueness in the present situation, with India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka abstaining from voting in the recent Russia-bashing UNGA session, has appealed even to common citizens. For instance, a typical comment heard in routine coffee house-style informal chats in Kolkata was that after 1947, this was probably the first time that the undivided India had spoken out in one voice on a major issue.

Prominent media analysts in Bangladesh see this as an unexpected political congruence that Western policymakers in London, Brussels and Washington would do well to take note of.

True, Nepal has blamed Russia as the aggressor and opposed the recent Russian recognition of the disputed Lugansk and Donetsk territories. The decision of Bhutan to support the West also comes as a surprise. However, it can also be argued that in the larger South Asian context, these are peripheral reactions. There have also been instances of Nepali-origin soldiers not always being aligned with India’s freedom struggle, whether in 1857 or in 1919.

As one Bangladeshi analyst said recently on the electronic media, “Their (the people of the three countries) prolonged experience of past colonial exploitation has been a major reason why south Asian leaders view the present conflict in Ukraine as a face-off between the advanced white peoples. Together, our leaders speak for over 1600 million people in the world, far more than there are in the EU or the US. Post 1947, the West has behaved even worse in Asia and Africa. Political developments whether in Viet Nam, Pakistan, Afghanistan or Iraq, have exposed the woeful inadequacies involved in the pursuit of Western policies in the name of achieving political stability and economic development in volatile parts of the world.

Explaining the South Asian response in recent TV panel discussions, Bangladeshi commentators refer to the spectacular US policy failures in Viet Nam, Iraq and the ignominious American retreat from Afghanistan in recent memory. During most West-sponsored interventions ostensibly to achieve a better life and greater liberties for the common people in all these countries, widespread devastation and utter misery for the hapless masses invariably followed.

No wonder, the ‘West knows best’ slogan does not work with most people these days, never mind the deafening artificial clamour of the so-called mainstream media that unquestionably supports every move made by the almighty military industrial complex. In Iraq and Libya, to give only two examples, they alleged that the US and EU countries first attacked them on a false pretext and proceeded to bomb them back to the Stone Age.

Other analysts said that for local political parties or politicians in South Asia, accepting substantial aid/help from Western countries was always fraught with major risks. When the US or European leaders failed to win a prolonged war on the ground, they dumped their local backers and supporters unceremoniously, as they withdrew their troops.

The fate of leaders in South Viet Nam in 1975 , or Gen Zia-ul-Haque in Pakistan, the recent triumphant return to power in Kabul of the undefeated Taliban ,the failure to prevent the break- up of Pakistan — were all spectacular examples of the sad decline of Western military power. ‘Might is NOT always right, thank god,’ said one participant during a recent chat show.

In contrast, the Russians have fared somewhat better in their interventions in the region. They stood firmly by India and the emergent republic of Bangladesh during the early seventies. Even in their retreat from Afghanistan, Mr Najibullah, the political progeny they left behind, continued ruling for four years before the Taliban killed him during a violent revolt.

Dhaka-based commentators suggest that these days, the West Anglosphere consisting of countries like Canada or Australia that unfailingly follow the US and the UK, appears none too keen about achieving an eventual victory over the parties or forces it fights with a great deal of fanfare. Examples: Viet Nam and Afghanistan. By now it is common knowledge all over the world that so long as the domestic political commitments are met, especially during election times in the US, and humongous orders for hi-tech planes, missile systems, tanks arms and ammunition are placed with major US producers, the eventual outcome of the struggle for freedom and democracy elsewhere hardly matters. The financial demands of the American deep state, its military-industrial establishment, must be always met at all costs.

It is not as though there are no pro-West liberals/thinkers in Bangladesh as there are in India. Influential opinion-building lobbies, think- tanks and academicians describe how life has become freer and easier for some people in Iraq now that former President Saddam Hussain has been over thrown. Ditto after the fall of Muammar Gaddafi in Libya.

What such observers gloss over is the stark impoverishment and chaos that are now part of life especially in Libya and to an extent in Iraq as well. Both countries have lost their earlier eminence as leading oil/gas producing states. While most of supply from Iraq goes West, the situation is more chaotic in Libya, the country being unofficially divided and run by various warring factions backed by the EU countries, the US and Russia.

As for Nepal not aligning with its three larger regional neighbours on the Ukraine issue, reasons of economy as well as national security could have played a big role. Whether relating to the continuing recruitment of Gorkha troops by the UK, as well as the demand for higher pensions and other benefits for retired Nepalis who have served the British for years, Kathmandu cannot afford to ignore Western sentiments. As for receiving major infrastructure-building help and expertise from China, a section of Nepalis are upset with what they see as efforts at area domination and systematic land encroachment especially in pockets close to the international border, made by a section of Chinese officials and their employees. There have been several anti-Chinese demonstrations in Nepal on such issues of late.

Naturally, the only effective support against China as far as Nepal is concerned can come from the West during major crises. This is not to suggest that all is well between Washington and Kathmandu; far from it. (IPA Service)