During his recent visit to the US to represent India at the inauguration of President Donald Trump’s second term, Indian Foreign Minister Dr S Jaishankar held several significant meetings. These included talks with the newly appointed US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, National Security Advisor Michael Waltz, and the first post-inauguration gathering of the Quad Foreign Ministers.
In a press briefing at the Indian Embassy in Washington, Dr Jaishankar, in response to a journalist’s query, mentioned that “the Bangladesh issue” was briefly discussed during his talks with Rubio and Waltz. However, he did not elaborate further, leaving observers to wonder why Bangladesh featured in bilateral discussions between India and the US.
While discussions about US-India relations, Quad cooperation, and the Free and Open Indo-Pacific (FOIP) were expected, the inclusion of Bangladesh was both unusual and significant. This raises several pertinent questions. Did Bangladesh request India to brief the US government on its behalf? If not, what prompted India to raise Bangladesh in a bilateral context?
While discussing third countries in diplomatic dialogues is not unheard of, it’s considered rare and requires careful justification. This episode strongly suggests that Bangladesh has become a central factor in India’s foreign policy, one that is significant enough to merit discussion with the US.
But why now? Does India view Bangladesh through the same lens as it views China or Pakistan? What specific concerns does India have regarding its eastern neighbour? More importantly, why did it feel the need to involve the US instead of addressing the matter bilaterally with Dhaka? These actions point to a sense of unease in India’s Bangladesh policy, raising concerns about New Delhi’s diplomatic competence and strategic judgment.
India’s shifting stance toward Bangladesh
India has often claimed to share a “golden era” of bilateral relations with Bangladesh. Yet, its actions following the overthrow of Sheikh Hasina on August 5, 2024, tell a different story. Instead of extending a helping hand to its neighbour during a time of political transition, India has seemingly declared a psychological and media war against Bangladesh, portraying the country as unstable and antagonistic.
For nearly 16 years, Sheikh Hasina ruled Bangladesh with overt support from India, often at the expense of democratic principles. Her tenure was marred by four fraudulent elections, systematic erosion of institutions, and widespread human rights abuses, including extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearances, jailing of political opponents and critics, politicization of judiciary, administrations, police, and armed forces.
Under her regime, democracy in Bangladesh was completely destroyed, literally creating an authoritarian and one-party system. Allegations of corruption against Hasina and her associates are staggering, with an estimated $234 billion laundered abroad, leaving Bangladesh’s economy on the brink of collapse.
The people of Bangladesh, pushed to the edge by years of misrule, rose in a mass uprising to overthrow Hasina’s government. The revolution was not merely a political movement, but a reflection of the collective anguish and aspirations of a nation that had suffered under autocratic rule for too long.
Yet, India’s response to these developments has been deeply disappointing. Instead of respecting the will of the Bangladeshi people, India provided refuge to Sheikh Hasina and supported her hate-filled campaign against the interim government led by Dr Muhammad Yunus and conspired to destabilize the country.
These actions point to a sense of unease in India’s Bangladesh policy, raising concerns about New Delhi’s diplomatic competence and strategic judgment
A question of priorities
India’s aggressive posture toward Bangladesh only raises further questions. Why has India chosen to escalate tensions instead of fostering dialogue? What specific threats does it perceive from a transition of power in Bangladesh? Does India view the interim government as a security risk, or is it simply unwilling to accept a leadership change in Dhaka that it did not control?
India’s decision to discuss Bangladesh with the US also raises questions about its intent. Does it seek US approval for unilateral actions against Bangladesh? Does it view the new leadership in Dhaka as hostile to Indian interests? Such actions only serve to alienate Bangladesh and diminish India’s credibility as a regional leader.
If India truly considers Bangladesh a close and friendly neighbour, it must demonstrate this through actions, not rhetoric. A true friend does not interfere in its neighbour’s internal affairs, nor does it launch malicious propaganda campaigns. Instead, it seeks to build trust and support its neighbour during times of crisis.
Propaganda and double standards
One of the key narratives India has been pushing is the alleged persecution of minorities in Bangladesh. While it is true that some incidents of violence against Hindu communities occurred following Hasina’s ouster, these were isolated political reprisals rather than systematic persecution.
India, however, has used these incidents to portray Bangladesh as a country hostile to minorities, conveniently ignoring its own track record. International human rights organizations have repeatedly highlighted the systemic persecution of Muslims and other minorities in India, making it one of the world’s largest violators of minority rights. By pointing fingers at Bangladesh, India seeks to deflect attention from its own failures.
The disinformation campaign against Dr Yunus is another example of India’s double standards. Accusations of him being aligned with Islamist ideology or Jamaat-e-Islami are baseless and absurd. Dr Yunus’s life work has been dedicated to secularism and human development. Through Grameen Bank, he has empowered millions of women, including in India. Despite India’s attempts to tarnish his image, Dr Yunus continues to enjoy widespread respect and support globally. His recent visit to the World Economic Forum in Davos is a glowing testament.
A call for pragmatism
India’s current approach to Bangladesh reflects insecurity and shortsightedness. By involving the US, it appears to be seeking external validation for its Bangladesh policy, a move that is both unnecessary and counterproductive. The US has its own robust mechanisms to assess developments in Bangladesh and does not need India’s input to shape its policies.
What India needs is a pragmatic and constructive approach towards Bangladesh. Both countries share deep historical, cultural, and economic ties that should serve as the foundation for mutual cooperation. Hostile policies and aggressive propaganda will only deepen the divide, harming the interests of both nations.
As the larger neighbour, the onus lies on India to reset the relationship. It must respect the will of the Bangladeshi people and engage with the interim government in good faith. A stable and prosperous Bangladesh is not only in the interest of its people but also crucial for regional peace and security.
India must abandon its adversarial stance and recognize that the path to lasting cooperation lies in dialogue, mutual respect, and a shared vision for the future.
Ashraf Ud Doula is a freedom fighter, a retired Secretary, and served as Ambassador to several countries
dhaka tribune
