Can Bangladesh and India turn a new leaf in 2025?
The July Uprising and its aftermath have tested the resilience of Bangladesh-India relations. As both nations grapple with new political realities, the future lies in mature leadership and visionary policies to navigate this turbulent phase
'Bangladesh is now leaderless because the mafia has risen and the government is weak' - Mamata Banerjee, the Chief Minister of Bengal, remarked on Bangladesh.
She also wanted India to urge the United Nations to send peacekeepers to Bangladesh to 'ensure the safety of minorities.'
This sounds ludicrous to us Bangladeshis, because last time we checked, Bangladesh has not descended into chaos and civil war, and apart from a few isolated cases, minorities are still safe. But if you go to X (formerly Twitter) or look at the Indian media, you will be flooded by the news of so-called 'Hindu genocide' or 'Hindu exodus', claiming Bangladesh has become a jihadist state like Syria. And Indian politicians, across the party line, are peddling disinformation across the world.
Now, it is no surprise that Bangladeshis are not happy with India backing a repressive regime in this country for 15 years. And so, understandably, anti-Indian sentiment is on the rise. However, this cannot be the way forward, and certainly there should be rapprochement between the two neighbours; after all, you cannot live with a hostile neighbour and rattle sabres all day long. It is bad for business for everyone.
Keep updated, follow The Business Standard's Google news channel
Over the years, the longstanding relationship between Bangladesh and India has witnessed significant ebbs and flows, rooted in historical and cultural issues, and geographical proximity. However, the events following the July Uprising in Bangladesh have brought about a seismic shift in bilateral ties.
The Awami League-India nexus: A relationship under scrutiny
India's historical affinity with the Awami League, particularly under Sheikh Hasina's leadership, has shaped much of the bilateral discourse.
"India has always kept a closer relationship with Awami League. And after the July Uprising, they have become alienated from the people of Bangladesh. And so, the people of Bangladesh have become displeased at India, thinking that Awami League was able to carry out atrocities under Indian blind patronage," said Dr Imtiaz Ahmed, a retired Professor of the Department of International Relations at the University of Dhaka.
And Hasina's personal relationship to Indian politicians played a big part in it.
"Sheikh Hasina has a personal connection to India, so much so that she stayed there before from 1975 to 1981. She herself has claimed that India can never forget what she has given them. So, India has a special relation to Sheikh Hasina and Awami League; and they exploited it to the maximum," said Dr Amena Mohsin, a professor of International Relations at the University of Dhaka.
Over Hasina's 15-year tenure, India enjoyed unparalleled access and influence in Bangladesh, ensuring security in its northeastern states, while benefiting from favourable trade and energy agreements, such as the Adani Power Deal. However, these arrangements fostered a perception of exploitation and asymmetry among Bangladesh's citizens.
"Now, even the ordinary citizens of Bangladesh are distrustful of India due to their interference into Bangladeshi domestic affairs," she said.
Such interference was at its height when the then Indian Foreign Secretary Sujatha Singh came to Dhaka in 2013 to convince H M Ershad to contest in the controversial 2014 National Parliament Election; which gave the otherwise one-party election a veneer of legitimacy. And Bangladesh never forgot that.
This alignment has not come without consequences. While India claims to seek a stable and friendly relationship with its neighbour, its actions have often contradicted this rhetoric.
According to Amena Mohsin, "India's refusal to engage equitably in treaty negotiations and its repeated interference in domestic politics have fostered widespread distrust among ordinary Bangladeshis." This sentiment was exacerbated by unequal agreements and India's silence on critical issues such as water sharing, leaving many in Bangladesh feeling sidelined.
Imtiaz Ahmed added, "The reason why India supported Awami League so blindly is because Awami League guaranteed the security of northeast India. In turn, Awami League, too, became too dependent on India. India failed to see the growing anti-Awami League sentiment in the country because of such dependence."
"Now, the tables have turned, and they have understood that being dependent on one party has not worked out for them. And they need to reorient their policies."
Sheikh Hasina's exile and its ripple effects
The dramatic removal of Sheikh Hasina from power and her subsequent exile to India symbolized a turning point. For India, hosting Hasina was a display of its unwavering loyalty to an ally, but it also complicated its diplomatic standing.
"The Hasina era is over," remarked Shafqat Munir, Senior Research Fellow at the Bangladesh Institute of Peace and Security Studies (BIPSS), emphasising the need for both nations to recalibrate their ties based on the evolving political landscape.
"A new chapter has to begin in the Indo-Bangladesh relationship, and therefore it is critical that we recast our ties between the two countries based on the new realities."
"Delhi needs to find a balanced diplomatic relationship with Bangladesh. India has only two ways to conduct diplomacy with its neighbours. Either it's antagonistic like that with Pakistan, or it's too dependent like that with Bhutan or Nepal. Even those countries are now opposing India. India should establish a relationship with the people of Bangladesh."
Dhaka's interim government has sought Hasina's extradition, a move laden with symbolism and pragmatic implications. While India's reluctance to honour this request reflects its political calculations, this stance has amplified anti-Indian sentiments in Bangladesh, where citizens increasingly associate India's support for Hasina with interference in domestic politics.
"India's protection of Sheikh Hasina undermines its claim of wanting a democratic and inclusive Bangladesh," said Touhid Hossain, an advisor to the interim government, in a statement. And Bangladesh has sent a formal request to India to extradite ousted Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina a week ago. Touhid Hossain said, "We have informed India about our request to bring her back for the judicial process."
However, India is not showing any sign of complying. And under the terms of extradition, they are not bound to send Hasina back. According to Article 6.1 of the Extradition Treaty, "Extradition may be refused if the offence of which it is requested is an offence of a political character."
Pinak Ranjan Chakravarty, former Indian high commissioner to Bangladesh, told VOA that when Hasina was sent to India by the military for her own safety, there were no legal cases against her. This would complicate extradition, he said, because it is a judicial process that requires solid evidence of a crime.
"Moreover, the bilateral extradition treaty has political exception clauses as well as clauses for fair treatment and safety. Unless these conditions are fulfilled, extradition could be denied," Chakravarty added.
Amena Mohsin thinks that the fate of Sheikh Hasina will be determined by her activities in Delhi. "What is more important is what Hasina is doing in Delhi and what sort of politics India wants to pursue regarding her."
Shafqat Munir is hopeful about extradition.
"Lately, we have seen that the relationship has somewhat improved after the Indian Foreign Secretary Mr. Vikram Misri's visit to Dhaka, as both sides had an opportunity to air their views and we hope that the relationship will continue to remain stable in the coming days. Bangladesh has since submitted a request to India for Sheikh Hasina's extradition and we certainly hope that request will be honoured."
Disinformation and media narratives: Fanning the flames
A significant catalyst in the deteriorating relationship has been the role of disinformation campaigns. Indian media's portrayal of Bangladesh as politically unstable and intolerant toward minorities has exacerbated tensions. "Unfortunately, Indian media has gone berserk over the issue," lamented Touhid Hossain, adviser to Bangladesh's interim government. These narratives have not only deepened mistrust but have also incited retaliatory rhetoric from Dhaka.
Bangladeshi media, in turn, has criticised India's reluctance to condemn inflammatory statements by Indian politicians.
Between August 5th and 13th, Rumour Scanner identified a surge in communal misinformation and fake news, with posts viewed over 15.4 million times. Their estimates suggest these false narratives reached audiences 10 to 12 times larger through other accounts and media outlets.
The investigation revealed that 72% of the accounts responsible for spreading these falsehoods were based in India, including mainstream media and influential individuals. This disinformation wave was so widespread that it transcended borders, with prominent figures from other countries amplifying these claims.
Shafqat Munir said, "The disinformation that we have seen emanating from sections of the Indian media has certainly not helped cast this relationship in a new light. It is very important that both sides understand one another very well. There needs to be dialogues and meetings held between officials at regular intervals so that the misgivings, misunderstandings, and other challenges can be cleared."
Agartala attack and border killings
The storming of Bangladesh's Deputy Consulate in Agartala epitomised the fragility of current ties. Bangladesh's Foreign Ministry condemned the attack as a violation of the Vienna Convention, demanding swift action from India. Border killings and unresolved disputes over water-sharing agreements, notably regarding the Teesta River, remain perennial irritants. "India's silence on these matters has been deafening," commented Amena Mohsin.
Border killing has not stopped, despite much protest. Moreover, the recent refusal by India to issue timely warnings during water releases has caused significant damage in Bangladesh, further fuelling resentment. "India's actions demonstrate an unwillingness to prioritise mutual benefit over unilateral advantage," said Imtiaz Ahmed.
He added, "Delhi needs to find a balanced diplomatic relationship with Bangladesh. India has only two ways to conduct diplomacy with its neighbours. Either it's antagonistic like that with Pakistan, or it's too dependent like that with Bhutan or Nepal. Even those countries are now opposing India. India should establish a relationship with the people of Bangladesh."
Shafqat Munir said, "What is required is pragmatic cooperation, respect for each other, and cooperation based on shared mutual interest."
Towards a new chapter in 2025
Despite the prevailing discord, opportunities abound for rapprochement. India's Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri's recent visit to Dhaka signalled a thaw, with both nations committing to dialogue on minority protection and democratic stability. However, these overtures must be followed by concrete actions rather than empty assurances. Bangladesh's interim government has made significant efforts to engage diplomatically, yet India's response remains half-hearted lip service at best.
The future of Bangladesh-India relations hinges on meaningful reengagement. Both nations must transition from personality-driven diplomacy to institutional cooperation. For India, this means moving beyond its entrenched relationship with the Awami League and engaging with a broader spectrum of political actors in Bangladesh. "India must stop relying on individual leaders and instead build ties with the Bangladeshi people," said Imtiaz Ahmed.
"Now, every country knows that they can't change their neighbours. Even more so when the relationship runs deep historically, culturally, and economically. Now, we need to salvage the relationship. I think the rapprochement has begun. Bangladesh has started it first, choosing the diplomatic route. The Indian foreign secretary has come to Bangladesh, and there are two important takeaways from it," he added.
"One is the protection of minorities, which indeed happened. Indian people have been deeply concerned by it. Another is that they want a democratic, stable, peaceful, and inclusive Bangladesh. They want a democratically elected government."
Resolving contentious issues such as water sharing and border security is paramount. Equitable treaties and transparent communication can mitigate recurring conflicts. "Without addressing these core issues, bilateral ties will remain strained," noted Amena Mohsin.
In addition, combating disinformation requires joint media forums and exchange programs to counteract divisive narratives.
"There needs to be dialogues and meetings held between officials at regular intervals so that the misgivings, misunderstandings, and other challenges can be cleared," remarked Shafqat Munir.
Enhancing people-to-people ties is another avenue for rebuilding trust. Normalising visa services and promoting cultural exchanges can reinforce grassroots goodwill.
Amena Mohsin calls for increased civil society interaction: "Our diplomatic activities and people-to-people contact should be increased. Being confrontational will not help anyone."
Furthermore, regional collaboration through platforms like Saarc could bolster mutual interests and regional stability.
The July Uprising and its aftermath have undoubtedly tested the resilience of Bangladesh-India relations. As both nations grapple with new political realities, the future lies in mature leadership and visionary policies to navigate this turbulent phase.
By addressing historical grievances, embracing mutual respect, and fostering inclusive dialogue, 2025 could mark the beginning of a more balanced and enduring partnership.
After the Battle of Waterloo, the Prussian general Blucher said, "May the pens of the diplomats not ruin again what the people have attained with such exertions." Let us hope this stays true for Bangladesh and India as well.
