The Bangladesh wake-up call: Revisiting India’s Neighbourhood First Policy
The July Uprising of 2024 and the fall of Sheikh Hasina, India's long-time ally, have dramatically shifted the political dynamics in Bangladesh. Hasina and her affiliates' escape to India, escalating border tensions, and misinformation by India's media and political elites have raised critical questions about India's neighbourhood-first policy.
The transition has caught India off guard, revealing a lack of strategic foresight. Her increasingly authoritarian rule and perceived alignment with India fuelled strong anti-Indian sentiment in Bangladesh.
The case of Bangladesh is not the first instance of India's neighbourhood policy being tested; similar challenges have arisen in the past. In Nepal and Maldives, Indian policy has failed and anti-India sentiment has risen, showcasing the policy shortcomings. The question may arise: Which way is the Indian diplomatic policy going?
For example, India's relations with Nepal have been strained by a series of gaffes, most notably the 2015 economic blockade. This action, widely perceived as India-backed, sparked intense anti-Indian sentiment and pushed Nepal closer to China.
Keep updated, follow The Business Standard's Google news channel
Similarly, India's bilateral relationship with the Maldives has deteriorated following President Mohamed Muizzu's landslide victory in the April 2024 parliamentary elections. Muizzu's "India Out" campaign resulted in an order to withdraw Indian military personnel.
India's latest diplomatic setback, marked by allegations of involvement in a plot to overthrow the Maldivian president, shows how its interventionist approach has undermined the core tenets of its Neighbourhood First policy.
The July Uprising: Bangladesh's democratic struggle
The student-led movement in 2024, which culminated in the ousting of Bangladesh's longest-serving Prime Minister, Sheikh Hasina, represents a defining moment in the country's long struggle for democracy. Initially triggered by the reinstatement of a controversial civil service job quota, the movement's roots lie in decades of disenfranchisement, suppression of dissent, and erosion of civil and political rights under Hasina's regime.
Over her 15 years in power, Sheikh Hasina systematically dismantled vital democratic institutions, leaving an entire generation politically orphaned—the leading force behind her downfall.
Under her watch, Bangladesh held three controversial elections—in 2014, 2018, and 2024—each marred by massive allegations of rigging, voter suppression, and intimidation. The opposition boycotted two of these elections, and the ruling Awami League (AL) secured landslide victories. These non-participatory elections painfully created a lost generation of Bangladeshis, many of whom reached voting age without ever exercising their voting rights.
The disenfranchisement extended beyond the ballot box. Hasina's regime enforced draconian measures to silence dissents, mainly targeting political opponents and pro-democracy and human rights activists. Thousands of political opponents, activists, journalists, and ordinary citizens were detained or forcibly disappeared.
The July Massacre of 2024, where hundreds of protesters—predominantly students—were killed during demonstrations against the quota system, became the ultimate symbol of the regime's brutality. Reports suggest that over 1,000 people have been killed, with mass graves uncovered in Dhaka.
India's misreading of the July Uprising
While the student-led protests quickly evolved into a broader movement for democracy and justice, reflecting the deep-seated frustration over the backsliding of democratic rights, India failed to grasp it, labelling it as an Islamist takeover.
What made this movement distinctive was its inclusivity—it brought together protesters from all walks of life. Students, professionals, women, the working class, and ordinary citizens joined hands to demand an end to authoritarian rule. Although some Islamist groups attempted to capitalise on the political vacuum, it is imperative to resist simplistic narratives that frame the pro-democracy movement as an Islamist takeover, as India claimed.
Such myopic labeling misrepresents the movement's diversity and undermines the legitimate democratic aspirations of the youth leading it. It represented a cross-section of society, united by shared grievances against systemic repression and a common vision for a more democratic future.
However, the portrayal of the July uprising in some of the Indian media has often been reductive and damaging. Framing the protests through the lens of communal politics or as a threat to regional stability has not only misrepresented the greater democratic aspiration but also risked exacerbating communal tensions across borders.
Such narratives, rather driven by domestic political agendas in India, have further strained India-Bangladesh relations. This is particularly evident in the rise of right-wing Hindutva politics in Indian states bordering Bangladesh. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and its affiliates have increasingly used the persecution of Hindus in Bangladesh as a political tool to mobilise their base, especially in states like West Bengal and Assam.
At the diplomatic level, India's envoy's meeting with Sheikh Hasina on 31 July, just days before her ouster, revealed a major diplomatic misstep. While Hasina characterised the movement as "terrorist attacks" aimed at creating "Sri Lanka-like mayhem," the reality was far more complex—the movement born from years of autocratic rule and economic grievances.
The Indian envoy welcomed "the steady restoration of normalcy" despite ongoing police brutality that had already claimed hundreds of lives. This diplomatic stance, prioritising strategic alliance over democratic aspiration, eventually proved costly as India failed to note the depth and legitimacy of the democratic aspirations that drove thousands of young Bangladeshis to risk their lives.
The consequences of this miscalculation became evident when India found itself in strained bilateral relations with Bangladesh, having alienated both the opposition and civil society through its unconditional support for Hasina's authoritarian regime.
Strategic blindspot: The fallout of India's Bangladesh policy
India's role in Bangladesh's political trajectory has been deeply contentious, epitomising the high price of its politics of patronage in Bangladesh. Over the years, New Delhi has closely aligned itself with Sheikh Hasina's government, viewing her as a reliable ally for India's security and strategic interests.
However, this unwavering support came at a cost, marking the beginning of a pattern of patronage that would eventually backfire. In 2014, Indian officials reportedly pressured opposition parties to participate in a controversial and rigged election. In subsequent dummy elections, including the 2018 and 2024 polls, India continued to back Hasina despite widespread allegations of vote rigging and repression.
India's rather narrow focus on its relationship with Hasina while ignoring broader democratic aspirations has proven to be a strategic miscalculation. The "India Out" campaign—a movement calling for reduced dependence on India—has gained traction among ordinary citizens, directly responding to years of perceived patronage politics.
This growing resentment poses long-term risks for India's bilateral relationship with Bangladesh.
As anti-India sentiment deepens, China has quickly filled the void. Beijing promptly recalibrated its Bangladesh policy following the July uprising, demonstrating strategic flexibility. China issued an official statement expressing its readiness to strengthen bilateral ties: "We want to further develop the 'all-round strategic partnership' with the new government in Bangladesh."
This carefully articulated statement underscores China's diplomatic agility and intent to maintain a robust presence in South Asian geopolitics, regardless of domestic political shifts. On the other hand, despite officially congratulating the new interim government, India's response to Bangladesh's political transition has been ambiguous and fraught with diplomatic challenges, further highlighting the complications of its patronage-based approach.
Hasina's presence on Indian soil is increasingly viewed as destabilising Bangladesh particularly her engagement in Bangladeshi politics through teleconferences, straining relations with Bangladesh's new administration.
India finds itself in a precarious diplomatic position, as no other country has offered Hasina political asylum, ultimately turning it into a diplomatic quagmire.
India's Bangladesh wake-up call
The Bangladesh experience offers important lessons for India's broader neighbourhood policy. The July Uprising presents India with an opportunity for introspection and a much-needed course correction. A failure to acknowledge shifting political dynamics risks undermining India's credibility as an important regional partner.
India must fundamentally rethink its approach to its neighbours by prioritising support for democratic institutions over specific regimes and engaging with a diverse range of political and social stakeholders. The success hinges on its ability to adapt to evolving political realities and foster partnerships grounded in mutual respect and democratic values.
A foreign policy rooted in inclusivity, democratic principles, mutual respect, and autonomy will not only strengthen India's ties with its neighbours but also contribute to a more stable and prosperous South Asia. The time for recalibration is now—India's future as a trusted regional partner depends on it.
Dr Anas Ansar is a Senior Researcher in the Asia program, at the Arnold-Bergstraesser-Institut (ABI), University of Freiburg, Germany.
Abu Faisal Md Khaled is a Research Associate at the Institute for International Law of Peace and Armed Conflict (IFHV) at Ruhr University Bochum, Germany.
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and views of The Business Standard
