India’s Failed Diplomacy and Bangladesh’s Changed Reality

India had a major expectation that Bangladesh’s ousted leadership might quickly return to the country and reclaim its political position. With that expectation unfulfilled, Delhi’s diplomatic calculations have also become complicated. The big question now is how effective efforts to return to the old reality will be, ignoring the political position of the people of Bangladesh, the emergence of new leadership, and changed international relations.

The recent political change in Bangladesh is not just an internal shift of power, but also has an impact on regional geopolitics. Dhaka’s relations with various countries are expanding anew. As Bangladesh’s contacts and cooperation with various powers, including China, Pakistan, Turkey, and the United States, increase, India’s scope to maintain its sole influence has also become more limited than before.

On the other hand, for the people of Bangladesh, the July movement and subsequent political change have given birth to a new reality. Among the young generation associated with the movement, the question of national interest, sovereignty and balance in foreign policy has become more important. Therefore, it will not be easy to re-establish any old political equation by bypassing the political aspirations of the people of Bangladesh.

A section of India’s media and various propaganda outlets are trying to interpret Bangladesh’s recent changes in their own way. But due to the spread of social media and alternative information flows, the impact of one-sided propaganda is not what it used to be. Bangladesh’s young generation is now receiving information from various international sources and forming its own political assessments.

In the context of India-Bangladesh relations, several other issues are becoming important.

First, in economic relations, Bangladesh’s tendency to develop alternative markets and supply systems is increasing. In areas where dependence on India was greater in the past, Bangladesh is gradually looking to other sources.

Second, a new reality has also emerged over how effective the old framework of security and intelligence cooperation between the two countries will remain.

Third, Bangladesh’s geostrategic importance to the security and connectivity of India’s northeastern states remains as before. Therefore, a stable and mutually respectful relationship with Bangladesh is also extremely important for India.

Fourth, the fear of losing the Bangladesh market is economically significant for India. India has extensive business interests in this market of nearly 170 million people. So if political tensions become prolonged, both countries will have to bear the economic consequences.

Fifth, Bangladesh’s growing economic and infrastructure cooperation with China is further complicating India’s strategic calculations. If Bangladesh builds multifaceted partnerships in various areas, including the Teesta project, river management, and communication infrastructure, the scope for excessive dependence on one country will diminish.

Myanmar’s issue is also important here. Although Bangladesh-Myanmar relations have passed through various complexities, the equation of engagement and interests with that country is also changing in the regional reality. As a result, establishing the influence of any single power over Bangladesh is becoming increasingly difficult.

India’s position around ousted former prime minister Sheikh Hasina is also an important issue in bilateral relations. However, this should ultimately be determined not through political but through legal and diplomatic processes. The extradition agreement, judicial decisions, and positions of the concerned states will determine the future situation. The expectation of the people of Bangladesh is that any allegations and judicial matters should be resolved through proper legal processes.

Perhaps this is India’s biggest challenge. Bangladesh is no longer where it was. A politically conscious new generation has emerged, unwilling to accept any country’s sole influence in foreign policy. To make India’s relationship with Bangladesh sustainable, priority must therefore be given to equality, mutual interests and respect for sovereignty, rather than old strategies of exerting influence.

Neither anti-India nor pro-India sentiment among the people of Bangladesh can be explained in a one-dimensional way. There are historical, cultural and economic relations between the people of the two countries. At the same time, the people of Bangladesh have their own expectations regarding political decisions and foreign policy. An interest in Indian culture or markets does not mean support for India’s political positions.

Finally, one thing is clear. The future of Bangladesh will be determined by its people. No foreign power’s preference, pressure or political equation can control the aspirations of the people of Bangladesh for long.

It is time for India too to accept the reality. Instead of trying to influence Bangladesh, building a partnership of equal standing with Bangladesh could be the most effective path for the future relationship between the two countries. Rather than clinging to old political equations, acknowledging the reality of the new Bangladesh would be a more realistic diplomacy.

Because ultimately the most important lesson of geopolitics is that sustainable influence cannot be established by ignoring the aspirations of a country’s people for long.