[🇧🇩] Indo-Bangla Relation: India's Regional Ambition, Geopolitical Reality, and Strategic Options For Bangladesh

[Saif]

India's transshipment won't affect exports: Commerce adviser

Commerce adviser Sheikh Bashir Uddin has said Bangladesh’s exports will not decline for revoking transshipment facilities by India. Efforts are underway to reduce costs by maximising the use of domestic capabilities. This, in turn, will further lower export expenses for local businesses.

en.prothomalo.com

India's transshipment won't affect exports: Commerce adviser
Staff Correspondent Dhaka
Updated: 24 Apr 2025, 18: 19

Commerce adviser Sheikh Bashir Uddin is speaking at the inaugural ceremony of the two-day exhibition. Photo: Prothom Alo

Commerce adviser Sheikh Bashir Uddin has said Bangladesh’s exports will not decline for revoking transshipment facilities by India.

Efforts are underway to reduce costs by maximising the use of domestic capabilities. This, in turn, will further lower export expenses for local businesses.

Commerce adviser Sheikh Bashir Uddin made these remarks during the inauguration of the two-day event titled “Meet Bangladesh Exposition” at the International Convention City Bashundhara in the capital on Thursday.

Abdur Rahim Khan, project director of the Ministry of Commerce's EC4J project, delivered the welcome speech at the opening ceremony.

Suhail Kasim, Acting Country Head of the World Bank Dhaka Office, Hosna Ferdous, Senior Private Sector Specialist at the Dhaka Office, Sultan M Albeshi, CEO of Al Nokhba Group from Dubai and the UAE and Shamim Ahmed of the Bangladesh Plastic Goods Manufacturers and Exporters Association (BPGMEA), among others, were present.

Simultaneously, he also said, the government is taking all necessary initiatives to simplify domestic trade and the process of attracting foreign investment.

Among these initiatives is the implementation of the National Single Window, along with several other measures. The avenue for discussion remains open with the commerce ministry and other relevant departments to address any issues faced by businesses. Any arising problems will be resolved accordingly.

Commerce adviser Sheikh Bashir Uddin remarked on the importance of reducing dependency on a single export product.

He said that diversification of export products is now a necessity. It is no longer viable to rely on a limited number of specific products. In order to remain competitive in the global market, innovation and exploration of new markets are essential.

Highlighting the World Bank’s support in promoting export growth and employment generation through diversification, Suhail Kasim said that foreign assistance to Bangladesh will decline once the country graduates from LDC status. Therefore, it is crucial to strengthen the small and medium-sized enterprise sector and focus more on enhancing the country’s competitiveness and technological advancement.

The international exhibition has been organised showcasing products from Bangladesh's promising export sectors, including leather, footwear, MPPE, plastics and light engineering. Over 120 companies from Bangladesh’s export sectors, such as leather, leather products, footwear, MPPE, plastics and light engineering, are displaying their products at the exhibition. More than 25 international sourcing agents and buyers from over nine countries, including Singapore, Libya, Colombia, Algeria, the United Arab Emirates, India, Bhutan, the Maldives and Malaysia, are participating in this event.

BPGMEA president Shamim Ahmed said while ready-made garments remain the country’s primary export item, attention must also be given to the export of other products. Small and medium-sized enterprises contribute 30 per cent of the country’s GDP.

He further mentioned that the plastic industry in Bangladesh is a promising sector, with its current growth rate standing at 20 per cent. Therefore, more focus is required on this industry.

Additionally, over 1,000 local buyers and 120 Bangladeshi manufacturing companies are participating in the exhibition. International sourcing agents and buyers will visit various Bangladeshi manufacturing factories during the event.​

 

[Saif]

A mirror needs no monument: The irony of India’s lecture on minorities

India’s moral posturing becomes all the more risible when juxtaposed with data from Bangladesh.

www.thedailystar.net

A mirror needs no monument: The irony of India’s lecture on minorities
A mirror needs no monument

VISUAL: SALMAN SAKIB SHAHRYAR

It was one of those moments in subcontinental diplomacy where irony takes a drag from a biri and smirks across the table. When India slammed Bangladesh for expressing concern over the safety of Muslims in West Bengal following the Murshidabad riots, the news moved with the sound of a stainless steel pot being called black by a soot-covered kettle. Bangladesh's call for "full security" for minority Muslims in India was met with indignation from New Delhi. One might say India is in no position to dish out lectures on minority treatment, yet here we are.

The incident itself was a grim reminder of how quickly a secular society can be undone by identity politics. In Murshidabad, a district with a dense Muslim population, protests erupted over India's new Waqf legislation, a law passed by Lok Sabha and rubber-stamped by Rajya Sabha earlier this month. Critics argue that the law erodes protections for Islamic charitable properties. The demonstrations, predictably labelled "violent," turned deadly. In a nation where dissent now rhymes with "anti-national," the crackdown was not long in coming. By April 12, three were dead, several injured, and Muslim-owned shops were set on fire overnight. Yet, it was Bangladesh's response that caused Delhi the most heartburn—not the deaths, not the discrimination.

What makes India's indignation especially rich is the continuing dehumanisation of its own Muslim citizens in recent years. Since the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) came to power in 2014, India has witnessed a frightening acceleration in communal rhetoric and policy. A report by the Washington-based India Hate Lab showed a 74 percent spike in hate speech incidents in 2024 compared to the previous year, with a staggering 98.5 percent of them targeting Muslims. The majority of these hate-filled events unfolded in BJP-ruled states like Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, and Maharashtra. In May alone, during the heated general election campaign, 269 hate speech incidents were recorded.

Despite what the Indian government may claim, this isn't the work of fringe elements or rogue sadhus. These provocations frequently come from the very top. In fact, top leaders of the current ruling party have been named among the most frequent purveyors of hate rhetoric. The BJP, through its political machinery, organised over 340 hate speech-related events in 2024 alone—a 580 percent increase from 2023. The speeches included calls for economic boycotts of Muslim businesses, threats of demolishing mosques, and warnings that Muslims must "prove their loyalty" to India or face consequences.

India's moral posturing becomes all the more risible when juxtaposed with data from Bangladesh. Nobody claims Bangladesh is a utopia for minorities—far from it. Attacks on Hindu, Christian, and Buddhist communities have occurred and must be condemned without hesitation. Between 2013 and 2021, Ain O Salish Kendra recorded 3,710 attacks on Hindus alone under Sheikh Hasina's rule. Yet, to say minorities are persecuted as a matter of state policy—as some Indian commentators suggest—is patently false.

Since the interim government came to power on August 8, 2024, there has been an unprecedented push to address minority grievances. In just the first six months, Bangladesh filed 88 cases linked to minority attacks and made 70 arrests. In a country where political instability is a feature, not a bug, this represents a notable institutional shift.

Contrast this with the legal paralysis that follows attacks on Muslims in India. In Uttar Pradesh, three Muslim men were beaten to death in November 2024 for opposing an archaeological survey at the Shahi Jama Masjid, accused of being built over a Hindu temple. There were no meaningful convictions. Indian media outlets, ever alert to cows and cricket, remained strangely silent.

Even the act of existing has become perilous for Indian Muslims. From 2010 to 2017, cow vigilante violence claimed the lives of 28 people, 24 of them Muslims. Another 124 were injured. The 2019 elections saw a spike, and the 2024 elections did not disappoint either. Nine more Muslims were lynched by mobs, accused of transporting beef or stealing cows. These incidents are not spontaneous combustion of communal angst; they are meticulously orchestrated theatre for electoral dividends.

Consider the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) passed in 2019. For the first time in India's legislative history, religion was introduced as a criterion for citizenship, and Muslims were pointedly excluded. Or the National Register of Citizens (NRC) implemented in Assam, which left nearly 20 lakh people stateless, many of them Bangla-speaking Muslims. It's telling that "Bangladeshi" has become a slur in Indian political vernacular, thrown about by ministers and media alike.

The situation has become so toxic that even slums in Ghaziabad—populated by Indian Muslims—were vandalised in late 2024 by the Hindu Raksha Dal. Why? Because some residents "looked like Bangladeshis." The ghost of Partition is a permanent tenant in India's nationalist consciousness, haunting every mosque and madrasa.

And yet, when Bangladesh moves to arrest a monk—Chinmoy Das—for allegedly inciting violence and engaging in anti-state activities, Indian media erupts in collective outrage. Das's followers allegedly murdered a Muslim government lawyer in Chattogram. But what was the narrative in India? That Das had been "persecuted." Protests were staged outside Bangladeshi embassies. In Agartala, the consulate was attacked. The Indian government did not urge restraint.

One wonders: is justice still blind, or does it now squint through saffron-tinted glasses?

The weaponisation of Bangladesh's internal affairs has become a staple of Indian electoral politics, especially in states like Assam, West Bengal, and Jharkhand. The BJP routinely paints Bangladeshis as infiltrators—vote-stealing, job-grabbing "aliens"—who must be expelled to preserve India's mythical purity. Ironically, this very narrative is now being turned on its head with the claim that Bangladeshi miscreants were behind the violence in Murshidabad. No evidence has been offered. No investigation concluded. Just the usual scapegoating, now export-grade.

Meanwhile, the relationship between the two neighbouring countries has frayed considerably since the ouster of Sheikh Hasina. India has grown wary of the new political players in Dhaka, especially those student leaders who led the uprising and are perceived as less pliant than their predecessors. On the Bangladeshi street, the sentiment towards India has turned from indifferent to frosty.

Perhaps it's time for both countries to recalibrate their approach to minority rights—not through sanctimonious statements, but through joint action. A regional commission on communal harmony could be a starting point, composed of independent observers, human rights experts, and media watchdogs. It could publish transparent, verifiable data on communal incidents and recommend policy changes on both sides.

For the long haul, interfaith youth exchanges, joint cultural festivals, and collaborative journalism can serve as antidotes to the poison being peddled by populist media and politicians. If hate can travel across borders, perhaps so can empathy.

Until then, India would do well to hold the mirror a little longer before pointing fingers. Because when it comes to minority rights, Bangladesh may be limping, but India is crawling backwards with a blindfold and a torch.

H.M. Nazmul Alam is an academic, journalist, and political analyst. He can be reached at nazmulalam.​

 

[Saif]

If trade between Bangladesh and India hampers, it will have deleterious effect on Indian economy because India exports to Bangladesh is over $13 billion whereas imports only $1.8 billion. I hope the Indian media realizes that India depends on Bangladesh to boost its trade in South Asia and stops propaganda against Bangladesh.

 

[Saif]

Misunderstandings are creating a bottleneck for better relations with India, says BNP's Mirza Fakhrul

BNP Secretary General Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir has said the problems with India are created by India itself by providing shelter to the deposed prime minister Sheikh Hasina and other Awami League leaders. In an interview with bdnews24.com's “Inside Out”, he said: “We always tr

thefinancialexpress.com.bd

Misunderstandings are creating a bottleneck for better relations with India, says BNP's Mirza Fakhrul
Published :
Apr 28, 2025 22:21
Updated :
Apr 28, 2025 22:21

BNP Secretary General Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir has said the problems with India are created by India itself by providing shelter to the deposed prime minister Sheikh Hasina and other Awami League leaders.

In an interview with bdnews24.com's “Inside Out”, he said: “We always tried to maintain a neutral position because we must have good relationships with all the countries for more trade and developed nations' support for economic advancement."

Fakhrul, who has been leading BNP in grassroots politics for a long time, spoke about contemporary politics, the 13th parliamentary election, the reform process, the interim government’s role, the demand to ban the Awami League, and India-Bangladesh relations.

The programme was broadcast on the English version of bdnews24.com's Facebook page and YouTube channel on Sunday.

While speaking on regional geopolitics, the BNP leader said: “The interim administration has repeatedly asked the Indian government to send back Sheikh Hasina. That has not been done, and unfortunately, the Indian government is not having any fruitful, effective, dialogue with Bangladesh.

“So this misunderstanding, or whatever you say, is creating a bottleneck for a better relationship with India.”

Fakhrul said, “India, unfortunately, always, has played a wrong diplomatic role by supporting only one political party in the last three elections.

“You must have observed that. The last three elections were all supported by India openly. The people didn't go to vote. There was no vote, no elections. So its support to only one party did not satisfy the people and that's why the people of the country turned against India.”

The BNP leader believes the sharing of cross-border river waters also remains a problem.

“India is not taking any serious initiative to solve that problem. Also, killing of people on the border is also not being solved alongside the issues tied to trade deficiencies.”

He stressed it will be difficult to improve ties if India does not resolve the issues.

The BNP leader also shed light on the dangers of "undemocratic forces" "and" "extremism” amid the desire to build a democratic and non-discriminatory Bangladesh following the July Uprising that changed the landscape of power and politics.

He highlighted several positive steps taken by the interim government, but said the inability to control the mob attacks was a "gross failure".

Commenting on the current situation, Fakhrul said it is not possible for the interim government to resolve everything. For this, he said, necessary reforms should be made and a roadmap for early elections should be provided.

During the half-hour discussion, differences over reform and elections with long-time ally Jamaat-e-Islami and the new student party National Citizen Party (NCP), which led the uprising, BNP Chairperson Khaleda Zia’s health condition, and the return of party’s Acting Chairman Tarique Rahman to the country came up.

Fakhrul, who entered politics with trust in the left-wing, was the president of the Bangladesh Students' Union’s Dhaka University unit. The economics teacher later joined BNP politics. He rose through the ranks of the party from the grassroots to the top.

He was officially named secretary general in the BNP's sixth National Council in 2016, but he had been serving in the role since 2011.

The BNP leader, who is known as a "gentleman" in the political arena and among the public, also addressed the numerous street protests involving students, teachers, job seekers and professionals with various demands in recent months.

Fakhrul believes that the protesters could not hold demonstrations for so long because of the prevalence of "fascism". Now every day, youths are coming out on the streets alongside workers and others. Moreover, other “anti-democratic forces” are emerging due to the delay in the election.

Referring to the political crisis, he said: "Some people are trying to instigate it in different ways. Attempts are being made to create unrest in the country.

"All this can be solved if reforms are fast-tracked and elections are held after those reforms. We demand that the government immediately publish these reforms that have been agreed upon. The fact is that the government should immediately go for the elections with these reforms.

"The protesters have to understand that it is not possible for an interim government to solve everything.”

The BNP secretary general continued, "I want to tell the nation that we should not lose sight of the main thing due to political rivalry and conflict. The main thing is to return to a democratic system.

"If there is no democratic practice and culture; if we cannot make the structure democratic, then all our efforts, sacrifices, movements, and the bloodshed, everything will be in vain.

He urged all to be united. When asked how that could be achieved, he said: "It is the government's responsibility to take the initiative.

"We welcome the reform measures. I think we should go back to the democratic form of government by making public the issues of these reforms quickly and signing the charter of reforms based on proposals that have been agreed upon."

WHAT IS THE SITUATION IN BANGLADESH?

Eight months have passed since the interim government took charge after the end of Awami League's one and a half decade rule. Fakhrul was asked whether fascism has been eliminated and the current political landscape.

"What we have been saying all along is that the fascist government that was in power has been overthrown through a student-led mass uprising. They have done a tremendous damage to Bangladesh's politics and economy.

"All democratic institutions have been destroyed. The Election Commission, the election system, the law and order, the judicial system, the economic system, health, education have all been completely collapsed and reduced to rubble. We're trying to get out of here from the beginning."

A decade and a half of “fascist rule” has ended. But the BNP leader believes its remnants remain in Bangladesh.

He said, "A large part of the bureaucracy that the previous government used to run the dictatorship and fascism, they still are there who have directly supported the fascists."

"Not only in the Secretariat, but also the institutions outside, the main agencies of the government, the high-ups of these organisations have not changed yet.”

‘BANGLADESH NOW NEEDS AN ELECTED GOVERNMENT’

Asked about his meeting with Chief Advisor Muhammad Yunus on the election, Fakhrul said: “We have talked to them three times and things are moving quite well. I believe we can sign a charter of reforms based on the minimum consensus, which can be reached, and then can go for the election as soon as possible.

“The country now needs an elected government, which will really empower its economic structure, as well as the political structures.

BNP Acting Chairman Tarique Rahman announced a 31-point reform programme to mend the state structure in 2023. The interim government is also working on reforms in multiple sectors.

The BNP has raised issues with some of the proposals. There are also important differences in the views of Jamaat, Islami Andolan Bangladesh and NCP. So what's the future of the consensus?

In response, Fakhrul said: “The government has to give a very clear idea about the election and its timeframe, what we have been asking for. Some people are trying to interpret it in a different way that we are just asking for elections.

“No, we are asking for a situation where the elected government can take over and the people can raise their voice in the parliament.

"In 2016, we have given Vision 2030. Then in 2023, we gave a 31 point charter of reform to repair the state structure. It is the BNP who gave them."

He continued, "The interim government has established some reform commissions based on public opinion. Their reports have been submitted. Political parties have also expressed their views. we are engaged with them already."

On differences with Jamaat and NCP over reforms, Fakhrul said: “The political parties will define their different opinions, and that's democracy basically. I believe the consensus, in most of the issues, can be achieved. And by achieving the consensus, we can sign a charter of reform.”

BNP’S STANCE ON BANNING THE AWAMI LEAGUE

Hasina and former Awami League ministers and MPs, along with other party leaders, are facing trial for attempting to violently suppress the student-led mass uprising. In light of this, there has been a demand to ban the Awami League.

When Fakhrul was asked about BNP's stance on banning the party, he said: "We have said this many times that banning a political party by executive order will not solve the problem. The ban should come from the people as a whole.

“The judiciary can take responsibility if there is a violation of the law.”

‘JUDICIAL PROCESS MUST NOT DELAY ELECTIONS’

Several political parties have demanded that Awami League leaders and those involved with the past regime be brought to justice before the next general election.

When asked about the issue, the BNP secretary general said: “We want justice. We want trials for those who committed ‘genocide’, and we want it to happen as soon as possible.”

He urged the government to increase the number of tribunals handling such cases to ensure faster proceedings.

Fakhrul, however, noted the “sluggish” nature of the country’s judicial activities. “It can take seven, eight, even up to twelve years to resolve a single case.”

“Do you wait 10, seven, or even five years to hold elections? You can’t. Both the judicial process and elections must continue simultaneously,” he said.

When asked about the BNP’s strategy for the upcoming election and whether the party plans to form alliances, Fakhrul referred to the party’s earlier declaration.

“We’ve made our position clear. In our 31-point charter of reforms, we’ve said that after the election, we intend to form a national government together with the parties that have stood against this ‘fascist’ regime,” he said.

He added that the country’s political landscape would improve significantly if all democratic parties were brought together under one inclusive government.”

HOW IS KHALEDA IN LONDON, WHEN TARIQUE IS COMING BACK?

Khaleda went to London in January for treatment. She was expected to return in April. How's her physical condition?

Asked about her health, Fakhrul said Khaleda's condition is quite stable.

"As far as we know, she will be back soon."

BNP Acting Chairperson Tarique’s return to the country has also been a matter of major discussion following his reprieve in multiple cases. The party has said once the election process begins, he will make plans to return. Fakhrul said, “There are still some cases pending, but he will be back when they are over."

He also praised Tarique for leading the party during the crisis.

STUDENT POLITICS

Fakhrul was asked about the recent clashes between the Anti-discrimination Student Movement and Jatiyatabadi Chhatra Dal — particularly those that occurred at the Khulna University of Engineering and Technology (KUET).

As a politician shaped by student activism, how did he view the situation?

In response, Fakhrul said: "These issues can be resolved through dialogue, negotiation, and by fostering better relations among the organisations involved.”

“If they sit together, they can work things out, and the government should take the initiative to help resolve these issues,” he added.

When asked about the repeated calls to ban political student organisations from campuses, the politician firmly disagreed, arguing that such measures would only address the symptom, not the root cause.

He likened it to trying to cure a headache by cutting off one’s head.

The BNP leader emphasised that student politics in Bangladesh — and across the subcontinent — has played a critical role for more than a century.

According to him, the real problem lies not within student politics itself, but in the system that has allowed these issues to fester.

Fakhrul said: "Over the past 15 years, the ‘fascist’ government has destroyed educational institutions and imposed its rule. They established their own student wing, the Chhatra League, and prevented any other organisations from operating.

“If there were fair and healthy student politics in the universities, it would foster the emergence of strong leadership.”

“This happened in the past when we were students; student politics was active, and leaders emerged from it.

He added that many of our key political leaders, who have shaped the country, came from active student politics.

The BNP leader insisted that the focus should not be on banning student politics, but on reforming the environment in which it exists. “It’s not student politics that’s to blame — it’s the nature of governance and the government's attitude.

“The real question is: how do you manage it? You need to create an environment that fosters healthy student engagement," he said. “Even in Western countries, universities hold student elections. Cabinets and unions are elected, and they manage extracurricular activities.

“That’s how those systems nurture future leaders.”

"What’s needed is an environment for constructive activities where students can learn the values of good politics, debate, and engage meaningfully."​

 

[Saif]

Indo-Pak conflict & Bangladesh: A call for caution

The recent Pahalgam attack, which claimed 26 innocent lives, has reignited the long-simmering tensions between India and Pakistan, casting a shadow over South Asia's fragile stability. As the two nuclear-armed neighbors engage in retaliatory measures -- from diplomatic downgrades to cross-border sk

thefinancialexpress.com.bd

Indo-Pak conflict & Bangladesh: A call for caution
MIR MOSTAFIZUR RAHAMAN
Published :
Apr 29, 2025 00:03
Updated :
Apr 29, 2025 00:03

The recent Pahalgam attack, which claimed 26 innocent lives, has reignited the long-simmering tensions between India and Pakistan, casting a shadow over South Asia's fragile stability. As the two nuclear-armed neighbors engage in retaliatory measures -- from diplomatic downgrades to cross-border skirmishes -- the ripple effects threaten to destabilise a region already grappling with economic headwinds. For Bangladesh, situated at the crossroads of this geopolitical fault line, the crisis demands a deft balancing act. The nation's economic aspirations and diplomatic credibility hinge on its ability to remain non-aligned, even as external pressures mount.

There is no doubt that if this tension cannot be swiftly and wisely eased, the long-term repercussions for Bangladesh could be profound. Already, a perception seems to be gaining ground among certain sections of Indian policymakers that Bangladesh's present regime is tilted towards India's strategic adversaries, namely China and Pakistan. Whether or not this perception is grounded in reality, the situation warrants Bangladesh's most cautious and professional diplomatic response.

It is imperative, therefore, that Bangladesh act with utmost professionalism and ensure that it remains totally non-aligned in current situation. History teaches that neutrality, when sincerely pursued and carefully maintained, is a nation's strongest shield in turbulent times. Bangladesh must reaffirm its neutral stance not just in official statements, but also in actions, gestures, and conduct at all levels of government and civil society. We earnestly hope that persons in responsible positions in Bangladesh will refrain from making any comment or displaying any gesture that could question or compromise the country's neutrality.

The Pahalgam attack has undoubtedly added fuel to an already volatile situation. India has directly blamed Pakistan for harboring links to the attackers, a charge that Islamabad has firmly denied. In response, India has swiftly downsized diplomatic relations, cancelled visas for Pakistani nationals, and, most significantly, suspended its participation in the Indus Waters Treaty -- an agreement that has stood resilient even through full-fledged wars between the two countries.

India's decision to put the Indus treaty on hold is no ordinary step. For decades, this treaty had symbolised a rare zone of cooperation between two bitter rivals. Suspending it reflects the deep anger and frustration within Indian policymaking circles. Predictably, Pakistan has termed the move an act of war and has taken countermeasures, including restricting its airspace for Indian flights. Within two days of the escalation, cross-border skirmishes erupted between soldiers of both countries -- a disturbing reminder of how quickly a regional dispute can spiral out of control.

The conflict's escalation comes at a time when South Asia's economies are already reeling under external pressures -- the lingering impacts of the Ukraine war, global inflation, and the imposition of new tariffs by a major global power. At a juncture when countries like Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, and Nepal are seeking pathways to economic recovery and growth, the Indo-Pak conflict has emerged as a spoiler -- a dangerous distraction from the urgent task of economic rebuilding.

For Bangladesh, the stakes are particularly high. It has strong and growing economic ties with India, encompassing trade, energy cooperation, and connectivity projects. Simultaneously, there have been early signs of a potential new opening in economic relations with Pakistan in recent times.

The region's economies, including Bangladesh, are battling post-pandemic recovery, soaring commodity prices, and shrinking export markets. India and Pakistan, both facing stagflation risks, are diverting resources from development to defense. The World Bank's recent downgrade of South Asia's growth forecast to 5.8 per cent in 2023 reflects these pressures. A protracted Indo-Pak conflict would exacerbate supply chain disruptions, energy shortages, and food insecurity, hitting Bangladesh's import-dependent economy hardest.

Any deterioration in the regional security environment could jeopardize these ties, undermining both immediate economic interests and long-term strategic goals.

Moreover, the conflict carries serious implications for Bangladesh's ambitions to attract foreign direct investment (FDI). After the fall of the previous regime, which had become synonymous with corruption and irregularities, Bangladesh managed to rekindle the interest of a number of international investors. The ongoing US-China trade war had also led many multinational companies to scout for alternative investment destinations, and Bangladesh -- with its strategic location and emerging manufacturing base -- was beginning to emerge as a serious candidate.

However, investors are notoriously risk-averse. No matter how attractive the incentives or the opportunities, few will be willing to invest in a country that is geographically positioned beside two potentially warring nuclear-armed nations. Instability, real or perceived, is poison to investor confidence. Thus, an extended or worsening Indo-Pak conflict could deal a heavy blow to Bangladesh's economic prospects at a time when it can least afford such a setback.

Given these realities, Bangladesh must tread with extreme caution. Its diplomatic efforts must focus on maintaining impeccable neutrality, reinforcing friendly relations with both India and Pakistan, and playing a constructive role -- if invited -- to promote dialogue and peace. Bangladesh must also be clear-eyed about its own national interests, prioritizing the security, economic stability, and well-being of its people above all other considerations.

At the same time, the broader hope must remain that India and Pakistan themselves will show the necessary restraint and pragmatism in dealing with the current crisis. Neither side should allow domestic politics, emotions, or historical grievances to drive them toward further escalation. The temptation to use conflict as a tool for short-term political gain must be resisted. At the end of the day, war between two nuclear powers is a zero-sum game in which no real victor can emerge. Both nations -- and the entire South Asian region -- would stand to lose immeasurably from such a catastrophe.

Indeed, the leaders of both India and Pakistan owe it to their own people, as well as to the region, to de-escalate tensions and return to the path of dialogue and diplomacy. There are enough challenges facing South Asia already -- poverty, inequality, climate change, and the pressing need for economic development -- that should command the full attention and resources of regional governments. To add the horrors of war to these burdens would be an unforgivable tragedy.

In conclusion, Bangladesh must prepare carefully for all possible scenarios while remaining steadfastly neutral and committed to peace. At the same time, it is in the collective interest of the region that India and Pakistan recognise the futility of further escalation and work toward resolving their differences through peaceful means. The future prosperity and stability of South Asia depend on it.​

 

[Saif]

Bangladesh-India trade relations

India and Bangladesh have good but unevenly balanced trade relations. India is Bangladesh’s second-largest trading partner after China, and Bangladesh has become one of India’s top export markets in recent years. Two-way trade was about $14 billion in the 2023-24 period. But Indian trad

thefinancialexpress.com.bd

Bangladesh-India trade relations
Protecting domestic industries by strategic import controls
Serajul I Bhuiyan
Published :
May 03, 2025 00:13
Updated :
May 03, 2025 00:13

India and Bangladesh have good but unevenly balanced trade relations. India is Bangladesh’s second-largest trading partner after China, and Bangladesh has become one of India’s top export markets in recent years. Two-way trade was about $14 billion in the 2023-24 period. But Indian trade has been overwhelmingly lopsided in favor of India. In 2023, India exported about $11–11.3 billion worth of goods to Bangladesh and imported only $1.8–1.9 billion from Bangladesh. This equates to a Bangladeshi trade deficit of $9–10 billion annually. Indeed, in a recent 20-month period, India’s trade surplus with Bangladesh was $9.22 billion, and Bangladesh is, therefore, the country with which India has its third-largest trade surplus.

Bangladesh exports jute products, ready-made garments, and a few agricultural commodities to India, but these are relatively small in comparison with India’s exports to Bangladesh. India also exports many things to Bangladesh – from cotton fabrics and yarn to machinery and chemicals, to consumer goods and food grains. Even energy trade increased as Bangladesh imports electricity and fuel from India, still “tilting trade in favor of India,” according to Policy Exchange Bangladesh CEO M Masrur Reaz. Indian goods enjoy almost duty-free entry under regional agreements, while Bangladeshi exporters are often subjected to non-tariff barriers in India. The result is a perennial imbalance much lamented by Bangladeshi economists and officials. “Imports of commodities have to be diversified… in order to reduce the trade gap,” Dr Reaz recommends, enumerating the need to diversify Bangladesh’s export basket and procure imports from other sources.

Recent events have placed additional pressure on the trade relationship. India suddenly withdrew, in April 2025, a transshipment facility that had allowed Bangladeshi exporters to ship merchandise (especially apparel) to third countries via Indian ports. The pullout of this transit facility affected Bangladesh’s export logistics — costing Bangladeshi shippers an estimated Tk 20 billion, according to Bangladesh’s trade adviser Sheikh Bashiruddin. During political changes in Bangladesh’s leadership, this move was perceived in Dhaka as an aggressive act and was preparatory to Dhaka’s own aggressive moves. Against the backdrop of a broad trade deficit and recent Indian policy realignments, Bangladesh’s National Board of Revenue (NBR) imposed new import curbs that would stem the tide of some Indian goods and protect domestic industries.
Details on the 33 Banned Indian Products: Bangladesh’s NBR banned imports from India of 33 categories of goods in an April 2025 gazette notification (subject to similar restrictions on a shorter list from Nepal and Bhutan). These cover a broad sweep of products already being imported by Bangladesh from India, from raw materials to household goods and inputs for industry. Some of the key banned product categories are:

• Paper and Packaging Materials. Several paper products used for printing and packaging were banned, such as duplex board, newsprint, kraft paper, and cigarette rolling paper. These are core inputs in the printing, publishing, and tobacco sectors, and Bangladesh hopes that its own paper mills may be able to replace them.

• Agricultural and Food Products. Staple foods like fish, potatoes, and powdered milk make up the list. India has been the lead supplier of these (e.g., Indian coastal state fish and West Bengal potatoes), but Bangladesh wishes to develop its own fisheries, potato farmers, and milk processors by eliminating Indian competition.

• Tobacco and Cigarette Inputs. The import of tobacco from India is essentially banned. This includes raw tobacco leaves that are used in cigarette manufacturing (other than that, VAT-registered Bangladeshi bidi manufacturers may continue to import raw tobacco stems as a one-off concession. Further, banning cigarette paper will force indigenous bidi and cigarette factories to produce domestically.

• Textile Inputs and Fabrics. Indian yarn and blended cloth, especially by land routes, are banned. Bangladesh, a leading garment-producing country in the world, has so far utilized low-cost Indian yarn and cloth in its garment industries. The new rules are attempting to protect the local spinning factories and cloth manufacturers from under-pricing by Indian imports.

• Building and Domestic Furnishing Materials. Bangladesh is banning a range of finished items used in homes and buildings. These include sanitaryware and ceramicware (plates, toilets, plates), Formica sheets (laminates), and marble slabs and tiles. Bangladesh is eager to develop new industries in building and ceramic items.

• Mechanical and Electronic Parts. Bangladesh has banned the import of motorcycle/bicycle parts and radio/TV parts from India. These parts are needed for assembling electronics and vehicles. By restricting these, Bangladesh anticipates that domestic parts makers or other sources will fill the gap to feed its burgeoning electronics and light engineering industries.

Remarkably, Bangladesh’s prohibition goes further than what it imposed on Nepal and Bhutan (where only a few commodities like yarn and potatoes are prohibited). The reach signifies Bangladesh’s desire for certain Indian products that are swamping its market. The government rationale behind prohibiting imports is twofold: to protect domestic industries from being inundated by Indian competitors and to prevent rerouting of third-country products (wherein the latter enter Bangladesh via India). It seeks to allow local producers of these items to monopolise the domestic market. As one NBR customs directive put it, the policy’s primary purpose is to “guarantee competitiveness for national industries, above all in the textile, paper, and ceramics industries.”

Though local manufacturers have welcomed the move, Bangladeshi importers and distributors of consumer products are worried. They worry that a shift toward alternative sources of these products (or speeding up local production) could increase costs, which might end up damaging consumers. However, the government is making this calculation assuming that overall industrial benefits overshadow short-term nuisances. Subsequent sections assess this calculation employing economic theory and probable impacts.

Application of Trade Theories: Prohibiting a few imports to strengthen domestic industries isn’t novel to Bangladesh. It is within line with quite a few age-old trade and development theories in support of local manufacturers being spared international competition where warranted. Consider hereafter three of those theories – and why and how these are relevant to the policy.

Infant Industry Protection. The theory of infant industry protection argues that young domestic industries sometimes need protection against established foreign competition until they mature and can compete. It began with the 19th-century economist Friedrich List and was employed by presently developed nations when they were becoming industrialised. For example, in the 1800s, America and Germany charged high tariffs to protect fledgling manufacturers. At the same time, in recent decades, post-WWII East Asian economies provided shelter and support for steel, motor vehicle, and electronics industries during their early development. The presumption is that new industries are costly initially; with time and a protected home market, they can achieve economies of scale, learn new technologies, and eventually compete on the world stage. Bangladesh’s case is in the shape of ceramics, paper, and light engineering goods, which are “infant industries.” By banning Indian imports of these goods, the government is giving local firms a captive market to grow. The theory of hope is that Bangladeshi businesses will seize this moment to invest in better machinery, produce quality products, and improve workers. So, in a couple of years, they can stand alone without protection. Otherwise, policymakers fear that such infant industries may be put out of business by cheaper or better-quality imports before they even have the opportunity to develop. This approach is reminiscent of past trends; as one Bangladeshi commentator dryly observed, protectionism can take on a life if sustained, producing “geriatric infants” that never mature. The test for Bangladesh will be to use infant industry protection in a time-limited and focused manner that does not create perpetual dependence.

Import Substitution Industrialisation (ISI). The bans on imports are also a model of Import Substitution Industrialisation, a policy of development under which nations endeavour to substitute local goods for imports. ISI was trendy in the mid-20th century – India, Brazil, and Mexico followed high tariffs, quotas, and prohibitions on imports to give local manufacturing an impetus from textiles to heavy machinery. The idea is to conserve foreign exchange, create jobs domestically, and build a diversified industrial economy by making at home what you used to import. Bangladesh itself practiced gentle varieties of ISI in the past: e.g., for many years, it had restrictive tariffs and controls over consumer goods that had domestic substitutes (e.g., electronics, cars, etc., often levying 25 per cent or more in duties). The 33-iteme ban could also be viewed as a new push of ISI targeting sectors – inputs into textile, foodstuff, consumer goods, etc. By preventing Indian supply, Bangladesh hopes to make domestic enterprises acquire domestic parts, such as newsprint or milk powder, which India had earlier met. ISI traditionally gave varied results for the world around us. It did encourage earlier industrialisation and reduced import dependence (India, for instance, built a vast industrial base behind protectionist regimes of the 1950s-1980s). However, prolonged ISI used to be inefficient, costly to manufacture, and less innovative due to the lack of competition. Policymakers in Bangladesh appear to know those pitfalls, hinting these bans may be transient and selective. The fact that it is adding largely non-capital goods suggests that Bangladesh is focusing on industries with some capacity or can develop them comparatively quickly (textiles, agrifoods, simple manufactures) rather than very high-tech electronics. In effect, Bangladesh is bringing back import substitution to stem undue reliance on India and bridge a gaping trade deficit. Still, it is trying not to tread the old path by coupling it with reforms and timelines.

Strategic Trade Theory. Another modern variant is strategic trade theory, which argues that in certain sectors – notably those characterized by very large economies of scale or oligopolistic rivalry – government intervention may be able to help domestic firms create a competitive foothold abroad. This theory, developed in the 1980s, often mentions examples like the aerospace or semiconductor industries, in which a nation might subsidise a national champion (like Airbus in the EU) or protect the home market to allow it to grow, with the hope of capturing global market share in the long run. Bangladesh’s restrictions on importation are domestically oriented more than anything else and don’t involve any near-term export aspiration, but a strategic element is involved. Textiles and clothing are already Bangladesh’s comparative advantage globally; by procuring the supply chain (yarn and fabric) locally, Bangladesh may consolidate its strategic position in the garment export sector. In the same way, emerging industries like pharmaceuticals, ceramics, or electronics components behind a shield wall today might, in a strategic sense, enable Bangladesh to export them in the future when the firms have gained competitiveness. The government move can also be read as a bargaining chip on a higher strategic level. By being willing to restrict imports, Bangladesh may be positioning itself to negotiate better terms with India (e.g., pressuring India to remove non-tariff barriers to Bangladeshi exports or to refrain from abrupt policy changes like the suspension of transhipment). Briefly put, Bangladesh is pursuing strategic trade interests through selective retreating from free trade for capacity development in sectors deemed key for attaining economic sovereignty and export diversification.

Using Theory for Bangladesh’s Policy: The above mentioned se theories shed light on Bangladesh’s thinking. The country’s policymakers are aptly arguing that the moment is now to build domestic industries – Bangladesh is moving towards middle-income status and set to graduate from Least Developed Country (LDC) status by 2026, which will increasingly phase out some trade preferences overseas to thrive in the future, Bangladesh wants a stronger industrial base at home. By using tariffs and currently flat import bans (unusual but allowed in some cases by WTO rules for developing nations), Bangladesh employs the old script of infant industry and import substitution to modern realities. It is hoped that protection in the short run will be followed by long-run competitiveness and diversification. Past experience suggests that Bangladesh’s success will be achieved by managing this protective phase – and, if managed responsibly, the nation could emulate the success stories (like protected babies emerging as export superstars). Mismanagement could yield inefficiencies and added costs to producers and consumers.

Economic and Industrial Benefits to Bangladesh: Bangladesh’s import restrictions on 33 Indian products are more than a gesture to limit foreign competition—they are a calculated move to direct economic energy inward and release domestic potential. As economist Friedrich List long ago convincingly argued, “The power of producing wealth is infinitely more important than wealth itself.” This policy does just that: it enables local industries to propel sustainable growth.

Spurring Local Industries. Now that the path has been cleared for Indian imports, local producers—especially manufacturers of paper, ceramics, and packaging—are in a good position to regain market share and raise output. Companies like Monno and Shinepukur Ceramics can now provide an expanding domestic market, perhaps boosting capacity and enhancing technology.

Job Creation. The policy is also expected to create jobs for growth in textiles, agro-processing, and light manufacturing. Textile mills that could not compete with Indian yarn might now operate at higher capacity levels, preserving existing jobs and generating thousands of new ones in spinning, agriculture, and assembly lines.

Enhancing Supply Chains. For sectors like apparel that contribute to Bangladesh’s bulk of exports, avoiding reliance on Indian inputs like fabric and yarn enhances backward linkages. Not only are domestic inputs value-added, but they also provide insulation to the industry from shocks, something crucial for the longer term.

Closing the Trade Gap. Making it at home will result in fewer dollars going abroad. Even partially replacing banned imports can trim billions from the annual trade deficit with India, offering economic and geopolitical leverage.

Spurring Technological Upgrades. With a larger home market to serve, firms are incentivised to upgrade and innovate. As Bangladesh’s pharma success story exemplifies, protected elbow room can be a platform for an internationally competitive industry.

Enabling Rural Producers. Bans on potatoes and fish reroute demand back to Bangladeshi farmers and fishermen, raising rural incomes and encouraging investment in storage, aquaculture, and supply chains—all of which strengthen food security and agricultural self-sufficiency.

Overall, Bangladesh’s strategy deflects the benefits of its robust consumer market inward. If managed well, these constraints could deliver a more diversified, robust industrial base and be a decisive step toward economic self-sufficiency.

Long-Term Impact and Strategic Value: Bangladesh’s decision to ban 33 varieties of Indian imports is greater than a strategic shift—a revolutionary articulation of economic self-determination.

Under the visionary leadership of Nobel Laureate Dr Muhammad Yunus, the country has moved from passive liberalisation to strategic protectionism, not as a retreat from globalisation but as a rebalancing of it. As John Maynard Keynes famously said, “The difficulty lies not so much in developing new ideas as in escaping from old ones.” In choosing to shield domestic industries and build indigenous strength, Bangladesh boldly renounces outdated assumptions of unqualified free trade.

If this policy succeeds, it may galvanise the growth of a diversified and robust economy—one where sectors such as ceramics, light engineering, agro-processing, and electronics thrive in addition to the country’s legendary garment industry. The trade deficit against India may begin to shrink, and Bangladesh may finally attain the economic clout and respect it has long aspired to in regional geopolitics.

But the way ahead needs to be careful. Protection, if not combined with encouraging productivity, can also rigidify industries and burden consumers. As Adam Smith warned, “People of the same trade seldom meet together. but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public.”

Yunus’s challenge will be to ensure that this policy is a stepping stone, not a crutch. Local industries must raise their game, innovate, and compete—survival is not enough behind tariff walls.

Dr Serajul I Bhuiyan is a professor and former chair of the Department of Journalism and Mass Communications at Savannah State University, Savannah, Georgia, USA.​

 

[Saif]

Govt doesn’t endorse Fazlur Rahman’s statement: Foreign ministry

The ministry also urged all concerned not to link Fazlur Rahman’s personal remarks to the official stance of the government.

en.prothomalo.com

Govt doesn’t endorse Fazlur Rahman’s statement: Foreign ministry
Staff Correspondent Dhaka
Published: 02 May 2025, 19: 28

The foreign ministry has clarified that the interim government does not support the recent comments made by Maj Gen (retd) ALM Fazlur Rahman, chief of the independent investigation commission on BDR carnage.

The ministry issued a press release in this regard on Friday. Earlier on Wednesday, Shafiqul Alam, the chief adviser’s press secretary, also noted that the interim government does not endorse Fazlur Rahman’s statement.

“The government of Bangladesh would like to clarify that the recent comments made by Maj Gen (retd) ALM Fazlur Rahman on his personal social media account are entirely his own. These views do not reflect the position or policy of the government," the release noted, adding the government does not endorse or support these comments in any way.

The ministry also urged all concerned not to link Fazlur Rahman’s personal remarks to the official stance of the government.

Reaffirming the foreign policy, the foreign ministry added, “Bangladesh remains firmly committed to the principles of sovereignty, territorial integrity, mutual respect, and peaceful coexistence of all nations.”

National news agency BSS quoted chief adviser’s press secretary Shafiqul Alam on Wednesday as saying that Bangladesh respects the sovereignty and independence of all nations.

"Bangladesh respects the sovereignty and independence of all nations and expects the same from others," he wrote in a statement posted on his verified Facebook account on Wednesday night.

Alam said the comments made by Maj Gen (retd) ALM Fazlur Rahman, the head of the BDR commission, in his social media account yesterday were made in his personal capacity. The interim government does not share his views in any shape or form and does not endorse such rhetorics, he said.

"We urge all not to drag the government of Bangladesh in reference to Major Gen Fazlur Rahman’s personal comments," the press secretary said.​

 

[Saif]

undefined | The Financial Express

thefinancialexpress.com.bd

YouTube channels of four Bangladeshi TV channels blocked in India
FE ONLINE DESK
Published :
May 09, 2025 22:27
Updated :
May 09, 2025 22:27

The Indian government has blocked YouTube access to four Bangladeshi television channels—Jamuna TV, Ekattor TV, BanglaVision, and Mohona TV— citing national security concerns.

The Indian government requested the removal of these channels, and YouTube complied by restricting access within India, reports local media.

When attempting to view these channels from an Indian IP address, users encounter a message stating that the content is unavailable due to a government order related to national security or public order.

This action aligns with India's broader efforts to regulate online content that it deems a threat to national security. In recent years, India has blocked several YouTube channels, including those based in Pakistan, for disseminating information considered harmful to the country's sovereignty and public order.

The blocking of these Bangladeshi channels underscores the Indian government's commitment to controlling digital content that may impact its national interests.​

 

[Saif]

India, Myanmar, and the weight of regional instability on Bangladesh

Situation across our borders is reason for concern.

www.thedailystar.net

India, Myanmar, and the weight of regional instability on Bangladesh

The illegal entry of Rohingya refugees from Arakan has surged in recent months. FILE PHOTO: STAR

Before their latest fighting, India and Pakistan fought three wars, and those experiences suggest that conflicts between these two countries rarely remain confined within their borders. Bangladesh inevitably feels the ripple effects. Much like during the India-Pakistan cricket matches, Bangladesh finds it difficult to remain emotionally neutral or indifferent to their armed confrontations.

This is not solely due to their geographical proximity. Their shared religious and sociocultural heritages also formed a connection over the centuries. These inseparable connections are why it often feels like Bangladesh, Pakistan, and India are members of a vibrant, albeit feuding joint family. The "past" may have politically divided these societies, but their separate "presents" have not emotionally detached them from one another. On the first day of the latest conflict, a friend working at a leading national daily informed me that their viewership had tripled. It's not just curiosity—it's a reflection of collective anxiety, nostalgia, and unresolved identity questions that still echo from the subcontinent's traumatic history of Partition and its aftermath.

However, besides shelling Pakistan, India has also initiated a massive push-in operation along its borders with Bangladesh, further complicating regional dynamics. So far, according to the Border Guard Bangladesh (BGB), Indian forces have pushed around 300 individuals into Bangladesh, including Rohingya, through remote border areas in Satkhira, Khagrachhari, Moulvibazar, and Kurigram. Some of these people are reportedly Bangla speakers and have come from Gujarat. If some among them were really illegal Bangladeshi migrants residing in India, that issue could have been addressed through formal channels. Instead, India has simultaneously launched push-in operations at multiple border points, which is clearly unjust and contrary to diplomatic norms.

Those already pushed into Bangladesh have claimed that various Indian agencies on the other side of the border are gathering more Bangla-speaking individuals. Many Rohingya who migrated to India from Arakan are also reportedly being assembled. These developments are deeply concerning. It is hard to believe that Indian policymakers do not understand how such actions would upset and anger the Bangladeshi government and people.

To respond to the push-in, Bangladesh may inevitably be compelled to initiate a pushback programme. While that may appear inhumane, the government has no real alternative. The border situation is bound to get heated up due to such back and forth.

This development is especially significant in light of the relentless propaganda war Bangladesh has faced from some segments of Indian media since the ouster of the Awami League from power in August last year. The nature of Bangladesh government should be a matter solely for the people of Bangladesh to decide. India may understandably be uncomfortable with the political changes here, but engaging in widespread misinformation campaigns targeting an entire country and its people is downright antagonistic.

Additionally, amid such hostile propaganda and aggressive push-in efforts, Bangladesh is also facing a tense situation along its southern border.

During the tenure of the interim government, the illegal entry of Rohingya refugees from Arakan has surged. The population in the refugee camps is now close to 13 lakh. A major concern for Bangladesh regarding these new and old refugees is the visible decline in international financial assistance. The question is, why has there been a renewed influx of Rohingya from Arakan? The new wave of refugees claims that they are facing security threats from the Arakan Army.

The Arakan Army has already taken control of approximately 80 percent of the Rakhine state. At the same time, the Myanmar military, the Tatmadaw, continues bombing various parts of the region. This ongoing conflict has created a severe humanitarian and security crisis. In response, the United Nations has recently requested Bangladesh to open a channel towards Arakan to facilitate the delivery of international humanitarian aid.

Now, there are precedents for such channels or corridors being established by third countries in conflict or war-ravaged zones. The UN initiated similar efforts in Gaza and Ukraine in recent years, but the outcomes were far from satisfactory. Those experiences failed to achieve their objectives. Understandably, the Arakan-bound channel proposal has triggered intense reactions in Bangladesh from the outset. Many questions have arisen: who will manage this channel—Bangladesh or the UN? What kind of supplies will be transported through it, and will the Rohingya refugees be involved in their distribution? Most importantly, who will ensure the channel's security? If Myanmar's armed forces object to the channel, or if China or India raise objections, who will be responsible for its protection? Will this require the creation of a "no-fly zone" or a similar security arrangement?

Matters related to the channel's security and management—including the possibility of a no-fly zone—are inevitably tied to military considerations, making this a highly sensitive issue. If there were a functioning parliament in the country, elected representatives would undoubtedly have deliberated on these matters. However, it appears that the interim government is yet to consult political leaders on this sensitive topic.

Senior officials of the government have issued contradictory statements regarding the channel. Initially, one adviser claimed that the government had agreed in principle to the proposal, subject to certain conditions. Another official stated that there had been no discussion on the matter. Later, it was said from the government's side that it was not considering a "corridor," rather a "channel." These disjointed and conflicting remarks have sparked public concern regarding the southern border.

Bangladesh's top priority regarding Myanmar and Arakan must be the repatriation of Rohingya and the prevention of further entries. Given the current situation in Arakan, any repatriation will require the consent and cooperation of the Arakan Army. At the same time, Myanmar remains a sovereign state with a functioning government in Naypyidaw, meaning their consent will also be needed for establishing a channel in Arakan. Only with the agreement of all parties can any humanitarian aid initiative be considered. And in that case, the primary condition must be the refugees' return. However, it remains unclear whether this crucial issue has been included in the current initiative. Without sufficient dialogue with political stakeholders on such a nationally critical and militarily sensitive matter, the country risks future controversies and divisions. Joining a military-style international initiative without a broad national consensus undoubtedly entails significant risk. The question, then, arises: does the current government have the authority to make such high-stake decisions unilaterally?

Though this government, formed through a mass uprising, has popular support, it remains unelected. The country is witnessing significant political tensions and uncertainty about when the next election will be held. In such a context, the prospect of establishing a humanitarian channel towards Arakan has added a new dimension to that. Moreover, some fear that a channel at the border could trigger military consequences. Considering the overall situation across our borders and the societal reverberations of the India-Pakistan war, there are reasons for concern. Are the people of Bangladesh being unwillingly dragged into the psychological and strategic orbit of a multi-front conflict, or have they already been entangled in one?

Altaf Parvez is a researcher and writer.​

 

[Saif]

Dhaka readying response as India seals land-ports to Bangladeshi products

Dhaka is studying the exigent situation for a response shortly as India sealed their land-ports to import of a slew of products from Bangladesh, including apparel made from imported Indian yarn. Stating that he was not yet officially informed about the latest taboo involving bilateral trad

thefinancialexpress.com.bd

Dhaka readying response as India seals land-ports to Bangladeshi products
FE REPORT
Published :
May 19, 2025 01:09
Updated :
May 19, 2025 01:09

Dhaka is studying the exigent situation for a response shortly as India sealed their land-ports to import of a slew of products from Bangladesh, including apparel made from imported Indian yarn.

Stating that he was not yet officially informed about the latest taboo involving bilateral trade-in a back-to-back restriction after recent transshipment embargo-Commerce Adviser Sk. Bashir Uddin Sunday said Indian traders would also to be affected as the two sides are interdependent for geographical proximity.

Still he holds the hope for continuity of bilateral trade and business between Bangladesh and India "in greater interest of consumers and traders both".

The adviser made his observations to reporters at his secretariat office in Dhaka a day after the newly imposed restrictions by the Indian government on the import of various items from Bangladesh to India.

But he has not officially been informed about the Indian restrictions on the import of goods from Bangladesh. Based on media and social-media reports, he said, necessary analysis has been started as to what step should be taken by the Bangladesh government.

Replying to a question, the commerce adviser said, "We do not export much furniture to the neighbouring state. In comparison, we export a large amount of clothing. The main reason for the exports from Bangladesh is competitiveness. We hope that bilateral trade would continue in the interest of consumers and traders of both countries."

Asked if the newly imposed restriction is in sync with the previous transshipment ban, he said it did not happen in continuation of the earlier transshipment taboo. "Due to newly imposed restrictions, Indian traders will also be affected. Both nations are dependent on each other due to geographical reasons."

The businessman-turned functionary of the post-uprising interim government hopes it will take a day or two to understand the situation and then the government will decide what to do next in this connection.

Mr. Uddin further said, "We believe in trade liberalization. We have to work to increase trade inclusion. It is our job to protect interests of consumers and traders."

In the two-way trade, India is in a very good position. This trade deficit will not decrease in a day. It will take a long time to eliminate it, he added.

The neighbouring India on Saturday imposed port restrictions on the import of certain goods, including readymade garments (RMG) and processed-food items, from Bangladesh. Their Directorate-General of Foreign Trade (DGFT), the Ministry of Commerce and Industry, issued a notification to this effect.

These trade restrictions reportedly came after Bangladesh restricted Indian cotton via seaports, closing land ports. But the Indian government said such port restrictions wouldn't apply to Bangladeshi goods transiting through India but destined for Nepal and Bhutan.

The prohibition took immediate effect.

Import of all kinds of RMG from Bangladesh shall not be allowed from any land port. However, it is allowed only through Nhava Sheva and Kolkata seaports, the notification reads.

It says garments, agro-processed foods, furniture and other goods from Bangladesh through land ports have been restricted.

Besides, imports of fruits, carbonated and fruit-flavoured drinks, processed foods, cotton and cotton-yarn waste, PVC and plastic products, and wooden furniture via land ports in Assam, Meghalaya, Tripura, Mizoram, and the West Bengal crossings at Phulbari and Changrabandha have also been under the restrictions.

However, the restrictions will not apply to fish, liquefied petroleum gas, edible oils, or crushed stone.

The total bilateral trade between Bangladesh and India was approximately $10.5 billion in official count in the fiscal year 2023-24, with the balance heavily tilted towards India with an annual trade surplus of $7.4 billion.

Bangladesh imported around $1.6 billion worth of cotton yarn from India in 2024. Its total apparel exports were worth over $38 billion that year, and more than $1.0 billion worth of goods were exported via Indian land ports.​