Sheikh Hasina’s Political Career at a Cross Road

SALEEM SAMAD

In the wake of the International Crimes Tribunal (ICT) verdict for the death penalty for Sheikh Hasina, will her political career come to an end on the road? It would be difficult for her to return to Bangladesh with a death penalty and lead the Awami League to survive in a rough sea.

Hasina’s father (Sheikh Mujibur Rahman) originally set up Bangladesh’s International Crimes Tribunal to try cases of atrocities during the Liberation War. The ICT was supposed to put on trial 195 Pakistani military officers accused of war crimes in the 1971 bloody independence war.

Hasina revived the tribunal when she assumed power in 2009. The current regime has used it against her opponents, wrote Bhagyasree Sengupta in the FirstPost. Hasina did not show remorse for the crimes against humanity in killing 1,400 protesters during last year’s July-August bloody uprising.

Hasina refused to accept defeat. Her party members also refused—especially those who fled to India. She must be having sleepless nights and worrisome days. The woman who ruled Bangladesh for nearly 20 years with an iron hand did not express her remorse for misrule.

For the past 15 months, even while staying in India, Hasina has been spewing venom about the July–August uprising and, in a way, attempting to call for the overthrow of this government.

In the past, she lived in exile in Delhi. For her, it was not a new city when she lived a low-profile life for six years until 1981, forming close relationships with leaders like Indira Gandhi and Pranab Mukherjee. During her tenure as Prime Minister, she gradually tilted towards India for security, intelligence sharing, trade, bilateral relations, and other crucial issues.

Hasina became an all-weather friend of India. Delhi reciprocated unflinching support to Dhaka in the regional forum and international forum. She listened to Delhi and destroyed the South Asian Association of Regional Cooperation (SAARC). The platform for regional understanding and cooperation collapsed after Islamabad announced that host the SAARC Summit.

Indian Prime Minister boycotted the event, and promptly, Hasina also cancelled her visit to Pakistan. Islamabad has postponed the summit. Since the boycott of the SAARC Summit in 2016, Bangladesh-Pakistan bilateral relations have plummeted. At one stage, Hasina decided to snap diplomatic relations. She called back senior diplomats, including the High Commissioner to Dhaka and kept them idle. She refused to give clearance to the new Pakistan High Commissioner to Bangladesh for several years.

The news of ice-breaking was first known through Pakistan’s news media that a new High Commissioner has arrived and met Sheikh Hasina at the Prime Minister’s Office. It was not clear what changed the mindset of Hasina to meet the High Commissioner. Whether there was external influence or other compulsion. Dhaka also sent High Commissioners to Islamabad, which eased the diplomatic relations.

The country twice declared two diplomats of Pakistan persona non grata. Islamabad reciprocated by deporting one Bangladeshi diplomat. It could not be determined whether the diplomats sent back home were on the basis of tit-for-tat.

Meanwhile, trade and commerce continued at a slow pace. Both countries depended on each other’s products. Bangladesh is dependent on several products, as raw materials, to feed the export-oriented industries. What will happen to her party is difficult to predict.

However, several political observers say the days will become thinner for Hasina. The extravagant pomp and glory that she enjoyed will be no more, no doubt, said a political analyst, Mohiuddin Ahmad, political historian and writer.

Well, Hasina will not be extradited by India, where she is living in a safe home, somewhere in New Delhi, presumed to be an armed force establishment. Dhaka has once again sent a note verbale in reference to the verdict of the death penalty, and the ICT has declared her a fugitive.

India, as usual, is dead silent over the issue of extradition. The Ministry of External Affairs has issued a brief statement acknowledging the ICT verdict and carefully did not mention the Delhi plan about Hasina’s status. The silence gave a clear message that Delhi will not hand over its loyal friend, Hasina and will not speak a word about her status.

There will be no resolution to these questions while this current government remains in power. The government has made it clear that the Awami League will not be allowed to contest the election during this term. What happens next will depend entirely on the government that comes afterwards—our future course and the structure of our politics will be shaped by that, wrote once a fiery student leader, Mahmudur Rahman Manna, in the largest circulated Bangla daily Prothom Alo.

Returning Hasina and her co-accused to Home Minister Asaduzzaman Kamal is dark. She and he co-accused, will live in Indian as guest. No Indian government will send her back when her life is in danger.

Delhi may reject the ICT and deny its legitimate existence and trial in a tribunal which was exclusively set up by Hasina for the trial of war criminals and crimes against humanity committed during the 1971 war.

The Indian statement, soon after the verdict of Hasina’s death penalty it has put the International Crimes Tribunal in question. Which means Delhi does not recognize the tribunal.

Indian could use the exception clause in the 2013 Bangladesh-India Extradition Treaty. There are certain clauses which could give leverage to India, refusing to hand over Hasina and others, said Suhasini Haidar with The Hindu.

To keep the diplomatic channels open to discuss Bangladesh’s concerns, convey India’s concern and possibly push Bangladesh for an inclusive election to allow Hasina’s party, Awami League, to participate in the upcoming February election, said Haider.

Presently, the government has imposed restrictions on party activities, and the Election Commission has deleted the boat symbol from the list of election symbols.

The death sentence awarded to Sheikh Hasina, former Prime Minister of Bangladesh, is a seismic political event that will be seared into the nation’s collective memory for a long time. Its tremors will be felt through the country’s institutions even if the death sentence is never executed.

Ironically, Hasina has now fallen victim to the system she created by weaponizing the judiciary against her political opponent, Bharat Bhushan writes.

First published in the Stratheia Policy Journal, Pakistan, on 27 November 2025

Saleem Samad is an independent journalist based in Bangladesh and a media rights defender with Reporters Without Borders. He is the recipient of the Ashoka Fellowship and the Hellman-Hammett Award. He could be reached at: saleem.samad.1971@gmail.com; Twitter (X): @saleemsamad

Defiant Sheikh Hasina refuses to apologize for her crimes

SALEEM SAMAD

Ousted Bangladesh prime minister Sheikh Hasina refused to apologize for the bloody crackdown on street protests that led to her downfall last year, and tells international media outlets that she has no intention to leave India.

Last week, Sheikh Hasina from her safe house – somewhere in Delhi, India gave written interviews to Reuters, The Independent, and French news agency AFP.

The interviews via email with international outlets were her first media engagements since her autocratic regime collapsed during the Monsoon Revolution. She spoke her mind, planned on her exile, her political party, Awami League, the upcoming election sans Awami League, and, of course, critiquing the Interim Government, describing it as an “illegal” government. She blamed the Yunus government was “sowing the seeds” of further division in her country.

The three international media which were published on the same day – the 78-year-old former leader remained defiant in her exile, rejecting charges of crimes against humanity and describing her ongoing trial as “politically motivated.” Despite her failure to hold free, fair, and inclusive elections in three consecutive sham polls during her 15-year rule, she has now demanded that the Interim Government should hold an inclusive election.

“Elections without the direct participation of all major parties, including the Awami League, cannot be credible,” she said. It should be pointed out that Hasina has been accused of disenfranchising millions of voters through holding elections in 2014, 2018, and 2024 without the participation of opposition parties.

The same opposition, Hasina once castigated, the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) is seen as the frontrunner, while Jamaat-e-Islami, the Sunni Muslim-majority country’s largest Islamist party, is rising in popularity during post Hasina.

The Election Commission suspended the Awami League’s registration in May. Earlier, the government banned all party activities, citing national security threats and crimes against humanity probe into senior Awami League leaders.

She warned that the ban on her Awami League by the interim government of Nobel laureate Muhammad Yunus was deepening a political crisis in the country of 170 million people, ahead of elections slated for February 2026. Millions of supporters of Bangladesh’s Awami League will boycott next year’s national election, Hasina told Reuters from her exile in India.

Hasina, 78, said she would not return to Bangladesh under any government formed after elections that exclude her party, and plans to remain in India to live “quietly and freely”, where she fled in August 2024 following a deadly student-led uprising. She added that she had “no intention of seeking asylum beyond India (in a third country).”

“The ban on the Awami League is not only unjust, it is self-defeating,” Hasina said in emailed responses to Reuters — her first media engagement since her dramatic fall from power after being elected to power for the fifth tenure.

“The next government must have electoral legitimacy,” Hasina told Reuters. “Millions of people support the Awami League cannot disenfranchise millions of people.” Political analyst Mohiuddin Ahmad said that Hasina shouldn’t expect from an “illegal” government. She has no alternative but to remain calm and enjoy the hospitality of Delhi.

Hasina is in exile in New Delhi for the second time. Earlier, she stayed for six years, from 1975 to 1981. Later, she returned to Bangladesh as president of Awami League, and in 1996, she was elected Prime Minister for the first time. The 78-year-old former leader remained defiant, rejecting charges of crimes against humanity and describing her ongoing trial as “politically motivated.”

The Prosecutors of the International Crimes Tribunal, a Bangladesh war-crimes court, are seeking the death penalty for Hasina, accusing her of crimes against humanity by ordering the use of lethal force against student protesters, resulting in up to 1,400 deaths.

In her AFP interview, Hasina rejected the accusations of crimes against humanity, insisting they were “not supported by any evidence” and that the tribunal was appointed by an administration that included her political opponents.

Hasina contested the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) death toll claim during the July Uprising in 2024, saying that “the 1,400 figure is useful to the ICT for propaganda purposes but is probably inflated”.

Prosecutors have sought the death penalty for Hasina, accusing her of ordering lethal force against protesters in July and August 2024, when as many as 1,400 people were killed and thousands were injured, according to what the United Nations described. Hasina is defended in ICT by a state-appointed lawyer, but said she would only recognize an “impartial” process, such as one at the International Criminal Court (ICC).

Hasina, meanwhile, has defied court orders to return to attend her trial on whether she bears command responsibility for the deadly crackdown, charges amounting to crimes against humanity under Bangladeshi law. A verdict is due on 13 November. In response to AFP, Hasina also condemned her crimes against humanity trial as a “jurisprudential joke”, adding she believed a guilty verdict was “preordained”. Her critics, including interim officials and human rights lawyers, say she bears “command responsibility” for the use of lethal force. Chief prosecutor Tajul Islam described her as “the nucleus around whom all the crimes were committed,” urging the court to impose the death penalty if found guilty.

Bangladesh’s premier English newspaper, the Daily Star’s own investigations found that Hasina had personally authorized the use of lethal weapons. The newspaper had published a leaked phone recording from 18 July 2024 where Hasina tells her nephew, former Dhaka South Mayor Fazle Noor Taposh, “I have given instructions, now I have given direct instructions; now they will use lethal weapons. Wherever they find them [protesters], they will shoot directly.” “The charge that I personally directed security forces to open fire on crowds is bogus,” Hasina told AFP, while conceding that “some mistakes were certainly made within the chain of command.” “They’ve been brought by kangaroo courts, with guilty verdicts a foregone conclusion,” she told Reuters, adding that she would “neither be surprised nor intimidated” if she were sentenced to death.

She told the Independent that she “mourns each and every child, sibling, cousin, and friend we lost as a nation,” but refused to issue a formal apology, arguing that the unrest was manipulated by her political rivals to topple her government. “I mourn the lives we lost, but I reject the false allegation that I ordered police to shoot demonstrators,” she said.

Rights groups, including the Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, long accused her government of a litany of abuses, including the murder of rivals, suppression of opposition parties, rigged courts, and one-sided elections.

In response to AFP, Hasina said her priority now was “the welfare and stability of Bangladesh,” while her party explores legal and diplomatic avenues to contest its exclusion from the political process.” 

Yunus must reinstate the Awami League to give Bangladeshis the choice they deserve.” 

To conclude, Awami League’s return to power, in any foreseeable future, remains a political impossibility, Abu Jakir wrote in a news portal, Bangla Outlook.

This article was published in the Stratheia Policy Journal, Islamabad, Pakistan, on 2 November 2025

Saleem Samad is an independent journalist based in Bangladesh and a media rights defender with Reporters Without Borders. He is the recipient of the Ashoka Fellowship and the Hellman-Hammett Award. He could be reached at: saleem.samad.1971@gmail.com; Twitter (X): @saleemsamad

https://stratheia.com/defiant-sheikh-hasina-refuses-to-apologize-for-her-crimes/

Bangladesh Politicalscape Division Deepens Over Democratization Roadmap

SALEEM SAMAD

The majority of people in Bangladesh are in the dark and groping in the wild to understand what the much-talked-about “July National Charter” is about, a political roadmap for democratic transition, at the behest of the Interim Government.

A genuine national consensus on the path to democratic renewal has fallen short of expectations. Uncertainty surrounding its implementation has left several political parties hesitant to sign, despite an eleventh-hour intervention by Chief Adviser Nobel laureate Professor Muhammad Yunus.

Many parties have shown themselves to be unable to bridge their differences over the nation’s future direction. Since the circulation of the final draft, some have questioned whether the exercise produced any meaningful consensus, wrote Kamal Ahmed, a columnist and former Chairperson of Media Reforms Commission of the Interim Government.

Last Friday, millions with access to national media, including television, newspapers, news portals, and social media, who are supposed to make informed decisions, plunged into a state of confusion over the new political roadmap.

Hasnat Quaiyum, president of the left-leaning Bangladesh Rastro Songskar Andolon, described the draft as “weaker” than the accord reached among the three alliances during the 1990s student uprising against former military ruler General HM Ershad.

However, the two major political parties Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) and the Awami League, in a see-saw to power several times, never bothered to bring about legislation in the parliament to implement the reforms agreed to in the joint declaration post-1990.

The Charter was named after the July-August Monsoon Revolution, which ousted autocratic Sheikh Hasina after 15 years of rule. A year ago, the street protests killed nearly 1400 young people in 36 days of Monsoon Revolution.

With the July Charter finally taking shape, Mohiuddin Alamgir of the Daily Star looks into the changes in the constitution, legislative structure, balance of power, and caretaker government system, as well as the new laws needed to reshape governance.

The Charter, born out of a compact among political parties, proposes a raft of constitutional reforms to reinvigorate Bangladesh’s parliament, which has remained weak and failed to function as an effective check on executive authority.

The proposals include the introduction of a bicameral legislature, a stronger opposition bench, institutional oversight, and checks and balances at the heart of parliamentary democracy.

Very few topics in Bangladesh’s political discourse have sparked as much debate or endured as long as the caretaker government system. To many, it represents not just a procedural framework but also a reliable means of conducting free and fair elections.

Introduced in 1991 through a rare political consensus, the caretaker system was widely accepted as a safeguard to ensure neutral elections, free from the influence of ruling parties. It was incorporated into the constitution in 1996.

Its unilateral abolition by the Awami League government in 2011 triggered a decade-long bitter dispute over an acceptable mechanism for holding credible elections.

The issue has emerged again with renewed urgency, as the July charter calls for the restoration of the system.

Restoring the caretaker system with more safeguards in the charter has been stressed. Presently, the Supreme Court is hearing the abrogation of the caretaker government system.

Once the apex court renders a verdict on the cancellation of the system, Bangladesh will switch to the caretaker system mode. The Interim Government will cease to function 90 days before the election and hand over power to the Caretaker Government.

Reforms ahead of the national election have been the most consistent pledge of the interim government. One of the core reforms, apart from reviving the caretaker government system, is to bring about a balance of power between the prime minister and the president.

For years, critics have warned that the immense constitutional powers vested in the prime minister risk fostering authoritarianism, with the post of president remaining largely ceremonial, devoid of substantive authority.

The July Charter proposes curbing the PM’s overarching powers and strengthening the role of the president.

“To prevent the emergence of a fascist regime in the future, there must be a balance of power,” said Prof Ali Riaz, vice president of the National Consensus Commission.

Political parties have long stressed the need for a mechanism to prevent the concentration of power in the hands of the head of the government.

“Nearly all institutions are subject to the prime minister’s unilateral control. The president is constitutionally bound to act on the advice of the prime minister. In effect, the president holds no independent authority,” remarked Riaz.

Presently, the post of president is ceremonial. Real executive authority lies with the PM, who is the most powerful political actor with control over the executive, strong influence over the legislature, and indirect dominance over other state organs, wrote Alamgir.

Following independence, Bangladesh adopted a parliamentary system of government. However, the country transitioned to a presidential form through the fourth amendment to the constitution in 1975.

The parliamentary system was reinstated in 1991, designating the prime minister as the executive head of the government and the president as the constitutional head of state. In reality, the president acts on the PM’s advice in almost all matters.

In an effort to curb the concentration of power in the Prime Minister’s Office, according to the charter, most political parties agreed that an individual may serve as PM for a maximum of 10 years. The PM will not be the leader of the ruling party in the parliament.

The charter proposes that a lawmaker would be barred from holding the office of PM and remaining party chief at the same time. However, BNP and several like-minded parties issued a note of dissent on the matter.

Not to the surprise of political analysts, the Islamist party Jamaat-e-Islam always echoed the Interim Government’s election road map, without any question.

“The aim here is to create a degree of separation between the party and the government, thereby reducing the concentration of power in the hands of the prime minister,” Ali Riaz said.

“Plenty of theoretical ideas are there [in the charter], but what will happen in reality remains to be observed,” said Al Masud Hasanuzzaman, a former teacher of Jahangirnagar University.

Consensus Commission Vice President Ali Riaz said the overarching objective is to establish an accountable state and strengthen its institutions so that the country is not governed by the whims of any individual or group.

Kamal Ahmed, consultant editor of The Daily Star, concludes that the deeper divisions surfaced over contentious political questions. Disagreements persist over the powers of the proposed second chamber in parliament, eligibility criteria for its members, provisions for amending or suspending the constitution, appointments to key constitutional and regulatory bodies, the president’s impeachment process, nominating a deputy speaker from the opposition, and parliamentary ratification of international treaties.

First published in the Stratheia Policy Journal, Islamabad, Pakistan, 20 October 2025

Saleem Samad is an independent journalist based in Bangladesh and a media rights defender with Reporters Without Borders. He is the recipient of the Ashoka Fellowship and the Hellman-Hammett Award. He could be reached at <saleem.samad.1971@gmail.com>; Twitter (X): @saleemsamad

India Spreading ‘Fake News’ About Anti-Hindu Violence

SALEEM SAMAD

Bangladesh, like elsewhere, the Hindus are celebrating a weeklong Durga Puja. This is the second Durga Puja celebration since the Interim Government took charge of the helm of affairs of the nation.

Durga Puja is widely celebrated with great enthusiasm, color, festivity, and religious passion by Bangla-speaking Hindu diasporas and in several neighboring Indian states and among those living abroad.

The festival goes beyond religion to promote strength, unity, and community spirit. However, the Puja is not the mainstream religious festival of majoritarian Indians. They celebrate the Diwali festival of lights.

“There is no anti-Hindu violence,” Chief Adviser of the Interim Government Professor Muhammad Yunus said in an interview with veteran journalist Mehdi Hasan for Zeteo news media on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) in New York last week.

Bangladesh’s majoritarian population is Sunni Muslims, and the religious minorities make up a small but diverse portion of the population of 9 per cent.

Hindus are the largest minority of 8 per cent, followed by Buddhists and Christians. The country has a tiny population of Shia Muslims, Ahmadiyya Muslims, Baha’is, animists, and atheists. Dismissing the claims as misinformation, Yunus told Hasan, “One of the specialities of India right now is fake news.”

Professor Yunus, a Nobel Peace Prize-winning economist, became the interim head of Bangladesh following the 2024 July Uprising known as Monsoon Revolution that led to the ouster of former fascist Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina.

Mehdi sits down with Yunus in New York, a year after student protesters in his country ousted the repressive former prime minister Sheikh Hasina, who ruled the 174 million people with an iron hand for more than 15 years.

The Nobel Laureate accuses India of spreading ‘fake news’ about anti-Hindu violence. Delhi often blames the Dhaka authorities for not doing enough to ensure protection and security for the Hindu population, especially the protection of Hindu temples, which Indian authorities claim are being sporadically attacked.

Dhaka avoids pointing fingers at Delhi for persecution, intimidation, and violence by Hindu extremists on Dalits (untouchable community), Muslims, Christians, Buddhists, Sikhs, Adivasis (ethnic communities), and others.

In November, around 30,000 Hindus in Bangladesh gathered to protest Yunus’ interim government, demanding protection and security, with Donald Trump even weighing in to call Bangladesh’s treatment of Hindus “barbaric”. “One of the specialities of India right now is fake news,” the Nobel laureate tells Zeteo, before declaiming, “There’s no anti-Hindu violence.”

Once, Murshidabad was the capital of Nawab Sirajuddowla (1756-1757), the last independent Nawab of Bengal. The young Muslim ruler met at the Battle of Plassey in 1757. He was defeated by the British East India Company. His defeat marked the end of the 500-year-long Muslim rule over Bengal.

In the same capital, a pavilion of a Durga Puja at Murshidabad, in a state adjacent to Bangladesh. The goddess Durga has other faces of Prof Yunus as a demon, Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, and US President Donald Trump as evils. It did not surprise many, the organizers deliberately avoided Israeli President Benjamin Netanyahu, blamed for atrocities in Gaza.

BBC Bangla was the first to post a visual story of the Puja celebration in Murshidabad, which enraged the netizens and social media users in Bangladesh and the Bangladeshi diasporas abroad. The tension and distrust between the two neighboring countries in South Asia have gone cold. No visible diplomatic initiatives from Dhaka and Delhi to warm up the relations.

In one incident, Indian Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal urged the interim government in Dhaka to “live up to its responsibility” of protecting minorities without “inventing excuses.” MEA protested the claim of vandalism at Rabindranath Tagore’s ancestral home in Shahzadpur, north of Bangladesh.

Immediately Indian government, Indian political figures, and Hindutva–aligned social media handlers circulated about the vandalism at Rabindranath Tagore’s ancestral home. Bangladesh Chief Adviser’s Press Wing, after fact-check, debunked the Indian claim and posted a statement on its verified Facebook page.

Without a fact-check, India’s Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) expressed concern over the incident. MEA spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal claimed that the attack was portrayed as a “systematic Islamist attack” or “terrorist act” against a symbol of Hindu heritage.

MEA spokesperson in his rhetoric on Bangladesh often states: “The attack falls in the broad pattern of systematic attempts made by extremists to erase the symbols of tolerance and eviscerate the syncretic culture and the cultural legacy of Bangladesh.”

Several Indian media outlets have circulated videos claiming that Hindus are being targeted by ‘Islamist forces’ in Bangladesh. Analysts say that while there have been attacks on minorities during the political unrest, the media is exaggerating the scale, says Qatar-based international TV network Al Jazeera.

South Asia witnessed a continuation of religious violence, fake news, and political messaging that mainly targeted Muslim minorities. In India, there were mob attacks, hate speeches by religious leaders, and forced deportations of Muslims to Bangladesh, wrote Mohammed Raihan in The Insighta, an analytical portal.

At the same time, some Indian media were alleged to spread false stories about events in Bangladesh, claiming attacks on Hindus, he wrote inThe Insighta. There is no hide and seek, India has huge discomfort and embarrassment about the political changeover in Bangladesh that took place on 5th August.

Developing events suggest that India considers the changeover as its ‘political defeat in Bangladesh’ and unleashing vengeful plots in hegemonic arrogance to destabilize the country to put back the government of its choice in power, writes Mohammad Abdur Razzak in a secular newspaper, The New Age, published from Dhaka.

Playing the Hindu card, the Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, in a message on his X (Twitter) handle, urged the chief adviser to Bangladesh’s interim government few days after Yunus was sworn in August last year to “ensure the safety and protection of the Hindus and all other minorities in Bangladesh”.

According to Indian media outlet The Wire published a short documentary titled “Being Hindu in Bangladesh is Not a Black and White Story,” which tells the personal story of Deepak Kumar Goswami, a well-known actor from Bangladesh who is a Hindu. He talks about what it’s really like to live as a Hindu in a Muslim majority country.

Deepak shows that life in Bangladesh for Hindus isn’t just good or bad – it’s more complex than what some Indian media shows. In the documentary, Deepak criticizes the Indian media for spreading propaganda after Hasina fled to India, questioning whether it truly supports Hindus or serves Hasina’s interests.

He rejects the portrayal of the July 2024 uprising as an Islamist movement, pointing out that Hindus, including himself, also opposed Hasina—a fact ignored by the Indian media.

Another bone of contention is the recent anti-immigrant crackdown in India. The crackdown ensued after the Pahalgam massacre by Islamic militants’ attack on tourists in Indian administered Kashmir.

Hundreds of Muslim migrants are forced into Bangladesh's porous borders. Many were found to be Indian citizens. Their crime, they speak Bangla and, most importantly, Muslims are eligible to the deported.

Indian ‘Godi Media’, within a few days after the fall of Hasina, quoting “reliable sources” inside Bangladesh, claimed a military coup in the country and Prof Yunus’ government is a façade.

When the Godi Media found the conspiracy theory of a military coup narrative is not credible, they quickly changed their claim that the Yunus government is governed by the Islamist party Jamaat-e-Islami.

Yunus addressed a group of researchers and academicians in New York last week. He flagged a piece of fake news claiming that the Gen Z (youths) who brought about change in Bangladesh are Taliban. “They even said I’m a Taliban too. I don’t have a beard. I just left it at home,” he laughed.

The Nobel laureate is a staunch secularist. The Grameen Bank, which he founded, has beneficiaries of 10.75 million (August 2025), with 97% of them being rural women. He has brought about the empowerment of women and supported them from sinking into poverty.

The person who has worked with millions of women over several decades and even got the rural women in the Grameen Bank as board members, is regularly slammed by the Indian media as being backed by the Islamists, Mullahs, and Muslim radicals. It is indeed a pity, remarked political historian and researcher Mohiuddin Ahmad.

First published in Stratheia Policy Journal, Islamabad, Pakistan

Saleem Samad is an independent journalist based in Bangladesh and a media rights defender with Reporters Without Borders. He is the recipient of the Ashoka Fellowship and the Hellman-Hammett Award. He could be reached at <saleem.samad.1971@gmail.com>; Twitter (X): @saleemsamad

India is Blowing Hot and Cold with Bangladesh

SALEEM SAMAD

India has multiple reasons for disliking Bangladesh. In the aftermath of the event of the ouster of all-weather friend Sheikh Hasina from power in August 2024. If we look into previous regimes, Delhi developed heightened relations with Sheikh Mujibur Rahman (1972-1975) and her daughter, Sheikh Hasina (1976-2001 and 2009-2024).

Why? The Awami League party was literally “owned” by the Sheikh’s family was tilted to India when their government was in power. The people did not like it, and thousands of critics, dissidents, opposition, and also journalists were severely punished by both the autocratic regimes.

Not only the Awami League, but also the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) and Jatiya Party. When the military junta of liberation war veteran General Ziaur Rahman (1977-1981) and the other by General Hussain Muhammad Ershad (1982-1990) floated their parties and recruited politicians mostly from the former defunct Muslim League and pro-Maoist parties. Interestingly, the South Block in Delhi had love and hate relations with both the Rahman and Ershad, but both regimes were suspicious and careful of the giant neighbor.

India reciprocated ‘not-so-warm’ diplomatic relations, but each other’s leaders were on reciprocal official state visits to Delhi and Dhaka. Presently, Delhi is not happy with the sudden change of regime in Dhaka. The 36-day Monsoon Revolution street protest by Gen Z forced Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina to quit and flee. She sought political asylum in India.

India has not been able to accept the change in Bangladesh because it “did not like” what the students did during the uprising last year. “We have problems with India right now because they disliked what the students have done,” remarked Nobel laureate Prof Muhammad Yunus, Chief Adviser of the Interim Government.

He was speaking at an event organized by the Asia Society and the Asia Society Policy Institute in New York last week, which was moderated by Dr Kyung-wha Kang, president and CEO of the Asia Society. He said India’s hosting of Hasina has created all sorts of problems in the country and is responsible for the deaths of hundreds of young people, and is not helping bilateral ties between the neighbors.

The United Nations human rights body (OHCHR) claimed that nearly 1,400 people, including students, daily wage earners, vendors, public transport drivers, and children. “This issue creates a lot of tension between India and Bangladesh. Also, lots of fake news is disseminated from the other side [of the border]. This is a very bad thing,” Yunus lamented while attending the UN General Assembly in New York.

He flagged a piece of fake news claiming that the youth who brought about change in Bangladesh are Taliban. “They even said I’m a Taliban too. I don’t have a beard. I just left it at home,” he quipped. Yunus said SAARC (South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation) is supposed to be a bloc of very close family members, and the idea was born in Bangladesh.

“You can invest in Bangladesh. Bangladesh is going to invest in your territory. That’s the whole idea of SAARC,” he said. “All of us benefit from that… This is what we should be doing.” Yunus said SAARC’s idea was to bring all the countries in South Asia (Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka) together so that young people can get in touch with each other.

The chief adviser said, “Our history allowed us to make that happen, but somehow it didn’t fit into the politics of someone’s country [not naming India], so it had to stop. We feel very sorry for that.” However, Yunus said Dhaka is willing to revitalize SAARC. “We want to make sure that we open it up and bring people [of South Asia] together. That is the only way to solve our issues.”

“I said, why don’t you look at neighbors, like Nepal, Bhutan, and also the seven northeast states of India. In the eastern part of Bangladesh, seven states don’t have any access to the ocean. These are landlocked regions,” he said, hinting at possible fields of economic cooperation. The Indian ‘Godi media’ are saber-rattling when Yunus mentioned that Bangladesh would give access to a new deep-seaport being built by the Japanese in the Bay of Bengal. So did the leaders of the radical Hindutva, ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), when Yunus spoke of giving access routes to landlocked northeast India states.

The Godi media and BJP stalwarts blamed Yunus for interfering in India and attempting to stir a separatist movement in the landlocked states, which will usher in China’s military presence in the conflict. He also mentioned Nepal and Bhutan. The countries welcomed the proposal, which will facilitate their exports through Bangladesh.

Earlier regional studies suggested that both Bangladesh and Northeast India need to scale up their multi-modal connectivity, which would not only help the region to raise its competitiveness but also narrow long-standing regional development gaps.

The port would immensely benefit economically and create jobs in Northeast Indian states, and Japan proposed a plan for road infrastructure for fast communication to the Bay of Bengal, and also developed backward linkage industries.

Japan has proposed developing an industrial hub in Bangladesh with supply chains to the landlocked northeast states of India, Nepal, and Bhutan beyond by developing a port and connectivity in the region, under the Bay of Bengal Industrial Growth Belt (BIG-B) initiative.

The connectivity will bring synergy in trade facilitation and build express corridors for the transshipment and transit of goods from northeast India to the Bangladesh port in Chattogram.

The former Japanese Prime Minister, Fumio Kishida, Japan’s Free and Open Indo-Pacific (FOIP) Vision, focused particularly on emerging economies and developing countries in the Indo-Pacific region and territories vulnerable to climate change and natural disasters.

It comes after Kishida visited India in March 2023, where he touted the idea of a new industrial hub for the Bay of Bengal and Northeast India that could bolster development in the impoverished region of 300 million people.

After Kishida visited India, Japan approved $1.27 billion to Bangladesh for three infrastructure projects – including an enormous commercial port in the Bay, which will be equivalent to the Port of Colombo in Sri Lanka or the Port of Singapore in terms of water depths, said a JICA (Japan International Cooperation Agency) official in charge of the project.

After the Japanese Prime Minister’s official visit, top Japanese officials visited New Delhi, Guwahati (Assam), Agartala (Tripura), and in Dhaka (Bangladesh). When Japan proposed the port and the economic emancipation of the majoritarian ethnic communities in the Northeast in 2023, the Indians cheered, after Japanese top officials made presentations in the Indian cities.

Japan wants her physical presence in the Bay of Bengal. As prestigious Japanese media Nikkei Asia writes, Bangladesh’s ambitious deep-sea port promises a strategic anchor for Japan and India.

A mega seaport under construction is shaping up to be a strategic linchpin for Japan and India as the QUAD (Quadrilateral Security Dialogue) partners (Australia, India, Japan, and the United States) aim to counter Chinese influence in the South China Sea.

The Red Sun, as Japan is branded, plans to build a Bengal – Northeast India industrial value chain in cooperation with India and Bangladesh to foster growth in the region.

A mega deep-sea port at Matarbari, in southeast Bangladesh waters, is expected to be completed in 2027. The complex will take a major load off of the country’s main Chattogram (formerly Chittagong) port and a trade gateway for northeast India, which would be less than 100 kilometers from the massive port facility.

Whatever the geopolitical strategy, the deep-sea port project has the potential to improve regional trade ties, boost investment, create jobs, and support infrastructural development, spurring economic growth for Bangladesh, Northeast India, Nepal, and Bhutan, as well as the surrounding areas of the Bay of Bengal.

First published in the Stratheia Policy Journal, Islamabad, Pakistan, 27 September 2025

Saleem Samad is an independent journalist based in Bangladesh and a media rights defender with Reporters Without Borders. He is the recipient of the Ashoka Fellowship and the Hellman-Hammett Award. He could be reached at <saleem.samad.1971@gmail.com>; Twitter (X): @saleemsamad

US Military Presence in Bangladesh Worries India

SALEEM SAMAD

In 1996, Bangladesh agreed to the “war on terror” against the rogue Jihadist regime in Afghanistan, officially the Global War on Terrorism, a global military campaign initiated by the United States following the 11 September attacks in 2001, and is one of the most recent global conflicts spanning multiple wars.

The US military arrived for three joint military exercises with its counterpart, the Bangladesh military. The US officers checked into a Bangladesh Army-affiliated Radisson Blu Hotel in Chattogram (formerly Chittagong) on September 10 for an exercise in the coastal region of the south.

For the fourth year in a row, the Bangladesh Army and US Army Pacific conducted Exercise Tiger Lightning for preparedness on counterterrorism, peacekeeping, jungle operations, medical evacuations, and countering improvised explosive devices (IEDs), says the US Embassy in Dhaka on 20 July.

Since 2009, the ongoing exercise will feature patrol boat handling and small arms marksmanship, strengthening warfare diving and salvage, as well as the para-commandos’ ability to respond to crises.

In  the hallmarks of defense relationship between the two countries, the US built C-130 fleets that are critical in disaster response, airdrops, and air mobility operations. The exercise included Search and Rescue (SAR) and Aero-medical operations, further developing Bangladesh’s ability to respond to humanitarian disasters.

The United States, with Bangladesh’s Army and Navy, develop an Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) capability for Bangladesh, and operated the new RQ-21 Blackjack system. The effort enabled Bangladesh to monitor its maritime domain, secure its borders, and conduct peacekeeping missions.

Whereas, hundreds of social media accounts loyal to the ousted regime of Sheikh Hasina burst into outrage, deep into conspiracy theories that the Nobel laureate Prof Muhammad Yunus Interim Government has opened the floodgate for “clandestine operation” to enable Bangladesh military forces to militarily strengthen the Myanmar rebels to oust the military junta in the capital Naypyidaw. The social media was abuzz that the US military officers had “secretly” arrived in Bangladesh and did not register their names at the hotel.

The second conspiracy theory, which was widely floating in social media and many suggests that the US military presence was to determine a suitable base which would make their presence felt in South Asia and also monitor South-East Asia. Well, the Bangladesh authority did not bother to counter the conspiracy theories that attempted to undermine the joint military exercise.

In August 2016, former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, during a meeting with former Secretary of State John Kerry in Dhaka, expressed a “very clear” desire to cooperate with the U.S. “very, very closely” on fighting terrorism. Kerry announced the two countries had agreed to “additional steps by which our intelligence and law enforcement will work together to try to get ahead of this.”

Secretary of State, said the US and the West are deeply worried after evidence of the presence of Islamic State jihadists operating in Iraq and Syria has sleeping cells in “eight entities around the world, and one of them is in South Asia.” He deliberately did not mention the name of Afghanistan. He, however, disclosed that Islamic State extremists are in contact with some operatives in Bangladesh, and there was no argument about it from the government officials he met with here, including the prime minister.

Hasina’s government was blamed by scores of terrorism analysts and security experts for ‘having its head in the sand’ about such links, repeatedly terming the attacks as homegrown. Meanwhile, popular India Today media published a documentary titled: Strategic Drills In India’s Backyard: US Footprint In Bangladesh Rising.

Another media News Arena India on 15 September wrote in an article that India’s intelligence circle, the US troops’ arrival has fueled speculation amid a noticeable uptick in American military activity in Bangladesh following the fall of the Hasina regime. The same article was widely quoted on social media that the US military officers refrained from registering their names with the front desk and slipped into pre-booked rooms.

“The purpose of the exercise remains vague, with officials mentioning Cox’s Bazar as a likely location. The Bangladesh Army has largely remained cagey about the presence of US forces, apart from acknowledging formal collaborations such as Operation Pacific Angel and Tiger Lightning-2025,” wrote News Arena India without mentioning the source of information. The presence of C-130Js has reinforced speculation about the scope of US military activities in Bangladesh, etcetra, etcetra.

In the mid-60s, the radical left students to imbibe dissent against the military dictator General Ayub Khan of Pakistan said that he had leased Saint Martin’s island in the southeast tip of the country to the United States to build a military base to counter India.

The conspiracy theory of St. Martin given away to the Americans has cropped up several times since its independence in 1971. They were deliberately blamed for different regimes for facilitating inroads for America to counter the regional influence of India and China.

Bangladesh’s only coral island, Saint Martin, the Department of Environment (DoE) in 1999 declared the 8 Sq Km isles an “Ecologically Critical Area (ECA)”. It warned that the geo-class of a tiny island cannot be changed without the permission of the DoE. A British team of surveyors in 1900 included Saint Martin’s island as part of the British Raj in India and named it after a Christian priest, Saint Martin.

Green activists and environmentalists say the island is home to several globally endangered marine turtles and birds, including the rare Pacific reef-egret, red crab, dolphin, and vulnerable olive Ridley sea turtles, which are also on the verge of disappearance.

Professor Kawser Ahmed, dean of the Earth and Environmental Sciences Faculty of Dhaka University, in his article published in Ocean Science Journal in 2020, predicts that coral species will completely disappear by 2045.

Earlier, Syeda Rizwana Hasan, environment adviser to the Interim Government, doubted whether an ecologically threatened island would be suitable for any military purpose. Political historian and researcher Mohiuddin Ahmad, quoted in the largest circulated Bangla newspaper, Prothom Alo that he first heard in February 1971 about leasing Bhola’s Monpura island out to the USA.

The rumor took wings after the then fiery opposition leader Sheikh Mujibur Rahman had parley with the US Ambassador to Pakistan, Joseph Simpson Farland, on 28 February 1971 – a month before the genocidal campaign ‘Operation Searchlight’ launched by the Pakistan military, which sparked the liberation war.

Indian media quoting Hasina from a press conference in July 2023, she asked, “How did [opposition] BNP (Bangladesh Nationalist Party) come to power in 2001?”? She continued that they came to power by pledging to sell [natural] gas [to India]. Now do they want to sell the country [to the United States] or come to power by pledging to sell Saint Martin’s island,” she told loyalist journalists. Her words spread like wildfire and were injected into the minds and hearts of millions of supporters that Americans have an interest in the ‘critically endangered’ tiny island.

She blames BNP for negotiating with Washington, DC, to give away the ‘critically endangered’ coral island to America for a military establishment to watch over a huge swatch of the Bay of Bengal, which merges with the Indian Ocean in the far south. BNP countered her statement and said, “No country signs a deal with the opposition; it is signed with the government.”

On the other hand, the United States State Department’s former spokesperson Matthew Miller scoffed at the rumor centering on the island and the USA. In a press briefing in Washington, DC, he confidently said, “We have never engaged in any conversations about taking over Saint Martin’s island,” he remarked. Despite the denial by the US official, the loyalist of Hasina still blows the horn that the American military presence is interpreted as the establishment of a strategic naval base in the ocean of Bangladesh.

First published in the Stratheia Policy Journal, Islamabad, Pakistan, 24 September 2025

Saleem Samad is an independent journalist based in Bangladesh and a media rights defender with Reporters Without Borders. He is the recipient of the Ashoka Fellowship and the Hellman-Hammett Award. He could be reached at <saleem.samad.1971@gmail.com>; Twitter (X): @saleemsamad

Nepal-India’s ‘Love & Hate’ Neighbor

SALEEM SAMAD

India is in a diplomatic quagmire with its neighbors in a series of political crises of ‘youth quake’ by Gen Z (generation Z), which have struck Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, and Nepal in South Asia.

South Block in New Delhi, before it could understand what was happening in Kathmandu, Nepal’s elected government, headed by Khadga Prasad Sharma Oli, collapsed and fled to an unknown destination. India miscalculated its steps in response to the uprising among its neighbors. Delhi is having hiccups with Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, and Nepal joining the bandwagon, after its recent political turmoil.

For 14 months since becoming the prime minister of Nepal last July, Sharma Oli kept knocking on the door of South Block in New Delhi. This September, the door was supposed to swing open to let him in. His political mistake with its giant neighbor, according to New Delhi, the newly elected Prime Minister Sharma Oli made his first official visit to China, instead of her neighbor India.

China’s inroads into Nepal with mega projects, offers, and connectivity irked India’s ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leadership. China’s massive infrastructure investments under the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), including projects like the cross-border railway and road networks, are seen by Nepalese as tangible signs of development and economic opportunity, further enhancing China’s appeal over India.

“Oli knew his premiership would remain shaky without New Delhi’s backing. India, which has deep trade and cultural ties with landlocked Nepal, has traditionally been a big determinant of the longevity of governments in Kathmandu,” wrote The Diplomat news portal.

Alas, the planned visit of Sharma Oli to Delhi has been dented by a two-day youth-quake by Gen Z (Genji) street protest. Interestingly, China’s response to Gen Z to the current political developments appeared cautious and calculated, reflecting its broader regional strategic interests.

Finally, on 10 September, the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs Spokesperson issued a statement saying, “China and #Nepal are each other’s traditional friends and neighbors. Hope the various sectors in Nepal will approach the domestic issues properly and restore order and stability in the country soon.”

After 2008, Beijing has carefully treaded with the Communist leadership in Nepal to deepen its diplomatic ties and goodwill in Nepal. The move has been viewed as a key element for strategic influence over the region. Leaders like Sharma Oli and Pushpa Kamal Dahal alias Prachanda did not hesitate to use the China card to stoke the nationalistic sentiments in Nepal.

Rishi Gupta, commentator on Global Affairs with India’s The Print portal that a day after the protests began in Nepal on 8 September, India stated the next day that it was “closely monitoring the developments in Nepal…(and) our thoughts and prayers are with the families and deceased. India also added that “as a close friend and neighbor, we hope that all concerned will exercise restraint.”

The same evening, Prime Minister Narendra Modi tweeted, “The violence in Nepal is heart-rending. I am anguished that many young people have lost their lives. The stability, peace, and prosperity of Nepal are of utmost importance to us. I humbly appeal to all my brothers and sisters in Nepal to support peace.”

In the same statement, India had urged that “issues on which there are differences should be resolved through dialogue in an atmosphere free from violence and intimidation and institutionalized in a manner that would enable broad-based ownership and acceptance,” as it was deemed as external interference. It would not be an exaggeration to say that small-state syndrome became an intense public mood in Nepal as it approached relations with India, especially after Nepal promulgated the constitution in 2015, wrote Gupta.

There was a divided crowd on social media about India’s approach, whether it was helpful and friendly or interventionist, but this came as no surprise, as the so-called border blockade of 2015 had already set the social media toolkit on India with hashtags like #BackoffIndia #GoBackIndia, wrote The Print.

For most who are watching Nepal closely, glimpses of the street protest and follow-up that unfolded in Kathmandu were reminiscent of the uprising that gripped Bangladesh in 2024 and Sri Lanka in 2022. In four years, three street protest movements showed how public anger against political corruption toppled the heads of government of Nepal, Sri Lanka, and Bangladesh, and led to their capitals.

The three South Asian countries are bedecked with corruption, nepotism, and favoritism by party leaders, lawmakers, and their family and relatives, who enjoyed the luxury and comfort from the perks from state exchequers, handsome commissions from government contracts, and sharks of bank loans.

Though Bangladesh and Sri Lanka are also India’s closest South Asian neighbors, Delhi’s relationship with Kathmandu is special because of historic people-to-people, economic, and strategic ties, wrote the BBC news portal. The protests in Nepal were initially seen by India’s political leadership as just young people upset at not being able to use social media. Delhi woke up when the government collapsed after the uprising escalated quickly.

On September 11, Kantipur, the country’s leading daily, reported that while Western media explored corruption, unemployment, and the social media ban as triggers, much of the Indian media pushed conspiracy theories – claiming either foreign powers like China and the US or a “deep state,” a conspiratorial term denoting bureaucracy and security forces, were behind the protest.

Nepal’s government has officially announced a total of 72 fatalities from the recent protests led by Gen Z. The total casualty of the nationwide Gen Z protests has reached 72. Newly appointed Prime Minister Karki of the caretaker government has declared that bereaved families of those killed in the protests will be compensated, while 191 still receiving treatment in hospitals will be treated for free.

The protesters killed during the Gen Z movement have been declared martyrs and cremated with due state honors. On 17 September, the nation paid tributes to the fallen protesters and declared the day a national holiday.

Viral videos on TikTok and Instagram have contrasted the lavish lifestyles of political families, with trends and hashtags #NepoKids #NepoBabies, #PoliticiansNepoBabyNepal involving designer clothes, foreign travel, and luxury cars, with the harsh realities faced by young people, including unemployment and forced migration.

Nepal is fraught with frequent political instability, and each prime minister’s tenure has lasted just a year or two since the new constitution came into effect in 2015. The country abolished its monarchy in 2006, after a violent uprising that forced its former king to give up his authoritarian rule, the American-based Associated Press (AP) writer said.

South Block and the ruling BJP are intensely watching political developments across the border, with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi swiftly reacting to the unfolding events and writing his feelings on Twitter (X). “The violence in Nepal is heart-rending. I am anguished that many young people have lost their lives,” Modi wrote in a post on X on Tuesday.

The Gen Z youth leaders protested during a scheduled meeting with the country’s Indian trained military chief, Ashok Raj Sigdel, over why Indian media had been given clearance to attend the meeting at the military headquarters, where a planned dialogue was scheduled, while Nepali media were barred.

While selecting the possible candidates for the prime minister, the youth leaders struck names for the premiership, who are pro-Indian and have close ties with Delhi. What angered the Gen Z protesters was that the Indian television channels declared the protests they had joined were not about inequality but about restoring Nepal’s monarchy.

While right-wing television led the charge, newspapers and digital outlets also amplified the narrative. In the process, their coverage downplayed the protesters’ actual grievances, corruption, inequality, and economic hardship by focusing on the theme that was never central to the demonstrations.

Nepali youth demanding accountability versus Indian media, especially outlets close to the ruling BJP, eager to weave the protests into its own narrative, wrote an Indian media outlet.

Indian pro-establishment “Godi Media” was actively downplaying the Gen Z movement in Nepal. Fuelling the narrative are allegations from Indian broadcasters and politicians that rioters vandalized Nepal’s Pashupatinath temple, a revered Hindu site in the Himalayan nation, BBC reported.

“Some rioters, hiding within the crowd of protesters, attempted to vandalize the temple, and it was only after this incident that the army was deployed,” an anchor for the right-wing Zee News, a staunch ‘Godi Media’ television channel, said in a report featuring a clip of people climbing onto the temple’s gate and violently shaking it. KN Swami, a respected monk in the Pashupatinath temple, also posted clips on social media to refute claims it had been attacked by protesters.

Jivesh Mishra, a member of India’s ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) in eastern Bihar state, which shares a border with Nepal, told reporters last week, “An attack on a temple is an attack on (the) Hindu faith.” Hundreds of social media posts have claimed without evidence that the protests were “instigated and funded” by “anti-Hindu forces and Islamists” to attack religious sites.

The French news agency, AFP fact-checkers, traced the footage to a religious ritual called Naxal Bhagwati Jatra, filmed weeks before the violence. Similarly, the Godi Media have been actively doing the same with political developments in Sri Lanka and Bangladesh.

Other posts viewed thousands of times on Twitter (X), Instagram, Threads, and Facebook have compared the unrest in Nepal with protests in Bangladesh, a Muslim-majority country where a student-led revolt ousted long-time leader Sheikh Hasina, daughter of the founder of Bangladesh.

Why is India worried about the instability in Nepal? Delhi deems direct and indirect security threats to India’s interests. In the political crisis in Nepal, the 1,700-kilometre open border with India could be a security threat to the region. Political chaos and a breakdown of law and order can lead to a surge in cross-border smuggling, human trafficking, and an increase in the activities of anti-India elements, wrote the popular NDTV network’s opinion column.

The potential for a security vacuum in Nepal could be exploited by hostile actors, particularly Pakistan’s ISI, to foment trouble in India, cautioned opposition Congress lawmaker Shashi Tharoor, a popular writer and commentator.

First published in the Stratheia Policy Journal, 17 November 2025

Saleem Samad is an independent journalist based in Bangladesh and a media rights defender with Reporters Without Borders. He is the recipient of the Ashoka Fellowship and the Hellman-Hammett Award. He could be reached at <saleem.samad.1971@gmail.com>; Twitter (X): @saleemsamad

https://stratheia.com/nepal-indias-love-hate-neighbor/

Why is Bangladesh-India Relations Cliff-Hanging?

SALEEM SAMAD

Last week, Bangladesh stated that there are no barriers from Dhaka’s end to improve relations with New Delhi, but progress requires the cooperation of both sides, remarked Bangladesh’s Foreign Affairs Adviser Touhid Hossain.

Why has Bangladesh publicly declared a willingness to improve bilateral relations, and what does this reveal about the nature of the current impasse? Delhi and Dhaka often boast of a century-old heritage, tradition, and cultural relations. Suddenly, both countries have ceased flowery diplomatic jargon. A stark indicator that the relationship is sailing through a rough sea.

South Asia researcher Sohini Bose with an Indian based Observatory Research Foundation (ORF) said, Bangladesh resets its foreign policy post-Hasina, India faces a rising challenge – a friend turning uncertain and Pakistan gaining ground. She deliberately did not mention developing relations with China, the United States, and the European Union. It is understood why she is playing with the Pakistan card.

The bilateral relations only a year ago were passing through a ‘Golden Era’. The so-called relationship was limited to two persons (Sheikh Hasina and Narendra Modi) and the Awami League and Bharatiya Janata Party.

India has developed love and hate relations with its neighbors. Bilateral and regional relations are sailing smoothly with Nepal, Maldives, Sri Lanka, and Bhutan, of course, with Bangladesh and Pakistan, which are often looked at with suspicion and distrust.

The Indian pundit wrote that Bangladesh and India are connected in multiple ways, extending beyond just the bilateral relationship between their governments. They share an enduring bond through their common history, culture, land, transboundary rivers, and adjacent maritime zones. Overjealous Indian leaders contemplate that Dhaka is getting closer to Islamabad and sticking close to New Delhi. Which is a half-truth!

The giant neighbor has indeed helped Bangladesh gain independence in 1971 from Pakistan. Time and again, the jealous leaders were intermittently reminded of India’s contribution to the independence struggle. India has provided shelter to ousted Sheikh Hasina, who is living in exile somewhere in Delhi. Like King Kong, Indian leaders should beat their chest and proudly claim hosting the most-wanted person of interest – Sheikh Hasina! Unfortunately, they are not doing it.

Foreign Adviser Touhid Hossain lamented that there was no update from India on the request for former Sheikh Hasina’s extradition to face the music of justice for crimes against humanity. “We [Bangladesh] wrote once, and updates will be shared if another request is sent,” Hossain said his government would continue to pursue Hasina’s extradition.

After Hasina fled her country in August 2024 after the collapse of her tyrannical regime following a mass uprising dubbed as Monsoon Revolution, Dhaka sent a diplomatic note to Delhi last December, formally requesting her extradition.

Nobel laureate Prof Muhammad Yunus, chief of the Interim Government, recently told an international media outlet that he may authorize the International Court of Justice (ICJ) for the trial of Sheikh Hasina and top officials of her government for committing crimes against humanity during her tenure (2009-2024) – especially the July-August revolution.

The trial in the ICJ would be based on a fact-finding investigation conducted by the Geneva-based United Nations human rights agency (OHCHR). The report has evidence of Hasina ordering his security forces to use excessive force and shoot and kill the street protesters. The fact-finding report claims nearly 1,400 people, mostly students, youths, vendors, day-laborers, public transport drivers, restaurant staff, and garment workers, during 36 days of the Monsoon Revolution.

Delhi remains conspicuously tight-lipped and gives no sign from the South Block in New Delhi of their mind. The Indian government made several remarks about the persecution of the Hindu population and urged protection and safety guarantees for the community. India also urged Bangladesh that the Interim Government should hold an exclusive and credible election in the upcoming national elections in February 2026.

The remark was made after the oldest party, Awami League, which inspired the independence of the country, the political activities were restricted, and its student wing, Chattra League, was banned for committing violence against the protesters during last year’s July-August street protest.

India has seen Bangladesh through the prism of Hasina. That was the reason Delhi is paying heavily, said Professor Sriradha Dutta of OP Jindal Global University in India. Satisfied with what India had received from Bangladesh. Delhi deliberately ignored the simmering discontent of the opposition, dissidents, critics, and rights groups, reflected in the media.

India turned a blind eye when Hasina ensured that no opposition contested elections and held sham elections in 2014, 2018, and 2024, according to independent election monitoring groups, reported in mainstream media. Obviously, India was always the first country to felicitate Hasina for being reelected in landslide victories, with full knowledge that the elections were fraudulent and were not free, fair, and inclusive.

When Hasina was elected for her fifth term through vote fraud, Modi did not hesitate to congratulate and shower blessings on her in January 2024. Several political scientists and political historians predicted that she would not be able to survive for another six months after the 2024 election. South Block was not reading the pulse of the people, who were bearing the brunt of the repressive regime.

Independent media, civil society, and rights groups had been beeping alarms over Hasina’s autocratic regime, which was monitored in Delhi – but largely disregarded. Sohani wrote in ORF that the Indian government gave lots of priority to the bonds of partnership with the former Awami League administration in Bangladesh, led by Sheikh Hasina.

Not only was this exhibited by their expanding portfolio of areas of cooperation, ranging from connectivity, security, to collaboration in public health, but also by their ability to continue nurturing bilateral ties in several domains, despite lingering contentious issues such as the Teesta Water sharing dispute, border killings of Bangladesh nationals, lopsided trade deficit, human trafficking, stop Hasina addressing on social media, which Dhaka interprets as jeopardizing the relations further.

A decade of this partnership had thus ushered in near-permanent amicability in the India-Bangladesh relationship, providing a strong foundation for New Delhi’s aspirations to ‘Act East’ by putting its ‘Neighborhood First’, stated Sohani. The overthrow of Hasina from power abruptly halted this partnership. Bangladesh’s new government’s foreign policy reflects uncertainty about India amidst struggles to secure its own legitimacy.

Both neighbors are suspicious, lack trust, and shed doubts on each other’s relationship. This has been further heightened by Indian Godi media disseminating anti-Bangladesh rhetoric. “Godi media” coined by Indian journalist Ravish Kumar, which describes the Indian media that are overtly biased and loyal to the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and the Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government. The term comes from the Hindi word “godi,” meaning “lap,” and refers to the media’s sycophantic, “lapdog” behavior towards the government.

Apparently, India is the second-largest trading partner, one of the top 15 sources of Foreign Direct Investment (FDI), and a foremost development partner with a development portfolio of US$8 billion, says ORF. As India’s Minister for External Affairs, Subrahmanyam Jaishankar, in a recent statement, “Bangladesh must decide what kind of ties it wants with India.”

First published in Stratheia Policy Journal, Islamabad, Pakistan, 9 September 2025

Saleem Samad is an independent journalist based in Bangladesh and a media rights defender with Reporters Without Borders. He is the recipient of the Ashoka Fellowship and the Hellman-Hammett Award. He could be reached at <saleem.samad.1971@gmail.com>; Twitter (X): @saleemsamad

Indian Police Crackdown on Muslim Bangla-Speaking Migrants

SALEEM SAMAD

Two impoverished families have been working as scrap pickers for over two decades in the suburb of New Delhi. Both families were detained, transported in harsh conditions, and pushed into Bangladesh in the dark hours. Police in Delhi claimed that they are Bangladeshi citizens and that their ancestors were from a village in the southern district of the country.

The ordeal of the two families surfaced after their families filed cases with the Delhi High Court and Kolkata High Court. The families complained that the Indian authorities do not know of their whereabouts in Bangladesh, and the families do not have any contact with them.

The petition said that last month, Sweety Bibi and her two sons, Korban Sheikh (16 years old) and Imam Sheikh (6 years old) and another family, Sonali Khatun, her husband, Danesh Sheikh and their son Sabbir Sheikh, were abducted, and police said they were deported to Bangladesh as they were Bangladesh citizens.

Later, the West Bengal police collected several documents to prove that the family’s ancestors’ history is from the state of West Bengal and that they are genuine Indian citizens.

A video shot inside Bangladesh, which went viral on social media, showed two women, one teenager and one male, who was seen in the footage. It could not be ascertained where in Bangladesh it was recorded. The woman, Sweety Bibi, described in the video how they were forcibly abducted by police and later pushed into a foreign country and were alleged to be émigrés from Bangladesh.

In the recent spate of crackdown against illegal immigrants, India, when persons speak Bangla (the official language of Bangladesh and also spoken in neighboring states of West Bengal and Tripura) and are Muslim, that person, in the eyes of the police, is a potential demographic threat to the country’s security. The authorities jump to the conclusion that the suspects are “illegal immigrants” from Bangladesh.

All over India, such suspects in thousands were hauled and taken to different concentration camps. The detained persons are enduring untold miseries, agony and sufferings. They are tortured by law enforcement agencies. The encampments have poor sanitation, no running water and inadequate food.

Indian press, which habitually barks anti-Bangladesh rhetoric, hardly reported the incidents of the harassment and illegal confinement of Indian citizens, bracketed as “unauthorized immigrants” from Bangladesh. Most of them live in shanty slums and work as menial workers and have migrated from different places for a better future and financial solvency.

According to international media and rights organizations, they have been critical of such government-induced crackdown against the working class in India. Most do not have proper documents to prove their identity. Even though they had valid citizenship documents, they had those confiscated and were told that the documents were counterfeit.

Human Rights Watch (HRW), a New York-based organization, said India forcibly expelled more than 1,500 Muslim men, women, and children to Bangladesh between 7 May and 15 June, quoting Bangladeshi authorities. The police, while detaining the suspects, speak of harrowing tales of being robbed of their cash and valuables, the poor people possessed. For the detained Muslims, the sky seems to have fallen over their head.

India is one of the few South Asia countries where secularism, equality and rights of citizens are guaranteed in the state constitution, but the government and law enforcement authorities are flouting the law with impunity during the arbitrary crackdown on illegal immigrants.

The suspects are forcibly boarded on a train or trucks and brought near the India-Bangladesh border. They are pushed through porous borders into Bangladesh. Such “push-in” as it is popularly said on both sides of the border has become a regular phenomenon of the Indian Border Security Forces (BSF).

Bangladesh is encircled by India on three sides by land, and has seen relations with New Delhi turn icy since a mass uprising in August last year toppled the autocratic government of Sheikh Hasina, an ally of India, who is living in exile somewhere in New Delhi.

Bangladesh’s Foreign Ministry has repeatedly communicated with the Indian Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) to abide by international laws for deporting illegal immigrants. The standard procedure would be to produce a list of names, photos, addresses in Bangladesh, and documents to prove they are from Bangladesh.

Bangladesh authorities would verify their citizenship and decide who could be sent back. Meanwhile, some Arab countries, Malaysia, South Korea, the United States and other countries have provided documents of those deported for illegally staying in their country and are undocumented. They are listed when their work permit and visas expired long ago, or they were involved in heinous crimes and given long-term prison sentences. The criminals are sent back to serve the rest of their imprisonment tenure in their home country.

Political historian and researcher Mohiuddin Ahmad aptly said thousands of senior and junior leaders of Awami League, which ruled Bangladesh for more than 15 years, have fled to India, but they are not arrested for illegally crossing the border to India without valid travel documents.

The Indian government has kept its eyes closed to exiled politicians. The political leaders are mostly living in Kolkata and New Delhi at the behest of the Indian authorities. The majority of the Awami League leaders are Muslims and speak Bangla, but they are exempted from the crackdown, Ahmad remarked.

South Block in New Delhi remains silent over the pressing issue. Every week, the Indian border police are pushing so-called unauthorized immigrants into Bangladesh. The Border Guards Bangladesh (BGB) is not at all informed of the push-in. The operation is secretly conducted and in the cover of darkness by the BSF.

Despite the arbitrary deportation of “illegal immigrants” including Indian citizens, embargo on exports to India, moratorium on visas for Bangladesh nationals, and other pressing issues, Foreign Affairs Adviser Touhid Hossain last week reiterated that the interim government always wanted a good working relationship with India based on reciprocity and mutual respect. Our (Bangladesh) position remains unchanged,” Hossain said, noting that no one from the interim government ever said they do not want good relations with India.

Meanwhile, HRW in a strongly worded statement recently said India has pushed hundreds of ethnic Bangla-speaking Muslims into Bangladesh without due process, accusing the government of flouting rules and fuelling bias on religious lines.

The Hindu nationalist government of Prime Minister Narendra Modi has long taken a hard-line stance on immigration, particularly those from neighboring Muslim-majority Bangladesh, with top authorities referring to them as “termites” and “infiltrators”.

The crackdown has sparked fear among India’s estimated 200 million Muslims, especially among those speaking Bangla, the HRW statement said. “India’s ruling BJP (Bharatiya Janata Party) is fuelling discrimination by arbitrarily expelling Bangla-speaking Muslims from the country, including Indian citizens,” said Elaine Pearson, Asia Director of HRW.

“The Indian government is putting thousands of vulnerable people at risk in apparent pursuit of unauthorized immigrants, but their actions reflect broader discriminatory policies against Muslims.” India has also been accused of forcibly deporting Muslim Rohingya refugees from Myanmar, with navy ships dropping them off the coast of the war-torn nation.

First published in Stratheia Policy Journal, Islamabad, Pakistan, 29 July 2025

Saleem Samad is an award-winning independent journalist based in Bangladesh. A media rights defender with the Reporters Without Borders. Recipient of Ashoka Fellowship and Hellman-Hammett Award. He could be reached at saleemsamad@gmail.com; Twitter (X): @saleemsamad