Special Correspondent:

One of the most important tests facing Bangladesh’s foreign policy during the first six months of the government has been its relationship with neighbouring India. In a rapidly changing global environment, ties with India are closely linked to Bangladesh’s national interests, economic security, regional connectivity and diplomatic balance. The challenge before Prime Minister Tarique Rahman is therefore to move the relationship forward based on national interest and practical realities rather than political emotion.

The BNP-led government has promised a new approach to governance and foreign policy. In today’s interconnected world, no country can prosper in isolation. For a country like Bangladesh, with its strategic geographical and economic position, maintaining a balanced foreign policy is essential.

Bangladesh’s longstanding foreign policy principle—“Friendship to all, malice toward none”—has now been complemented by the concept of “Bangladesh First.” The central consideration in dealing with any country should therefore be the interests of the Bangladeshi people. Relations that contribute positively to the country’s economy, security, trade, energy, connectivity and overall development should be strengthened.

One of the most fundamental realities of foreign policy is that neighbours cannot be changed. Friendly relations with neighbouring countries can contribute to border stability while also creating opportunities for trade, connectivity and economic cooperation. For Bangladesh, the importance of India is therefore distinct from that of many other countries.

The two countries share a long border and have deep connections involving rivers, trade, energy, transportation, security and people-to-people contact. It would therefore be unrealistic for Bangladesh to formulate its foreign policy by ignoring India.

India’s support during Bangladesh’s Liberation War in 1971 remains an important chapter in the history of the two countries. Since independence, however, bilateral relations have gone through periods of both warmth and tension. Following the political changes of 1975, President Ziaur Rahman played an important role in improving relations with India.

After assuming the presidency in April 1977, Ziaur Rahman visited India in December of the same year at the invitation of then-Indian Prime Minister Morarji Desai. Despite differences within his own government over the visit, Ziaur Rahman placed national interests above political calculations.

The subsequent agreement on the sharing of Ganges water came to be regarded as an important diplomatic achievement for Bangladesh’s interests concerning water resources.

A key feature of Ziaur Rahman’s foreign policy was the development of diversified international relations. His efforts to strengthen ties with Japan and China, expand engagement with Middle Eastern countries and create new opportunities for manpower exports were driven largely by Bangladesh’s economic interests.

His approach toward India was similarly pragmatic. Rather than relying on a single major power, his foreign policy sought to establish relations with different countries on the basis of Bangladesh’s national interests.

A similar pragmatic approach was visible during the tenure of former Prime Minister Khaleda Zia. After forming the government in 1991, she visited India following a visit to the United States. She also visited India in 2006. Her 2012 visit, when she was leader of the opposition, was particularly significant.

During that seven-day visit, Khaleda Zia held meetings with senior Indian political leaders and received considerable attention from the Indian side. Although sections of the BNP-led alliance and some party leaders had reservations about the visit, she proceeded with it, prioritising her own assessment of Bangladesh’s national interests.

She also made it clear that the BNP did not pursue anti-India politics. Her position reflected an understanding that maintaining relations with a neighbouring country was necessary for Bangladesh’s national interests.

As the successor to that pragmatic diplomatic tradition, Prime Minister Tarique Rahman now faces a similar and potentially significant test. The practical application of his government’s “Bangladesh First” policy will be most important where political pressure, public sentiment and national interests do not necessarily point in the same direction.

The interim government following the political changes of 2024 also saw several developments that contributed to uncertainty in Bangladesh’s foreign relations. Critics argued that the government placed too much emphasis on its international acceptability and global image rather than clearly prioritising Bangladesh’s interests.

Relations with India, in particular, deteriorated significantly during the period. The deterioration did not produce any clear long-term benefit for Bangladesh. Instead, difficulties emerged in areas including trade, visas, border management, connectivity and people-to-people movement.

Statements by senior figures in the then-government that were perceived as anti-India further contributed to diplomatic tensions. Although there were calls to cancel what were described as “unequal agreements,” no major agreement was ultimately cancelled. Similar debates over the Adani power deal also failed to result in its termination.

Remarks made by Muhammad Yunus during his visit to China regarding India’s northeastern states, commonly known as the “Seven Sisters,” generated further controversy. Statements by a head of government concerning a neighbouring country’s security and sovereignty can naturally have diplomatic consequences.

India subsequently introduced restrictions concerning the use of certain ports for Bangladeshi exports, creating difficulties for exporters. Visa services were also severely restricted for an extended period, affecting Bangladeshis travelling to India for medical treatment, education and business.

Tensions were also reported along the border at different times. The deterioration in bilateral relations, however, offered no lasting economic or practical benefit to ordinary Bangladeshis.

The impact of strained relations even extended into the sporting arena, with uncertainty surrounding Bangladesh’s participation in major international events creating concerns about the country’s sporting image. More broadly, the deterioration of a long-standing relationship with a major neighbour also had implications for Bangladesh’s international standing.

Recent developments, however, have created some indications that the relationship could move toward normalisation. Following the death of Khaleda Zia, Indian Foreign Minister S. Jaishankar travelled to Bangladesh to offer condolences. After Tarique Rahman became prime minister, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi congratulated him and expressed hope for further progress in bilateral relations.

The participation of Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla in the swearing-in ceremony of Bangladesh’s new government was also viewed as a significant diplomatic gesture.

India has subsequently expressed interest in strengthening bilateral ties and invited the Bangladeshi prime minister to visit India. For Dhaka, this creates an opportunity to rebuild confidence and establish a more stable relationship.

India’s decision to appoint experienced politician Dinesh Trivedi as its high commissioner to Bangladesh and moves to resume visa services have also been seen as indications of an interest in restoring normal relations.

During periods of energy shortages, India has expressed willingness to support Bangladesh, while discussions have also taken place on increasing supplies of gas and other energy resources. Even relatively small developments, such as the opportunity to import green chillies from India when shortages affected the Bangladeshi market, demonstrate the practical nature of the two countries’ economic interdependence.

For Bangladesh, the importance of relations with India is not limited to politics or diplomacy. It is directly connected to the economy.

Bangladesh’s garment and manufacturing industries require cotton, yarn, fabrics, chemicals, dyes, machinery, spare parts and other inputs. Because of India’s geographical proximity, many of these products can be transported quickly and at comparatively lower costs.

Any major disruption in the supply chain could force Bangladeshi businesses to rely more heavily on distant markets such as China. That would increase transportation costs, lengthen delivery times and require companies to maintain larger inventories.

Ultimately, such developments could raise production costs and weaken Bangladesh’s export competitiveness.

Bangladesh’s geographical position is one of its major economic advantages. Through road, rail, river and border trade networks, the country has opportunities to connect not only with India but also with markets in Nepal, Bhutan and India’s northeastern region.

Indian cooperation is particularly important for regional connectivity and transit. A deterioration in bilateral relations could therefore undermine these opportunities.

Water sharing, energy, border management, trade, transit and security all involve significant mutual interests. India is important to Bangladesh, but Bangladesh is also strategically important to India. The relationship should therefore not be viewed simply in terms of dependence. It should instead be managed on the basis of mutual interests and mutual benefit.

The same principle applies to security cooperation. Information sharing and coordination between the two countries are important in addressing border management, smuggling, human trafficking, cross-border crime, terrorism and militancy. A breakdown in such cooperation could create risks for both countries.

None of this means Bangladesh should agree with India on every issue. Dhaka must continue to take a firm position on border killings, a fair share of transboundary river waters, trade imbalances, restrictions on Bangladeshi products and any agreement that does not adequately protect national interests.

A friendly relationship and a firm defence of national interests are not mutually exclusive. Indeed, the real test of diplomacy lies precisely in maintaining friendship while protecting national interests.

The question before Bangladesh is therefore not whether to choose India or another major power. The real challenge is how to maintain balanced relations with India, China, the United States, Japan, Europe, the Middle East and other partners while securing Bangladesh’s interests to the greatest possible extent.

That is the practical meaning of the “Bangladesh First” policy.

The government should also be cautious about pressure from domestic groups seeking to push Bangladesh toward an excessively anti-India position. Disagreements between states are normal. But allowing one or several disputes to close the door to all forms of dialogue and cooperation would hardly constitute prudent diplomacy.

There are also risks in turning anti-India sentiment into a political instrument. An overly confrontational approach could deepen political divisions, create uncertainty among businesses and investors and place additional pressure on the economy. It could also unnecessarily push Bangladesh toward one side amid growing competition among regional and global powers.

The BNP describes itself as a liberal and democratic political party. Its government’s foreign policy should therefore reflect pragmatism, balance and a clear commitment to national interests. Diplomatic success should not be measured by how strongly a government opposes India, but by how effectively it secures Bangladesh’s interests.

Prime Minister Tarique Rahman now has an important opportunity. He can build on the pragmatic foreign policy traditions associated with Ziaur Rahman and Khaleda Zia while adapting them to the realities of the 21st century.

Bangladesh can seek to normalise relations with India while maintaining firm positions on every issue affecting its national interests. Water sharing, border management, trade, energy and connectivity should all be addressed through sustained diplomatic engagement.

There is little permanent value in resentment or political stubbornness in international diplomacy. Ultimately, national interest must remain the final consideration.

The question of whether Tarique Rahman should accept an invitation from the Indian prime minister and visit India should therefore be decided not on the basis of political emotion, but through careful consideration of Bangladesh’s long-term national interests.

The people of Bangladesh deserve a foreign policy that neither blindly aligns with any country nor creates unnecessary hostility. It should promote friendship while preserving national dignity, encourage cooperation without compromising sovereignty, and place the welfare of the Bangladeshi people above all other considerations.

For Prime Minister Tarique Rahman, this may be the most important test yet of his government’s “Bangladesh First” foreign policy.

The expectation of the people is clear: the government should not bow to political pressure or emotion. Instead, it should make decisions based on long-term national interests, economic realities and public welfare. Bangladesh’s interests must be defended most effectively at the negotiating table.

That, ultimately, would be the clearest expression of a genuine “Bangladesh First” foreign policy.