Bangladesh’s foreign policy with India has seen many ups and downs.

The Centre-to-Left political constituents (believers in the spirit of 1971) led by the Awami League under Sheikh Hasina sustained deeper ties with India whereas the Centre-to-Right forces (adherents of 1947) led by the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) under Khaleda Zia have a huge stake in an anti-Indian contract.

The movement that has ousted Sheikh Hasina was launched by students, predominantly from the Left-wing and liberal student groups. It irked the Right-wing Opposition parties, especially the BNP and the Jamaat-e-Islami.

The BNP, remote-controlled by Khaleda Zia’s son Tarique Rahman from exile in the UK, lacks a vision of its own. Having boycotted the elections of 2014 and 2024, it has already lost its political influence and organisational strength in Bangladesh. To revive its political prospects, it joined the anti-Hasina protests.

However, the current epoch has witnessed certain fundamental changes in the outlook of the Bangladesh polity. What are the new changes, and how permanent are they? And where is the new government headed?

Who is behind the coup? Did domestic factors dominate the discourse or were there external forces that determined Sheikh Hasina’s fate?

These are some of the questions that will be answered in time to come.

Over the years, Bangladesh has become India’s closest development partner although several significant developments happened relating to foreign investment in Bangladesh, particularly China’s intended investment on the Teesta Barrage. Hasina, however, preferred India.

Being geo-strategically significant, Bangladesh has attracted many international actors, including the US.

The US wanted a strong military and political presence in Bangladesh. In 1998, the US proposed that Bangladesh sign a Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA), to enable American troops to conduct joint exercises and participate in rescue and relief operations.

However, a softer form, the Humanitarian Assistance Need Assessment (HANA) was signed.

Today in Bangladesh, America’s biggest concern is the increasing Chinese presence in the Bay of Bengal and China’s support to the military junta in Myanmar. America wants to bring Bangladesh into its Indo-Pacific strategy and minimise the Chinese influence.

In recent decades, the Chinese have come out with several economic and infrastructural projects in the region. China aspires to physical connectivity through projects like the proposed Bangladesh-China-India-Myanmar (BCIM) Economic corridor.

In fact, Bangladesh and China are transforming their robust strategic partnership. As Bangladesh’s largest trading partner, China has made substantial investments in manufacturing and infrastructure projects like the Karnaphuli tunnel, Padma bridge, Payra deep-sea port, Chittagong shipping facility, and a proposed upgrade of Sylhet airport.

Since 2002, China has served as Bangladesh’s primary arms supplier under a Defence Umbrella Agreement.

There has been constant pressure from extra-regional powers such as the
US, UK, Japan and Australia on Bangladesh to have free, fair, transparent, participatory and meaningful elections and a viable space for the Opposition.

The US has used its strategic interests to align its policies vis-a-vis Bangladesh. It has been appreciative of Bangladesh’s developmental agenda, but criticised the domestic apparatus and democratic practices in the country.

One may argue that US-imposed sanctions and visa restrictions on Bangladesh have provided the country with a dominant reason to incline towards China.

If Peace Nobel winner Muhammad Yunus is picked as chief adviser to Bangladesh’s interim government, it will be clear that the US is still engaged in the recent developments in Bangladesh.

Yunus has been known for his pro-West stance and neo-liberal approach. Having Yunus in this significant position will not have much of an adverse impact on India-Bangladesh ties. Peace and security will not be disrupted, and the hardliners will have less opportunity in Bangladesh.

However, the big question remains: How will the hardliners and radicals take it if Yunus assumes this new role?