It may not have the blood and gore of ‘Game of Thrones’, but the diplomatic drama involving the dragon, the elephant and the tiger, playing on a news channel near you is no less riveting. The latest salvo involves the elephant, or India, as it suspended transshipment facilities for export cargo from Bangladesh, a move that is expected to have significant implications for trade across the region. This decision was made just days after Bangladesh’s interim leader, Muhammad Yunus, made provocative remarks regarding India’s north-eastern States and their strategic vulnerability. His comments, coupled with Bangladesh’s growing engagement with China, signal a shift in Dhaka’s foreign policy that raises questions about the future of India-Bangladesh relations.
The Indian government’s decision to revoke the 2020 circular that allowed Bangladesh to use Indian Land Customs Stations for the transshipment of goods to third countries is likely to disrupt the flow of goods from Bangladesh to Bhutan, Nepal, and Myanmar. The cancellation came swiftly, leaving little room for negotiation, and will undoubtedly cause logistical delays and increase costs for Bangladeshi exporters. While the Indian authorities have clarified that cargo already in transit will not be affected, the broader implications of this move point to an escalating diplomatic rift between the two countries.
What makes this decision even more noteworthy is the timing. Just days before India’s move, Yunus made controversial statements during his visit to China, where he referred to Bangladesh as the “only guardian of the ocean” for the region, alluding to the “Seven Sisters” of India’s north-eastern States. This statement is an implicit invitation for China to extend its economic influence in the region. Yunus’s rhetoric, including his assertion that the north-eastern Indian States, along with Bhutan and Nepal, could become part of an “extension of the Chinese economy,” has stoked fears in New Delhi about Bangladesh’s growing alignment with China.
For India, these remarks are alarming, as India’s north-eastern States, particularly those connected by the Siliguri Corridor, are of immense strategic importance to New Delhi. The potential for a Chinese military or economic foothold near this critical corridor would be seen as a direct threat to India’s security. Yunus’s comments suggest Bangladesh is beginning to distance itself from India while seeking closer ties with China. This is underscored by Yunus’s visit to China, where he signed agreements aimed at modernising Mongla Port with Chinese financial backing. China’s $400 million investment in the port expansion could potentially increase its influence in the Bay of Bengal, further complicating India’s strategic landscape. These developments are not merely economic – they are part of a larger, long-term strategic game in which China seeks to extend its reach in South Asia.
China has already established a significant presence in South Asia through its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), with projects such as the Hambantota Port in Sri Lanka and the Gwadar Port in Pakistan. Bangladesh, with its strategic location and growing ties with China, is at risk of falling into a similar debt-trap diplomacy. By allowing China to expand its influence, Bangladesh could find itself increasingly dependent on Beijing, potentially at the expense of its traditional ties with India.
However, Yunus’s government, which came to power after the ousting of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina last year, is in a fragile position, both politically and diplomatically. Yunus’s controversial statements, made during his first visit to China, may be part of an attempt to shore up support from Beijing, given the domestic challenges his government faces. The diplomatic fallout from Yunus’s comments has been swift. Indian political leaders, including Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma, have condemned the remarks, calling them “offensive” and “strongly condemnable”. Even regional leaders have expressed concern about the potential implications of Bangladesh’s growing proximity to China. For India, the risk of a destabilised and weakened regional order is too great to ignore. India has long been a key partner in Bangladesh’s development, contributing to infrastructure, power, and energy sectors. Yet, this partnership is now under strain.
Both nations must also recognise the dangers of allowing external powers to gain too much influence in their backyard. Bangladesh’s growing ties with China could create a regional power imbalance that neither country can afford. The coming months will be crucial in determining whether India and Bangladesh can find a path back to cooperation or whether they will continue to drift further apart. While Yunus’s remarks reflect a broader geopolitical shift, they also reveal the growing complexities of South Asian regional relationships, which are anyway intertwined through shared colonial histories. Caution and pragmatism should be the order of the day, or else instability fuelled by power games can engulf the region. ‘Game of Thrones’ has enough pointers to how that can unfold.