Former Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee often highlighted that friends can be changed and chosen, but neighbours cannot. His wise quote brings to the surface many intricate realities of the modern-day diaspora. The foundation of modern diplomatic relations today is largely based on economic profit and loss—whether it is the recent deal between India and the European Union or trade negotiations involving the United States. Diplomats are busy analysing the gains and losses of these agreements in their own ways.
Beyond this, a new question is often raised: what will happen to India’s old ally Russia as India moves towards what many describe as the “Mother of All Deals”? Will India continue to buy cheap crude oil from Russia as it did before?
With rapidly changing power dynamics, the strain on relationships is bound to fluctuate. However, India’s geopolitical equations are changing a little too fast. To the east lies Bangladesh, which shares a border of more than 4,000 kilometres with India, where general elections are scheduled to be held on February 12. The question now is: who will form the government in Bangladesh after February 12? Will a radical government come to power? If so, at whose behest will such forces take decisions? How are the tones of Jamaat-e-Islami changing just before voting? What will happen to Bangladesh Nationalist Party powerbroker Tarique Rahman? Will the BNP be able to return to power riding a sympathy wave after the death of Khaleda Zia? Has the Awami League’s role in Bangladesh politics come to an end? After February 12, will attacks on minority Hindus increase or decrease? And how much impact will the Bangladesh elections have on India, China, and Pakistan? Today, we try to find answers to these questions.
Bangladesh Elections: A Brief History
About two years ago, general elections were held in Bangladesh. Voting took place for 299 out of 300 seats. Of these, Sheikh Hasina’s Awami League won 204 seats, and the reins of Bangladesh remained firmly in her hands. However, by the time July arrived, her government faced multiple challenges simultaneously. On August 5, 2024, Sheikh Hasina resigned after massive protests and narrowly escaped Bangladesh to save her life.
With Bangladesh yet again standing on the precipice of elections, Sheikh Hasina’s Awami League is no longer in the race. In this situation, it becomes important to understand which political parties are now contesting.
On February 6, thousands of workers of the Inqilab Manch took to the streets in Dhaka to demand justice for Usman Hadi Shahid. Protesters marched to gherao the official residence of interim government chief Mohammed Yunus. Police forces tried all possible methods to stop the protesters.
Usman Hadi was a major force behind the anti–Sheikh Hasina movement in July 2024. On December 12, he was shot dead in broad daylight in Dhaka’s Paltan area and later succumbed to his injuries on December 18. At present, police and paramilitary forces are deployed across Dhaka. Under such circumstances, the question arises: will the elections be conducted in a fair manner?
These elections mark a historic shift for Bangladesh, as it is the first time in the last 30–35 years that the country is witnessing polls without either of the two “Begums.” Sheikh Hasina is out of the country, while BNP leader Begum Khaleda Zia passed away on December 30. The party is now being led by her son, Tarique Rahman.
Over the years, politics in Bangladesh has largely been dominated by two parties: the Awami League and the BNP. One of the major decisions taken by Mohammed Yunus’s interim government was to ban the political activities of the Awami League and its alliance partners. In this scenario, the BNP under Tarique Rahman appears to be emerging as a major political force.
In the battle for power, Jamaat-e-Islami is the second major contender, led by Shafiqur Rahman. Jamaat-e-Islami is heading an alliance of 11 parties. The National Citizen Party, formed by students who led the movement against former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, has also joined hands with Jamaat. There is little ideological difference between Shafiqur Rahman’s Jamaat and Tarique Rahman’s BNP.
With the absence of the Awami League, the character and faces of political parties in the electoral arena have changed significantly. The BNP has promised administrative and democratic reforms in its election manifesto and has avoided directly mentioning India.
Jamaat-e-Islami is trying its best to capture power. Its strategy is to take advantage of the Awami League’s absence and attract undecided voters. Jamaat’s hardline brigade has significantly softened its political stance, and its manifesto avoids aggressive rhetoric against India.
The National Citizen Party has similar ambitions but different plans. Its leaders have focused on youth and employment, have been vocal about demanding Sheikh Hasina’s extradition, and promise to strengthen economic ties with China.
Several new parties are also trying their luck in the February 12 elections. It appears that three forces are clashing in Bangladesh’s political arena: first, Mohammed Yunus’s interim government, allegedly backed by radical groups; second, the BNP led by Tarique Rahman; and third, foreign powers pursuing their interests amid Bangladesh’s turmoil.
The most significant change has been in Jamaat-e-Islami. Its manifesto mentions restoring relations with India and other neighbouring countries and taking steps towards a safe and humane Bangladesh.
This raises critical questions: what is the real reason behind Jamaat-e-Islami’s change in tone? Will attacks on minority Hindus stop? Will temples no longer be demolished? Will the government formed after February 12 maintain relations with India the way they were during Sheikh Hasina’s tenure?
Jamaat chief Shafiqur Rahman believes that his party’s fortunes will turn this time and that Jamaat will get a chance to govern Bangladesh. Jamaat is leading an alliance of 11 parties, including hardliners. However, Shafiqur Rahman understands that gaining power through old hardline ideology and anti-India rhetoric is no longer viable. Hence, Jamaat’s 41-point manifesto promises judicial and economic reforms, inclusion of women in the cabinet, and constructive relations with India and neighbouring countries. It emphasises dialogue and cooperation for regional peace, stability, and shared prosperity.
Reports from Bangladeshi media outlets suggest that unemployment and governance are Bangladesh’s biggest challenges and that solutions are impossible without good relations with India and neighbouring countries.
Bangladesh’s key political players acknowledge that unemployment and governance are the country’s biggest challenges and that lasting solutions are not possible without stable relations with India and other neighbours. Jamaat-e-Islami, however, remains a deeply controversial force due to its support for the Pakistani army in 1971, its re-emergence after secularism was removed in 1977, its alliance with BNP governments, and the eventual crackdown under Sheikh Hasina, including the cancellation of its registration in 2013 and its designation as a terrorist organisation in 2024.
What India Wants
India seeks a stable government in Bangladesh to prevent infiltration along the 4,000-kilometre border and to protect minority communities. Pakistan would welcome either the BNP or Jamaat coming to power, while China wants to maintain its influence. The United States also has strategic interests, particularly in the Bay of Bengal.
Though elections are scheduled for February 12, uncertainty remains. Who will govern? Will there be a majority or a coalition government? What will happen to interim chief Mohammed Yunus? Claims of him becoming president are also doing the rounds.
For now, most answers remain uncertain. Indian diplomats believe that neither the BNP nor Jamaat can afford poor relations with India at this stage. Bangladesh’s youth need jobs, growth, and stability, and for these goals, relations with Delhi, Islamabad, and Beijing are bound to reset.
History is replete with examples of Bangladesh’s repeated upheavals. As the country once again stands at a crossroads, the Indian government will have to remain vigilant—because in diplomacy, what is said and what is ultimately done are often very different.
