Answer

India’s close engagement with the Awami League government in Bangladesh has strengthened connectivity and security cooperation, but it also raises concerns about future relations if a different political leadership assumes power. With Bangladesh’s general elections witnessing political tensions, India’s approach highlights the need for a balanced and adaptive foreign policy to ensure regional stability and strategic continuity.

Long-Term Diplomatic Risks of Aligning Foreign Policy Too Closely with a Single Political Regime

• Loss of Alternative Alliances: Over-reliance on a single leader restricts diplomatic flexibility, leaving limited engagement with opposition groups and broader state institutions.
• Anti-India Sentiment Growth: Perceived favoritism fuels public resentment, making India a target for opposition forces and shifting national sentiments against its policies.
• Economic and Trade Repercussions: Close alignment with one regime risks economic ties being sidelined under new leadership, affecting trade agreements and market access.
• Security and Strategic Setbacks: A sudden leadership change can result in military and intelligence cooperation being downgraded or reversed.
  For example: Bangladesh, once a key partner in counter-insurgency cooperation, is now exploring military collaboration with Pakistan, altering the regional security balance.
• Diplomatic Credibility Damage: Shifting positions after a regime change creates inconsistencies, reducing India’s credibility as a neutral and long-term diplomatic partner.
  For example: India’s stance on inclusive elections changed post-Hasina, raising accusations of double standards, damaging trust in its diplomatic commitments.

Way Ahead for India’s Bangladesh Policy

• Diversify Political Engagement: India must establish ties beyond ruling parties, engaging opposition leaders, civil society, and bureaucratic institutions to maintain long-term diplomatic stability.
  For example: In Nepal, India’s engagement with both Maoists and democratic forces helped it retain influence despite leadership changes.
• Address Public Concerns: Tackling trade imbalances, border security, and water-sharing disputes will improve India’s image and reduce public resentment.
  For example: A revised Teesta water-sharing agreement would address Bangladesh’s grievances, preventing it from turning to China for alternatives.
• Enhance Economic Cooperation: India should support investments in Bangladesh’s industrial sectors and technology-driven collaborations to balance economic dependence.
  For example: Japan’s investment in Bangladesh’s Matarbari deep-sea port offers a model of sustained economic cooperation beyond political shifts.
• Promote Regional Stability: Strengthening BIMSTEC and SAARC platforms ensures diplomatic continuity beyond individual governments, fostering regional resilience.
  For example: India’s diplomatic role in the Maldives remained steady despite leadership changes due to its regional commitments.
• Use Strategic Soft Power: Strengthening people-to-people ties through cultural exchanges, educational scholarships, and media cooperation can build long-term goodwill.
  For example: India’s educational scholarships for Afghan students maintained its influence even after political turmoil in Afghanistan.

To safeguard strategic interests, India must cultivate multi-party engagement in Bangladesh, fostering ties beyond political cycles. Strengthening economic interdependence, people-to-people connections, and institutional collaborations will ensure resilience against regime shifts. A pragmatic, adaptive foreign policy will secure long-term regional stability and India’s leadership in South Asia.