The July Uprising is not merely a political transition. It is a clear sign of a potential realignment in Bangladesh’s geopolitical positioning. The voices of the new generation that took to the streets, echoed demands for democracy, transparency, accountability, and equality, demands that have not only reshaped domestic politics but also compelled a rethinking of the country’s foreign policy and international orientation.
This generation no longer desires dependency on any geopolitical bloc. What they seek is a principled, dignified and equality-based diplomatic outlook. However, in stark contrast to these aspirations, Bangladesh’s current diplomatic stance appears trapped in a crisis of hesitation, ambiguity and lack of coordination.
Historically, Bangladesh has pursued a vacillating policy between its two neighbours, India and Pakistan. It sometimes leaned towards India, at other times tilted towards Pakistan, depending on the political camp in power. But today’s generation envisions a Bangladesh whose foreign policy is grounded not in bloc dependence, but in principled positions, national dignity and self-defined interests.
The demands of this transformed generation, and the urgency for a non-aligned, values-driven policy, have become even more pronounced amid the rapidly changing geopolitical landscape of South Asia and its surrounding regions. The electoral process and military-ethnic conflicts in Myanmar, the Rohingya crisis, India–Pakistan tensions, and the growing China–US rivalry over the Bay of Bengal, all contribute to an increasingly volatile regional context. Against this backdrop, the real question is: how coherent, self-reliant and professionally competent are Bangladesh’s positions, decisions and diplomatic strategies?
In 2016, Bangladesh joined China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). And in 2023, through the announcement of its Indo-Pacific Outlook, Bangladesh expressed interest in working with the United States and its allies in the Indo-Pacific region. As a result, a framework for a kind of balanced diplomacy began to emerge. But the question remains: was this balancing strategy genuinely well-planned and coherent, or was it confined to grand declarations alone?
Many observers believe that the current foreign policy suffers from a serious lack of coordination, vision and professionalism. Although there have been some initiatives at the highest levels of government, their implementation appears largely absent. The role of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs seems rather marginal. In the face of geopolitical crises, our responses often appear erratic and contradictory. For instance, on the issue of communication with Myanmar’s Arakan Army, different sources within the government have offered varying and unclear statements at different times. This has further complicated the already critical matter of Rohingya repatriation.
This policy ambiguity, some argue, is partly tied to the question of political legitimacy. However, even if a government is not elected through a credible electoral process or lacks strong political support, it can still consolidate its international standing by building public support. What is essential in such cases is a strong and well-organised diplomacy. Diplomacy is a complex field where personal connections are secondary to institutional professionalism, creativity, competence and consistency.
For example, when it comes to the Rohingya crisis and the broader Arakan situation, Bangladesh has little to show in terms of recent success. On the contrary, various statements and actions from different levels of the government have sown confusion and doubt among the public. At the same time, our bilateral relationship with Myanmar has become more entangled, pushing the prospect of Rohingya repatriation into deeper uncertainty.
We must remember that Myanmar is our neighbor. The nature of our relationship with them must be determined based on reality, strategy, and potential consequences. Diplomacy does not function on emotion or spectacle. Wishing alone does not make things happen; but with the right strategy and structure, much can indeed be achieved.
In this context, Bangladesh needs a well-organised diplomatic framework that not only understands the realities of the Arakan region and creates opportunities for effective engagement, but also maintains essential levels of communication with all stakeholders. This includes Myanmar’s central government, the Arakan Army, and local groups, each requiring meaningful and sensitive dialogue. Some of these connections must be official, others at the non-governmental level, and in some cases at the strategic or technical level. For such engagement, a clear policy direction and inter-ministerial coordination in foreign affairs are essential.
What we now need is a foreign policy that reconfigures our relationships with India, China, the United States, and Pakistan, on the basis of equity, interest, and mutual respect.
Unfortunately, this desired coordination is still absent in our foreign policy. On a sensitive issue like communication with the Arakan Army, if the Myanmar government raises questions or if in the future they themselves enter into an agreement with the Arakan Army, what position will Bangladesh take? These questions point to gaps in our strategic preparedness.
In my view, as a neighbour, our objective should be to support the creation of conditions within Myanmar that would enable the safe, dignified and sustainable repatriation of the Rohingya. Whether that means accepting the mediation of China or another regional power, or maintaining constructive and respectful bilateral relations with the Myanmar government, in all cases, a realistic, humane, and coordinated strategy is essential.
At this moment, Bangladesh’s diplomacy faces at least four major and clearly defined challenges: 1. To continue economic progress through good governance while working in balanced partnerships with the global community, especially in creating an enabling domestic environment for employment and a secure future for the new generation; 2. The Rohingya crisis and Myanmar’s political instability; 3. Energy security and geostrategic competition in the Bay of Bengal; and, 4. Establishing a balanced and self-reliant diplomatic position amid the competing spheres of influence of the United States, China, and India.
To address these challenges, diplomacy must be considered a national priority. The ‘Three Ds’–Development, Diplomacy, and Defence — must be urgently aligned in a coordinated framework. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs must be restructured as the country’s window to the world and empowered through professional competence, institutional capacity, and political support.
Our political history shows that, at various times, political parties have attempted to control internal politics by strategically relying on external powers, through the bureaucracy, military support, or assistance from regional actors. These tendencies have long posed significant obstacles to the development of an independent, principled, and dignified foreign policy.
The global reality is changing rapidly. What we now need is a foreign policy that reconfigures our relationships with India, China, the United States, and Pakistan, on the basis of equity, interest, and mutual respect. Let our diplomatic direction be guided not by history, emotion, or political camps, but by national needs and the welfare of the people.
We must understand that diplomacy is our primary channel of connection with the outside world. Trade, investment, climate finance, and security cooperation, all operate under the umbrella of diplomacy. Therefore, whether we deepen ties with China, collaborate with the United States, or maintain friendship with India, this must all be done in light of national interest, practical necessity, and the aspirations of the young generation. Only then can Bangladesh attain a balanced, dignified, and strategically resilient position in the geopolitical landscape.
M Humayun Kabir is President, Bangladesh Enterprise Institute (BEI) and former ambassador
(Transcription: Syed Rifat Moslem)
