- Rather than playing to its strength, Bangladesh now finds itself torn in a tornado of extremism and foreign intervention.
- Radical factions, spurred by foreign support, are propagating narratives that view India as a foe instead of a long-time friend.
- By financing extremist networks and insinuating itself in political circles, ISI has attempted to erase Bangladesh’s secular underpinnings in favour of anti-India sentiment.
- Reports suggest that the long-term plan was to establish a pro-U.S. government that would permit American military bases on Bangladeshi territory, countering China’s regional hegemony.
Bangladesh was born after a long-fought battle in 1971, with India as its ally. It had all the ingredients to be a prosperous nation—geographical location, an emerging economy, and a vibrant cultural heritage. For decades, it progressed towards development, demonstrating its capability on the international front, such as its rise that even managed to increase its purchasing power parity compared to India.
But somewhere along the line, everything went wrong. Rather than playing to its strength, Bangladesh now finds itself torn in a tornado of extremism and foreign intervention. What was formerly a rising country is now adrift towards insecurity, eroding its sense of self and destiny. The very dream upon which millions laid down their lives in 1971 is currently under threat—and not because of foreign foes but because of domestic decisions. Rather than embracing its past and natural friends, Bangladesh is falling into a pattern of self-destruction—one that profits China, radicalizes forces, and destabilizes South Asia.
Rising Anti-India Wave
On the Dhaka and Chittagong streets, protests against India are becoming increasingly common. Radical factions, spurred by foreign support, are propagating narratives that view India as a foe instead of a long-time friend. Increased attacks on Hindu minorities, denigration of Indian investments, and glorification of extremist ideologies all indicate a broader, more sinister plan. Who gains from this mayhem? Not the common Bangladeshi citizen who hopes for economic stability and regional harmony in the future. The actual gainers are located beyond Bangladesh’s borders—Pakistan’s ISI, China’s, and parts of the US intelligence.
The Teesta Betrayal: How Bangladesh Played Into China’s Hands
Bangladesh and India sparred for years over the Teesta River, a lifeline for farmers on both sides of the border. Through political setbacks, the river represented a shared destiny—a future where the two neighbours could cooperate for mutual advancement. But rather than negotiating a balanced agreement with India, Bangladesh approached China. Now, Beijing is financing a multi-billion-dollar Teesta River Management Project, effectively owning a resource that should have been kept in the region.
This isn’t just about water; it’s about sovereignty.
- India loses a key strategic ally, while China gains leverage over both nations.
- Bangladesh is moving closer to a debt-trap situation, as Sri Lanka did.
- China’s increasing presence along India’s Siliguri Corridor is a security worry.
What Bangladesh perceives as economic assistance, China perceives as an investment in power. And when the moment arrives, Beijing will get its due—just as it did in Sri Lanka, where Chinese lending resulted in the loss of Hambantota Port.
Pakistan’s Revenge and the US Deep State’s Game
Pakistan’s ISI spent decades attempting to destabilize Bangladesh, never forgetting its loss in 1971. As Islamist forces gained prominence, ISI at last discovered the ideal instrument—radicalization. By financing extremist networks and insinuating itself in political circles, ISI has attempted to erase Bangladesh’s secular underpinnings in favour of anti-India sentiment. In the meanwhile, the US Deep State, in the name of promoting democracy, also had its own game to play. Washington viewed Sheikh Hasina as an obstacle—too autonomous, too close to India and China. With diplomacy pressure, sanctions, and covert backing of opposition forces, the US collaborated in driving out Hasina and creating the very power vacuum ISI and China hurried to occupy.
The USAID Controversy
For decades, Bangladesh has been one of the prime beneficiaries of American financial assistance, with assurances of economic growth, good governance, and social development. In 2024, USAID committed another $202 million, allegedly to benefit these causes. But behind the scenes, recent exposures have questioned whether this fund benefits Bangladesh’s interests.
Ex-U.S. State Department official Mike Benz has revealed an even more disturbing truth: that USAID money was purportedly spent not to improve Bangladesh, but to influence its politics. For Benz, this aid was all part of a larger scheme to destabilize the current government and pave the way for a more U.S.-friendly leadership. Accounts indicate that much of this cash went to fund opposition parties, frame political agendas, and even instigate disturbances—all in the name of promoting democracy. Even the new DOGE headed by Elon Musk officially announced last week that the USA has also stopped the $29m aid to Bangladesh which was given to strengthen the political landscape in the country, now it’s been very clear that this political landscape was nothing but a mere pretext for supporting the opposition extremist party like Jamaat, Bangladesh nationalist part, now the question arises that why would the U.S. do this?
A Geopolitical Game
As China spreads its wings in South Asia, Washington is keen to gain a foothold in Bangladesh. Reports suggest that the long-term plan is to establish a pro-U.S. government that would permit American military bases on Bangladeshi territory, countering China’s regional hegemony. For the average Bangladeshi, this poses a very serious question: Is foreign aid really for development, or is it another means of control? If USAID funds are being employed to destabilize the nation rather than to build it, then Bangladesh is being pushed into a risky game—one where its destiny is no longer within its control. As more facts emerge, Bangladesh will have to consider its choices and future.
Bangladesh’s Identity Crisis
The irony in all this is that Bangladesh is going into its destruction with open eyes. By going against its past, it is going against itself. In 1971, Bangladeshis fought for a country that would be free from foreign domination, religious fanaticism, and foreign puppetry. But now, the same enemies are returning—only this time, they’re being invited in.
- Radicals are rewriting history, painting Pakistan as a friend instead of a brutal oppressor.
- China is buying influence, making Bangladesh another client state.
- The sole neighbour who had a true stake in Bangladesh’s prosperity is being driven away.
Today Bangladesh is no longer in charge of its future. A country where outside powers call the shots, where extremists drive policy, and where economic security is lost for political expediency. The option remains. Bangladesh can either regain its identity, consolidate its natural friendships, and secure its destiny—or keep moving down a path that leads to dependency, division, and decay.
References:
- India Today. 2024. “How India Lost Bangladesh to Pakistan and China.” *India Today*, December 3, 2024. https://www.indiatoday.in/world/story/how-india-lost-bangladesh-to-pakistan-and-china-2644392-2024-12-03
- Foreign Policy. 2024. “Bangladesh and India’s Tensions Are Growing.” *Foreign Policy*, December 16, 2024. https://foreignpolicy.com/2024/12/16/bangladesh-india-relations-hasina-tensions-pakistan-religion/
- Times of India. 2024. “How USAID Was Used for Regime Change in Bangladesh: Former US State Dept Official Mike Benz Reveals.” *The Times of India*, accessed February 17, 2025. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/us/how-usaid-was-used-for-regime-change-in-bangladesh-former-us-state-dept-official-mike-benz-reveals/articleshow/118118878.cms
Satish Chogule is pursuing a Masters in Political Science at the University of Kolhapur, Maharashtra. He has contributed to several online platforms on international affairs and global developments. Views expressed are the author’s own.
Pranav S & Vadiraja B 
Balaji Subramanian 
Piyush Anand