Foreign Minister Khalilur Rahman’s first visit to India after the BNP government assumed office has been described as a positive beginning, though the future of high‑stakes bilateral relations will hinge on how both countries address longstanding and emerging challenges.
During the three-day visit to India on his way to Mauritius to attend the Indian Ocean Conference from April 10-11, he met Indian External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar, Oil and Natural Gas Minister Hardeep Singh Puri, and National Security Adviser Ajit Doval.
While Bangladesh described it as a “goodwill visit”, India had put it as an official one. Foreign policy analysts think the meetings were more about understanding each other’s points of views to take forward the relations after strained relations during the interim government period since August 2024.
Indian officials indicated that engagement with an elected government and the recent developments suggest a shift.
Jaishankar’s attendance at the funeral of former prime minister Khaleda Zia, Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla and Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri’s attending the BNP government’s oath-taking ceremony, Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s multiple messages to Prime Minister Tarique Rahman and invitation to visit India -- all indicate New Delhi’s eagerness to mend ties with Dhaka.
Dhaka responded positively by resuming all categories of visas for Indians and sending Khalilur Rahman to New Delhi. There are indications of a visit by Prime Minister Tarique Rahman to India, though a date has not been fixed yet.
Following the meetings, Dhaka and New Delhi issued separate statements committing to improve overall relations, but many of the specific challenges in their relations remained untouched or were not made public.
Bangladesh had raised the extradition of deposed prime minister Sheikh Hasina, former home minister Asaduzzaman Khan Kamal, and others accused in the killing of Inqilab Moncho spokesperson Sharif Osman Bin Hadi. While India has agreed to extradite those accused in Hadi’s killing, the statements did not mention any response regarding Hasina or Kamal.
“This suggests there was no consensus on the matter,” said former ambassador Humayun Kabir, also president of the Bangladesh Enterprise Institute.
Regarding Khalilur’s meeting with Ajit Doval, former ambassador M Shafiullah said the presence of Hasina and thousands of Awami League leaders in India is embarrassing for India. “I think India wants to return the Awami League leaders to Bangladesh,” he added.
Both analysts welcomed India’s positive response to Bangladesh’s request for increased diesel and fertiliser supplies amid the Middle East crisis.
Jaishankar also indicated that visas -- particularly medical and business categories -- would be eased in the coming weeks, but the analysts observed that India’s resuming of all categories of visas for Bangladeshis would give a strong signal for improving relations, as Bangladesh did so in late February.
Khalilur Rahman’s remark in this regard was striking. “People-to-people contact will sustain our relations. If they cannot reach us, you basically deny the important source of trust and confidence,” he had told NDTV.
Jaishankar had reiterated India’s desire to engage constructively with Bangladesh’s new government, strengthen bilateral ties, and explore ways to deepen cooperation through existing mechanisms and added that follow-up official meetings are expected soon. The statement said both sides exchanged views on regional and global issues of mutual interest.
Shafiullah described the statement as encouraging but cautioned that the future of the relationship will depend on how sincerely both sides engage and address longstanding concerns.
Neither of the statements spoke of several critical issues, including India’s trade restrictions, border killings, water sharing, or even India’s concerns. One of the vital ones is the renewal of the Ganges Water Sharing Treaty that expires in December this year.
In his NDTV interview, Khalilur Rahman had stressed that Bangladesh would like to see a new or revised treaty or arrangement on the Ganges water.
Shafiullah said the Teesta water-sharing deal has remained unsigned, despite being nearly finalised in 2011. So, India needs to take a serious look at the water sharing of the common rivers.
Another irritant in the relation is border killing, said Shafiullah, adding, “Border management issues can be resolved through dialogue, but loss of life cannot be justified.”
The statements made no mention of anti-Bangladesh or anti-India rhetoric used, especially during the interim government.
Khalilur Rahman had stressed that propaganda from the Indian side concerned the policymakers in Bangladesh deeply and sought to ensure that the narratives are not negative when both sides try to build confidence and trust.
According to the Indian newspaper The Economic Times, security cooperation had featured prominently in the India-Bangladesh talks, particularly in the context of cross-border crime and extradition matters.
India had also reiterated its position that its territory would not be used for activities against Bangladesh’s interests -- an assurance that must be welcome for the Bangladesh government, given that Hasina and many other political leaders and activists are now living in India.
Shafiullah said security for northeastern states is a serious issue for India, while another concern is Chinese influence in the region.
On this matter, Khalilur Rahman had said Bangladesh’s relationship with India or China is not a zero-sum game, while assuring that any worries of India should be put to rest.
Prime Minister Tarique Rahman’s letter to Indian ruling party BJP National President Nitin Nabin is noteworthy.
“This means BNP as a party also wants to build party-level relations with the BJP, keeping in mind that India traditionally favoured Awami League,” said M Humayun Kabir.
Humayun Kabir said the spirit of the July uprising emphasises that relations with foreign countries should be based on mutual respect and shared interests. The BNP government’s foreign policy slogan, “Bangladesh First”, reflects a similar approach.
He emphasised that Bangladeshis are unlikely to support a return to past patterns where external actors were seen as favouring particular political parties or intervening in domestic affairs.
“All in all, the future relationship between the two countries will depend on how India accepts the new realities of Bangladesh and how efficiently Bangladesh can deal with them,” said Humayun Kabir.
