In recent months, a wave of commentary from across the border has painted Chittagong Port—Bangladesh’s most significant maritime hub—as a looming threat to India’s eastern frontier. This rhetoric from India surrounding Chittagong Port reflects a troubling shift—from partnership to paranoia. These narratives, steeped in strategic anxiety, mischaracterize Bangladesh’s sovereign choices and overlook the region’s shared interest in peace, prosperity, and partnership.
Bangladesh stands at a strategic crossroads, and its response to growing foreign interest in Chittagong Port will shape its regional role for years to come. Most importantly, Chittagong is not a chessboard for foreign powers. It is a cornerstone of Bangladesh’s economic development, a gateway to global trade, and a platform for regional cooperation and collaboration. To frame it as a danger is not only misleading—it risks undermining decades of goodwill between two neighbors who have more to gain from collaboration than confrontation.
India’s Strategic Anxiety: Misplaced and Misguided
When Sheikh Hasina’s 16-year grip on Bangladeshi politics collapsed in the student-led uprising of August 2024, India was taken aback by the sudden geopolitical shock. After Hasina fled to India, Bangladesh’s interim government demanded her extradition—a request New Delhi has so far refused. This, along with numerous other disputes, has sharply strained bilateral ties. By relying entirely on the Awami League, India now finds itself struggling to accept that its bet has failed and its key ally has slipped away. Being desperate, India is now trying every chance to create pressure on Bangladesh.
Following this, a recent article from India Today inaccurately portrays Chittagong Port as a threat to India’s eastern borders and ‘real risks’ to India, allegedly due to the growing activities of great powers in the region. This article contains several instances of misinterpretation of events, misrepresentation of reality, and outright false or incorrect information. Indian media have echoed similar views and arguments on the country since last year. These claims, while dramatic, misrepresent Bangladesh’s sovereign choices and overlook the region’s shared interest in peace, development, and cooperation. India’s concern over U.S., Chinese, and Russian visits to Chittagong is rooted in a zero-sum view of regional influence. But the U.S.–Bangladeshi joint exercise in Chattogram and the goodwill visits paid by Chinese and Russian navies to the seaport are routine procedures, not ‘real risks’ to India.
Again, Chittagong Port is Bangladesh’s largest maritime gateway, handling over 90% of the country’s trade. Economic imperatives, not military ambitions, drive its modernization and expansion. Hosting multinational exercises or port calls is standard practice for any sovereign nation seeking to build capacity, foster goodwill, and prepare for humanitarian crises. These activities do not equate to militarization or foreign control. Moreover, hosting humanitarian exercises, such as Pacific Angel, or naval port calls from friendly nations, is a standard international practice. These engagements do not compromise Bangladesh’s autonomy, nor do they pose a threat to India’s security. India itself conducts joint drills with the U.S., Russia, and other powers. To criticize Bangladesh for similar engagements is hypocritical and reveals a troubling double standard.
Geography Should Foster Partnership, Not Paranoia
Apparently, Chittagong lies near the Siliguri Corridor. But proximity should be a basis for cooperation, not confrontation. Bangladesh has consistently supported India’s counter-insurgency efforts, facilitated cross-border trade, and maintained peaceful borders. India’s portrayal of Chittagong as a strategic vulnerability ignores the reality: Bangladesh has never acted against Indian interests. Instead of viewing Chittagong as a threat, India should see it as a partner port—one that can enhance maritime security, enable regional logistics, and support disaster response across the Bay of Bengal.
Notably, India is worried that every multinational exercise or visit to Chittagong is making northeast India vulnerable. However, in reality, these events are routine and cooperative, rather than hostile. Bangladesh does not host foreign bases. It does not permit permanent deployments. It does not cede control over its strategic assets. Chittagong Port remains under full Bangladeshi command. International cooperation is welcomed—but always on terms that respect our sovereignty. India’s suggestion that Chittagong could be used as a forward base against its interests is speculative at best, and alarmist at worst. Bangladesh has no interest in becoming a staging ground for foreign powers. Our foreign policy is guided by balance, not bloc politics.
Therefore, India’s discomfort with Bangladesh’s evolving political landscape should not translate into strategic hostility. Respect for democratic processes must be mutual. The formation of Bangladesh’s interim government under Nobel laureate Muhammad Yunus is a domestic matter, rooted in civic activism and democratic aspirations. India’s insinuation that this transition opens the door to foreign manipulation is both patronizing and inaccurate. Bangladesh’s institutions remain resilient, its military professional, and its foreign policy independent.
India’s Recent Hostility: A Strategic Misstep
India’s increasingly hostile posture—marked by media narratives, strategic briefings, and diplomatic pressure—risks alienating a neighbor that has long been a reliable partner. From water-sharing disputes to trade barriers and border tensions, India’s recent actions suggest a shift away from cooperative regionalism. This approach is short-sighted. If India continues to treat Bangladesh’s sovereign decisions as threats, it may inadvertently push Dhaka toward deeper engagement with other powers. The wiser path is mutual respect, strategic dialogue, and joint development initiatives.
However, Pradyot Manikya Deb Barma, the current titular King and statesman of Tripura, recently stated that India should capture the Chittagong port to ensure the northeast state’s survival. This absurd rhetoric was never heard during the previous regime; it emerged only after Sheikh Hasina fled to India. India’s foreign policy has recently shifted towards a short-term, interest-based approach, rather than one focused on mutual benefits and promoting peaceful cooperation. The present strains between India and the U.S. and Bangladesh are also visible among Indian citizens, as Trump and Yunus were depicted as ‘Asur’ for Durga Puja in India. Indo–Bangladeshi ties have cooled considerably since 2024, despite Dhaka’s ongoing efforts to normalize relations with New Delhi, primarily due to false media narratives. Hence, Indian media outlets should act more responsibly and refrain from exaggerating the events taking place in Bangladesh.
India and Bangladesh share more than borders—we share history, culture, and democratic values. Policymakers in New Delhi must recognize that Bangladesh’s rise is not a threat—it is an opportunity. Chittagong Port can be a gateway to deeper regional integration, enhanced maritime security, and shared prosperity. The choice before India is clear: engage constructively or risk strategic isolation in its own neighborhood. Chittagong Port is not a danger—it is a symbol of Bangladesh’s sovereignty, progress, and global engagement. For India, it can be a partner port, a strategic ally, and a regional asset. But only if New Delhi chooses cooperation over confrontation. Let us build bridges—not barriers. Let us choose partnership—not paranoia.