Editorial

The recent meeting between Bangladesh’s Foreign Minister Khalilur Rahman and India’s External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar, along with National Security Adviser Ajit Doval, marks an important moment in the evolving trajectory of India–Bangladesh relations. At the heart of the discussions lies Dhaka’s request for the return of former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, coupled with a broader articulation of its new “Bangladesh First” policy.

This dual-track engagement—combining a sensitive political demand with a forward-looking diplomatic posture—reveals both the challenges and opportunities before the two neighbours. The call for Sheikh Hasina’s return is not merely a legal or procedural issue; it carries significant political overtones, touching upon questions of sovereignty, justice, and internal political consolidation in Bangladesh. For India, any response must carefully balance legal obligations, diplomatic prudence, and long-term strategic interests.

Equally noteworthy is Dhaka’s emphasis on a “Bangladesh First” approach. While such a doctrine underscores national interest—as expected from any sovereign government—it also signals a subtle recalibration in foreign policy. For India, which has traditionally enjoyed close ties with Bangladesh, particularly during Sheikh Hasina’s tenure, this shift necessitates a nuanced understanding. A policy rooted in mutual trust, as articulated by Rahman, should ideally reinforce cooperation rather than create distance.

India and Bangladesh share deep historical, cultural, and economic linkages. From cooperation in counter-terrorism to connectivity and trade, the partnership has often been cited as a model for regional diplomacy. However, transitions in political leadership inevitably test such relationships. The present moment is one such test—whether both nations can move beyond personalities and anchor their ties in institutional strength and shared interests.

India’s response must be guided by strategic patience. It should avoid being drawn into the internal political dynamics of Bangladesh while reaffirming its commitment to bilateral cooperation. At the same time, Dhaka must recognise that mutual trust is a two-way street, built not only on diplomatic assurances but also on consistency and respect for existing understandings.

Ultimately, this engagement is less about a single issue and more about the future direction of India–Bangladesh relations. If handled with maturity and foresight, it could pave the way for a renewed partnership—one that is resilient, pragmatic, and anchored in regional stability.

Recent political developments across India reflect a familiar yet troubling pattern—where public discourse is increasingly shaped by controversy rather than constructive debate. From remarks sparking outrage to investigative actions and electoral disputes, the tone of politics appears more combative than consensual.

The apology issued by Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge following his remarks on Gujarat highlights the sensitivity of political rhetoric in a polarized environment. While public figures are expected to speak with responsibility, the swift backlash also underlines how political narratives are often amplified for partisan advantage. Kharge’s apology may have defused the immediate situation, but it raises a broader question: has political communication become more about provocation than persuasion?

Simultaneously, the search conducted by Assam Police at the residence of Congress leader Pawan Khera in connection with a case involving the wife of Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma brings into focus concerns about the intersection of law enforcement and politics. While investigative agencies must be allowed to function independently, their actions often invite scrutiny when they involve opposition leaders. The perception of selective targeting—whether justified or not—can erode public trust in institutional neutrality.

In West Bengal, Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee filing her nomination amid disputes over electoral rolls adds another dimension to the unfolding political climate. Electoral integrity is the cornerstone of democracy, and any controversy surrounding voter lists risks undermining confidence in the process. Allegations and counter-allegations in this domain must be addressed transparently, ensuring that the sanctity of elections remains intact.

Taken together, these developments suggest a political ecosystem where confrontation often overshadows collaboration. Apologies become necessary damage control, investigations turn into political flashpoints, and electoral processes are contested even before votes are cast.

India’s democracy has thrived on robust debate and institutional resilience. However, the current trend demands introspection from all stakeholders. Political leaders must exercise restraint in speech, governments must ensure that institutions are seen as impartial, and electoral authorities must uphold unquestioned credibility.

Ultimately, democracy is not weakened by disagreement, but by distrust. Rebuilding that trust requires a shift from adversarial politics to accountable governance—where issues, not individuals, take center stage.

• SAS Kirmani