Skip to main content

'Not a threat to India': Chittagong Port as a symbol of Bangladesh's sovereignty

By Dr. Mohammad Asaduzzaman* 
In recent months, commentary from sections of Indian media and policy circles has described Chittagong Port—Bangladesh’s principal maritime hub—as a potential strategic threat to India’s eastern frontier. Such views reflect a shift in perception, from cooperation to suspicion, and risk mischaracterizing Bangladesh’s sovereign decisions while overlooking the wider regional interest in stability and partnership.
Chittagong Port is central to Bangladesh’s economy. It handles over 90 percent of the country’s trade and plays a vital role in modernization, connectivity, and development. Activities such as joint military exercises, humanitarian drills, and naval goodwill visits by foreign countries are part of standard international engagement. These do not amount to militarization or foreign control, and they do not compromise Bangladesh’s sovereignty. India itself hosts similar engagements, and applying a different standard to Bangladesh risks creating unnecessary distrust.
Concerns raised about the port’s proximity to India’s Siliguri Corridor also merit perspective. Geography should encourage cooperation, not confrontation. Bangladesh has consistently supported India’s security concerns, facilitated cross-border trade, and maintained stable borders. Viewing Chittagong as a vulnerability overlooks the record of cooperation between the two countries. Bangladesh does not host foreign bases, does not allow permanent deployments, and retains full control over its strategic assets.
The political transition in Bangladesh following the change of government in August 2024 has added to regional uncertainty. However, the formation of the interim administration under Nobel laureate Muhammad Yunus is a domestic development shaped by civic and democratic processes. Suggesting that this transition automatically invites foreign interference underestimates the resilience of Bangladesh’s institutions and its independent foreign policy.
Recent commentary in India portraying Chittagong Port as a forward base for great power competition risks fueling misunderstanding. Statements from political figures advocating extreme measures, such as capturing the port, are speculative and counterproductive. Media narratives that exaggerate routine developments may further strain relations that have already been tested by disputes over trade, water-sharing, and political differences.
India and Bangladesh share deep historical, cultural, and social ties. Both countries stand to benefit more from cooperation than confrontation. Chittagong Port can be seen not as a strategic challenge but as an opportunity for enhanced maritime cooperation, disaster preparedness, and regional integration across the Bay of Bengal. Respect for sovereignty, mutual trust, and constructive dialogue remain the best path forward.
For India, treating Bangladesh’s sovereign choices with respect will strengthen a partnership that has long been valuable. For Bangladesh, Chittagong Port remains a symbol of sovereignty, development, and global engagement. Approaching it as a point of collaboration rather than conflict will serve the long-term interests of both nations and the region as a whole.
---
*Professor, Department of Linguistics, University of Dhaka; Director General, International Mother Language Institute

Comments

Post a Comment

NOTE: Hateful, abusive comments won't be published. -- Editor

TRENDING

Sardar made up his mind on Pakistan in Dec 1946 "before" Mountbatten's Partition Plan

By Hari Desai* One has to be extra cautious while dealing with the history of towering personalities of the Indian freedom struggle, especially that of Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel (October 31, 1875 - December 15, 1950). Present-day politicians prefer to "pronounce” on his life and quote him according to their convenience like a blind person describing an elephant.
2 comments
»

The Guardian controversy and the moral question of 12 years of Modi's leadership

By Mohd Ziyauallah Khan    A recent opinion article published in The Guardian , titled "Can Narendra Modi Accept Any Medal?", reignited a fierce debate about Prime Minister Narendra Modi's international recognition and the moral legacy of his leadership. The article argued that while Modi has received numerous state honours and awards from foreign governments, a more fundamental question remains unanswered: Can a leader be celebrated internationally while presiding over growing concerns about democratic decline, social polarization , and civil liberties at home? The controversy quickly spread across political and media circles. Supporters dismissed the article as biased, while critics argued that it reflected concerns already expressed by international democracy watchdogs , human rights organizations, and sections of the global press. Yet beyond political loyalties lies a deeper question: How should the success of a government be measured, especially when it...
2 comments
»

Beyond the Ayodhya theft: A tainted system, a crisis of trust

By Martin Macwan*   Recently, the issue of "theft of offerings at the Ayodhya Ram temple" has taken centre stage on social media. Whether "no theft occurred," or "this is the first such incident," or "the theft was limited only to cash" are now secondary questions, because the evidence has come not from the opposition, from people of other faiths, or from foreigners, but from ordinary devout believers, from saints and monks, and from sincere workers of the ruling party itself.
Post a Comment
»