Skip to main content

Why Dhaka remains cautious about the BJP’s rise in eastern India

By Nava Thakuria 
The recent electoral victories of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and its allies in the eastern Indian States of West Bengal and Assam have drawn varied responses in Bangladesh. For many observers in Dhaka, the outcome represents not only a regional political shift in India but also a development with possible implications for India-Bangladesh relations, border management, migration debates, and regional security.
The BJP first came to power at the national level in 2014 and expanded its influence in northeastern India after winning the Assam assembly elections in 2016. Over time, most northeastern States, with the exception of Mizoram, came under governments aligned with or supported by the BJP. However, West Bengal remained outside the party’s control under the leadership of Mamata Banerjee and the Trinamool Congress since 2011.
Banerjee had positioned herself as one of the BJP’s prominent political opponents and frequently disagreed with the Union government on several policy matters. Differences emerged over issues such as border fencing along the India-Bangladesh frontier and the implementation of some centrally sponsored welfare schemes, including Ayushman Bharat, Beti Bachao Beti Padhao, Pradhan Mantri Jan Arogya Yojana, Ujjwala Yojana, and others.
The BJP’s strong performance in the Bengal assembly election, along with its continued dominance in Assam, has been interpreted by some analysts as a consolidation of the party’s influence across eastern India. In Assam, Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma has continued to emphasize issues related to undocumented migration and the protection of indigenous communities. In West Bengal, the new leadership has indicated that border infrastructure and security may receive greater administrative attention.
These developments have generated concern among sections of Bangladeshi civil society and political groups, particularly those apprehensive about the impact of nationalist politics and anti-immigration rhetoric on Muslims in the border region. Some commentators in Bangladesh have expressed fears that political narratives targeting undocumented migration could contribute to communal tensions. Media reports in Bangladesh have also highlighted allegations concerning deportations and cross-border pushbacks, especially from Assam, though such claims remain politically contested.
At the same time, reactions within Bangladesh’s political establishment have not been uniform. Leaders of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), which returned to power following the February 2026 parliamentary elections, stated that they expect bilateral relations with India to remain stable despite political changes in eastern India. Some BNP leaders also expressed hope that long-pending issues, particularly the Teesta river water-sharing agreement, could move forward under a new political configuration in West Bengal. The agreement had faced opposition during Mamata Banerjee’s tenure as chief minister.
Former Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina also reportedly congratulated the BJP leadership following the election results. Hasina, who left Bangladesh after the political unrest of 2024, continues to remain a significant figure in Bangladeshi politics despite ongoing legal and political controversies surrounding her tenure. Her supporters argue that political conditions in Bangladesh may eventually allow her return, while critics point to the serious allegations and legal cases she faces.
The political developments in eastern India therefore carry significance beyond electoral arithmetic. For Bangladesh, they intersect with concerns about border management, migration, minority rights, regional diplomacy, and water-sharing arrangements. While official relations between New Delhi and Dhaka are likely to continue through established diplomatic channels, political changes on either side of the border are closely watched because of their potential social and strategic implications for the wider region.

Comments

TRENDING

Civil society at a crossroads: Service delivery vs. rights in the fight for social change

Counterview News   In the latest episode of the podcast Unmute , hosts Gagan Sethi and Minar Pimple convened a profound conversation with two veteran development practitioners to dissect a persistent tension within civil society: the perceived divide between service delivery and the struggle for rights. The episode, titled "Beyond Service Delivery: Civil Society, Rights, and the Politics of Social Change," featured Apoorva Oza , a development practitioner with decades of experience in rural development and institution-building, and Professor Dipa Sinha , a development economist known for her work on food, nutrition, gender, and social policy.

Grain vs. gasoline: How the global biofuel boom threatens India’s food and water security

By Rajiv Shah  A new report published by the international research and advocacy organization GRAIN has warned that the global resurgence of biofuels is triggering a dangerous dynamic of “more fuel, less food, more land grabs.” Driven by intersecting energy security concerns, geopolitical tensions, and aggressive decarbonization mandates, the expanding agrofuel industry is increasingly pitting corporate energy interests against global food security and indigenous land rights. 

Sikkim governor row: ALIFA asks centre to explain hurried appointment in Ankita Bhandari case

By A Representative   The All-India Feminist Alliance (ALIFA) on Saturday expressed “immense pain and outrage” that even after four years and a national uproar, justice has not been fully delivered in the Ankita Bhandari murder case and that a ruling party politician facing allegations has been “gifted a high-ranking constitutional office.” In a statement, ALIFA extended “unflinching solidarity” to Ankita’s parents, who it said are “fighting for justice on the streets of Delhi,” and demanded that pending the CBI inquiry and judicial decision, the appointment of BJP leader Dushyant Kumar Gautam as Sikkim’s Governor be subject to “immediate presidential review.”