Key Findings
- India’s sanctuary for fugitives wanted in Bangladesh breaks established bilateral norms and undermines Dhaka’s transitional justice process
- This mirrors New Delhi’s Dalai Lama policy—strategic consistency that prioritizes leverage over regional partnership
- Asymmetric power dynamics leave Bangladesh without effective recourse through bilateral mechanisms
- Continued intransigence accelerates Bangladesh’s pivot toward China, Gulf states, and alternative alignments
- Defense modernization emerges as an imperative for protecting sovereignty
The bilateral relationship between Bangladesh and India stands at an inflection point. What was once characterized as a partnership founded on the shared legacy of 1971 is now increasingly defined by fundamental tensions over sovereignty, interference, and the treatment of individuals wanted for serious crimes in Bangladesh.
In December 2024, Bangladesh’s civil society and student movements faced a profound shock with the targeted killing of Sharif Osman Hadi, a prominent youth leader associated with the Inqilab movement. The response from Inqilab Moncho was swift: a 24-hour ultimatum to the interim government demanding the arrest of those responsible.
Reports emerging from multiple sources suggest that the alleged perpetrators crossed the border into India. This follows a now-familiar pattern: Sheikh Hasina, facing serious charges including crimes against humanity, mass killings, and corruption, has been residing in India since August 2024.
Pattern Recognition
The Structural Roots of the Crisis
A Pattern of Interference
To understand the current crisis, one must examine the structural asymmetries that have characterized India-Bangladesh relations since 1971. While officially framed as a partnership of equals, the relationship has consistently featured significant Indian influence over Bangladesh’s domestic political trajectory.
Intelligence Penetration
Credible reports from Bangladeshi officials, journalists, and civil society organizations have long suggested deep penetration of Bangladesh’s institutions by Indian intelligence services. This is acknowledged at street level in Dhaka, where the phrase “RAW ka agent” (RAW agent) has become common parlance for suspected collaborators.
The alleged infiltration extends across:
- Military intelligence structures—raising questions about command integrity
- Civilian intelligence agencies—compromising domestic security operations
- Media organizations—influencing public narrative
- Political parties—particularly those with historical ties to India
The “Love Towards All” Doctrine
Bangladesh’s defense posture has been deliberately weakened over decades through what critics have termed the “Love Towards All, Malice Towards None” approach to regional security. While rhetorically appealing, this doctrine has left Bangladesh without credible deterrent capabilities.
The consequences are evident: India calculates that Bangladesh lacks the military capacity to impose costs for violations of its sovereignty. This assessment shapes New Delhi’s willingness to take actions—such as harboring wanted individuals—that would be unthinkable with Pakistan or China.
| Neighbor | India’s Approach | Key Differentiator |
|---|---|---|
| China | Cautious accommodation despite hosting Dalai Lama | Nuclear capability, economic leverage |
| Pakistan | Managed hostility with deterrence recognition | Nuclear parity, military credibility |
| Bangladesh | Intervention with limited concern for pushback | Weak defense posture, political dependency |
The Dalai Lama Parallel
India’s hosting of the Dalai Lama since 1959 provides instructive parallels for understanding the current Bangladesh situation. Despite the CIA eventually abandoning its Tibet operations, India has maintained sanctuary for the Tibetan leadership—a constant irritant in Sino-Indian relations.
Recent developments have heightened these tensions. In December 2024, India hosted an international symposium in Tawang (disputed Arunachal Pradesh) commemorating the Sixth Dalai Lama. China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs responded sharply: “Don’t even think about stealing our Dalai Lama.”
This pattern reveals India’s strategic calculus: New Delhi prioritizes hosting adversaries of neighboring governments as leverage, regardless of the costs to bilateral relationships. For Bangladesh, this means the current sanctuary situation is unlikely to be resolved through bilateral negotiation alone.
What This Means for Bangladesh
-
Credibility of Justice—Bangladesh’s ability to deliver justice for the victims of the July-August 2024 uprising depends on accessing those accused of crimes. If alleged perpetrators can simply cross into India with impunity, the entire transitional justice framework loses credibility.
-
Sovereignty Deficit—The sanctuary issue crystallizes a fundamental question: to what extent is Bangladesh a sovereign state if individuals wanted for the most serious crimes can escape accountability by crossing a border that India effectively controls?
-
Foreign Policy Realignment—Continued Indian intransigence may accelerate Bangladesh’s diversification away from its traditional dependence on New Delhi. Potential partners include:
- China—Already Bangladesh’s largest trading partner
- Gulf States—Major destinations for Bangladeshi labor
- ASEAN—Natural partners for Bay of Bengal orientation
- Turkey and Malaysia—Emerging diplomatic partners
-
Military Modernization Imperative—The strategic lesson is clear: nations without credible defense capabilities cannot protect their sovereignty.
India’s Self-Defeating Calculus
India’s current approach creates a self-defeating dynamic. By treating Bangladesh as a sphere of influence rather than a partner, New Delhi pushes Dhaka toward alternative alignments that undermine India’s own regional position.
The contradictions are stark:
- Security vs. Interference—India’s security concerns are legitimate, but addressing them through interference creates the very instability India fears
- Economic Integration vs. Political Domination—Political heavy-handedness jeopardizes beneficial economic ties
- China Competition vs. Neighborhood Stability—Antagonizing Bangladesh pushes it toward Beijing
If New Delhi wishes to retain Bangladesh as a partner, it must recognize that political asylum has limits under international law, and that a sovereign Bangladesh is ultimately in India’s interest. Constructive engagement with Dhaka’s transitional justice process would signal a willingness to treat Bangladesh as an equal—not a client state.
The Path Forward for Bangladesh
A Defining Moment
The sanctuary crisis represents an inflection point. India’s choice to harbor individuals wanted for serious crimes—while expecting cooperation on its own security concerns—reveals a fundamental asymmetry that Bangladesh can no longer accept. The era of taking Indian good faith for granted has ended.
As Inqilab Moncho’s ultimatum demonstrates, Bangladesh’s civil society will no longer remain passive. The question for New Delhi is whether it wishes to retain Bangladesh as a partner through constructive engagement, or lose it entirely through a policy of dominance.
History suggests that nations which treat their neighbors as spheres of influence rather than sovereign equals eventually find those neighbors in alternative alignments. For Bangladesh, sovereignty is not negotiable.
“The struggle for sovereignty is not against any nation, but for the principle that every nation has the right to determine its own destiny without external interference.”
This Issue Brief represents the analysis of the Inqilab Delta Forum research team.
Citation: Inqilab Delta Forum. “The Sanctuary Dilemma: India’s Harboring of Fugitives and the Crisis in Bangladesh-India Relations.” Issue Brief, Bay of Bengal Security Initiative, December 2025.