Dhaka’s Drift and Delhi’s Dilemma: What the Doval–Rahman Talks Really Mean

Paromita Das

New Delhi, 25th November: In a week charged with geopolitical tension, a quiet but crucial meeting took place in New Delhi. Bangladesh’s National Security Adviser Dr. Khalilur Rahman sat across the table from Bharat’s NSA Ajit Doval, marking one of the most significant diplomatic exchanges in South Asia since the political upheaval in Dhaka. Their meeting, while routine in appearance, carried the weight of uncertainty that now defines Bharat–Bangladesh relations.

The timing could not have been more delicate. Bangladesh, still reeling from the coup that ousted Sheikh Hasina, is navigating a storm of internal instability, external alignments, and resurgent extremism. For Bharat, the developments across the border are not just matters of diplomacy—they cut deep into the fabric of national security. Against this backdrop, Doval and Rahman’s dialogue became more than an exchange of views; it was a test of trust between two neighbors standing on the edge of strategic divergence.

The Coup That Changed the Equation

The Yunus government in Dhaka, which seized power through a coup, has dramatically altered the political landscape of Bangladesh. Once one of Bharat’s most reliable regional partners under Sheikh Hasina, Dhaka’s new rulers have adopted a tone of detachment—sometimes even hostility—toward New Delhi.

The political rift widened after Bangladesh’s International Crimes Tribunal sentenced former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina to death on charges of crimes against humanity. The move not only deepened Bangladesh’s internal polarisation but also placed Bharat in a diplomatically precarious position, as Hasina has taken refuge in Bharat since the coup. While Bharat continues to insist that she remains under humanitarian protection, Dhaka accuses New Delhi of shielding a convicted leader—further straining ties that once symbolized regional cooperation.

Radical Undercurrents and Pakistan’s Shadow

Beyond the headlines, Bharat’s real concern lies in the shifting security dynamics inside Bangladesh. Intelligence reports have indicated a worrying surge in Islamist radical activities since the change in government. The possibility of Pakistan’s ISI exploiting this instability has added an unsettling dimension to Bharat’s security calculus.

For Bharat’s Northeastern region, particularly states like Assam, Meghalaya, and Tripura that share borders with Bangladesh, the rise of radical groups could prove dangerous. These porous frontiers have historically been vulnerable to cross-border infiltration and ideological spillover. Renewed extremist activity on the Bangladeshi side threatens to destabilize this delicate ecosystem.

Even more troubling is the warming relationship between Dhaka and Islamabad. In recent months, senior Pakistani military and political officials have made multiple visits to Bangladesh, reciprocated by Dhaka’s high-level delegations to Pakistan. The reopening of direct flights and commercial channels between the two countries marks a strategic shift—one that could tilt South Asia’s power balance away from Bharat’s sphere of influence.

This growing Dhaka–Islamabad closeness, coupled with the potential for ISI-backed extremist networks, raises pressing questions for Bharat’s security establishment: Could Bangladesh become the new frontier for anti-Bharat operations? And is New Delhi prepared for such a scenario?

The Meeting That Could Reset the Equation

Against this tense backdrop, the meeting between Ajit Doval and Khalilur Rahman offered a brief but necessary moment of engagement. Official statements described the discussion as “detailed and constructive,” focusing on regional security under the Colombo Security Conclave (CSC) and bilateral concerns.

The symbolism of the meeting, however, went far beyond policy notes. It reflected a recognition on both sides that communication must continue, even when consensus seems distant. As part of the diplomatic exchange, Dr. Rahman invited Ajit Doval to visit Dhaka, signaling Dhaka’s willingness—at least on paper—to prevent a complete breakdown in ties.

For Bharat, the dialogue is an opportunity to convey red lines clearly—particularly on issues of extremism, Pakistan’s involvement, and the safety of refugees. For Bangladesh, it is a chance to reassure its neighbors that it seeks legitimacy through regional cooperation, not confrontation.

South Asia’s Fragile Balance

What happens next will depend on whether Dhaka chooses confrontation or cooperation. The political volatility within Bangladesh, coupled with its economic dependence on international support, makes long-term hostility toward Bharat risky. Yet, the Yunus administration’s overtures to Pakistan and China suggest a recalibration of its foreign policy—one that seeks multiple power anchors rather than a single ally.

From Bharat’s perspective, this evolution demands a two-pronged approach: strategic patience combined with heightened vigilance. As South Asia’s largest democracy and economy, Bharat cannot afford to appear reactive. Instead, it must use its diplomatic depth to engage Dhaka while strengthening border security and intelligence cooperation with other partners in the region.

Between Diplomacy and Deterrence

Bharat’s challenge is to strike a delicate balance—to defend its security interests without alienating a crucial neighbor. The temptation to adopt a hardline stance must be weighed against the need to maintain dialogue. After all, every South Asian conflict has shown that silence breeds suspicion, and suspicion breeds instability.

At the same time, Bharat cannot ignore the signals of shifting alliances. If Bangladesh’s new government continues to lean toward Pakistan or enables radical resurgence, New Delhi may need to rethink its engagement model—possibly expanding regional security coalitions under mechanisms like the Colombo Security Conclave or deepening cooperation with partners such as Sri Lanka and the Maldives.

Dialogue in a Divided Moment

The Doval–Rahman meeting in New Delhi was more than a diplomatic courtesy; it was a reflection of Bharat’s strategic maturity and Bangladesh’s cautious pragmatism. At a time when politics in Dhaka teeters between nationalism and instability, and when extremism threatens to blur borders, communication remains the only viable bridge.

Whether this bridge leads to reconciliation or rivalry depends on the choices made in the coming months. For now, both sides seem to understand one essential truth: in South Asia’s volatile geography, peace is too fragile to leave to chance.