India Reaches Out to Khaleda Zia: Strategic Signalling or Purely Humanitarian?

The rapid deterioration of former Bangladeshi Prime Minister Khaleda Zia’s health has drawn significant international attention. Messages of concern have poured in from various quarters as the 79-year-old BNP chairperson remains in a critical condition in a Dhaka hospital. Among these, Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s public offer of “all possible assistance” stands out not only for its timing but also for the political undercurrents it has triggered in the region.

At first glance, Modi’s post appeared to be an expression of humanitarian sympathy for a neighbour’s ailing leader who has long played a defining role in South Asian politics. Yet, considering the complex history of India-Bangladesh relations, the rivalry between the Awami League and the Bangladesh Nationalist Party, and the shifting regional balance involving China, Modi’s statement inevitably carries diplomatic weight.

India’s relations with Khaleda Zia and the BNP have conventionally been cold. The BNP often accuses New Delhi of interference in Bangladeshi internal affairs, propping up the Awami League, and strategic interests at the expense of bilateral balance. Zia herself has openly voiced critical views of India’s role in the 1971 liberation war and India’s perceived proximity to Sheikh Hasina.

Given this background, Modi’s message is unusual. India has enjoyed close relations with Hasina for 15 years, relying on her government for security cooperation, connectivity projects and cross-border management. New Delhi seldom engaged the BNP leadership after the mid-2000s. Modi’s only publicised meeting with Khaleda Zia was in 2015 during his visit to Dhaka, which was considered at the time to be an exceptional outreach.

Therefore, this new message from Modi signals a possible recalibration, or at least a pragmatic acknowledgment of the changing political winds in Dhaka.

Bangladesh is poised for elections next year. After widespread protests and political upheaval in 2024, the government of Sheikh Hasina fell, and she fled to India. Today, she faces a death sentence in Bangladesh, underlining growing diplomatic unease for New Delhi. On the other hand, the caretaker government entrusted on Nobel laureate Muhammad Yunus has distanced itself from India and leaned toward Beijing for infrastructural and political support.

After years of suppression, BNP is now revitalized and considered the frontrunner for the upcoming polls. The likelihood of Khaleda Zia’s return to power has forced India to take a fresh look at its equation with a political force it had kept at arm’s length for long. In this context, the expression of concern for Zia’s health serves not just as humanitarian goodwill but an opening gesture towards the party that could lead Bangladesh next.

Another critical factor behind India’s message is China’s proactive posture. A five-member Chinese medical team arrived in Dhaka to assist in Zia’s treatment-a pointer to Beijing’s consistent strategy: maintain relationships across political divides. Whether Bangladesh was ruled by Zia, Hasina or the current interim leadership, China has managed to retain strong ties through economic assistance, defence cooperation and diplomatic neutrality.

Historically perceived as personality-driven and heavily dependent on Hasina, India’s approach now risks leaving New Delhi marginalized in a post-Hasina Bangladesh. Analysts also say India’s reliance on one political faction has produced vulnerabilities. Modi’s outreach to Zia thus seems a step-however symbolic-toward correcting that imbalance.

To many, Modi’s tweet would comfortably fit into both categories. The tweet will acknowledge Zia’s long public service and convey India’s readiness to help, all part of diplomatic etiquette. But the subtext is clear: India cannot afford its isolation in the rapidly shifting Bangladesh political landscape.

The gesture also allows India to balance the discourse within Bangladesh, where New Delhi is often perceived as encroaching upon internal politics or acting solely in favor of Hasina. By extending public support to Zia, India demonstrates neutrality and political pragmatism—qualities necessary in rebuilding bridges with the BNP.

This episode assumes even greater significance because of the broader geopolitical context. India’s position in the immediate neighbourhood has been tested by Sri Lanka, the Maldives, and Nepal, where the influence of China has gained substantially. The loss of strategic space in Bangladesh, due to geographic centrality in the Bay of Bengal and participation in subregional connectivity projects, is especially undesirable.

By reaching out to Zia, Modi’s government seems to hedge a bet: indicating goodwill to BNP without antagonizing Hasina, who remains politically relevant, even in forced exile in India. Whether this is actually the beginning of a wider reset depends on how India engages with Bangladesh’s different political actors in the coming months.

The health crisis of Khaleda Zia has inadvertently opened a diplomatic window. While Modi’s message is humanitarian and sincere, it also reflects the Indian imperatives to adapt to a changing Bangladesh-the one in which the political centre of gravity may soon shift. As elections approach, and China continues to entrench itself, New Delhi seems to be signalling that it is ready to build bridges beyond old partnerships.