Dissecting the Delusional Calls for Bangladesh’s Dismemberment

Bangladesh and India are two neighboring countries. Bangladesh has had good relations with India since its establishment. But since August 5, the gap in this relationship has been noticeable.

Experts hope that this relationship will be resolved after the Modi-Yunus meeting in Thailand.

On 1 April 2025, an article titled “Carving A Homeland For Hindus Of Bangladesh And Unlocking The ‘Landlocked’ Northeast” was published on Swarajya, a right-wing and pro-government Indian news portal. The article is divided into five sections. In the first section, the author outlines the strategic and economic challenges faced by the landlocked Northeast India. In the following two sections, he argues, without providing a shred of evidence, that religious minorities are being persecuted in Bangladesh, and calls for the annexation of Rangpur and Chattogram Divisions into India to create ‘homelands’ for Bangladeshi religious minorities. In the next section, the authorprovides pseudo-historical justifications for the proposed annexation of Bangladeshi territory into India. In the concluding section, he urges the Indian government to wage information warfare against Bangladesh, incite inter-communal conflicts within the country, invade Bangladesh to annex Rangpur and Chattogram Divisions, and launch a campaign of ethnic cleansing against 26.8 million Bangladeshi Muslims in the annexed Rangpur and Chattogram Divisions.

The provocative and insidious article reflects the neo-imperialist, expansionist, neo-colonialist, and supremacist attitude towards Bangladesh on the part of portions of the Indian establishment. The article deliberately uses a wide array of false, misleading and historically inaccurate information to justify Indian expansionist designs on Bangladesh. However, in the age of Internet and information overload, jt is not difficult to disprove the premise of the article.

First and foremost, it should be remembered that Bangladesh has been a land of ethno-religious harmony since time immemorial. The overwhelming majority of the rulers of Bengal, ranging from Emperor Dharmapala to Sultan Daud Khan Karrani, were renowned for their exemplary religious tolerance. Even afterBengal was annexed into the Mughal Empire in 1576, religious harmony largely prevailed in Mughal Bengal. It was only after the British takeover in 1757 that seeds of religious conflict were deliberately sown by the British rulers in accordance with their ‘divide and rule’ policy. The Pakistani rulers pursued a similar policy in the erstwhile East Pakistan after 1947, but following the independence of Bangladesh in 1971, the state again became renowned for its tradition of communal harmony.

The author of the article makes a number of claims about the persecution of religious minorities in Bangladesh, none of which is substantiated by data. He argues that attacks on religious minorities skyrocketed in Bangladesh after the change of government on 5 August 2024. However, he has conveniently forgotten to mention that the attacks were politically motivatedand targeted the supporters of the previous government, among whom there were both Muslims and Hindus. Also, he has refrained from mentioning that these politically motivated attacks have drastically reduced owing to substantial efforts of the interim government. It should be remembered that after 5 August, Indian media outlets have waged an intense disinformation campaign against Bangladesh, spreadinghundreds of fake news about alleged persecution of religious minorities in the country.

The author claims that religious minorities are being subjected to socio-economic boycotts in Bangladesh’s small towns and villages, and students from religious minorities are being bullied in educational institutions as part of a concerted strategy. Not a shred of evidence exists to justify this ridiculous claim, and it can only be described as a pure fantasy.

Also, the author claims that religious minorities working in government offices and the private sector are being forced to resign in Bangladesh. This is another misleading claim devoid of context. After the change of government on 5 August, so far more than 2,000 teachers have been forced to resign from educational institutions in Bangladesh, among whom only 49 are reported to be from the Hindu community. Those who were forced to resign were not targeted for their religious faith, rather for their perceived affiliation with the previous government and alleged involvement in corruption. In addition, the author fails to mention that 19 of the aforementioned 49 Hindu teachers have been reinstated in their posts.

Moreover, the author forwards the claim that restrictions have been imposed on the religious and cultural festivals of minority communities in Bangladesh. The reality on the ground is completely opposite. The interim government has gone to great lengths to ensure that religious minorities can celebrate their festivals in safety and security. This is demonstrated by the stringent security measures undertaken during the Durga Puja in the previous year.

Also, the author mentions that the percentage of Hindus in the population of Bangladesh has reduced drastically. However, he conveniently ignores the fact that the reduction took place during the Pakistani rule, and the Bangladeshi state had nothing to do with it. It should be mentioned that the number of Hindus in Bangladesh has risen from 9.6 million in 1974 to 13.1 millionin 2022. Such increase in the number of Hindu population in Bangladesh would not have been possible if the Bangladeshi state had indeed pursued a repressive religious policy.

Finally, the author argues that since several Hindu dynasties had previously ruled Rangpur and Chattogram regions, the region should be annexed into India. However, he conveniently forgets that some of the dynasties he mentioned, such as the Gaur, fiercely protected the independence of Bengal against the encroachment of North India-based empires, while some other dynasties, such as the Pala and the Chandra, were not Hindus but Buddhists. Aside from this ridiculous pseudo-historical and factually incorrect claim, the author outrageously suggests that after annexing Rangpur and Chattogram, India should cleanse the regions of their 26.8 million Bangladeshi Muslim inhabitants.

Basically, the author suggests that India should invade its neighbour Bangladesh under false pretexts, annex its northern and southeastern territories, and commit genocide and ethnic cleansing against millions of Bangladeshi people. Thus, the author not only calls upon his own country to violate international law but also encourages it to commit crimes against humanity. This is contrary to all notions of civilized conduct in international relations.

The author of the Swarajya article proposes using Bangladeshi Hindus in dismembering the country. However, he has chosen to forget that throughout Bangladesh’s history, the religious communities of the land have always demonstrated remarkable unity during national emergencies. During the invasions of Bengal by the Delhi Sultanate in 1353–1354 and 1359–1360, hundreds of thousands of Muslim and Hindu troops fought against the invaders under Sultan Shamsuddin Ilyas Shah and Sultan Abul Mujahid Sikandar Shah. Following the Mughal annexation of Bengal in 1576, both Muslim and Hindu chieftains, led by Isa Khan and Pratapaditya, fiercely resisted the Mughal takeover. During the Battle of Plassey in 1757, both Mir Madan and Mohan Lal fought hard against the British invaders under Nawab Siraj-ud-Daulah. During the British colonial period, both Muslim and Hindu revolutionaries, ranging from Titumir and Haji Shariatullah to Surya Sen and Subhash Chandra Bose, fought against the British. Finally, during the Bangladesh Liberation War in 1971, thousands of Muslims and Hindus fought in the Mukti Bahini against the Pakistani occupiers.

The Bangladeshi people would like to believe that the aforementioned article reflects the opinion of an individual and not the Indian state, with which Bangladesh seeks a partnership based on sovereign equality and good-neighbourliness.However, if Bangladesh is subjected to external aggression, millions of Bangladeshi citizens, irrespective of their ethnic and religious background, would again demonstrate their ironclad unity by resisting and repelling the invaders, just like they have been doing for centuries.

By: Mohammad Ashaduzzaman 

Mohammad Ashaduzzaman is a Professor, Department of Linguistics

University of Dhaka, Director general International Mother Language Institute

×