Hasina's repressive legacy and India conundrum

Can I respond to this question over lunch in private?

This evasive, though light-veined, response by Dinesh Trivedi, the Indian High Commissioner, represented the catch 22 situation that both India and Bangladesh are trapped in over the issue of ex-PM Sheikh Hasina.

When pressed harder by several locals on Dhaka's request for Hasina's extradition, Trivedi referenced the "well-structured legal process currently underway in New Delhi" to extricate himself from the extremely uncomfortable situation during the recent Bay of Bengal Conversations 2026.

In a typical deflective way, the Indian envoy held the Bangladesh Army responsible for flying Hasina to India with an innocent qualification; as neighbours it was our duty to accept the situation on that day (August 5, 2024).

Such postulations, nevertheless, can hardly disguise a bitter reality; Bangladesh's political spectrum remains deeply divided over the fate of Sheikh Hasina. For many Bangladeshis, she must face justice for the murder and maiming of thousands of opposition activists, students during the July 2024 uprising. For them, Hasina's 15 year rule embodied brute repression and a foreign policy beholden to India at the cost of broader national interest.

Even the International Crimes Tribunal sentenced Hasina to death for crimes against humanity (on 17 November 2025). This verdict came on the back of raging public sentiment over the Hasina era.

Since Sheikh Hasina's 15-year era was marked by enforced disappearances (up to 4000, though figures vary), extrajudicial killings, arbitrary arrests, torture, politically motivated criminal cases and the use of administrative and legal mechanisms to marginalise and silence opposition parties, the younger generation seems unforgiving. The calls for bringing the former PM to justice resonate almost everywhere.

Between 2009 and 2024, the security establishment, intelligence agencies in particular, were used indiscriminately to abuse, harass and punish the political rivals. And hence the popular demand to hold her accountable.

Yet, for India, the former prime minister still counts as a "treasured guest" and hence New Delhi's nearly flat refusal to hand her over.

The issues also exposes limitations of any government in Dhaka; Bangladesh is almost surrounded by Indian territory, with the Bay of Bengal to its south and a short border with Myanmar to its southeast. Its land border with India extends roughly 4,096 kilometres. This makes India an unavoidable neighbour in Bangladesh's security, economic and diplomatic calculations – also called the "tyranny of geography" by Ali Riaz, a Bangladesh-origin Distinguished Professor at the University of Illinois.

Geography – a powerful structural factor – clearly imposes limits to Bangladesh's relations with India. No surprise that a recent speech Prime Minister Tarique Rahman delivered at the Bay of Bengal conference betrayed a deliberate shift towards diplomatic moderation, economic pragmatism and regional engagement. Though Rehman focused mostly on democratic transparency, accountability and indiscriminate rule of law, he did allude to the inevitability of normal relations with all neighbours.

That's why conscious transition from emotional vows of revenge to guarded rational positive messaging is clearly discernible in the government's narratives, possibly in view of the limits that inescapable geography and the Hasina legacy – deeply entrenched loyalists, supporters within civil-military hierarchies – place on the government.

Additionally, 15 years of Hasina's rule changed the institutional, political and economic landscape, and those networks, habits and loyalties cannot disappear with one electoral transition. At the same time, India's unusually close relationship with Hasina created a structural Indian stake in Bangladesh that complicates Rahman's effort to reform the state and redefine foreign policy.

While pursuing democratic ideals, Bangladesh also wants relations based on mutual respect and equality, Rehman underlined. The language of dialogue, partnership and mutual respect a clear signal, amplified also by Andaleeve Rahman, Rehman's information minister.

We are determined to take on the multitude of challenges that are upon our head and hence not interested in bloc politics. We want to stay clear of big power rivalries to be able to focus on internal economic development, improving governance and ensuring stability, the minister explained, in what appeared to be an indirect message to India.

Both the PM and the Information Minister as well as a number of Bangladeshi participants at the Bay of Bengal Conversation appeared to project their country as a pivotal access to maritime trade, regional supply chains and potentially more efficient transport links between India, Nepal, Bhutan and the Bay of Bengal.

Rahman's speech explicitly identified shipping, fisheries, tourism, energy and regional supply chains as areas of opportunity, without detailing the steps being taken to address the public anxiety over the injustice and oppression perpetrated under Hasina. Will he be able to deliver justice without turning accountability into another instrument of political revenge – as is the norm in South Asia and many African countries? This requires investigating disappearances, prosecuting those credibly implicated in abuses, providing redress to victims and ensuring fair trials regardless of political affiliation.

Rehman's predicament also shows that repression and autocratic regimes deeply scar the society, making it difficult for the victims and those at the receiving end to get over it. High-handed politics – rough treatment of the opposition, enforced disappearances, etc – subvert the rule of law to the extent that turns correction an arduous job – a double edged sword.

That is why the critical test that lies ahead for Rahman is whether he will be able to normalise relations with India on the one hand, and whether the pressing circumstances would allow him to break with the methods of the past or reproduce them under a different political leadership wrapped in a self-serving lingo.