Northeast Leaders Slam Muhammad Yunus Over Bangladesh’s Geopolitical Remark
The recent remarks by Muhammad Yunus, chief advisor to Bangladesh's interim government, have sparked a strong backlash in India, particularly among political leaders in the Northeast. During his visit to China, Yunus described India’s northeastern states as “landlocked” and positioned Bangladesh as the “guardian of the ocean” for the region. His statement, widely circulated on social media, has been criticized as offensive and strategically concerning, with leaders questioning Bangladesh’s growing alignment with China and its implications for India’s security.
The comments come amid shifting geopolitical dynamics between India and Bangladesh, especially following the departure of the Sheikh Hasina government. India has extended support to Hasina, while the new Bangladeshi administration under Yunus has been seen engaging closely with China. The controversial remarks have added fuel to existing tensions between New Delhi and Dhaka, especially as concerns grow over attacks on minorities and changing diplomatic ties in the region.
Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma was among the first to condemn Yunus’s statement, calling it not only “offensive” but also a reflection of historical vulnerabilities concerning India’s strategic "Chicken’s Neck" corridor. The corridor, a narrow land passage in West Bengal’s Siliguri, is the lifeline connecting the Northeast to the rest of India. Sarma emphasized the need for stronger road and rail networks to ensure better connectivity and reduce dependence on external routes. He pointed out that past narratives had dangerously suggested cutting off the corridor, making it even more urgent to invest in alternate infrastructure projects to safeguard the region’s integration with mainland India.
Tripura's Tipra Motha party leader, Pradyot Manikya, also responded sharply, highlighting the historical context of India’s access to the Bay of Bengal. He lamented that India had let go of the Chittagong port during the 1947 partition despite its significance for the indigenous communities of Tripura and the surrounding regions. Manikya took an aggressive stance, even suggesting that rather than investing billions in infrastructural challenges, India could take a bolder approach by breaking up Bangladesh and reclaiming access to the sea. He pointed to the plight of indigenous tribes like the Chakma, Garo, Khasi, and Tripuri people, many of whom reside in Bangladesh under difficult conditions. According to him, their struggles could be leveraged in India’s national interest while securing better living conditions for these communities.
The remarks have also triggered political debates beyond the Northeast. Congress leader Pawan Khera criticized Bangladesh’s actions as a potential security risk, warning that Dhaka’s growing ties with Beijing could lead to a strategic siege against India. He accused the central government of neglecting issues like the Manipur crisis while China has been making inroads into Arunachal Pradesh. According to Khera, India’s foreign policy is in such a weak state that even a country that India helped liberate in 1971 is now positioning itself against Indian interests.
Sanjeev Sanyal, an economic advisor to Prime Minister Narendra Modi, also questioned the rationale behind Yunus’s statement. While acknowledging that China is welcome to invest in Bangladesh, he found it intriguing that Yunus publicly referenced India's northeastern states as being landlocked. The mention of the region in a China-focused speech has raised eyebrows, with analysts speculating whether Bangladesh is signaling a deeper strategic shift towards Beijing.
Former Indian High Commissioner to Bangladesh, Veena Sikri, joined the chorus of criticism, condemning Yunus’s statement as shocking and unwarranted. She emphasized that India and Bangladesh already have formal agreements on access to the Bay of Bengal for northeastern states, making Yunus’s remarks not only misleading but diplomatically unnecessary. Sikri reminded that the Northeast is an integral part of India and that Bangladesh should respect the long-standing understandings between the two nations.
The controversy has reignited debates over India’s connectivity strategy for the Northeast. While Bangladesh has traditionally been a crucial partner for transit routes, the growing influence of China in the region has raised security concerns. Analysts suggest that India must accelerate its investments in alternative transport corridors, such as the India-Myanmar-Thailand highway and port connectivity projects in the eastern region, to counteract any potential geopolitical leverage Dhaka may try to exert.
Moreover, the incident underscores the fragility of India-Bangladesh relations in the post-Hasina era. While Sheikh Hasina maintained a pragmatic relationship with India, the new interim government’s outreach to China suggests a possible recalibration of Bangladesh’s foreign policy. India must now navigate these changes carefully while ensuring that the Northeast remains well-integrated and secure from external influences.
As diplomatic tensions continue, the Indian government will likely seek reassurances from Dhaka about its stance on the Northeast. The controversy also highlights the need for India to remain vigilant about regional developments and proactively strengthen its internal infrastructure and connectivity plans to mitigate external geopolitical risks.