Yunus’s China visit sparks controversy over India’s northeast and maritime access

Bangladesh’s interim Chief Adviser, Muhammad Yunus, has stirred controversy with his recent statements during a high-profile visit to China, where he described his country as the “only guardian of the ocean” for India‘s northeastern states. The remarks, made in the presence of Chinese officials, suggested that the region—often referred to as the “Seven Sisters”—is entirely dependent on Bangladesh for access to maritime trade and global commerce. This assertion, coupled with Yunus’s invitation to China to expand its economic influence in the region, has provoked sharp responses from Indian officials and analysts.

Yunus’s four-day diplomatic engagement with Beijing was marked by discussions on economic cooperation and infrastructure development. His appeal to Chinese investors positioned Bangladesh as a strategic conduit for the movement of goods between India’s landlocked northeast and global markets. “Seven states of India, eastern part of India, called Seven Sisters… they are landlocked… They have no way to reach out to the ocean,” Yunus stated, adding that Bangladesh alone provides the critical maritime access necessary for economic expansion.

The statement has led to strong reactions from Indian policymakers, who view such rhetoric as not only misleading but also potentially disruptive to established agreements between India and Bangladesh on trade and connectivity.

How does Yunus’s pitch align with China’s regional ambitions?

Yunus’s invitation to China comes at a time when Beijing is seeking to consolidate its presence in South Asia through large-scale infrastructure projects and trade partnerships. The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), China’s ambitious global development strategy, has already made significant inroads in Bangladesh through projects like the Padma Bridge Rail Link and the Payra Deep Sea Port.

By framing Bangladesh as an essential link between China and India’s northeastern states, Yunus has aligned his country’s economic aspirations with Beijing’s regional objectives. His assertion that Bangladesh could serve as an “extension of the Chinese economy” echoes China’s broader strategy of increasing its footprint in South Asia, particularly in countries facing economic difficulties.

This approach, however, places Bangladesh in a delicate position, as India remains one of its largest trading partners and a crucial ally in regional security. While China has invested heavily in Bangladesh’s infrastructure, India has also contributed to key projects, including cross-border rail links and energy cooperation. Any shift in Dhaka’s strategic alignment could have lasting implications for its diplomatic relationships.

What has been India’s response to Yunus’s remarks?

Yunus’s comments have drawn sharp criticism from Indian officials, who have questioned both the accuracy and intent behind his statements. Sanjeev Sanyal, a member of India’s Economic Advisory Council to the Prime Minister, responded by questioning why Bangladesh was emphasizing the landlocked nature of India’s northeastern states in an appeal to China. He noted that while China is free to invest in Bangladesh, the reference to India’s geography appeared unnecessary.

Former Indian High Commissioner to Bangladesh, Veena Sikri, was more direct in her criticism, calling Yunus’s statement “very shocking” and “completely inappropriate.” Sikri emphasized that India and Bangladesh have long-standing agreements that ensure northeastern India has access to the Bay of Bengal through established trade corridors. She warned that Bangladesh should not harbor any “illusions” about its regional position, suggesting that if Dhaka failed to honor existing connectivity agreements, it could face consequences regarding its own rights as a riparian state.

What are the economic motivations behind Bangladesh’s outreach to China?

Bangladesh’s growing economic ties with China come at a time when the country is facing financial challenges. Rising external debt, declining foreign reserves, and inflationary pressures have created an urgent need for external financing. China has positioned itself as a key investor, offering loans and development funds, particularly in infrastructure projects.

Defense expert Captain Anil Gaur (Retired) suggested that Yunus’s visit to Beijing was primarily driven by economic necessity. “Muhammad Yunus has gone to China to get some funds because Bangladesh’s economy has collapsed… Today, Bangladesh is in the same situation as it was during the time of East Pakistan before its liberation in 1971,” he stated, drawing a historical parallel between Bangladesh’s current financial struggles and the economic conditions that led to its independence.

There is also growing concern that Bangladesh’s increasing reliance on Chinese funding could lead to a debt dependency similar to what has been observed in countries like Sri Lanka, where Chinese-financed infrastructure projects have resulted in severe financial strain. Given these concerns, India is likely to closely monitor Bangladesh’s economic engagements with Beijing.

How do water management discussions fit into Bangladesh-China relations?

Beyond economic cooperation, Yunus’s visit to China also included discussions on river water management. One of the key issues raised was the Teesta River, a critical water source for both India and Bangladesh. For years, Dhaka has sought China’s assistance in managing water resources, particularly during times of drought and flooding.

China’s expertise in large-scale water infrastructure projects has made it an attractive partner for Bangladesh, but any collaboration in this domain is likely to raise concerns in India. Water-sharing agreements between India and Bangladesh are already a sensitive topic, and the introduction of a third-party—especially one with strategic interests in South Asia—could complicate negotiations.

By engaging China in discussions on river management, Bangladesh may be signaling its willingness to diversify its partnerships, potentially leveraging Chinese expertise to strengthen its negotiating position with India. However, this approach also risks exacerbating tensions, particularly if China’s involvement is seen as an attempt to exert influence over shared water resources.

What are the broader implications of Yunus’s visit for regional geopolitics?

Yunus’s remarks and outreach to China reflect the shifting dynamics of South Asian geopolitics, where economic interests and strategic partnerships are increasingly shaping diplomatic relations. For Bangladesh, balancing relationships with both India and China is a complex task, requiring careful navigation to ensure long-term economic and political stability.

For India, the growing influence of China in Bangladesh is a cause for concern, particularly given Beijing’s history of using economic investments to gain strategic leverage. India has traditionally viewed Bangladesh as an important regional partner, and any signs of Dhaka drifting closer to Beijing could prompt a reassessment of India’s engagement strategies.

As Bangladesh continues to seek investment and development support, it will need to weigh the benefits of Chinese economic assistance against the risks of over-reliance. India, meanwhile, may need to adopt a more proactive approach in strengthening its economic and diplomatic ties with Bangladesh to counterbalance China’s expanding influence.

Ultimately, Yunus’s visit to China and his comments on regional connectivity highlight the evolving geopolitical landscape of South Asia—one where economic ambitions, strategic rivalries, and historical relationships intersect in complex and often unpredictable ways.