Decoding why B’desh PM Tarique Rahman put off his visit to India

It is now certain that the proposed visit of Bangladesh Prime Minister Tarique Rahman to Delhi for a one-on-one meeting with Narendra Modi is off the table, in spite of the best of intentions and hectic backroom parleys on both sides. Ironically, a section within India’s foreign service ecosystem — comprising serving and retired foreign service officers — is celebrating this as a victory rather than a setback.

An email to the media by the Rashtrapati Bhavan on Friday (21 August 21, 2026) gave the impression that the long-under-discussion visit of Bangladesh Prime Minister Tarique Rahman was imminent. The email stated, “The Change of Guard Ceremony at the Forecourt of Rashtrapati Bhavan will not take place this Saturday (22 August 2026) due to the full rehearsal for the ceremonial welcome of the Prime Minister of Bangladesh”. The email was issued by Navika Gupta, Deputy Press Secretary to the President of India. The email was, however, withdrawn within hours. Such a diplomatic faux pas had apparently happened for the very first time.

Gossip in New Delhi that a section of the Indian foreign policy establishment, including retired diplomats, are actually gloating gained support from a post by Suhasini Haidar, the Diplomatic Editor of The Hindu.

“The withdrawn email from Rashtrapati Bhavan indicates not only the tensions in India-Bangladesh ties at present, but tensions within the foreign policy establishments in Delhi and Dhaka,” she posted on X early on Saturday morning. There is also renewed speculation that diplomats are gloating partly because they put India’s failure to convince Rahman to visit New Delhi at the door of the new Indian envoy in Dhaka, a non-diplomat and former union minister Dinesh Trivedi.

Prima facie, it is Shiekh Hasina’s 5 August press conference which is being touted as the trigger. During the event, Hasina publicly reiterated, among other issues, her resolve to return to Bangladesh by December 2026. Bangladesh had no choice but to register its strong protest for India providing a platform to Hasina who is convicted for engineering a genocide and allowing her to indulge in political activities even when her repatriation request was pending.

Government of India’s argument that it had nothing to do with the event, organised by a private entity, convinced no one in Dhaka. In a formal statement on 16 August, Bangladesh Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MoFA) spokesperson A.K.M. Shahidul Karim said a "propitious environment needs to be created" for the visit to take place. The ministry noted that while both governments had been in touch for weeks regarding the trip, the atmosphere surrounding the visit was vitiated following Sheikh Hasina's 5 August press interaction. MoFA linked extradition of Sheikh Hasina and other fugitive criminals as well as handing over the killers of Sharif Osman Hadi as indicators for creating the “propitious environment.”

Since then, there has been a series of statements by retired Indian foreign service officers vitiating the atmosphere, as opposed to creating one which was “propitious.” This ranged from describing MoFA statement as “very rude” and “arrogant” when the two sides were still discussing dates for Tarique’s visit and preparations were continuing, to reminding Bangladesh that repatriation was a time-consuming judicial process which involves more than sending notes verbale.

While pointing out that such remarks reflected India’s typical big brother attitude, sources in Dhaka say India needs to restrain “people making such remarks” in order to move forward, more so since such statements are silent on what triggered the 16 August MoFA statement — Hasina’s 5 August press conference.

It is a sentiment shared by a section of Bangladesh watchers in India as well. “Some people in MEA and outside continue to remain in a Hasina-centred time warp, not realising that Bangladesh has moved ahead,” a senior diplomat told the National Herald.

A case in point is how Bangladesh’s opposition party Jamaat regarded Tarique Rahman’s India visit. “The Prime Minister can travel anywhere in the world. We have no problem if he visits our neighbouring country, India. But the visit must be based on equal status as partners and friends,” said Jamaat Amir Dr. Shafiqur Rahman. There is a consensus between Jamaat and the ruling BNP on this issue.

This consensus reflects the underlying flip Bangladesh’s polity has undergone since August 2024, when Shiekh Hasina fled to India. The refusal to accept this shift appears to have split India’s foreign policy establishment over its approach to Bangladesh. While the IFS-dominated lobby in MEA remains stuck in its Hasina-Awami League-oriented cosy comfort, deployment of Dinesh Trivedi as a political appointee, with cabinet rank, is a clear message to MEA that initiatives led by career bureaucrats were not sufficient.

Backing Shiekh Hasina may no longer ensure India’s diplomatic and strategic leverage over Bangladesh. Although Awami League retains some of its earlier cadre base, especially among the youth, it is currently a party without leaders to ensure protection to workers. Also, being a dynastic party, its support base, built around an iconic leader, has eroded to a large extent.

Interestingly, India’s domestic politics, some led by the Home Ministry, too has had an adverse impact on India-Bangladesh relations. Although issues like NRC, CAA, SIR in Bengal and Assam, BSF push-back of illegal Bangladeshi migrants and anti-Bangladeshi political rhetoric aimed at domestic audience may have ensured BJP’s political success, it is now standing in the way of improving bilateral relations.

As frustrated bureaucrats pick up the pieces in Delhi and Dhaka from their aborted attempt to bring Tarique Rahman to Delhi, India needs to think hard as to how it approaches its foreign policy — as a dynamic inter-agency process, or as a fiefdom of self-involved old bureaucrats swilling single malt at India Habitat Centre.

Sourabh Sen is a Kolkata-based independent writer and commentator on politics, human rights and foreign affairs. More by the author here