In a calculated power grab cloaked in diplomacy, Dr. Muhammad Yunus has installed himself atop an unelected “interim government” through backdoor dealings with deep-state actors and foreign sponsors. Lacking any constitutional mandate, his regime now governs through secrecy—culminating in a covert Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) with the United States. In exchange for a modest tariff cut, Bangladesh has surrendered its defense autonomy, abandoned key allies, and entered a one-sided alliance that compromises its sovereignty. What’s being paraded as diplomacy is, in truth, a historic act of submission.
The consequences of this capitulation are already unfolding. Under the guise of a tariff adjustment—promoted loudly as a reduction from 35% to 20%—the regime has entered into an NDA that explicitly prohibits Bangladesh from procuring military equipment from its two longstanding defense partners: China and Russia. This is not a diplomatic alignment; it is a unilateral surrender of strategic flexibility, signed in silence, and branded as a victory.
The timing is no accident. According to multiple credible sources, U.S. Chargé d’Affaires Tracey Ann Jacobson recently visited the Armed Forces Division in Dhaka. In a closed-door meeting with the Principal Staff Officer, she is reported to have delivered a direct ultimatum: continued military dealings with China or Russia would trigger sanctions against the Bangladesh Armed Forces. The same warning was conveyed to Yunus himself. The NDA, far from being a mutual agreement, was effectively coerced.
To understand the gravity of this agreement, Let us examine the facts. Bangladesh’s military capacity — spanning the Army, Navy, and Air Force — is fundamentally structured around Chinese and Russian defense technologies. The Bangladesh Army operates 320 tanks, of which 281 are Chinese. Its 77 rocket launchers include 49 Chinese and 28 Turkish systems. Armored personnel carriers, used across internal and operational activities, largely originate from the Russian Federation and legacy Soviet supplies. Ammunition production is self-sufficient in name only — its raw materials and machinery are entirely imported from China. The Bangladesh Navy maintains 117 vessels including two Chinese-origin submarines and a mix of frigates from China, the U.S., and South Korea. The Air Force, with 212 aircraft, relies heavily on Chinese F-7 and Russian MiG-29 fighters, while its 73 helicopters include a significant number of Russian MI-series aircraft.
These are not minor dependencies — they are structural pillars of our national defense. If either China or Russia—with ample reason and precedent—decide to halt maintenance assistance, spare parts, or logistical support in response to this betrayal, large portions of Bangladesh’s defense apparatus would collapse into dysfunction. Without firing a shot, this regime has placed the entire military at the mercy of geopolitical retaliation.
But the damage does not end with defense. The economic implications of this pivot are equally catastrophic. Bangladesh’s key industries—most notably garments rely heavily on Chinese inputs. From textiles to machinery, Chinese supply chains are the arteries of the nation’s economic life. Alienating Beijing to appease Washington risks triggering retaliatory trade responses that could disrupt production, fuel inflation, or even precipitate a supply crisis.
And for what? To purchase 25 unnecessary Boeing aircraft at inflated prices, and accept overpriced U.S. wheat under bundled agreements? This is not diplomacy—it is tribute. This regime has traded strategic autonomy for transactional subservience.
Historically, Bangladesh maintained a delicate but effective balance in its foreign relations. The government led by Honorable Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, while often criticized for proximity to India, never sacrificed defense independence. Her administration cultivated parallel ties with China, Russia, the U.S., and India—managing contradictions with calculated diplomacy. The contrast is stark. Just in a year, the interim regime has unraveled decades of carefully structured non-alignment, collapsing Bangladesh into a one-dimensional client state.
Bangladesh now stands disarmed not by war, but by pen. The NDA does not represent a shift in alliance; it represents the annihilation of choice. It reduces Bangladesh’s military to a dependent appendage, its economy to a hostage of imported goodwill, and its sovereignty to a bargaining chip in another nation’s strategic ledger.
This is not a policy failure—it is a national betrayal. It is the willful dismantling of sovereignty, sealed with ink and silence, and disguised as success. What no invading army, no insurrection, no foreign lobby could do, this unelected and unconstitutional regime has done with chilling efficiency: hand over Bangladesh’s future for the illusion of international validation.
The cost will not be measured in tariffs or trade. It will be measured in compromised deterrence, constrained diplomacy, and economic subjugation. The people of Bangladesh do not deserve this future. Yet under Dr. Yunus’s illegitimate rule, they are being forced to live it.
History may not be kind to this chapter. Nor should it be.
