HomeBlogPage 415

Trump Lifts Restrictions on Household Water Use

Dastagir Jahangir
-
0

U.S. President Donald Trump has repealed water usage limits for household activities such as bathing, washing dishes, doing laundry, and cleaning cars — restrictions previously imposed by former presidents Barack Obama and Joe Biden to prevent water wastage.

On Friday, President Trump signed an executive order in the Oval Office in Washington. During a press briefing with journalists after the signing, he said, “I like to take showers. I like to take care of my beautiful hair, and for that, I need a great shower.”

“But when I stand under the shower, the water drips slowly, and it takes 15 minutes just to get my hair wet. It’s ridiculous.”

Trump further stated, “If it takes five times longer than usual just to wash your hands, then what are you supposed to do? So, the water is the same, and we are making it available to the people so that they can live.”

In 2009, after assuming office, Democratic Party leader and former president Barack Obama signed an executive order to reduce the wastage of potable water by limiting its use in household activities. As part of that order, restrictions were placed on water flow rates in residential pipelines, as higher water flow could lead to greater water wastage.

After Obama’s term ended, Donald Trump became President in 2017 and revoked several executive orders issued by his predecessor, including the one limiting water flow speed.

However, in the 2020 election, Trump was defeated by Democratic candidate Joe Biden. After taking office, Biden reinstated Obama’s executive order. On Friday, Trump repealed it once again.

In a statement released by the White House following Trump’s discussion with journalists, it was said, “Previous administrations, led by past presidents, had turned basic household tasks in the U.S. into a bureaucratic nightmare. From now on, showerheads and taps will no longer have weak water flow.”

Notably, Obama and Biden’s orders to limit water flow in households were based on the 1992 Energy Policy Act. The idea was that by controlling water flow and using water-efficient showerheads and faucets, electricity consumption could also be reduced.

In American households, about 20 percent of daily water usage comes from showers.

Saudi Arabia Rejects Proposal to Evict Palestinians

Dastagir Jahangir
-
0

Saudi Arabia has rejected any proposal aimed at evicting Palestinians from their homeland. Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan expressed his country’s stance during a ministerial-level meeting held in Antalya, Turkey, on Friday (April 11), focusing on ending the war in Gaza.

He stated that the people of Gaza are being deprived of basic necessities for survival. Nearly a month and a half ago, Israel imposed a complete blockade on Gaza. At that time, the hostage exchange between Hamas and Israel came to an end, and the ceasefire agreement became fragile.

The Saudi foreign minister emphasized that the entry of essential goods into Gaza should not be conditional upon a ceasefire agreement. He called on the international community to ensure the free and unobstructed entry of food and other necessities into Gaza.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former U.S. President Donald Trump have previously stated their intentions to relocate the residents of Gaza to another country and turn Gaza into a modern city. Saudi Arabia has firmly rejected this proposal.

Qatar, Egypt, and the United States have been mediating the ceasefire between Israel and Hamas. Prince Faisal bin Farhan stated that Saudi Arabia trusts these countries and supports their efforts in the mediation process.

The ministers attending the conference issued a joint statement, collectively rejecting any forced eviction of Palestinians from Gaza, East Jerusalem, and the West Bank. They also called for the unification of these three regions under the Palestinian Authority (PA), currently led by President Mahmoud Abbas. While the PA governs the West Bank, Hamas controls Gaza.

The ministers further condemned Israel’s ongoing settlement construction and expansion in the occupied Palestinian territories, labeling it as an act of aggression.

Missing context in Yunus’s narrative at Dhaka Investment Summit 2025

Dastagir Jahangir
-
0

Ashequn Nabi Chowdhury
Journalist, Author, Former Diplomat

Professor Muhammad Yunus is renowned for his persuasive public speaking skills, capable of captivating audiences and shaping narratives to serve his interests. At the recent Bangladesh Investment Summit 2025 in Dhaka, he once again seized the spotlight by delivering a passionately charged speech that garnered international attention.

With dramatic flair, Yunus recounted the horrors of the 1974 famine, portraying himself as a compassionate visionary deeply affected by the plight of the poor. He claimed that this tragedy inspired his groundbreaking work in microfinance and the establishment of Grameen Bank—a story that has solidified his reputation as a global humanitarian.

However, Yunus’s narrative has drawn criticism for omitting certain contextual details. While he emphasized the famine’s role in inspiring his poverty alleviation efforts, he did not mention that his microfinance project began in 1976 as part of a Chittagong University economics department initiative in Jobra village. He also did not acknowledge the official establishment of Grameen Bank in 1982 with government support, nor his adoption of principles from the Colombo Bank of Microcredit and the influence of Sri Lankan students during his time in the United States.

In 2006, Yunus and Grameen Bank gained international recognition with the Nobel Peace Prize. Despite Yunus being widely credited as the ‘microfinance guru,’ the concept traces its origins to the 1950s when Akhtar Hameed Khan introduced it in East Pakistan. Yunus popularized and refined the model through Grameen Bank.

Grameen Bank is well-known for its contributions to poverty alleviation and for empowering women through microloans. However, it has faced criticism for high interest rates and aggressive debt collection practices. Some media reports have suggested a connection between borrowers’ suicides and the stress of repaying loans under these conditions. While Muhammad Yunus has undeniably helped many individuals, questions remain about the balance between financial inclusion and ethical lending practices.

He faced significant criticism for allegedly exploiting the poor by charging interest rates of up to 44% for loans from Grameen Bank. He denied these allegations, but David Roodman, a senior fellow at the Washington, D.C.-based Center for Global Development, conducted an analysis in 2010 that revealed the effective interest rate at Grameen Bank during Yunus’s tenure ranged from 20% to 25%. Furthermore, it increased to 44% for borrowers who were required to maintain a restricted savings account to access loans.

In his address at the Investment Summit, Yunus spoke about the impact of the famine but provided only a limited explanation regarding its causes. A more in-depth exploration of its root causes would have been beneficial, offering essential context and clarity while helping to mitigate public speculation and misunderstandings about the most significant natural disaster in Bangladesh’s history.

The famine of 1974 was a significant event shaped by a range of factors, with catastrophic flooding being a primary contributor. This flooding not only ravaged the agricultural sector but also caused widespread unemployment in a newly independent nation grappling with the aftermath of a nine-month struggle for freedom. Nobel Laureate Professor Amartya Sen has thoroughly analysed these issues in his articles, providing valuable insights that deepen our understanding of such crises.

“The starvation was initiated by regional unemployment caused by floods. These floods affected food production many months later when the reduced crop was harvested. However, the famine occurred earlier, before the affected crop had matured.”

Contributing to the crisis was a global food shortage, primarily driven by the Soviet Union’s aggressive grain purchases from the United States in the early 1970s. As detailed in the compelling book “The World for Sale” by Javier Blas and Jack Farchy, published by Oxford University Press in 2021, the Soviet Union, confronted with serious domestic crop failures, strategically acquired around 10 million short tons of grain from the US. This operation, famously dubbed the “Great Grain Robbery,” put immense pressure on global supply chains and fuelled skyrocketing grain prices worldwide, intensifying food insecurity in nations like Bangladesh.

Apart from this global food crisis, the newly formed Bangladeshi government also struggled with poor infrastructure, inefficient food distribution, and administrative inexperience. Food grain smuggling to neighbouring countries further worsened domestic shortages.

During his speech, Yunus acknowledged that Bangladesh has made significant progress in recent years. However, he did not mention the contributions of the Awami League government, led by Sheikh Hasina, over the past 15 years. Nevertheless, Sheikh Hasina’s economic successes have received global recognition, including praise from the Geneva-based World Economic Forum (WEF).

United States Engages in Talks with Iran, Bypassing Europe

Dastagir Jahangir
-
0

The U.S. is facing criticism for its diplomatic decision to hold secret talks with Iran in Oman regarding its nuclear program without coordinating with European allies. Analysts and diplomats believe this move could reduce pressure on Iran and potentially heighten the risk of military action from Israel and the U.S., according to a report by Reuters.

Before President Donald Trump announced the talks with Iran on Tuesday, the U.S. did not inform the UK, France, or Germany (E3), despite the key role these European countries play in imposing new UN sanctions on Iran. This was confirmed by three European diplomats.

Blaise Misztal, Vice President of the Jewish Institute for National Security of America, stated that the U.S. needs a coordinated diplomatic strategy with European allies in discussions with Iran. He emphasized the importance of maintaining maximum pressure while keeping diplomatic avenues open.

In February, Trump reinstated the “maximum pressure” strategy on Iran and again threatened military intervention if Iran didn’t shut down its nuclear program, saying Israel would take the lead in such action.

Western countries suspect Iran of attempting to develop nuclear weapons, although Tehran denies this. While threats of sanctions aim to pressure Iran, diplomats say there hasn’t been a detailed strategic discussion with the U.S. yet.

Since the U.S. withdrew from the 2015 nuclear deal, it can no longer initiate the re-imposition of UN sanctions through the Security Council. Thus, only the UK, France, and Germany have the power to begin this process, making coordination with these allies crucial, analysts say. Israel, a staunch opponent of Iran, is already lobbying for such action.

According to three diplomats, the European trio has informed Iran of their intention to initiate the process by the end of June. In response, Tehran warned of severe consequences and said it might reconsider its nuclear policy.

A senior European diplomat expressed reduced trust in the U.S., citing its tendency to take unilateral decisions without consultation.

In 2018, Trump withdrew the U.S. from the Iran nuclear deal signed with Russia and China. Under the deal, Iran had agreed to curb its nuclear activities in exchange for the lifting of sanctions. Russia now opposes any new sanctions.

This unilateral approach mirrors Trump’s first term, when he prioritized one-on-one talks with Iran. A similar strategy was observed in the context of the Ukraine war, where the U.S. bypassed Europe to engage directly with Moscow.

European officials have held some meetings with U.S. counterparts, but they yielded little progress. Just a week before Trump’s announcement, European officials faced a tough time during a NATO foreign ministers’ meeting where they discussed Iran with U.S. Senator Marco Rubio.

The foreign ministries of the UK, France, and Germany have not directly responded to whether they had prior knowledge of the Oman talks. A British Foreign Office spokesperson said they are committed to all diplomatic steps necessary to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, including the possibility of a “snapback” mechanism.

French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrault briefly commented that France is observing the negotiations with interest.

Since 2003, European countries have engaged in trilateral talks on Iran’s nuclear issue. The 2015 agreement offered Iran significant incentives, including trade opportunities with Europe. Recently, Europe has supported the U.S. in imposing new sanctions over Iran’s ballistic missile program, detention of foreign nationals, and support for Russia in the Ukraine war.

Following Trump’s election victory but before he assumed office, European countries began preliminary talks with Iran in September. They argued that with the 2015 deal expiring on October 18, urgent steps were necessary. They hoped to negotiate even a more limited version of the original deal if possible.

Diplomats noted that Iranian officials frequently asked European representatives about the new U.S. administration’s stance.

An Iranian official stated that Iran believes talks with the European trio and other signatories of the nuclear deal could help ease tensions and complement any dialogue with the U.S.

Analysts warn that the U.S.’s unilateral policy could fracture the Western alliance on the Iran issue.

Tahawwur Rana Extradited to India in Connection with Mumbai Attacks

Dastagir Jahangir
-
0

Tahawwur Rana, one of the key conspirators in the 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks, has been extradited to India by the United States. On Thursday, a special aircraft carrying Rana landed at Delhi’s Palam Airport. Indian intelligence and investigation officials accompanied him on the flight. Upon arrival, the National Investigation Agency (NIA) officially arrested him.

Later, a special court ordered Rana to be held in custody for 18 days, although the NIA had requested a 20-day remand. In court, the NIA stated that Rana was involved in a criminal conspiracy to carry out terrorist activities and had conspired with other attackers.

Originally a Pakistani citizen, Rana also holds Canadian citizenship. He had been detained in a Los Angeles prison for several years. Authorities accused him of having close ties with David Coleman Headley, another Pakistani-origin terrorist. Together, they allegedly planned the 2008 Mumbai attacks. Rana was also linked with the banned militant group Lashkar-e-Taiba and had connections with another extremist group, Harkat-ul-Jihad al-Islami (HuJI).

The Mumbai attacks took place on November 26, 2008, when ten armed terrorists infiltrated the city via the sea and launched coordinated assaults on multiple locations, including the Taj Hotel, a hospital, a railway station, and a Jewish center. The 60-hour siege resulted in the deaths of 166 people and injuries to more than 300. Rana was arrested by the FBI in October 2009 and was convicted in a U.S. court in 2011. He had been held in a detention center in Los Angeles ever since.

26,000 Teachers Lose Jobs in West Bengal—Who Will Teach the Students?

Dastagir Jahangir
-
0

The abrupt cancellation of nearly 26,000 teaching and non-teaching staff jobs has plunged West Bengal’s school education system into crisis.

One such affected institution is the Birinchibari Surendranath Girls’ School in the remote Sunderbans area of Jharakhala. The school, which runs up to 12th grade, has 498 students.

Last week, when India’s Supreme Court ordered the termination of nearly 26,000 school teachers and staff hired in 2016, the school’s headmistress Arusima Mitra was devastated.

She said, “Perhaps I should have first thought of my colleagues who lost their jobs. But believe me, the first thought that struck me was—what will happen to my students? Who will teach them now?”

No Teachers Left—Who Will Teach the Children?

Even before the ruling, the school had only nine teachers for nearly 500 students. Four of them have now lost their jobs due to the Supreme Court verdict.

“We were already struggling with just nine teachers. Everyone was overburdened. I personally took classes regularly,” said Headmistress Mitra. “Now, running the school has become extremely difficult.”

This situation is echoed across thousands of schools in West Bengal. In many cases, half or more of the staff are gone. Some schools had only one teacher—who also lost their job. Retired teachers have stepped in at some places. Many individuals on social media have offered to teach for free.

In schools lacking support staff, even the head teachers are ringing the school bells themselves. “We have no science or geography teachers. Who will prepare the students for their higher secondary exams next year? What will happen to their future?” asked Mitra.

Both ‘Qualified’ and ‘Unqualified’ Teachers Were Fired

The Supreme Court order did not differentiate between roughly 7,000 allegedly corrupt hires and those who earned their positions on merit. As a result, both categories lost their jobs.

Many were accused of getting jobs by bribery, including some who submitted blank answer sheets in recruitment exams. The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has probed the matter. Former Education Minister Partha Chatterjee and several senior officials from the ruling Trinamool Congress (TMC) have been arrested. However, in the latest ruling, the Supreme Court didn’t separate the qualified from the unqualified.

Teachers have criticized the government, asking why the qualified and unqualified were not categorized properly despite earlier commitments and existing CBI reports identifying those who paid bribes.

“Even the Supreme Court had earlier said it would define the criteria for distinguishing between qualified and unqualified candidates,” said Mehbub Mondal, a teacher from Dhosha Chandaneswar High School in South 24 Parganas and convenor of the Qualified Teachers’ Rights Forum.

He added, “Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee recently said she would try to reinstate the qualified teachers, but she also hinted at rehabilitating the unqualified ones—which we strongly oppose.”

Teachers: Victims of Political Game

Many teachers believe they are victims of political conspiracies. Mehbub Mondal said, “While we—the qualified teachers—were terminated, the same Supreme Court rejected a CBI probe into the government’s creation of excess job positions.”

This implies that the state cabinet’s alleged backdoor plan to rehire corrupt hires could still proceed, shielding them from legal scrutiny.

“We ordinary people have been scapegoated for political gain ahead of the next state elections,” said Mondal. He blamed institutional failure and pointed fingers at the state government.

Brutality Against Teachers

While the controversy over the job terminations rages, police brutality against protesting teachers has added fuel to the fire. A video showing a police officer kicking a teacher during a protest in Kolkata sparked public outrage.

The Kolkata Police Commissioner and Chief Secretary had to hold a press conference. Commissioner Manoj Verma said only “mild force

S. Jaishankar Expresses Hope for National Elections in Bangladesh, Warns of Rising Extremism

Dastagir Jahangir
-
0

New Delhi, April 2025 — India’s External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar has expressed both hope and concern regarding the political developments in Bangladesh, emphasizing the importance of democratic continuity while warning against the rise of extremist elements in the country.

Speaking at News18’s flagship Rising India Summit held on Wednesday at Bharat Mandapam in New Delhi, Jaishankar said he is optimistic that national elections will be held in Bangladesh soon.

“Bangladesh has a democratic tradition. Elections are essential for democracy. It is through elections that mandates are given and renewed. We are hopeful that they will follow this path,” he stated.

Jaishankar’s comments came amid increasing political uncertainty in Bangladesh, following the recent transition of power to an interim government led by Nobel Laureate Dr. Muhammad Yunus. India’s top diplomat also reaffirmed the deep-rooted and historical bond between the two nations.

In a separate statement reported by Indian media outlet Firstpost, Jaishankar addressed India’s concerns over recent violent developments in Bangladesh. Referring to a meeting between Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Dr. Yunus during the BIMSTEC summit in Bangkok, Jaishankar said, “Our key message during the meeting was that our relationship with Bangladesh is historic and unparalleled. It is a people-to-people relationship, and deeper than any other. We must acknowledge this bond.”

However, he didn’t shy away from expressing concern over the troubling signs emerging from across the border. “The messages we are receiving from the people, and the rise in extremist tendencies, are troubling. We are also concerned about attacks on minorities,” Jaishankar warned, noting that these issues were openly discussed during the Modi-Yunus meeting.

He added, “No other country wants what’s best for Bangladesh more than India does — it’s in our DNA. As a friend and well-wisher, we hope to see Bangladesh stay on the right path and do the right thing.”

With Bangladesh grappling with rising reports of political violence, suppression of dissent, and persecution of legal professionals and minority communities, India’s diplomatic remarks appear to signal both a warning and a gesture of support for democratic values in the region.

From Courtroom to Prison Cell: The New Career Path for Bangladeshi Lawyers Writer

Dastagir Jahangir
-
0

Sayed Abedin is a Solicitor of the Senior Courts of England and Wales and a Barrister

Coup That Came in Student Uniforms
If George Orwell were alive today, he’d probably move to Bangladesh — not for inspiration, but because reality has outpaced fiction.
On August 5th, 2024, Dr. Younus, a man of many secrets and even fewer votes, ascended to power—not through the ballot box, but via an unholy alliance with the so-called “Student Shomonnoyok,” a coalition that introduced itself as the reincarnation of the Liberation War spirit. They claimed to stand for democracy, socialism, secularism, and nationalism — the four pillars of Bangladesh’s 1972 Constitution.

From Founding Father to Political Arson
And what did they do next?
They torched the house of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, the founding father of the nation, in what can only be described as an arsonist’s tribute to independence. Ah, yes, long live nationalism — the new kind that comes with Molotov cocktails and Taliban-style justice.

The Extremist Hall of Fame in Student Garb
It turns out, the Student Shomonnoyok was less of a student coalition and more of a who’s who of extremist thuggery. Think Islami Chhatra Shibir, Hizb ut-Tahrir, ISIS sympathizers, Ansarullah Bangla Team — basically a Netflix docuseries on terror waiting to happen. These “freedom-loving” students then went on a rampage: killing minorities, torching Sufi shrines, lynching Awami League members, and dragging democracy into a shallow grave.

Justice in Shackles, Terror in Robes
Among their most inventive hobbies? Assaulting accused individuals inside courthouses, targeting anyone wearing a black lawyer’s robe — especially if they dared represent Awami League affiliates. Few lawyers who dared to stand in the court were abused in open court. Their crime? Upholding justice.

Courtrooms or Crime Scenes?
It didn’t stop there. The courts, once symbols of justice, are now crime scenes. Lawyers — 84 of them — have been arrested (reported in many newspapers on the 6th April 2025) across the country, accused of murder without evidence, all for the sin of defending the wrong people (i.e., those not endorsed by the Younus Junta™). Human rights groups are calling it “a collapse of rule of law.” The regime calls it “Tuesday.”

Punishing the Prosecutors of Yesterday’s Monsters
Among the detained is Tureen Afroz, former prosecutor at the International Crimes Tribunal (ICT), known for sending 1971 war criminals to the gallows. Her arrest? A clear message from Younus: If you ever stood for justice, you now stand accused. She is not just being punished — she is being erased, for daring to hold war criminals accountable.

Indemnity for Arsonists, Immunity for Terrorists
It gets better. In a move that would make even the worst banana republic blush, Dr. Younus issued a presidential ordinance granting indemnity to all those involved in the violent overthrow of the Sheikh Hasina government — a beautiful masterpiece of legalized lawlessness. The murderers, arsonists, and thugs of Student Shomonnoyok are now untouchable. You can’t investigate them. You can’t charge them. You can only thank them for the “transition.”

Terrorists Out, Truth-Tellers In (Jail)
Oh, and remember those Islamic State-linked terrorists behind the Holey Artisan massacre? Guess who’s been quietly walking out of prison under Dr. Younus’s watch? That’s right. The same regime that promises law and order has opened the gates to those who once turned restaurants into bloodbaths.

Secularism Dismantled, Justice Dead on Arrival
The irony is Shakespearean. The government that speaks of restoring justice is silencing lawyers. The leadership that chants secularism is waltzing with Wahhabis. The rulers who claimed to honour the Constitution are dismantling it, brick by brick — starting with the part about “secularism,” of course.

Bangladesh: Where Justice is a Crime
In Dr. Younus’s Bangladesh, war criminals are heroes, freedom fighters are fugitives, and lawyers are criminals. Rule of Law? Only if the law wears a beard and carries a machete.

Welcome to the Upside-Down
So here we are, in a nation where the protectors of justice are jailed, and the enemies of independence sit in parliament. Welcome to the upside-down — Bangladeshi edition.

God save Bangladesh. Because no one else will.

Bangladesh Investment Summit: A Grand Spectacle with Hollow Out comes

Dastagir Jahangir
-
0

Dr Abul Hasnat Milton

The recently concluded Bangladesh Investment Summit, hyped for months by loyalists of the illegitimate Yunus regime, has ended with little to show for the extravagant promises that surrounded it. What was touted as a turning point for the country’s economic future has instead become a classic case of state-sponsored pageantry with little substance—a wasteful exercise that failed to deliver on its core promise: to attract meaningful foreign investment.

From the very beginning, the summit was marketed as a magnet for global capital and innovation. Government-backed media campaigns and social media influencers repeatedly claimed that top global billionaires and tech magnates would be attending. Names like Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, and Larry Ellison were floated as prospective guests, creating enormous anticipation among the public and the business community. However, when the time came, none of these high-profile figures showed up. Their absence was not only embarrassing for the organisers but also exposed the disconnect between the regime’s propaganda machine and the global reality.

In place of these influential investors, the summit saw participation from a handful of mid-level business executives and regional partners—none with the financial clout or global reach that had been promised. The event, which had been painted as a game-changer, ended up being more of a glorified networking session for local elites and bureaucrats. There was no major investment deal announced, no groundbreaking project unveiled, and certainly no transformative foreign partnerships formed.

The most troubling aspect of this summit, however, is not just its failure to attract investors but the way it represents a broader trend under the Yunus regime: the relentless use of public funds for political theater. At a time when millions of Bangladeshis are struggling with inflation, unemployment, and crumbling public services, the government chose to spend lavishly on an event that was more about optics than outcomes. The massive costs involved—venue setup, security arrangements, hospitality, promotional campaigns—could have been better spent addressing urgent domestic issues. Instead, it became another example of misplaced priorities by an administration increasingly out of touch with the people it claims to serve.

Why did the summit fail? The reasons are not hard to find. No serious investor will commit capital to a country where political instability looms large and where democratic legitimacy is in question. The current regime, widely seen as unelected and propped up through manipulation and coercion, lacks the credibility required to instill confidence among global financiers. In today’s global investment landscape, stability, transparency, and the rule of law matter. Bangladesh under the Yunus regime offers none of these.

Furthermore, the law-and-order situation in the country continues to deteriorate. Reports of extrajudicial killings, political crackdowns, and suppression of dissent are commonplace. Civil liberties are under threat, and opposition voices are silenced through intimidation and arrest. These are hardly the conditions that invite international investors looking for predictable and safe environments. In addition, the alarming rise in extremist activities and religious militancy over the past year has further eroded the country’s global image. No matter how attractive the profit margins may seem on paper, investors are wary of pouring funds into a country teetering on the edge of volatility.

The regime’s approach to governance has become increasingly performative. While grand speeches and glossy promotional videos may create temporary headlines, they do not build investor confidence. The Yunus government’s promises have consistently failed to materialize into action. Infrastructure projects remain incomplete, regulatory frameworks are arbitrary, and corruption continues to plague almost every level of administration. Investors don’t just need promises; they need results. And right now, Bangladesh offers little in the way of tangible outcomes.

It’s also important to note that a genuine investment environment is built over time through trust, transparency, and institutional strength. No single summit—no matter how expensive or well-publicised—can substitute for the hard work of creating a stable and predictable economic system. What this summit has shown is that without structural reforms, without a legitimate and accountable government, and without a clear roadmap for security and justice, such efforts are doomed to be little more than public relations stunts.

In conclusion, the Bangladesh Investment Summit under the Yunus regime will be remembered not for the investments it brought in, but for the illusion it attempted to sell. It has proven once again that rhetoric without action, and publicity without policy, cannot take a country forward. Instead of focusing on real reforms and democratic restoration, the government continues to chase international approval through superficial spectacles. But the world is watching—and it is not convinced.

Until Bangladesh addresses its political legitimacy, restores democratic norms, ensures law and order, and combats rising extremism, no amount of summits or speeches will attract the investment the country so desperately needs. The sooner the regime realises this, the better it will be for the future of Bangladesh.

  • The author is a Bangladeshi-born Australian writer, public health expert, and social activist.

Bay of Bengal Trade Route Hit as India Revokes Transshipment Facility for Bangladesh

Dastagir Jahangir
-
0

NEW DELHI/DHAKA — India has revoked a crucial transshipment facility that allowed Bangladesh to export goods to third countries using Indian territory, including land customs stations, ports, and airports. The decision, which came through a notification issued by the Indian central government on Tuesday, effectively ends a long-standing arrangement between the two neighbors.

The move was reported by The Telegraph Online on Wednesday, citing the Press Trust of India (PTI).

The transshipment facility, granted to Bangladesh in June 2020, had enabled seamless trade flows to countries such as Bhutan, Nepal, and Myanmar—strengthening regional connectivity across the Bay of Bengal. However, in a fresh notification issued on April 8, the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs of India stated, “It has been decided to withdraw the circular issued on June 29, 2020. This revised decision will take immediate effect.”

The notification did make an exception for Bangladeshi cargo that has already entered Indian territory under the previous rule, allowing those consignments to exit as planned.

According to the report, Indian exporters—particularly those in the garments sector—had previously lobbied the Narendra Modi-led government to withdraw the facility, citing competitive concerns over market access and pricing.

The decision to revoke the facility comes at a sensitive time, just days after the United States imposed high tariffs on several countries and regions, including India and Bangladesh. Observers suggest the move could signal shifting regional trade dynamics and growing protectionist sentiment in South Asia, potentially impacting the Bay of Bengal’s strategic trade corridors.

1...414415416...424Page 415 of 424