Bangladesh, a country known for its steadfast commitment to peace and diplomacy, has recently been rocked by a political controversy that threatens its regional reputation. On December 17, Mahfuz Alam alias Mahfuz Abdullah, a key advisor to the Yunus-led revolutionary Islamist regime, made a shocking statement on social media, expressing a desire to annex Indian territories. The audacity of this claim has left many questioning the motives and implications of such rhetoric. This wild idea of territorial expansion, coming from someone in a position of significant influence, has sent ripples across South Asia.

This statement is not an isolated outburst but rather a reflection of Muhammad Yunus’s personal vendetta. It contradicts Bangladesh’s historical stance of “friendship to all, malice to none,” and raises serious concerns about the country’s future direction. Unlike Pakistan, which has had a fraught relationship with India since its inception, Bangladesh has no historical animosity or geopolitical ambition to justify such an aggressive approach. This makes Mahfuz Alam’s statement not only reckless but potentially catastrophic for Bangladesh.

The Yunus-led interim government has frequently criticized India, accusing it of exercising hegemony over Bangladesh under the previous Awami League government. Advisors and influential figures in this regime have claimed that the “July uprising” of 2024 was a second independence movement that freed Bangladesh from Indian domination. These narratives have been strategically used to garner domestic support and paint the previous government as subservient to Indian interests.

However, this narrative is deeply flawed and contradictory. At the same time that the Yunus regime criticizes India, it has shown increasing openness to engagement with Pakistan. This raises troubling questions about the regime’s true intentions. Is Bangladesh, under Yunus’s leadership, at risk of falling under Pakistani influence after supposedly liberating itself from Indian hegemony? This duality in approach not only confuses the people of Bangladesh but also weakens the country’s position on the global stage.

The historical context cannot be ignored. Pakistan has long harbored ambitions to regain influence over Bangladesh, a nation that was once its eastern province. While Bangladesh’s liberation in 1971 ended that chapter, Pakistan’s renewed interest in the Yunus regime could be a strategic move to destabilize the region. For Bangladesh, aligning with Pakistan after decades of animosity would be a betrayal of its hard-fought independence and sovereignty.

Mahfuz Alam, also known as Mahfuz Abdullah, is a figure shrouded in controversy. With an obscure ethnic identity and a meteoric rise to prominence, he has been a central figure in the Yunus-led regime. Described by Muhammad Yunus as the “mastermind” of the protests that led to the regime change in Bangladesh, Mahfuz enjoys significant influence within the Islamist regime.

Mahfuz posted a bold and dangerous statement on his verified Facebook account, claiming that Bangladesh should annex parts of India, including West Bengal and the northeastern states. He alleged that India has consistently followed a policy of “contain and ghettoized” towards Bangladesh, hindering its growth and sovereignty. He further argued that historical events such as the 1975 coup and the 2024 uprising were necessary steps to free Bangladesh from Indian dominance.

The post was deleted within two hours, but not before screenshots were widely circulated. This statement, coming from a person of Mahfuz’s stature, cannot be dismissed as a mere personal opinion. As an advisor with a status equivalent to a cabinet minister, Mahfuz’s words carry significant weight and are likely reflective of the broader ideology of the Yunus regime.

The timing and content of the post suggest an attempt to provoke India and destabilize the region. While it is unclear whether this was a calculated move or a blunder, the consequences are equally dire. The statement directly challenges India’s sovereignty and risks escalating tensions between the two countries, with potentially devastating repercussions for South Asia.

Since its independence in 1971, Bangladesh has built its foreign policy on the principles of peace and diplomacy. The country’s founding leaders emphasized “friendship to all, malice to none,” a mantra that has guided Bangladesh through decades of regional and global challenges. This commitment to peaceful coexistence has enabled Bangladesh to resolve disputes with its neighbors, including land boundary issues, through dialogue and negotiation.

Bangladesh’s track record speaks for itself. Unlike many countries in the region, it has never engaged in territorial aggression or shown ambitions of expansionism. The nation’s leadership has always prioritized its sovereignty while respecting the sovereignty of others. This approach has earned Bangladesh respect and goodwill on the international stage.

The reckless statements made by Mahfuz Alam and the apparent endorsement of such rhetoric by Muhammad Yunus and his advisors stand in stark contrast to Bangladesh’s traditional values. This shift in tone and policy is deeply troubling. It risks undoing decades of diplomatic achievements and undermines Bangladesh’s position as a peace-loving nation.

One plausible explanation for this provocative rhetoric is that Muhammad Yunus and his allies are attempting to create chaos as a distraction. Facing mounting criticism and dwindling support, the Yunus regime may be resorting to divisive tactics to consolidate its power. By instigating tensions with India, the regime could be trying to rally nationalist sentiment and divert attention from its domestic failures.

A destabilized Bangladesh would also serve as a convenient excuse for Yunus to seek a safe exit from the political stage. By creating a crisis, he could position himself as an indispensable leader or secure international backing under the guise of maintaining stability. This strategy, while clever, is extremely risky. It jeopardizes not only Yunus’s legacy but also the future of Bangladesh and its people.

Provoking India or any neighboring country is a perilous strategy, potentially driven by the influence or appeasement of Pakistan. It is essential to remember that leaders like Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, Gen Ziaur Rahman, and even Gen Ershad never succumbed to subservience to any foreign power. Why, then, should Muhammad Yunus align himself as a sycophant of a nation like Pakistan, which is teetering on the brink of becoming a failed state?

The statement made by Mahfuz Alam about annexing Indian territories is not just a diplomatic misstep but a serious threat to regional stability. Coming from a key advisor to Muhammad Yunus, this rhetoric reflects the ideological shift under the current regime. It contradicts Bangladesh’s long-standing commitment to peace and diplomacy and risks dragging the country into unnecessary conflicts.

Bangladesh has always been a beacon of peace and stability in South Asia. Its people have rejected warmongering and embraced a foreign policy rooted in mutual respect and cooperation. The reckless rhetoric of the Yunus regime threatens to undermine these values and tarnish the country’s reputation.

It is imperative for the people of Bangladesh and the international community to recognize the dangers posed by this shift in policy. The country must return to its foundational principles of peace and diplomacy to navigate these turbulent times. Only then can Bangladesh continue to thrive as a sovereign and peaceful nation in South Asia.

Please follow Blitz on Google News Channel