📷 One-man Newsroom Collage

Sharif Khiam Ahmed, Dhaka

The downfall in Bangladesh–India relations following the fall of the Sheikh Hasina administration cannot be attributed solely to politics or ideology. The shift, Indian analysts contend, is influenced by strategic and financial considerations of business groups allied with the ruling party, most prominently the corporation linked to Gautam Adani.

These business groups hold significant stakes across the media landscape and maintain strong ties with pro-Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) digital networks. Bangladeshi officials describe these maneuvers as a coordinated campaign directed at Dhaka during its delicate political transition.

Nazrul Ahmed Zamader, a researcher and writer from West Bengal, shared his insights with One-man Newsroom. “In a democracy, the media plays a crucial role. Before India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh gained independence, the Indian media played a distinctly historic role. But that era has ended.”

“Today, the Indian media functions as an instrument of the state, engaging in continuous propaganda. The primary reason is that India has effectively become a ‘deep state,’ backed by four or five massive corporate houses that own the majority of mainstream media.”

“These include Reliance Industries of Mukesh Ambani, the Adani Group of Gautam Adani, Zee News, founded by Subhash Chandra, a former BJP Rajya Sabha MP, and Republic TV, led by Arnab Goswami, a prominent BJP ally. Ambani and Adani are among the most politically connected industrialists in India; consequently, they control the bulk of India’s mainstream media.”

Nazrul continued, “Simultaneously, digital media has gained extreme importance, a space where the BJP has invested heavily. As a result, the entire Indian media ecosystem has become pro-BJP. In this context, Bangladesh became a major political instrument for mobilization.”

“If the BJP can mobilize India’s numerical majority on the Bangladesh issue, it secures two outcomes: first, it serves corporate interests; second, it signals to the people of West Bengal ahead of the 2026 state legislative assembly election that unless they support the BJP, West Bengal will be West Bangladesh. The campaign is currently underway,” Nazrul added.

In an interview with One-man Newsroom, Bangladesh’s press minister in New Delhi, Faisal Mahmud, also critically analyzed Indian media coverage, highlighting a distinct editorial bias.

He said, “Let me name some newspapers. Since I started in print, I’ll begin there. Take the Times of India, for instance, the world’s largest English-language daily. That is a massive brand. Then there are The Hindu, Indian Express, and Hindustan Times, all reputable outlets.”

“However, if you look at the Times of India’s coverage from July 16 to August 5 (2024), during the fall of the Sheikh Hasina government, a huge portion of their reporting echoed the regime’s narrative. They gave more prominence to Information Minister Arafat’s (Mohammad A. Arafat) claims about ‘militants on the streets’ than to the actual ground reality. Despite having the resources to send reporters or get original data from stringers in Bangladesh, they chose not to. That was their editorial choice.”

“Even in the following months, their coverage remained skewed. They have a reporter, Ahsan Tasnim, who specializes in Bangladesh. Around 30 to 40 percent of his reporting consists of straightforward, factual news that leaves no room for distortion; the rest is subject to editorial spin. Take the attacks on minorities, which did happen, and I agree the Bangladesh government should have done more. But the Indian media turns these into opinionated news. They give these issues prominent front-page placement.”

Faisal Mahmud continued, “Then there is the broadcast media with a global audience, like NDTV, CNN-News18, WION, and Republic TV; the English one, as the Bengali one is now more of an entertainment channel. If you watch their framing, even famous anchors use leading questions.”

“In broadcast media, we see talk shows, expert opinions, and the news itself. While the news is sometimes neutral, they often cite problematic sources. For example, they keep citing the Bangladesh Hindu Buddhist Christian Unity Council (HBKOP)’s report on minority persecution, even after local media and the Sweden-based Netra News categorically debunked it. They stick to the old narrative instead of accepting new facts.”

Faisal, a journalist-turned-diplomat, also said, “When I participate in their Indian talk shows, something intriguing happens. They ask a question, and if you answer, they immediately jump. They don’t give you space to elaborate. The funniest part is the conclusion; they always end with their thesis, regardless of what you said. It feels like casting pearls before swine. It doesn’t matter what I say; they draw their own conclusion, which destroys journalistic neutrality. They summarize according to their bias instead of respecting the guest’s opinion.”

“Despite all this, I can name a few good outlets that are genuinely interested in what’s happening in Bangladesh. Most are independent. Among the large ones, The Week magazine is excellent and very neutral. Then there are The Wire, founded by Siddharth Varadarajan; Scroll, edited by Naresh Fernandes; and The Print, which accommodates both anti-Bangladesh and pro-Bangladesh perspectives.”

“Among the large dailies, The Hindu is probably the most neutral. I haven’t seen such a skewed vision there, though they aren’t neutral on everything. For instance, if a Pakistani delegation visits Bangladesh, they twist it to claim Bangladesh is leaning toward Pakistan.”

“However, among the majors, The Hindu remains the most balanced. Their journalists, Kallol Bhattacherjee and Suhasini Haidar, are very senior and maintain news value regardless of the subject. In TV, WION and NDTV occasionally do good work, but overall, they still have a skewed vision of Bangladesh. That is my assessment,” Faisal Mahmud ‍added.

Atanu Singha, an Indian Bengali poet and journalist, told One-man Newsroom, “If you look at who owns the major media houses in India, you will understand the situation very quickly. Not long ago, NDTV was independent, and Ravish Kumar was one of the few national journalists openly critical of the BJP. His job loss was a major development, considering his stature. The explanation was clear. The channel changed hands, with Adani taking ownership.”

“There is also News-18, which belongs to Ambani. So, everything is either Adani or Ambani. Some of the channels belong to business figures from South India who maintain links with Chandrababu Naidu. Naidu’s party is now allied with the central ruling party, the BJP. Therefore, these corporate players, these corporations, are either directly aligned with the BJP or allied through political partnerships. In socio-political terms, they remain within the broader RSS orbit.”

“As a result, India’s economy and politics are effectively controlled by two, maybe three, or at most four major groups. The dominant two are Adani and Ambani. Then you may have another one or two large families, the Birlas.”

Atanu Singha mentioned, “A strange thing has happened: even within the capitalist class, a class division has emerged. Some capitalists are beneficiaries, while others have become marginalized. Some are privileged capitalists; others are oppressed capitalists.”

“For example, there is a channel in West Bengal named Kolkata TV. It has consistently and openly criticized the BJP. Its owner was targeted by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) with corruption cases, completely fabricated allegations, in my view, and authorities detained him. Yet the channel continues to operate. Across India, you may find only two or three such cases.”

Nazrul Ahmed ‍said, “Delhi-based businessmen own most of the 24-hour channels in Kolkata. Zee Media operates in multiple languages, English, Hindi, and Bengali, but the owner is Subhash Chandra. Republic TV, owned by Arnab Goswami. The only major Bengali-owned mainstream outlet, ABP Ananda, also aligns with central government interests to secure advertising.”

“Even Anandabazar Patrika, considered a prestigious Bengali newspaper, recently published a report claiming that Muhammad Yunus wants to become president, that he has met Chuppu (Mohammed Shahabuddin), and that he wants to remove him and make himself president. I have no idea where they got that from. That was manufactured news, crafted to spread fear, heighten anxiety, and keep society unsettled. That is how the media is functioning.”

Nazrul added, “It is true that with the new government in Bangladesh, Jamaat-e-Islami has re-emerged as a powerful actor. Historically, Jamaat has always wanted good relations with Pakistan. But that does not mean Bangladesh has become pro-Pakistan. That is absurd propaganda. To manufacture consent among the majority, the campaign frames Hasina’s Bangladesh as India-friendly, contrasting it with a post-Hasina narrative of pro-Jamaat and pro-Pakistan.”

Cricket and the Gujarat axis

In the run-up to the 2026 ICC Men’s T20 World Cup, Jay Shah, the Chairman of the International Cricket Council (ICC), has taken a pivotal role in determining Bangladesh’s participation. Analysts describe Jay Shah’s association with Gautam Adani as a cornerstone of India’s prevailing political-business alignment.

Both men hail from Gujarat and share deep ties with India’s top leadership; Jay Shah is the son of Home Minister Amit Shah, a key ally of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, and Gautam Adani.

Jay Shah’s Adani connection has frequently manifested in cricket. Under his tenure as BCCI Secretary, the Adani Group secured the Ahmedabad franchise in the Women’s Premier League (WPL) for a record Rs 1,289 crore (approx. USD 158 million). Analysts argue that this nexus allows corporate interests and political agendas to shape not only domestic sports but also international cricket governance.

Following Dhaka’s political transition in 2024, the Bangladesh Cricket Board (BCB) requested the relocation of its group-stage matches to Sri Lanka, citing security concerns. As ICC Chairman, Jay Shah rejected the request, leading a 14–2 board vote to uphold India as the host.

Reports from ANI and the Hindustan Times indicate that the ICC issued a final ultimatum to the BCB. When Bangladesh refused to travel, the ICC replaced them with Scotland. While pro-BJP Indian commentators celebrated this as a display of authority, other observers saw it as a politically motivated exclusion.

Atanu Singha, an Indian Bengali analyst, argues that Gautam Adani has become a critical factor shaping India’s approach toward Bangladesh. He told One-man Newsroom, “Even the interim government under Dr. Yunus has not provoked Adani in any way. However, they cannot replicate what Sheikh Hasina previously offered him: an open, unrestrained commercial corridor.”

“Because it is uncertain if that situation will ever return, Adani feels a sense of profound loss, as if he has lost the golden goose. It’s the compulsion driving Delhi’s stance after Hasina’s fall,” he added.

A few days after Hasina’s fall, Adani Group Chairman Gautam Adani reached out to Dr Muhammad Yunus, the chief advisor in Bangladesh’s interim government, seeking his help to expedite the clearance of outstanding payments owed by the Bangladesh Power Development Board (BPDB) to Adani Power, according to a report by The Economic Times.

“The lenders have now been severe on us as we continue to meet our commitment to Bangladesh. I would request your kind intervention in early liquidation of USD 800 million of receivables due from BPDB,” Adani wrote in a letter dated August 27, 2024.

India’s corporate footprint in Bangladesh reflects far more than ordinary trade. Over the past decade, politically aligned Indian conglomerates have taken on strategic roles in the economy. The Adani Group’s 1,600 MW Godda power plant, for instance, provides around 10 percent of Bangladesh’s overall electricity demand, illustrating how deeply embedded these ties have become despite ongoing disputes over tariff structures and hundreds of millions of dollars in arrears.

It follows earlier attempts by other giants, such as Reliance Power, which signed agreements in the mid-2010s to establish up to 3,000 MW of LNG-fired capacity. These investments create significant leverage during diplomatic tension. By tying infrastructure to long-term, politically backed agreements, these corporations embed themselves in Bangladesh’s economy, reinforcing India’s strategic influence.

On January 25, 2026, Dhaka’s National Review Committee (NRC) concluded that Bangladesh is incurring an additional USD 400–500 million annually due to its power import agreement with Adani Power. This burden could persist for 25 years, a substantial risk for the country’s foreign reserves and fiscal stability.

The NRC stated that Bangladesh’s prolonged use of emergency procurement laws bypassed competitive bidding, enabling inflated pricing and one-sided risk allocation. Electricity prices under the Adani agreement jumped from BDT 8.61 per kilowatt-hour to BDT 14.87 in 2025, surpassing rates from other sources.

Former World Bank Lead Economist Dr. Zahid Hossain noted that between FY-2011 and FY-2024, government payments to Independent Power Producers increased elevenfold while generation capacity grew only fourfold. It has left the BPDB with annual losses exceeding BDT 500 billion (USD 4.07 billion) for FY-2025, with arrears expected to surpass BDT 550 billion (USD 4.48 billion).

The NRC further reported evidence of irregularities and alleged corruption linked to the Adani contract, involving several million dollars in illicit payments to a small group of individuals. Members of the NRC have recommended that the government prepare for arbitration in Singapore, citing an evidentiary basis for an international corruption case.

Indian Poet and journalist Atanu said, “This is the reality; the major business groups control Indian politics and also own the Indian media. Alongside them are global corporations, and of course, major external factors such as the United States and Israel.”

“Now, if a new government takes office in Bangladesh, an elected government, and if it behaves the same way the Awami League (AL) did and sells Bangladesh’s economic sovereignty to Delhi’s hegemony, then it does not matter whether that party is the AL, the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), Jamaat, or even a Communist party,” he added, “The ideology or branding is irrelevant. If they compromise, Delhi will support them. And if that happens, Delhi will eventually deport Sheikh Hasina, or handover to them as well.”

“Delhi has no particular emotional attachment to Sheikh Hasina, to the Liberation War, or to Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. It’s not about sentiment. It’s purely about economic and political interests,” Atanu concluded.

Nazrul, who left journalism to focus on research, added to this analysis, stating, “At the end of the day, the Indian state is massive. Its media is part of a deep-state infrastructure. And look at Gautam Adani, one of the richest men in Asia. When you have that kind of wealth, corporate funding, and power in the media market, Bangladesh cannot compete in a propaganda war. It’s a geopolitical reality.”

In this context, One-man Newsroom has sought to understand how the Bangladesh government is navigating this information war.

Limitations of India’s response

Bangladeshi press minister in New Delhi, Faisal, said, “To be honest, this is completely new for us. We have never faced this before, at least not on this scale. Because it is new for us, we are still trying to understand the working process and what options we have, how far we should engage, and at what level.”

“If this had been purely a government-to-government issue, we could have engaged formally and lodged protests. And we have done that at times, sometimes from the Office of the Chief Adviser, sometimes from the Bangladesh Army, and sometimes from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. But now it is clear that this is not just media versus media; this is a coordinated effort.”

“In such a situation, ideally, government-to-government communication could resolve the situation, but dialogue between the two sides has ground to a halt. Even when we try, the Indian side is not very interested in engaging.”

Faisal continued, “Through informal channels, suppose our High Commission tries to communicate through personal connections inside the Indian government bureaucracy, whether at the Ministry of Information or the Ministry of External Affairs; when we raise the issue, they respond very professionally by saying that their media is independent and that the government does not interfere in the media. And if the government says that, we have nothing to say after that.”

“On our side, what we are doing is this: The Press Wing of the CA often issues clarifications or statements voluntarily on misleading or incorrect Indian reports. Sometimes these are published on social media, including Twitter. In some cases, written communications are sent directly to media houses or forwarded through the High Commission. It’s one form of communication.”

Press Minister said, “From the High Commission, our responsibility in the Press Wing is to monitor Indian media, identify issues, and supply factual information. Personally, I have the full contact list of most major Indian media outlets, their editors, news editors, and planning editors. If I notice a report that contains errors, I prepare brief synopses outlining the accurate facts and share them via email. Most of the time, I do not even receive an acknowledgment of receipt. Sometimes I do, but I rarely see any reflection of the corrections in later reporting. So that is where things stand at the moment.”

“When there is a major incident, the Foreign Ministry may issue a direct clarification. That is uncommon, since the Foreign Ministry typically refrains from involvement in media matters. Up to now, that is what we have done, and that is what they have done,” Faisal added.

With the approach of Bangladesh’s 13th National Election, the interim administration anticipated an escalation in disinformation. On January 13, 2026, CA Muhammad Yunus called on the United Nations human rights team to “counter a surge of misinformation targeting the February 12 elections,” his office said in a statement. “There has been a flood of misinformation surrounding the elections,” Yunus told UN rights chief Volker Turk in a telephone call, according to a statement.

Earlier, on October 29, 2025, after a high-level meeting, the CA’s press secretary, Shafiqul Alam, said, “The CA cautioned that disinformation is imminent, with organized campaigns expected both domestically and internationally to undermine the election. They will use AI-generated images and videos. We must contain these and stop them before they spread.”

He added, “CA said, to sabotage the election, powerful forces from inside and outside will operate. Not minor forces, major forces. Sudden attacks can come. This election will be challenging. Whatever storms come, we must navigate through them.”

Asked about the meaning of attacks, the press secretary clarified that the chief adviser was referring primarily to attacks through disinformation.

Briefing further on the meeting, Shafiqul added, “In Bangladesh, the majority of disinformation spreads through Facebook. So, the meeting decided that we must engage Facebook more deeply and convey our concerns directly.”