killings rapidly increased over the decade and there was no sign

of declining the number either. According to another rights

1. INTRODUCTION:
group’s report, from 2000 to 2020, at least 1236 Bangladeshi
civilians were killed and 1145 Bangladeshi individuals were
The recently launched movement, mostly injured in shootings by the BSF.
known as ‘Boycott Indian Products’ Among all the incidents, a brutal disgraceful case of border
initiated and nurtured by a cross-section of killing, the Felani Khatun killing incident of January 7, 2011,
young Bangladeshi netizens at home and created a sudden shock all over the country. Felani Khatun, a
abroad, came to the forefront of scholarly, 14-year-old girl, was shot by BSF and was left hanging on the
political and public discussions, in reaction fence for about four hours when she was still alive in that time
to India’s hegemonic act towards as villagers reported, requested water and assistance. As no
Bangladesh and started posting a significant help was reached because of the fear of shooting, Felani died
threat to the Indian economy as it visibly eventually and thirty hours later her body was brought back.
achieved social momentum in the country. The image of her body hanging on the fence spread rapidly in
The emerging situation raises concerns to the media of Bangladesh and created intense anger towards
the policymakers as friendly relations have India among the people.
been seen between the two countries from Another controversial topic in Bangladesh-India relation which
the beginning. In this paper, I will try to find plays big role in shaping the movement’s base is Farakka and
some drivers, concerns and answers of the Teesta barrage issue. Farakka problem first drew huge attention
‘Boycott India Movement’ and other in 1976, when a mass manifestation led by Maulana Bhashani
prospects to get some useful insights and from Dhaka to Indo-Bangladesh border took place. In response
thoughts. to India’s unilateral operation of Farakka barrage ,which
1. DRIVERS AND MOMENTUM OF allegedly killed the Ganges river and disrupted millions of
THE BOYCOTT MOVEMENT : Bangladeshi people’s live, the procession demonstrated a
profound sense of deprivation among Bangladeshi people. Later
There are several factors that are motivating in 1977 in UNGA, a five-year temporary agreement was
the call for ‘Boycott Indian Products’ adopted but soon after that it stumbled. After that , even if there
movement and among them, the border was Ganges Water Sharing Treaty signed in 1996, the water
issue plays a significant role according to problem is still not solved which is causing river’s drying up
my gathered information. Killing in the because of excess drawing of water by India.
Bangladesh-India border line is not a new
scenario to the people of our country.
According to Ain O Salish Kendra , a
human rights organization based on
Bangladesh, between the year 2013 and
2023, a total number of 332 individuals
were reported killed near the border on
Bangladesh – India by BSF and on average
30 person were killed per year . These
frequency of using lethal force along the
border raises question among the general
mass of Bangladesh about the friendly
neighbourhood relations and the friendship
has faced significant criticism over the
decades. If we look back to the 90s, the
frequent killing was present there also. From
1990 to 1999, A total number of 206
Bangladeshi civilians were reported as
killed by the BSF, according to Dr
Mohammad Abdur Rab’s book,
“Bangladesh: Geography, Geopolitics and
Environment.” The number of shootings and
Teesta water sharing has always been a long
standing demand of Bangladesh. Life and
livelihood of millions of people is attached
to this rivers water. But constant building of
dams along the Teesta in Sikkim has
resulted in lean seasonal flow draining into
Bangladesh. In 2011 , India agreed to share
37.5% of Teesta waters during the lean
season between December and March but
the deal never went through the opposition
and yet left to reach a conclusion. The
Siliguri Corridor, the Teen Bigha Corridor,
trade imbalance and economic disparities
are also some area of contention between
two states.
Now, almost all the above problems are
unsolved for a long period of time and
causing different problems on a regular
basis. Not only that, these problems are
imposing question about the friendly
relationship between Bangladesh and India
among the general mass. On the other hand,
bitter experience of these problems and the
hegemonic mentality showed by India
towards Bangladesh are creating pent-up
anger among the mass. This pent-up anger
sparked in ‘Boycott Indian Products’
movement which basically sustains the
momentum of the movement.
1. INTEGRATION INTO
BANGLADESH-INDIA
RELATIONS :
some discomfort inside Indian territory and if it continues to
grow, Bangladesh will face some economic difficulties for sure.
We cannot ignore the political impact of the campaign if it
continues strongly in the future. Even if our prime minister
Sheikh Hasina criticized the movement and the parties related
with the campaign and fights back against the campaign, a big
party in Bangladesh, BNP has joined the movement and the
movement is getting social pace on a regular basis. If it
continues, the relation between two states will get sour
eventually.
There are some historical and political context present shaping
the campaign. There is no doubt that India was our biggest ally
and help in the independence war in 1971, their contributions
are unmatched and appreciated. But just within some decades,
the aspect about India got questioned which is a matter of
worry for Bangladesh. The independence of Bangladesh is the
achievement of people of Bangladesh, people sacrificed
millions of lifes to achieve it. However ,most of the present-day
Indian youth, misled by a politically customized narratives of
history, tend to believe that Bangladesh was a creation of
India . Most members of the Indian elite – political and
intellectual, rather continue to assert that idea. Their
expectation to Bangladesh to continue to serve Indian political,
economic and culture interest because of that thought is also
questionable. Any history-conscious patriotic bengali people
will not accept it.

Reflecting both underlying tensions and

broader geopolitical dynamics, the
campaign intersects with the complex
bilateral relationship between Bangladesh
and India in several ways. There is a strong
economic interdependency between two
countries, specially from Bangladeshi side.
Bangladesh imports more from India than it
exports and Bangladesh relies heavily on
India for essential commodities .India is one
of the top trade partner of Bangladesh and
second largest import market after China
where India’s export base is diversified.
India’s trade with Bangladesh is only 1% .
Some analysts pointed out that boycotting
Indian products could have major
repercussions for the economic relationship
between Bangladesh and India. This
movement in Bangladesh is already causing
During the military and nationalist
governments in Bangladesh, initial
cooperation turned into tension which
viewed India’s influence with suspicion.
Historical border issues over chhitmahals
were longstanding irritant, but Land
Boundary Agreement of 2015 resolved
many of these disputes. The sharing of trans
boundary rivers ,particularly the Teesta river
has always been a controversial topic. Trade
imbalance causing economic grievances,
periodic border clashes, domestic political
and cultural concerns are there for shaping
the campaign. This campaign is not merely
an economic or commercial action but is
deeply rooted in the historical and political
fabric of Bangladesh-India relations.
1. POTENTIAL MANIPULATION OF
ANTI-INDIAN SENTIMENT :
In present world, many countries have close
but complex relations with their neighbours.
Bangladesh is also one of them. This anti-
Indian sentiment in Bangladesh can be
manipulated for various political, social an
economic ends. To distract from internal
issues or to gather support, this sentiment is
often amplified by political actors to
consolidate power. Historical grievance,
economic disparities, cultural tensions and
others, works as potential manipulation of
anti-Indian sentiment, often through media
and political rhetoric.
Politically, opposition parties in Bangladesh
is accused to drive the anti-Indian sentiment
to undermine the ruling party. The ruling
party, Bangladesh Awami League (BAL) is
considered historically closer to India. The biggest party
supporting the movement, Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP),
is considered to criticize India more, and BNP with other
opposition group of ruling power have historically accused
Awami League of being overly subservient to Indian interest.
These parties can use India by framing it as an exploitative
neighbour or as an external threat , by doing that these party
can gather nationalist support , or present themselves as a
protector of Bangladeshi sovereignty. This political strategy is
specially used or get momentum during election cycles,
specially when nationalism and identity politics is needed to be
showed to the people for gaining support. On the other hand,
this sentiment can also be used as distraction from domestic
issues, issues like corruption, economic mismanagement,
human right abuses to be covered up, and also to redirect public
anger towards external scapegoat rather than internal failures.
Anti-Indian sentiment can be manipulated economically.
Bangladesh is a big market of Indian products. To reduce
competition from Indian imports, to get benefit in the market, to
gain business interest, manipulation can happen. Local
industries and businesses may portray them as patriotic and as
protector of Bangladeshi economic interest by supporting the
campaign or even funding it. This campaign can create a
consumer preference for local products which will ultimately
benefit domestic business. So fostering a sense of economic
nationalism by this campaign will be beneficial . Also foreign
labor or business practices can be influenced by using anti-
Indian sentiment which will serve benefit to trade unions and
worker groups. This manipulation will not only serve or support
local industry but also will create more protectionist economic
environment and by that, certain business sectors and interest
groups within Bangladesh will be benefitted.
This multifaceted phenomenon can also be manipulated
culturally. The dominance of Indian media, cinema and cultural
products are prominent and often seen in Bangladesh. But it is
seen as a threat to local culture and traditions by cultural elites
and nationalist groups. So they may use this sentiment to
promote Bangladeshi culture, art, music as a defence against
cultural homogenization. This manipulation is evident in campaigns that call for the boycott of Indian television
channel or films and the call for supporting local productions instead, which is seen previously in Bangladesh.
This campaign reinforces national identity and pride. Various agendas like political gain, economic advantages,
cultural preservations serve potential manipulation, can exacerbate tensions between the two countries and
complicate efforts at diplomatic and economic cooperation.
1. PENETRATION INTO BANGLADESHI SOCIETY :

A notable presence and impact of the ‘Boycott Indian Products’ campaign is seen on Bangladeshi society,
which reflects deep-seated historical, political and economic tensions between two countries. Political
statements, border conflicts or trade disputes, all those specific incidents periodically influenced the campaign
and finds a strong ground in nationalist and protectionist sentiments. The presence of the campaign is most
fertile in the political zone as to challenge the ruling party’s policies and alliances with India, opposition parties
and nationalist groups use it. Portraying such ties is contradictory to Bangladesh’s interest and economic
interests. On the other hand, economically the campaign basically gains traction among local businesses and
industries , as it advocate for reduced dependency on Indian goods. For local side, positioning the boycott works
as a means to protect and promote them in the big market place of Bangladesh. Consumer advocacy groups and
media campaign amplifies this economic nationalism. On the cultural arena, this boycott movement is to
preserve Bangladeshi culture identity as the influence of Indian media is pervasive in our society and most often
it overshadows our local cultural expressions. In magnifying the campaign’s reach, social media plays a crucial
role and mobilize public opinion intensifying through viral content and online activism. The campaign basically
serves as catalyst and reflection about national identity at the same time.
Public enthusiasm and organized efforts in promoting the campaign can be observed through several indicators.
The extent and intensify of social media activity often calculates public enthusiasm. Social media works as a
mirror of opinion as it reflects the opinion of individuals, platforms like Facebook, Twitter and Instagram serve
as barometers of public sentiment. Campaign’s traction among ordinary citizens is highlighted through hashtags
calling for the boycott, viral posts and widespread sharing of content critical of India, and public support and
involvement is quantitatively provided by the engagement levels including likes, shares and comments. Surveys,
opinion poles conducted by local media also offer more structured insights . The depth of support for the
boycott call and the reasons behind it is revealed by this indicators. Public demonstrations, protests, grassroots
meetings, participation of students, workers and civil society groups also indicates the situation of the
movement . The involvement of major opposition parties like BNP and Islamist groups also gives a significant
momentum to the movement to articulate anti-India sentiments and call for economic resistance.
1. COMPARISON WITH SIMILAR MOVEMENT :

There are other boycott movement going on right now in other country, a great example would be ‘India out’
movement of Maldives. For past six decades ,India and Maldives have
shared diplomatic, defence, economic and cultural relations. To maintain Indian strategy for the Indian ocean
and neighbourhood, Maldives is a vital country for India as it located in a crucial geographical position in the
Indian ocean. India also has assisted Maldives in various ways in various fields like maritime security, socio-
economic development since it’s independence in 1965. But when Abdulla Yameen came to power in 2013, the
India-Maldives relations goes downwards. Proximity towards China was seen and anti-India rhetoric was used
to muster nationalist sentiments. The ‘India out’ movement that we know was officially launched in October
2020 to challenge the bilateral relationship by the opposition coalition of parties ( Progressive Party of Maldives
and People’s National Congress ).
There are some similarities, differences and outcomes of campaigns in Bangladesh and Maldives. Political
manipulation works as a critical factor in both cases where opposite parties of both countries capitalized on anti-
Indian sentiment against the government. Maldives former president Abdulla Yameen and his administration
frequently used anti-Indian sentiment to gather nationalist supports which was contrasting with India-friendly
policies of his successors. In the political arena of Bangladesh, BNP and other parties also criticized Awami
League for it’s closeness to India. The ‘Boycott Indian Products’ campaign in Bangladesh is fuelled by different
mix events like historical grievance, economic imbalances, cultural resistance and other events. Maldives’s
experience is similar to Bangladesh, their movement termed as ‘ India out’ movement which reflects political
influx and concerns over sovereignty. These movements are largely driven by the political opposition parties in
Maldives and similarly, even though the movement was started by a person named Pinaki Bhattacharya, later
the movement is driven by the opposition political parties as they joined it and the main accusation is that the
government’s allowing excessive Indian influence. So, the primary motivation behind the political movement is
political . Also both movement utilized the social media extensively to mobilize public opinion which resulted
the rise of nationalistic resistance. Economic concerns also played a big role in both campaign but in different
ways.
Even if both movements are similar in some ways, there are some massive differences which makes
Bangladesh’s ‘Boycott Indian Products’ different than Maldives’ ‘India out’ movement. First of all, historical
context plays a big role to shape motivation for any movement in each country. In Bangladesh’s context,
historical grievance, for example the legacy of the liberation war of 1971, presence of water disputes even
before independence and after independence, border problems , all together provides deep-rooted reasons for the
anti-Indian sentiments, which makes the boycott movement more sustained in the national consciousness. But in
the context of Maldives, the movements tend to be more episodic, oriented around some specific political events
like military overreach or strategic agreements.
In economical arena, Bangladeshi movement’s focus is on trade imbalances and on protecting local industries
whereas in the ‘India Out’ movement of Maldives, the concerns are entered on infrastructure projects and
strategic assets perceived to be controlled by India.
The outcome of both movements also differ as the motivation of movements are different. In Maldives, the
campaign led to fluctuating diplomatic relations and significant impact on strategic partnership and economic
projects. But in the case of Bangladesh, the movement led to some periodic diplomatic strains but also pushed
India to put their attention on specific matters that can be resolved, for example matters like trade imbalance and
border security issues. These specific differences makes the movements different from each other.
1. PERCEPTION BY GOVERNMENT AND POPULACE :

The “Boycott Indian Products” campaign is viewed differently by the government and the general public in
Bangladesh and India, reflecting the two countries’ complex and frequently strained relationship. In
Bangladesh, the government, particularly the Awami League, tends to downplay the campaign, focusing instead
on maintaining strong bilateral relations with India. Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina’s administration views India
as an important ally for economic development and regional security, so it frequently attempts to mitigate the
impact of boycotts through diplomatic engagement and public reassurances. For example, Sheikh Hasina has
emphasised the significance of friendly relations with India, stating, “Our relationship with India is based on
mutual trust and respect, which is essential for regional stability and growth.” However, the general public,
swayed by historical grievances and nationalistic sentiments, frequently sees the campaign as a legitimate
expression of economic and cultural survival. Border clashes and political statements made by Indian leaders
that are perceived as disrespectful or overreaching exacerbate public sentiment. Social media platforms play an
important role in amplifying these sentiments, resulting in a strong groundswell of support for the boycott.
In India, the government’s response to the boycott campaign has been measured, with an emphasis on
diplomatic efforts to address underlying issues and prevent escalation. The Indian government recognises
Bangladesh’s strategic importance as a regional partner and frequently seeks dialogue to address trade
imbalances and other grievances. Official statements usually emphasise the value of collaboration and mutual
benefit. For example, India’s Ministry of External Affairs could issue statements highlighting efforts to improve
bilateral trade relations and address specific concerns in order to reassure both the Bangladeshi government and
the general public. Indian officials may emphasise that “India remains committed to deepening its relationship
with Bangladesh through mutual respect and understanding.” On the other hand, public opinion in India can be
split. While some segments see the boycott campaign as an unfortunate result of political manipulation in
Bangladesh, others may believe India is unfairly targeted despite its efforts to help Bangladesh develop. India’s
media frequently portrays the boycott as motivated by political reasons, reflecting a larger narrative of regional
dynamics in which India is viewed as a benign neighbour who has made significant contributions to
Bangladesh’s progress.
Both governments face difficulties in managing bilateral relations as a result of complex historical ties and
nationalistic fervour. Public sentiment is volatile and influenced by historical, political, and economic factors,
necessitating a comprehensive response.
1. PROSPECTS FOR IMPROVED BILATERAL RELATIONS :

The “Boycott Indian Products” campaign in Bangladesh has the potential to significantly impact Bangladesh-
India relations, both positively and negatively. On the one hand, the campaign draws attention to underlying
tensions and grievances, such as economic imbalances, border conflicts, and cultural dominance, which, if not
addressed, could
exacerbate diplomatic strains and fuel nationalist sentiments. On the other hand, the visibility of this discontent
may push New Delhi to take a more collaborative and sensitive approach to Dhaka. Recognising Bangladesh’s
importance as a regional ally, India may attempt to address key issues raised by the boycott campaign, such as
improving trade equity, ensuring fair water sharing agreements, and respecting cultural sensitivities. Given the
strategic and economic advantages of a stable and cooperative relationship with Bangladesh, New Delhi is
likely to take a more collaborative approach. Increased diplomatic engagement, high-level visits, and targeted
economic assistance could all be part of India’s strategy to repair relations. Initiatives to increase Bangladeshi
exports to India, joint infrastructure projects, and collaboration on trans boundary river management, for
example, could all be used to boost confidence. Furthermore, addressing border security concerns through
improved cooperation and dialogue could alleviate one of the sources of conflict.
However, the success of these measures will be determined by their sincerity and effectiveness, as well as their
ability to communicate positively to the Bangladeshi public. While political and nationalist factions in
Bangladesh may continue to use anti-Indian sentiment, New Delhi’s demonstrably proactive and respectful
approach could aid in gradually changing public perception and strengthening the foundation of a more resilient
bilateral relationship. Finally, the boycott campaign serves as a reminder of the two countries’ complex
interdependence and the importance of ongoing, genuine engagement in navigating their common challenges.
1. LIMITATIONS AND PROSPECTS OF THE CAMPAIGN :

The “boycott Indian products” campaign in Bangladesh has significant limitations that jeopardise its
effectiveness and sustainability. One major limitation is Bangladesh and India’s economic interdependence.
India is a major supplier of essential goods to Bangladesh, including pharmaceuticals, agricultural products, and
raw materials for the garment industry, which is an important part of the Bangladeshi economy. This reliance
makes it difficult to carry out a comprehensive boycott without causing significant economic disruption.
Finding alternative sources for these imports can be expensive and logistically difficult, potentially resulting in
shortages and price increases for essential goods. This economic interdependence creates a practical barrier to
the boycott’s success, as any significant disruption in trade with India would almost certainly have immediate
negative consequences for the Bangladeshi economy and ordinary consumers.
Bangladesh’s political landscape also presents a significant challenge. The ruling Awami League government,
led by Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, has consistently emphasised the importance of close bilateral ties and
economic cooperation with India. This pragmatic approach stands in stark contrast to the more nationalistic and
anti-Indian sentiments expressed by opposition groups like the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP). The
absence of a unified national stance on the boycott leads to a fragmented and inconsistent message, undermining
the movement’s potential impact. Regional geopolitics adds an additional layer of complexity. Bangladesh’s
strategic location between India and China requires careful diplomatic balancing. While anti-Indian sentiment
may be driving the boycott, the government must also manage its relations with other major powers, particularly
China, which has been expanding its economic presence in Bangladesh. This geopolitical balancing
act may limit the government’s willingness to fully endorse or support the boycott, fearing that it will jeopardise
larger strategic interests. Despite these limitations, the “Boycott Indian products” campaign has some prospects
for success, depending on a number of factors. If the movement gains significant public support and maintains
momentum, it may put pressure on the Indian government to address specific grievances raised by Bangladesh,
such as trade imbalances, water-sharing issues, and border security concerns. A successful boycott could result
in better trade terms for Bangladesh and increased bilateral cooperation, resolving some of the two countries’
long-standing economic and political issues. Furthermore, the campaign may foster a sense of economic
nationalism in Bangladesh, encouraging investment in domestic industries and reducing reliance on foreign
imports. This increase in domestic production could help create jobs and stimulate economic growth, bolstering
the country’s long-term economic resilience.
However, the boycott’s success is largely dependent on its ability to overcome the aforementioned obstacles.
The movement would need to form a broad and united front, bridging political divides and aligning national
interests. It would also necessitate significant improvements in local manufacturing capacity to meet demand for
goods that would otherwise be imported from India. Addressing underlying structural issues in the Bangladeshi
economy, such as improving industrial infrastructure, increasing production efficiency, and maintaining quality
standards, is critical to the campaign’s success. Furthermore, effective communication and public education
campaigns would be required to maintain public support and manage expectations, particularly if the boycott
causes temporary economic disruptions. The “Boycott Indian products” campaign in Bangladesh, despite facing
economic and political challenges, has the potential to achieve meaningful outcomes if managed effectively,
contributing to a more balanced bilateral relationship between Bangladesh and India.
1. Conclusion :

Bangladesh’s “Boycott Indian Products” movement highlights significant economic interdependence, political
fragmentation, and regional geopolitical complexities. The campaign, which is motivated by historical
grievances and nationalist sentiments, faces challenges such as the critical reliance on Indian imports, making a
complete boycott economically disruptive. The movement is further complicated by the political landscape,
which pits the ruling Awami League’s pragmatic approach against opposition groups’ anti-Indian rhetoric.
Bangladesh’s need to balance relationships with major powers such as China complicates matters further.
Despite these limitations, the campaign has the potential to put pressure on India to address specific grievances
while also encouraging economic nationalism and boosting local industries. However, success is dependent on
achieving a unified national stance, increasing domestic manufacturing capacity, and effectively managing
public support. The broader implications for Bangladesh-India relations include the possibility of better trade
terms and greater cooperation, while regional dynamics highlight South Asia’s delicate balance of power and
influence. The movement reflects the complex interplay of economic, political, and strategic factors influencing
bilateral relations and regional stability.
 REFERENCE :

1. On ‘boycott Indian products’ campaign. (2024b, June 14).

https://www.newagebd.net/article/228787/on-boycott-indian-products-campaign

1. Rouf, A. A. (2023a, April 4). The changing face of trade between Bangladesh and India. The Business
Standard. https://www.tbsnews.net/features/panorama/changing-face-trade-between-bangladesh-and-india-
610654 Rouf, A. A. (2023a, April 4). The changing face of trade between Bangladesh and India. The
Business Standard. https://www.tbsnews.net/features/panorama/changing-face-trade-between-bangladesh-
and-india-610654

1. Rizve, S. (2024b, April 13). The Deadly Border Between Bangladesh and India. The Diplomat.
https://thediplomat.com/2024/02/the-deadly-border-between-bangladesh-and-india/#:~:text=Despite%20the
%20friendly%20political%20relations,average%20of%2030%20per%20year.

1. NatStrat. (2021b, April 22). https://www.natstrat.org.

https://www.natstrat.org/articledetail/publications/understanding-the-indiaout-campaign-in-bangladesh-
141.html#:~:text=At%20the%20core%20of%20the%20%23IndiaOut%20campaign%20lie%20allegations
%20of%20undue%20Indian%20influence%20in%20Bangladeshi%20politics%2C%20particularly
%20perceived%20support%20for%20the%20AL%20government%20led%20by%20Prime%20Minister
%20Sheikh%20Hasina NatStrat. (2021b, April 22). https://www.natstrat.org.
https://www.natstrat.org/articledetail/publications/understanding-the-indiaout-campaign-in-bangladesh-
141.html#:~:text=At%20the%20core%20of%20the%20%23IndiaOut%20campaign%20lie%20allegations
%20of%20undue%20Indian%20influence%20in%20Bangladeshi%20politics%2C%20particularly
%20perceived%20support%20for%20the%20AL%20government%20led%20by%20Prime%20Minister
%20Sheikh%20Hasina

1. Rahman, S. A., & Rahman, S. A. (2024b, February 23). Bangladeshis launch ‘India Out’ campaign over
New Delhi’s alleged meddling to keep Hasina in power. South China Morning Post.
https://www.scmp.com/week-asia/politics/article/3253018/bangladeshis-launch-india-out-campaign-over-
new-delhis-alleged-meddling-keep-hasina-power

1. “India Out” Campaign Gains Traction in Bangladesh. (2024b, February 21). Voice of America.
https://www.voanews.com/a/india-out-campaign-gains-traction-in-bangladesh/7497217.html