Photo Diplomacy, Symbolism, and the Future of India-Bangladesh Relations

In the grand theatre of international relations, moments of symbolism often eclipse even the most meticulously negotiated treaties. Such was the case when Dr. Muhammad Yunus, Chief Adviser of Bangladesh’s interim government, met Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi on the sidelines of the BIMSTEC summit in Bangkok. Though brief and largely ceremonial in appearance, the encounter carried layers of diplomatic nuance and strategic depth. It was not simply a routine meeting between neighbors—it was, in essence, a bold attempt to recalibrate a fraught bilateral relationship against a backdrop of political upheaval, shifting allegiances, and the emerging geopolitical dynamics of South Asia.

When Prime Minister Modi announced, “I met Yunus,” it seemed almost casual, yet the implications were far from trivial. In his statement, Modi emphasized India’s commitment to fostering a “constructive and people-centric relationship with Bangladesh,” reiterating India’s support for “peace, stability, inclusion, and democracy.” He went on to highlight mutual concerns about border security, specifically referencing illegal crossings and the safety of Hindus and other minorities in Bangladesh. On the surface, these remarks read like standard diplomatic platitudes—but within each sentence lay a subtle messaging war, signaling intent, reassurances, and expectations.

Reactions to this encounter were predictably mixed. For some analysts, Modi’s measured language was indicative of India’s strategic recalibration—a graceful pivot from the now-ousted Sheikh Hasina government, which New Delhi had long propped up as a regional ally. Others interpreted the moment as a deliberate assertion of legitimacy by Dr. Yunus, keen to demonstrate his international credibility and acceptance. In presenting himself as a democratic reformer and a statesman who could maintain cordial relations even with India, Yunus was sending a clear message to both domestic critics and international observers: he was not an outlier, but rather a capable custodian of statecraft.

Indeed, the optics of the meeting were telling. The footage captured the Indian delegation, already present at the venue, rising in respect as Dr. Yunus entered the room—a seemingly minor detail, yet one with enormous symbolic weight. For an interim leader whose ascent followed a bloody student-led uprising and the collapse of a long-entrenched regime, such moments serve as instruments of political validation. And in the diplomatic arena, validation is everything.

While official visit and press statements hold their value, modern diplomacy is increasingly conducted through images—carefully curated, widely disseminated, and powerfully resonant. This is what scholars and practitioners refer to as “photo diplomacy,” a genre of statecraft where photographs serve as both artifacts of memory and active agents of geopolitical narrative-building.

In this context, Dr. Yunus’s decision to gift Prime Minister Modi a photograph from their past interaction—a snapshot of Modi awarding Yunus a gold medal at the Indian Science Congress in Mumbai in 2015—was not an exercise in nostalgia. It was, rather, a masterstroke of soft power. The image itself, frozen in time, conveyed mutual respect and a shared history. But its real significance lay in its reactivation—its deliberate insertion into the present moment to signify continuity, goodwill, and mutual recognition.

This gesture drew upon a long and storied tradition of photo diplomacy. From Churchill’s wartime images to Nixon’s handshake with Mao, history is replete with examples of leaders using the camera lens as a tool of political persuasion and alliance-making. The photo is more than a record—it is a declaration.

To understand the full gravity of Dr. Yunus’s gesture, it helps to contextualize it within the broader history of photo diplomacy. One of the most iconic instances dates back to the Cold War—specifically, the 1959 Kitchen Debate between then-US Vice President Richard Nixon and Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev. Captured in a mock American kitchen in Moscow, the images of the two leaders debating the virtues of capitalism and communism became enduring symbols of ideological rivalry and engagement. The photos spoke volumes, transcending language and culture.

Another indelible moment was the handshake between Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat during the signing of the Oslo Accords in 1993. Flanked by US President Bill Clinton, the image was immortalized as a fleeting but powerful representation of the possibility of peace in the Middle East.

Similarly, the images of East and West Berliners tearing down the Berlin Wall in 1989 encapsulated the triumph of democratic ideals over authoritarian division. Richard Nixon’s handshake with Mao Zedong in 1972 served as a harbinger of a new chapter in Sino-American relations, while the photograph of Nelson Mandela walking hand in hand with Winnie Mandela upon his release in 1990 became a global emblem of reconciliation and hope.

These instances underline a singular truth: in diplomacy, photographs are not passive souvenirs—they are active participants in the making of history.

Back in Bangkok, the photo of Dr. Yunus and Narendra Modi was anything but ornamental. It was a calculated maneuver in a much larger game of diplomatic repositioning. South Asia is a region riddled with historical grievances, asymmetric power dynamics, and complicated alliances. For Bangladesh, a country almost entirely enveloped by India’s geography, the stakes of this bilateral relationship are existential.

The summit marked the first formal diplomatic encounter between India and Bangladesh since the installation of the interim government following the fall of Sheikh Hasina’s administration in August of the previous year. That regime’s downfall—precipitated by a mass uprising of students and civilians—was a tectonic political shift. India’s long-standing support for Hasina’s Awami League had rendered the relationship between the two neighbors increasingly lopsided, often criticized as an alliance bordering on subservience.

Hence, Dr. Yunus’s rise, and his subsequent overtures to India, mark an inflection point. His elevation to the chairmanship of BIMSTEC during the summit was more than ceremonial—it was a signal that Bangladesh intended to assert itself as a regional player with autonomy and vision. And while the Indian side had previously shown clear discomfort with the transitional government in Dhaka, the meeting suggested a readiness to engage, if not embrace, the new political reality.

The bilateral conversation, though diplomatically choreographed, was substantive. The two leaders reportedly discussed a range of thorny issues, including the fate of former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina—currently in exile in India—cross-border water sharing agreements, and the persistent scourge of border killings. According to post-meeting reports, Dr. Yunus expressed Bangladesh’s displeasure at inflammatory remarks made by Hasina from Indian soil, characterizing them as destabilizing and inappropriate. He also raised concerns over disinformation campaigns alleging widespread minority persecution in Bangladesh.

Modi, for his part, emphasized India’s commitment to a democratic and inclusive Bangladesh, stating clearly that India does not support any particular party, but rather values people-to-people relations. This formulation, while diplomatically safe, signaled a departure from India’s previously partisan posture toward Dhaka.

The conversation reportedly turned tense when Dr. Yunus cited a recent report from the United Nations Human Rights Office documenting grave violations during the suppression of the student-led uprising that ousted the Hasina government. According to the report, more than 1,400 people were killed, including a significant number of children, with evidence suggesting direct orders from the former Prime Minister to eliminate protest leaders and conceal their bodies.

Such candid discussions, rarely made public, suggest that the Yunus government is committed to a policy of transparency and moral clarity, at least in its initial phase. They also suggest that India, while concerned about regional stability, is no longer in a position to ignore Bangladesh’s internal dynamics.

One of the most pressing issues discussed was the ongoing problem of border killings—a persistent irritant in India-Bangladesh relations. Dr. Yunus was unambiguous in condemning the killings, asserting that the life of a Bangladeshi citizen cannot be bartered in the name of security. Modi acknowledged the issue, defending the actions of Indian border guards as acts of self-defense, but pledged to work jointly to reduce such incidents.

This is a core concern for the people of Bangladesh, and the Yunus administration’s vocal stance on the matter underscores a shift toward people-first diplomacy. There is no appetite in Dhaka for maintaining a relationship where sovereignty is compromised, and the message from the new leadership is clear: diplomacy must respect dignity.

Dr. Yunus articulated a foreign policy framework that puts Bangladesh’s internal interests at the forefront. This includes a fact-based approach to cross-border issues like trade imbalances, river water sharing, and border security. The principle guiding this new framework is unambiguous: “Bangladesh first.”

According to policy advisors close to the administration, future relations with India must be premised on equality, not hierarchy. Gone is the language of “big brother” and “small neighbor.” The new paradigm seeks mutual respect and shared benefit—a coordinated alignment of interests, not domination.

Economic equity is another core tenet. The Yunus government advocates for balanced trade relations that protect local industries while promoting regional integration. The Teesta water-sharing agreement and the renewal of the Ganga water treaty are now priority issues, and Bangladesh is prepared to push firmly for outcomes based on scientific, transparent, and internationally recognized principles.

The BIMSTEC platform has emerged as a vital arena for regional diplomacy, and Dr. Yunus has wasted no time in using it to present a forward-looking vision. In his address, he emphasized the importance of regional connectivity and cooperation, advocating for the implementation of the BIMSTEC Master Plan on Transport Connectivity. He also called for a Free Trade Agreement among the seven member states, stressing that economic integration is key to 

regional stability.

India, keen to counterbalance Chinese influence in the region, has incentives to respond positively. A cooperative and democratic Bangladesh is not only desirable—it is strategically essential. For Bangladesh, BIMSTEC offers a forum to amplify its voice, diversify its alliances, and reduce overdependence on any single regional actor.

What emerges from all these developments is a coherent diplomatic philosophy anchored in self-respect, national interest, and strategic independence. Bangladesh is asserting its right to engage with India not as a subordinate, but as an equal partner. As one senior official put it, “We are neighbors—not vassals.”

This recalibration is not anti-India; rather, it is pro-Bangladesh. The message is not one of rejection, but of redefinition. As the geopolitical landscape of South Asia undergoes rapid transformation, such assertiveness is not only timely—it is necessary.

The Yunus-Modi meeting in Bangkok may not have resolved every contentious issue, but it succeeded in opening a channel of dialogue grounded in realism and mutual interest. It also demonstrated how soft power, symbolism, and the art of the photograph can sometimes achieve what countless rounds of formal negotiation cannot.

As Henry Kissinger once said, “Personal relationships are the fertile soil from which all advancement, all success, all achievement in real life grows.” In diplomacy, as in life, sometimes it is the image—the handshake, the photograph, the moment shared—that writes the next chapter of history.