A ceremonial gift meant to symbolize goodwill has spiralled into one of South Asia’s sharpest diplomatic storms of the year. When Bangladesh’s Chief Adviser Dr. Muhammad Yunus presented visiting Pakistani General Sahir Shamshad Mirza, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee, with a book titled “The Art of Triumph: Bangladesh’s New Dawn,” it was intended as a token of friendship — a gesture celebrating Bangladesh’s 2024 student uprising.
However, what appeared to be an innocuous cultural exchange quickly morphed into controversy. Indian media outlets reported that the cover of the book contained a “distorted” map of Bangladesh extending into India’s northeastern states. Within hours, social media erupted, turning what began as a symbolic gesture into a full-blown diplomatic dispute.
The incident comes at a sensitive time. Since taking office in August 2024, Yunus has sought to reorient Bangladesh’s foreign policy posture, balancing between major powers. Yet his recent comments and gestures have increasingly unsettled New Delhi, which now views Dhaka’s actions as part of a broader pattern of strategic signalling.
Dhaka’s denial and counter-statement
The Chief Adviser’s Office in Dhaka moved swiftly to counter the narrative. In an official statement, it rejected the Indian media reports as “completely false and imaginary,” clarifying that the book’s cover art merely reflected the style of student graffiti from the 2024 uprising. According to the statement, the red map behind the image of martyr Abu Sayed — the first victim of that protest — was purely symbolic, not a cartographic representation.
Government sources further emphasized that the book was a publication of the July Memorial Foundation and had been earlier presented to figures like UN Secretary-General António Guterres and former leaders Joe Biden and Justin Trudeau. “While the proportions may appear abstract,” the statement said, “there is no political message embedded within the artwork.”
Despite these clarifications, doubts persist. Political analysts in Dhaka argue that the government’s explanation fails to address the deeper issue — the recurring use of provocative imagery and rhetoric under Yunus’s leadership. “Symbolism in diplomacy is never accidental,” said one political commentator. “Even if the artwork was unintentional, the pattern suggests a desire to redefine how Bangladesh positions itself in the region.”
Beginning of the controversy
The current diplomatic rift began when Indian news channels aired reports claiming that Yunus had handed General Mirza a “Greater Bangladesh” map. Several online outlets published images that appeared to show a red-tinted outline stretching into India’s Assam, Tripura, and Meghalaya. Though the authenticity of these images remains disputed, the reports triggered a wave of nationalist commentary in India.
The map in question had first appeared months earlier at a Dhaka University exhibition in April 2025. The imagery, resembling motifs used by the Islamist group Sultanat-e-Bangla, had already drawn limited attention within Bangladesh. The group’s idea of a “Greater Bangladesh” — encompassing parts of India’s Northeast and Myanmar’s Rakhine State — has long been dismissed by Dhaka as extremist propaganda.
Still, the resurfacing of that same design on the cover of an official-looking publication handed to a Pakistani general was enough to rekindle suspicions. To many in New Delhi, the move appeared not only careless but calculated — part of a pattern of symbolic assertions that blur the lines between cultural expression and political messaging.
Indian media and political reaction
Indian media and social networks were quick to amplify the controversy. Hashtags such as #GreaterBangladesh, #MapControversy, and #MapDiplomacy began trending on X (formerly Twitter), as users accused Dhaka of “provoking India under the guise of art.” The outrage, although largely online, reflected deep-seated mistrust over Bangladesh’s recent diplomatic choices.
Politicians soon joined the chorus. One opposition member of Parliament demanded that India’s Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) issue a formal diplomatic protest. “This is not art — it is an assertion of territorial imagination,” he said, warning that India could not remain silent in the face of such “symbolic aggression.”
The MEA, however, has so far refrained from an official statement. Senior officials told The Borderlens that New Delhi is “closely monitoring developments and awaiting a clear explanation from Dhaka.” Yet, even in its silence, the unease is evident — especially within India’s security establishment, where analysts are revisiting Dhaka’s recent statements about the Northeast and its expanding proximity to China and Pakistan.
India’s strategic reading
For Delhi, the map episode fits into a larger pattern of discomfort. Since the fall of the Sheikh Hasina-led Awami League government, Bangladesh’s foreign policy has tilted toward greater diversification, particularly with China and Pakistan. Bilateral issues such as water-sharing, border security, and trade have become strained, while political rhetoric from Dhaka has grown more assertive.
Analysts argue that Dr. Yunus’s symbolic gestures — from remarks about the Northeast being “landlocked” to now the alleged map imagery — are not isolated acts but calculated positioning. They are seen as efforts to project Bangladesh as a sovereign regional player less dependent on India and more aligned with new power equations in Asia.
“The optics are what matter here,” said a former Indian diplomat. “Even if the book’s cover was misinterpreted, it reinforces a perception that Dhaka is willing to play with sensitivities to make a point — that Bangladesh can stand apart, even at the cost of discomforting India.”
The Pakistan factor
For Islamabad, the timing could hardly be more fortuitous. Pakistan has been attempting to rekindle ties with Dhaka after decades of diplomatic chill since 1971. The visit of General Mirza, accompanied by open cordiality and symbolic exchanges, provided an opportunity to reset relations and challenge India’s dominance in the region.
The map controversy, whether accidental or deliberate, plays to Pakistan’s advantage. It allows Islamabad to frame the narrative around “shared history and fraternity,” while subtly undermining India’s regional influence. Pakistani commentators have already hailed the Yunus-Mirza meeting as a sign of “new South Asian cooperation.”
For Bangladesh, the optics of the meeting serve domestic purposes as well. By engaging Pakistan while fending off Indian criticism, Dhaka can project an image of balanced diplomacy. Yet this balancing act risks being perceived as opportunism — a dangerous game in a neighbourhood where perception often outweighs intent.
Dhaka’s domestic calculus
At home, the controversy is being interpreted through different lenses. Supporters of the Yunus government see the backlash as an extension of India’s discomfort with Bangladesh’s growing confidence. For them, asserting sovereignty — even through cultural symbolism — signals a new era of self-reliance.
Opponents, however, believe the interim administration is using nationalist posturing to shore up its legitimacy amid growing internal pressures. By tying itself to the memory of the 2024 student uprising and distancing from India, the government seeks to cultivate a populist image grounded in patriotic sentiment.
Political analysts argue that this pattern of calculated provocation serves Yunus’s larger strategy: to reframe Bangladesh’s foreign relations while consolidating his domestic standing. Even if the controversy was unintentional, it conveniently reinforces a narrative of independence from Indian influence — a narrative that resonates strongly with sections of Bangladesh’s youth.
A familiar pattern of map diplomacy
South Asia’s cartographic disputes are far from new. In 2023, China’s release of an official map claiming Arunachal Pradesh and Aksai Chin as its own drew sharp protests from India. Earlier, Nepal’s revised national map of 2020, incorporating Kalapani and Lipulekh, similarly strained its ties with Delhi.
In such a politically charged landscape, even artistic representations can spark geopolitical reactions. Maps here are not just lines and borders; they are extensions of history, identity, and power. When exchanged between rival states, even a painted outline can become an act of diplomacy — or defiance.
Analysts note that Bangladesh’s latest controversy fits into this long tradition of “map signalling.” What might have been dismissed as symbolic art elsewhere becomes, in South Asia, a message about sovereignty and allegiance — one that can ripple far beyond its intended meaning.
Looking ahead
While the Yunus government’s denial has temporarily defused the crisis, mistrust lingers. For India, the episode underscores how fragile its eastern neighbourhood has become — geographically porous, politically volatile, and increasingly contested by external influences.
For Bangladesh, the event marks yet another step in a shifting diplomatic calculus. By testing symbolic boundaries, Dhaka seems determined to project a new identity — one that engages China and Pakistan as strategic partners while redefining its historical relationship with India.
Yet as history has shown, when maps, art, and politics intersect in South Asia, lines blur dangerously. And once drawn — even in graffiti — those lines are not easily erased.
