Analysis, Bangladesh, China, Current Affairs, India, Myanmar, Proxy War, USA, War

The Corridor of Complicity: Bangladesh at the Edge of a Proxy War

Iconus Clustus

In the shadow of Myanmar’s civil conflict and the ongoing humanitarian tragedy of the Rohingya, a new geopolitical proposition emerges: the creation of a humanitarian corridor through Bangladesh. While clothed in the language of compassion, this proposition is anything but innocent. This piece examines the philosophical and ethical stakes of such a corridor, the actors involved—state and non-state, regional and global—and the legitimacy crisis of Bangladesh's interim regime. It warns that the corridor risks becoming a conduit for proxy warfare, drawing Bangladesh into a dangerous entanglement, compromising its moral identity and national sovereignty.

1. Setting the Stage: The Specter of the Corridor The emergence of a proposed "humanitarian corridor" connecting the Arakan region of Myanmar to the outside world through Bangladesh is not an isolated gesture of international goodwill. Instead, it harks back to historical precedents where similar rhetoric masked hard geopolitical motives. Corridors have often functioned as the thin edge of interventionist wedges, paving the way for foreign involvement, regime change, or the legitimization of proxy actors. In this context, the corridor risks becoming a gateway for U.S.-led strategic penetration, not just into Myanmar, but into the heart of South Asian balance. The alignment of the corridor with insurgent activity and covert arms movement under the guise of humanitarianism bears striking resemblance to past interventions in Iraq, Syria, and Libya. 2. An Illegitimate Regime, An Unrepresentative Gamble At the heart of this unfolding dilemma lies Bangladesh – a nation whose current government holds no electoral mandate. The Yunus-led interim regime, installed following

the ousting of the elected government, lacks constitutional legitimacy. It neither represents the will of the people nor adheres to the foundational principles upon which Bangladesh was founded. Any decision it takes, especially those with massive geopolitical and ethical consequences, must be questioned not only for their outcomes but for the very authority under which they are made. The regime’s submission to U.S. designs casts a long shadow on national sovereignty, one that cannot be overlooked or excused. 3. The Chorus of Actors: State and Non-State Entanglements The scenario brings together a complex cast of actors: the United States with its strategic doctrines; China, wary and watchful; Myanmar, whose sovereignty is directly endangered; the Arakan Army (AA), a non-state military actor now courted by Western support; India, in whose backyard the entire drama is being played out; and Bangladesh, which finds itself caught in a web of foreign interests and domestic instability. Crucially, the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army (ARSA), another…

Analysis, Bangladesh, Current Affairs, India, Opinion, Pakistan, Politics, Secularism, War

A Region Unravels: From the Indus to the Bay of Bengal, the Secular Order Faces Its Greatest Test

Iconus Clustus

The Indus Treaty has collapsed. The Shimla Agreement lies suspended. From Pakistan’s proxy warfare to Bangladesh’s creeping Islamism and great power maneuvering, South Asia is entering not just a geopolitical spiral—but a civilizational eclipse. What we’re witnessing is the slow disintegration of the pluralist soul that once defined this region.

I. Introduction: The Breaking of a Compact When India suspended the Indus Waters Treaty following the terror attack in Pahalgam—carried out by The Resistance Front (TRF), a group with clear operational and ideological ties to Pakistan's deep state—it did more than nullify a water-sharing agreement. It shattered one of the few remaining symbols of post-Partition cooperation between the two nuclear-armed rivals. For decades, the treaty withstood wars, diplomatic breakdowns, and public rage. That it should now collapse in response to yet another incident of state-proxied terror speaks volumes—not only about India’s strategic posture but about the region’s crumbling secular compact. Now, that compact has fractured even further. In a retaliatory gesture of its own, Pakistan has suspended the Shimla Agreement (1972)—a foundational accord that once governed diplomatic protocols, bilateralism, and conflict resolution between India and Pakistan. If the Indus Waters Treaty was the hydrological pillar of cooperation, the Shimla Agreement was its diplomatic spine. Together, these two treaties formed the

last architecture of mutual restraint between nuclear neighbors. Their dual collapse signals a freefall into a pre-1970s strategic environment—one where war, not negotiation, is again the default setting. However, to treat the Treaty’s dissolution as a bilateral escalation alone would be myopic. It is better understood as the tremor before a regional quake. From the Indus in the West to the Bay of Bengal in the East, a new geopolitical alignment is taking shape—an alignment that threatens to undo the fragile, secular, and postcolonial order that had once offered a vision of stability. Across South Asia, terror proxies are resurgent, Islamist politics is infiltrating interim governments, and foreign powers are circling zones of instability under the guise of humanitarian concern. India, at the heart of it all, finds itself in a two-front dilemma. In the West, Pakistan continues to serve as an incubator for transnational jihadist ambitions. In the East, Bangladesh’s descent into political instability and Islamist resurgence—combined with creeping…

Lost your password? Please enter your username or email address. You will receive a link to create a new password via email.
We do not share your personal details with anyone.