See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/377963737

Revisiting Bangladesh-Russia Relations: Reflections of

Neoclassical Realism

Article · January 2024

DOI: 10.56888/BIISSj2024v45n1a4

CITATIONS READS
0 147

2 authors:

Sheikh Shams Morsalin Saddam Hosen

University of Dhaka Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman Science & Technol…
17 PUBLICATIONS 9 CITATIONS 3 PUBLICATIONS 1 CITATION

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Sheikh Shams Morsalin on 04 February 2024.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

BIISS JOURNAL, VOL. 45, NO. 1, JANUARY 2024: 89–114
DOI: https://www.doi.org/10.56888/BIISSj2024v45n1a4
ISSN: 1010-9536 (Print)

Sheikh Shams Morsalin

Saddam Hosen
REVISITING BANGLADESH-RUSSIA RELATIONS: REFLECTIONS
OF NEOCLASSICAL REALISM

Abstract

Bangladesh enjoys a longstanding relationship with the Russian Federation

(the then Soviet Union), which played a pivotal role in Bangladesh’s War of
Independence in 1971. Standing on a solid platform of friendship and trust,
bilateral relations have been somewhat less productive compared to expectations.
However, under the premiership of Sheikh Hasina, Bangladesh-Russia relations
have been experiencing a revitalisation with enhanced cooperation in the
areas of energy and technology, trade, and defence over the last decade. At a
time when Bangladesh enjoys its golden jubilee of independence and moves
forward to cross the threshold of the LDC, Russia seems to occupy a central
place in the country’s foreign policy. Therefore, it is essential to look back on
Dhaka-Moscow relations more theoretically, which in turn would guide us to
comprehend the future trajectory of this significant partnership. Despite the
dearth of academic literature on Bangladesh-Russia bilateral relations, this
paper primarily attempts to revisit Bangladesh-Russia relations based on a
qualitative analysis of available secondary data. Relying on the theoretical tool
of neoclassical realism, the paper shows how systemic constraints and domestic
factors, particularly leadership factors, influenced Bangladesh’s foreign policy
towards Russia.

Keywords: Bangladesh, Russia, Neoclassical Realism, Cold War, Leadership

1. Introduction

Bangladesh has been maintaining a profound relationship with Russia,

which originated in the early 1970s. The Russian Federation, the former Soviet
Union, played a pivotal role in Bangladesh’s (the then East Pakistan’s) 1971

Sheikh Shams Morsalin is Associate Professor, Department of International Relations, University of Dhaka,
Bangladesh. His e-mail address is: [email protected]; Saddam Hosen is Assistant Professor,
Department of International Relations, Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman Science & Technology University,
Gopalganj, Bangladesh. His e-mail address is: [email protected]

© Bangladesh Institute of International and Strategic Studies (BIISS), 2024

89
BIISS JOURNAL, VOL. 45, NO. 1, JANUARY 2024

Liberation War. It is often argued that the war was not merely a struggle against
West Pakistan (present-day Pakistan), but rather had much broader significance
on the global stage under the Cold War realities. The official records of the United
States Department of State reveal how the war led the two superpowers—the
United States (US) and the Soviet Union—close to a possible nuclear conflict.1 The
uncompromising pro-Pakistani and pro-Chinese stance of ‘Nixon-Kissinger Dyad’,
however, fell short against the overwhelming support from the Soviet Union and
India. Although the Cold War geopolitical calculations influenced Soviet policy
towards Bangladesh during the Liberation War, the newly born state soon realised
that Indo-Soviet assistance could hardly fulfil its huge economic and humanitarian
demands in the post-independence era. As a result, Bangladesh sought to strengthen
its relations with the Western development partners. However, that initiative did
not hamper Bangladesh’s balanced approach vis-à-vis the two superpowers. During
Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman’s regime (1972–75), Bangladesh relied on the
Soviet Union as a trusted friend, essentially to remain under its security umbrella and
receive necessary diplomatic support for the country’s recognition and admission into
different international organisations. The bilateral relations somewhat deteriorated
during the successive regimes of General Ziaur Rahman and General H.M. Ershad
in the late 1970s and 1980s. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, Bangladesh gave
official recognition to the Russian Federation on 29 December 1991, as a successor
state. It was, however, not until the latter half of the 1990s that Bangladesh-Russia
relations under the premiership of Sheikh Hasina, daughter of Bangabandhu Sheikh
Mujibur Rahman, started to get momentum.

Since 2009, with Sheikh Hasina’s assumption of the premiership for the
second time, Bangladesh-Russia relations have been experiencing a renaissance
with increased cooperation in the areas of energy, technology, trade, and defence.
During her official visit to Moscow in 2013, Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina concluded
the biggest-ever arms deal in Bangladesh’s history, worth US$1 billion, to procure
Russian weapons and military technology. Russia also committed a US$22 billion
loan to Bangladesh for the construction of its first nuclear power plant in Rooppur,
which is progressing smoothly. Likewise, Bangladesh-Russia bilateral trade has
made substantial headway in recent years, and both countries are working closely to
boost it further. Although Russia still lags behind other global powers such as the US,
China, Japan, or the European Union (EU) in terms of foreign aid, trade, and Foreign
Direct Investment (FDI) directed towards Bangladesh, the recent trend truly shows
that “Russia is coming back to Bangladesh ‘seriously’ and ‘for a long time’,” as once

1
“Southeast Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO), 1954,” US Department of State Archive, accessed June 20,
2021, https://2001-2009.state.gov/r/pa/ho/time/lw/88315.htm.

90
 REVISITING BANGLADESH-RUSSIA RELATIONS

noted by Russian Ambassador to Dhaka Alexander Nikolaev.2 The present political

regime of Sheikh Hasina believes that Bangladesh-Russia relations have had a firm
historical foundation based on trust and considers Russia as a potential source of
energy and defence cooperation, in particular. Russia, on the other hand, under the
firm leadership of President Vladimir Putin, considers that bilateral relations have
become increasingly dynamic and looks forward to advancing cooperation both at the
state level and on different multilateral platforms.

Although write-ups on the Soviet Union and its foreign policy were
frequently seen during the time of the Cold War, the post-Cold War era saw a
relatively less academic focus on Russia. Russian expansionist role in recent years
and the debate around Russia’s return as a great power, however, have gained much
academic attention since the last decade.3 Again, most of the academic pieces on
Russia’s bilateral relations concentrate on either its immediate neighbours or the
regional and global powers. In the existing literature, there is also a limitation in
understanding Bangladesh-Russia relations based on neoclassical realism. In this
aspect, Lailufar Yasmin articulates the historical development and the rapprochement
process between Bangladesh and Russia. The author argues that although the former
Soviet Union supported Bangladesh during the Liberation War, bilateral relations
began to deepen in the latter part of the 1990s.4 Mohammad Abdul Halim analyses
the foreign policy of Bangladesh, where the author explains that bilateral relations
between Bangladesh and Russia reached a low point due to the expelling of several
Soviet diplomats from Bangladesh.5 In terms of relations between Bangladesh
and Russia, Drong Adrio focuses on the shifting patterns of Bangladesh’s foreign
policy. The author makes the case that domestic changes in political regimes are of
utmost importance for understanding these relations.6 In his analysis of how Russia
contributed to the creation of Bangladesh, Vijay Sen Budhraj shows how the Soviet
Union conducted its foreign policy during the East Pakistan crisis in light of the
realities of the Cold War.7 After analysing the available existing literature, the authors
find that there is a significant dearth of academic literature on Russia’s relationship
with Bangladesh. Even Bangladeshi authors have not emphasised on this bilateral

2
Nurul Islam Hasib, “Russia Coming Back to Bangladesh,” bdnews24.com, March 28, 2014.
3
Andrei Melville and Tatiana Shakleina, eds., Russian Foreign Policy in Transition: Concepts and Realities
(Budapest: Central European University Press, 2005).
4
Lailufar Yasmin, “Bangladesh and the Great Powers,” in Routledge Handbook of Contemporary Bangladesh,
eds. Ali Riaz and Mohammad Sajjadur Rahman (London and New York: Routledge, 2016), 395–396.
5
Mohammad Abdul Halim, “Foreign Policy: A Review,” in Bangladesh: On the Threshold of Twenty-First
Century, eds. Abdul Momin Chowdhury and Fakrul Alam (Dhaka: Asiatic Society Bangladesh, 2022).
6
Drong Adrio, “The Effects of the Political Changes in the Relationship between Bangladesh and Russia
(USSR) in 1971–2014,” Bulletin of RUDN University 1 (2015).
7
Vijay Sen Budhraj, “Moscow and the Birth of Bangladesh,” Asian Survey 13, no. 5 (1973): 482–495.

91
BIISS JOURNAL, VOL. 45, NO. 1, JANUARY 2024

relation much during the recent decades except for time-to-time newspaper reporting.
The Bangladesh-Russia relationship, which is already flourishing and promising far
more opportunities in near future, therefore, demands greater academic attention.
In this context, this paper intends to investigate two key questions. First, how do
systemic constraints and domestic factors, particularly leadership factors, influence
Bangladesh’s foreign policy towards Russia? Second, what will be the future outlook
of Bangladesh-Russia relations? In answering the questions, the paper not only
provides a brief overview of Bangladesh-Russia relationship across some major
issue areas but also attempts to analyse the bilateral relations through a theoretical
lens of neoclassical realism. The paper is a qualitative work that mainly relies on
secondary data collected from academic books, journal articles, newspaper reports,
policy papers and verified online resources. Primary data have been collected from
interviews following the telephone survey method.

The paper is organised as follows: As the key objective of this paper is to

theoretically explain the foreign policy behaviour of Bangladesh towards Russia, the
paper analyses the basic theoretical discussions on neoclassical realism, the latest
approach in the realist tradition to study foreign policy, in the second section. In the
next section, the paper discusses a brief overview of Bangladesh-Russia relations.
Section four investigates the factors that influenced Bangladesh’s foreign policy
towards Russia based on a neoclassical realist approach to understand how systemic
constraints and leadership factors influenced bilateral relations between these two
countries. In section five, the paper demonstrates the future outlook of Bangladesh-
Russia relations. Finally, the paper concludes by establishing the significance of
neoclassical realism as an effective theoretical tool to understand Bangladesh’s
foreign policy towards Russia, which is expected to guide us in comprehending the
future trajectory of this bilateral partnership.

2. A Neoclassical Realist Explanation of Bangladesh-Russia Relations

Among all the theories, realism, often also referred to as political realism,
is the most influential and well-established theoretical perspective in understanding
international relations.8 Although realism emerged as a dominant theoretical
framework since the end of World War II, it has a long historical tradition and a
number of variants. Realism, as the name suggests, attempts to explain the reality of
international politics ‘as it is, not as it ought to be’.9 Despite some disagreements among
8
Jill Steans, Lloyd Pettiford, Thomas Diez, and Imad El-Anis, An Introduction to International Relations
Theory: Perspectives and Themes (London: Routledge, 2010), 53.
9
Knud Erik Jorgensen, International Relations Theory: A New Introduction (London: Palgrave Macmillan,
2010), 78.

92
 REVISITING BANGLADESH-RUSSIA RELATIONS

different variants of realism, they commonly view the state to be the primary actor in
world politics and consider the concept of power as the key to define state behaviour.
While classical realism emphasises on ‘egoism’, neorealist tradition is centred on the
concept of ‘anarchy’.10 According to classical realists, human beings are inherently
selfish, and that ambition manifests itself in international politics as a struggle for
power.11 Neorealism, on the contrary, is a departure from such a pessimistic view
regarding human nature. Neorealists focus largely on the international system and the
ways the system restricts or dictates state behaviour. For them, it is the absence of a
supranational authority i.e., anarchy, not the human behaviour, which leads states to
act the way that they do.12

The prospect of progress through the establishment of international

institutions like the League of Nations has been challenged by classical realists like
E. H. Carr. Instead, they emphasised the ongoing influence of power and self-interest
on how states behave. The rise of classical realism after the start of World War II
helped shape the great powers’ post-war foreign policies, especially that of the US. In
the 1970s, neorealism—associated particularly with the contribution of Kenneth N.
Waltz—emerged methodologically as a more rigorous variant of realism highlighting
anarchy to be the ordering principle of the international system composed of
sovereign states. For Waltz, in the anarchic international system, what he termed
as a ‘self-help’ system, states’ behaviours are determined by the distribution of
power, rather than states’ domestic institutions, effectiveness of diplomacy, quality
of statecraft, national morale or human nature. He also argued for bipolarity to be
the most stable arrangement. Neorealism added a more scientific touch to the realist
tradition and made it possible to envisage state behaviour and to prescribe rational
policy options, such as internal and external balancing, for the states to stabilise
international relations during the Cold War period. However, the collapse of the Soviet
Union and the subsequent post-Cold War era characterised by globalisation, greater
interdependence, increased influence of non-state actors, eroding state sovereignty,
and ideational factors gaining importance in International Relations (IR) scholarship,
led to a considerable setback to a realist tradition. Against this backdrop, the paper
counts on the emerging theoretical perspective of neoclassical realism which attempts
to combine neorealism with classical realist thoughts and is persuasive enough to
explain the complex foreign policy behaviour of different states, be it a great power
or an ordinary power. It also attempts to envisage a range of policy priorities and
associated challenges under the current realities.
10
Jack Donnelly, “Realism,” in Theories of International Relations, ed. Scott Burchill (New York: Palgrave
Macmillan, 2009), 31–56.
11
Hans J. Morgenthau, Politics among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace (New York: Alfred A.
Knopf, 1948).
12
Scott Burchill et al., Theories of International Relations, 2nd ed. (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2001), 1–321.

93
BIISS JOURNAL, VOL. 45, NO. 1, JANUARY 2024

To Gideon Rose, who originally coined the term neoclassical realism, this
theoretical approach is perceived as—

“The scope and ambition of a country’s foreign policy is driven first

and foremost by its place in the international system and specifically
by its relative material power capabilities… [T]he impact of such
power capabilities on foreign policy is indirect and complex because
systemic pressures must be translated through intervening variables
at the unit-level.”13

Neoclassical realists, in other words, hold that when states carry out their
foreign and security policies, they largely do so in response to the opportunities
and constraints presented by the international system. However, these responses are
influenced by unit-level variables such as the relationships between the state and
its society, the political system in place, the strategic culture, perceptions, and the
effectiveness of the leadership, among others. Neoclassical realism uses this strategy
to integrate system-level and state-level variables into a single theoretical framework.
Moreover, Taliaferro, Lobell and Ripsman refer that—

“Neoclassical realism seeks to explain variation in the foreign

policies of the same state over time or across different states
facing similar external constraints. It makes no pretense about
explaining broad patterns of systemic or recurring outcomes. Thus,
a neoclassical realist hypothesis might explain the likely diplomatic,
economic, and military responses of particular states to systemic
imperatives, but it cannot explain the systemic consequences of
those responses.”14

While neorealists argue that systemic pressures immediately influence the

behaviours of states in an anarchic environment, neoclassical realists believe that the
extent of systemic effects on the states are subject to relative power and the internal
factors of the states.15 In other words, neoclassical realists deny accepting states
as the sole actors of the international system and consider systemic stimuli as the
13
Gideon Rose, “Review: Neoclassical Realism and Theories of Foreign Policy,” World Politics 51, no. 1
(1998): 146.
14
Jeffrey W. Taliaferro, Steven E. Lobell, and Norrin M. Ripsman, “Introduction: Neoclassical Realism, the
State, and Foreign Policy,” in Neoclassical Realism, the State, and Foreign Policy, eds. Steven E. Lobell,
Norrin M. Ripsman and Jeffrey W. Taliaferro (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009), 21.
15
Randall L. Schweller, “Unanswered Threats: A Neoclassical Realist Theory of under Balancing,” International
Security 29, no. 2 (2004): 159–201.

94
 REVISITING BANGLADESH-RUSSIA RELATIONS

principles that force specific foreign policy outcomes. Neoclassical realists attempt to
understand foreign policy by focusing on the relative power of states in the anarchic
international system as an independent variable; internal realities of states and
perceptions of decision-makers as intervening variables; and the responses of states
in the international environment as dependent variables. In this way, neoclassical
realism tries to overcome the deficiencies of classical realism and neorealism in
analysing foreign policy of states.16

Neoclassical realists argue that national leaders of a state play a crucial

role in creating perceptions based on information, cognition, experience, historical
contexts, etc. Domestic constraints such as dependence of state on other political
parties, civil society, business groups, civil and military bureaucracy, political
coalition, organisational politics, institutional capacity, socio-political coherence,
and state’s resource base play a vital role in foreign policy decision making and
provide leaders with different policy options. Ultimately, the outcome of foreign
policy is determined by the capability of leadership to mobilise resources under
different domestic constraints. For neoclassical realism, personality or capacity of
leadership, who engage in a two-level game—responding to the systemic pressures
on one hand and mobilising internal resources on the other hand—directly influence
foreign policy of the state.17 In simple words, neoclassical realists consider leaders
as the key factor in foreign policy formulation who define state’s national interests
and implement decisions on the basis of their own assessments and ideas regarding
constraints posed by domestic factors and the anarchic international system.

It is important to understand the bilateral relations between Bangladesh

and Russia from the perspective of neoclassical realism, where the paper finds a
close linkage between systemic constraints and leadership factors considering the
development of Bangladesh’s relations with Russia. When comparing the relationship
between Russia and Bangladesh under various regimes, it is evident that domestic
factors are crucial in determining the development of their bilateral relations.
Neoclassical realists would contend that both leaders pursued policies based on their
domestic political considerations and the external threats and opportunities they
faced in the realm of Bangladesh-Russia relations during the Bangabandhu and Ziaur
Rahman regimes. Bangladesh made an effort to maintain a balance in its relations
with the Soviet Union and the US under Bangabandhu’s rule. However, the foreign

16
John Baylis, “International and Global Security in Post-Cold War Era,” in The Globalization of World
Politics: An Introduction to International Relations, eds. John Baylis, Steve Smith, and Patricia Owens (New
York: Oxford University Press, 2001), 1–525.
17
Nicholas Kitchen, “Systemic Pressures and Domestic Ideas: A Neoclassical Realist Model of Grand Strategy
Formation,” Review of International Studies 36, no. 1 (2010): 117–143.

95
BIISS JOURNAL, VOL. 45, NO. 1, JANUARY 2024

policy of Bangladesh has shifted towards a more pro-Western stance following

Bangabandhu’s assassination and the ensuing rise of General Ziaur Rahman. General
Zia’s desire to obtain US support for his regime and his view of the Soviet Union as a
threat to Bangladesh’s security were the main factors behind this change.18

Bangladesh has pursued a policy of upholding a balance between the region’s

major powers, which include India, China, and Russia, under the leadership of
Sheikh Hasina. To balance the influence of India and China, the current government
in Bangladesh has sought to strengthen its ties with Russia in particular. The domestic
factor of political leadership has a close linkage behind this. As part of its larger
foreign policy objectives, the Sheikh Hasina administration is focused to improve
relations with Russia. As a result, Bangladesh-Russia relations have improved under
her leadership, and both nations have signed several agreements to boost trade and
investment. However, relations between Bangladesh and Russia were less friendly
under Khaleda Zia earlier in 1991. The Zia administration prioritised its relations
with the US, the Middle East, and China while placing less emphasis on its relations
with Russia. The domestic factor of bureaucratic politics may be applied to explain
this. The Zia government was more concerned with domestic political issues, and the
competing interests within the government bureaucracy had an impact on its foreign
policy. As a result, the Zia administration did not place much emphasis on developing
ties between Bangladesh and Russia, which led to a lack of progress in those ties.

The economic situation in both the countries has affected relations between
Bangladesh and Russia under different regimes. Bangladesh has been eager to entice
Russian investment and technology to help it in developing its economy under
Sheikh Hasina’s rule, and Russia has viewed Bangladesh as a potential market for
its energy exports. The domestic factor of economic interests can help to analyse
this. The government of Sheikh Hasina is committed to foster economic growth and
development and views Russia as a potential ally in this endeavour. Like Bangladesh,
Russia wants to deepen its economic ties with Bangladesh to gain access to new
markets and diversify its economy. On the contrary, economic factors were significant
under Khaleda Zia’s administration during 2001–2006, but the emphasis was more
on luring investment from China and the US. Overall, Neoclassical realists contend
that a combination of systemic and domestic factors can adequately account for the
relationship between Bangladesh and Russia under various regimes. The trajectory
of their bilateral relations has been influenced by systemic factors like the shifting
global balance of power and changing regional dynamics as well as domestic factors
like political leadership, bureaucratic politics, economic interests, and cultural
18
Dr. Muhammad Faridul Alam, Professor, Department of International Relations, University of Chittagong,
interview with authors, June 02, 2023.

96
 REVISITING BANGLADESH-RUSSIA RELATIONS

interests. Discussion, henceforth, demonstrates the neoclassical realist explanations

of Bangladesh-Russia relations. However, it is undoubtedly crucial to observe the
historical developments and dynamics of Bangladesh’s relations with Russia to
understand the foreign policy behaviour of the states.

3. Revisiting Bangladesh-Russia Relations: A Brief Overview

It seems without arguing that in order to explain relations between Bangladesh

and Russia, one must comprehend Russian foreign policy toward South Asia. For
Russia, South Asia is a region of geopolitical importance since it has a significant
impact on its security, energy, and strategic interests. Russia’s foreign policy has
altered dramatically over time, reflecting both regional and global dynamics, as
the geopolitical situation has gotten increasingly difficult due to the persistence of
US hegemony and the rise of China.19 However, Russia has a pivotal interest in the
region of South Asia to enhance its strategic presence to counter the US and the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which led to Russia’s active engagement with
India, Bangladesh, and China.20 In order to create Soviet-Russian policy toward the
region during and after the Cold War, structural constraints in the form of rivalries
with other great powers, particularly the US and China, and the balance of power,
in particular, triggered significant outside-in processes.21 Russia has maintained a
close and long-standing relationship with India, particularly under the leadership
of Vladimir Putin, which is one of its key security partners and a key partner in
multilateral forums such as BRICS and Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO)
that acknowledge the geopolitical significance of Russia in South Asia.

Russia’s energy concerns, notably in connection with its gas and oil exports,
also influence its interest in South Asia. Russia sees South Asia as a potential market for
its energy resources, as it is one of the biggest producers and exporters of natural gas
and oil. Russia has pursued several projects to construct gas pipelines that would link its
gas fields in Siberia and Central Asia with South Asian nations like India, Pakistan, and
Bangladesh. By diversifying its gas export routes, Russia could reduce its reliance on
Europe as its main market while also strengthening its economic ties with South Asian
states. The factors mentioned above constitute the primary drivers of worry for Russian

19
Stephen Kotkin, “Russia’s Perpetual Geopolitics: Putin Returns to the Historical Patterns,” Foreign Affairs
(May/June 2016).
20
Arshad Mahmood and Umar Baloch, “Enhancement of Russian Interests in South Asia During Putin’s Era,”
Margalla Papers (2013), 58.
21
Almas Haider Naqvi and Syed Qandil Abbas, “Russian South Asia Policy: From Estrangement to
Pragmatism,” Strategic Studies 42, no. 1 (2022): 98.

97
BIISS JOURNAL, VOL. 45, NO. 1, JANUARY 2024

foreign policy in South Asia, where the relationship between Bangladesh and Russia
also has significant ramifications in light of Russian foreign policy in South Asia.

The birth and subsequent evolution of an independent Bangladesh witnessed

active and decisive roles played by the superpowers as well. During the 1971 Liberation
War, Bangladesh received monumental support from the Soviet Union, which ultimately
laid the foundation for Bangladesh-Russia relations in the post-Cold War era.22 The
Soviet role during the war was, however, a strong response to the Cold War-driven US
policy in Asia pursued during the 1950s and 1960s.23 It was an attempt by the Soviet
Union not only to limit the US influences but also to contain the military and ideological
desires of China in Asia. The security arrangements called the Southeast Asia Treaty
Organization (SEATO) and the Central Treaty Organization (CENTO) naturally caused
a grave drift regarding the bilateral relations between Pakistan and the Soviet Union.24
In response to these developments, the Soviet Union extended its cooperation to India,
which was consolidated following Soviet President Nikita Khrushchev’s visit to India
in 1955.25 Later in 1962, India’s debacle in the Sino-Indian War forced India to build
stronger relations with the Soviet Union, which had been engaged in a confrontational
relationship with China for a long time.26 Following the Sino-Soviet border conflict,
Soviet leader Leonid Brezhnev declared ‘systems of collective security for Asia’ in
1969 as a part of an Indo-centric policy under the fold of communism, which created
profound unease for the US.27 In response, China started to rethink its policy towards
the US, while President Nixon and his national security advisor Henry Kissinger used
Pakistan as a conduit to open diplomatic relations with China.28

In the 1970 Pakistan National Assembly election, the Awami League, led by
Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, gained a sweeping majority.29 However, in the
name of forming a national government, the military regime of Yahya Khan initiated
a negotiation process, which was aimed at delaying power transfer to East Pakistan.
Meanwhile, troops from West Pakistan were brought into East Pakistan secretly with

22
Mizanur Rahman Shelley, “Super Powers in Liberation War,” The Daily Star, December 16, 2012.
23
Dr. Muhammad Faridul Alam, interview with authors.
24
Himani Pant, “The Changing Contours of Russia’s South Asia Policy,” ORF Issue Brief, no. 193 (2017): 3.
25
Shelley, “Super Powers in Liberation War.”
26
Sergey Radchenko, “Sino-Soviet Relations in the 1970s and IR Theory,” in Misunderstanding Asia:
International Relations Theory and Asian Studies over Half a Century, ed. Gilbert Rozman (New York:
Palgrave Macmillan, 2015), 47.
27
Yasmin, “Bangladesh and the Great Powers,” 395–396.
28
Lorraine Boissoneault, “The Genocide the U.S. Can’t Remember, But Bangladesh Can’t Forget,” Smithsonian
Magazine, December 16, 2016.
29
Craig Baxter, “Pakistan Votes—1970,” Asian Survey 11, no. 3 (1971): 197–218.

98
 REVISITING BANGLADESH-RUSSIA RELATIONS

the intention of carrying out one of the world’s most notorious military campaigns,
codenamed ‘Operation Searchlight’. On the night of 25 March 1971, the Pakistani
army launched its genocidal campaign in erstwhile East Pakistan by mercilessly
killing thousands of unarmed, innocent Bengali populations within a single night.30
The Soviet Union was one of the leading countries that immediately criticised West
Pakistan’s genocidal activities against the general population of East Pakistan (later
Bangladesh). In an official message sent to President Yahya Khan, Soviet President
Nikolai Podgorny expressed his deep concern over the mass killings, oppression,
and arrest of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and other political leaders in East Pakistan.31
He also urged for a peaceful political solution to the situation, which gave life to the
Liberation War in Bangladesh.32

On the other hand, India signed a 20-year “Treaty of Peace, Friendship, and
Cooperation” with the Soviet Union on 09 August 1971.33 Although the treaty did not
assure India of any all-out defence from hostile countries, it successfully provided a
“deterring warning to both China and Pakistan,” as Gary J. Bass argued.34 Later in
September 1971, Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi visited Moscow to reassure the
military cooperation between India and the Soviet Union, which accelerated the security
threat towards Pakistan.35 On 03 December 1971, Pakistan launched a sudden strike
against India, which turned the Bangladesh Liberation War into the India-Pakistan War.36
Following several days of scuffles with Pakistani forces along its western border, India
thwarted an all-out invasion of East Pakistan on 06 December 1971. The US President
Nixon, doubting Indira Gandhi’s so-called Grand Design to conquer the whole of West
Pakistan, ordered Naval Task Force 74, which included the nuclear aircraft carrier
USS Enterprise, to proceed through the Malacca Straits into the Bay of Bengal.37 In
response, the Soviet Union dispatched two groups of cruisers and destroyers along with
a submarine armed with a nuclear weapon, which ensured stopping the US military

30
Taqbir Huda, “Remembering the Barbarities of Operation Searchlight,” The Daily Star, March 25, 2019.
31
Jubeda Chowdhury, “Russia, Bangladesh mark 50 years of friendly ties,” Asia Times, January 26, 2022.
32
Ankit Agarwal, “The United States and the Indo-Pakistani War of 1971: A Critical Inquiry,” Indian Journal
of Asian Affairs 27/28, no. 1/2 (2014–2015): 28.
33
Rudrajit Bose, “Genocide, Ethical Imperatives and the Strategic Significance of Asymmetric Power: India’s
Diplomatic and Military Interventions in the Bangladesh Liberation War (Indo-Pakistan War of 1971),”
Security Defense Quarterly 38, no. 2 (2022).
34
Shah Tazrian Ashrafi, “How the Cold War Shaped Bangladesh’s Liberation War,” The Diplomat, March 03,
2021.
35
Syed Waqar Ali Shah and Shaista Parveen, “Disintegration of Pakistan: The Role of Former Union of Soviet
Socialist Republic (USSR): An Appraisal,” Journal of the Research Society of Pakistan 53, no. 1 (2016): 183.
36
Prakash Pillai, “Indo-Pak War 1971,” The Hindustan Times, September 28, 2002.
37
Roger Vogler, “The Birth of Bangladesh: Nefarious Plots and Cold War Sideshows,” Pakistaniaat: A Journal
of Pakistan Studies 2, no. 3 (2010): 37.

99
BIISS JOURNAL, VOL. 45, NO. 1, JANUARY 2024

interference in Bangladesh.38 On 04 and 05 December 1971, the Soviet Union vetoed

twice the US attempt to enforce a ceasefire between Pakistan and India at the United
Nations Security Council (UNSC).39 All this evidence suggests how the geopolitical
calculations of the Cold War rivalry shaped the trajectory of Bangladesh’s Liberation
War and to what extent the Soviet Union played a monumental role in the process of
achieving Bangladesh’s victory over Pakistan (then West Pakistan).

Given the experiences of the Liberation War, Bangladesh forged trusted

relations with the Soviet Union. It was the first major global power to come forward
to establish diplomatic relations with Bangladesh on 25 January 1972, followed
by its political recognition only a day before.40 On 01 March 1972, Prime Minister
Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman paid his second official foreign visit to
Moscow (after India), heading a political and economic delegation. The Soviet
Premier Alexei N. Kosygin warmly welcomed Bangabandhu stating that—

“Sheikh Mujib’s visit will lay the foundation on which to build good
traditions of firm friendship and cooperation between two countries.”41

In reply, Bangabandhu expressed his gratefulness for Soviet moral and

diplomatic assistance during the liberation war of Bangladesh by noting that—

It was a “great revolutionary tradition that from the very beginning

placed the Soviet Government and the Soviet people on the side of
our struggle for justice and freedom.”42

Bangabandhu also urged for emergency aid from the Soviet Union. He stressed
on the need for food, medicine, transport equipment, and construction materials to
rebuild millions of destroyed homes and public infrastructure.43 Consequently, both
countries signed inter-governmental agreements relating to economic and technical

38
Field Marshal Sam Manekshaw, “Article on Indo-Pak War of 1971: You surrender or we wipe you out,
Field Marshal Sam Manekshaw’s message to Pakistan,” accessed November 12, 2023, https://static.mygov.
in/indiancc/2021/06/mygov-1000000000986806070.pdf.
39
“UN Security Council Veto List (1946–2004),” The Dag Hammarskjöld Library, accessed July 25, 2021,
https://research.un.org/en/docs/sc/quick/veto.
40
Chowdhury, “Russia, Bangladesh mark 50 years.”
41
Theodore Shabad, “Sheik Mujib, in Moscow, Opens Talks with Kosygin,” The New York Times, March 02,
1972.
42
Shabad, “Sheik Mujib, in Moscow.”
43
Shabad, “Sheik Mujib, in Moscow.”

100
 REVISITING BANGLADESH-RUSSIA RELATIONS

assistance, air services, trade, and cultural and scientific cooperation.44 However, Soviet
aid to Bangladesh was far lower than expected. By March 1973, Bangladesh received
US$136 million worth of assistance from the Soviet Union, while more than US$318
million came from the US (the largest till that time) and US$262 million from India (the
second largest).45 Nevertheless, Bangabandhu preferred to sustain amicable relations
with the Soviet Union in order to get continuous diplomatic and moral assistance on
international platforms and to remain under the Soviet security umbrella given the
harsh realities of the Cold War at the systemic level. On the question of Bangladesh’s
admission into the United Nations (UN), for instance, the Soviet Union extended
wholehearted support and took a firm stand against Chinese opposition. On 25 August
1972, in response to the Chinese veto against Bangladesh’s application for the UN
membership, the Soviet representative at the UNSC stated that—

“The Chinese delegation, however, has obstructed the admission of

Bangladesh to the United Nations. The irony is that opposition was voiced to the
universality of the United Nations by the representatives of a country which was itself
for more than 20 years the victim of gross discrimination, and which was deprived
by imperialist forces...”46

The proclamation indicated the Soviet commitment to Bangladesh. After

struggling for years, Bangladesh attained UN membership on 17 September 1974,
which further consolidated its relationship with the Soviet Union.

Under the leadership of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, Bangladesh

followed the Soviet model of economic development by nationalising some of its
industries. However, Sheikh Mujib carefully followed a non-aligned foreign policy
based on the dictum of “friendship with all, malice toward none”. Before the 1973
National Elections of Bangladesh, the Soviet Union attempted to bring Bangladesh
under the socialist bloc, which irked the Sheikh Mujib regime and resulted in the
recall of Soviet Ambassador V. F. Popov from Dhaka.47 Later in February 1974,
Bangladesh became a member of the Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC) (now
Organisation of Islamic Cooperation) despite Indian and Soviet reservations. These

44
“Overview of Russia-Bangladesh Relations,” Russian Embassy in Bangladesh, accessed February 04, 2022,
https://bangladesh.mid.ru/bilateral-relations.
45
Bernard Weinraub, “U.S. Has Top Role in Bangladesh Aid,” The New York Times, March 10, 1973.
46
“UN Security Council Official Records (1975),” accessed February 15, 2022, https://documents-dds-ny.
un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N75/821/81/PDF/N7582181.pdf?OpenElement.
47
Mohammad Abdul Halim, “Foreign Policy: A Review,” in Bangladesh on the Threshold of the Twenty-First
Century, eds. Chowdhury Abdulla Momin and Fakrul Alam (Dhaka: Asiatic Society of Bangladesh, 2002).

101
BIISS JOURNAL, VOL. 45, NO. 1, JANUARY 2024

incidents demonstrate Bangabandhu’s bold and independent foreign policy outlook

as a leader. Moreover, Bangabandhu pursued a smart foreign policy to get the most
out of the Cold War atmosphere and sought economic assistance from the US and
its Western allies in the face of dire need for food and financial resources on the one
hand and insufficient economic support from the Indo-Soviet axis on the other.

Following the August 1975 tragedy, numerous constitutional, economic, and

political changes were brought under successive regimes in Bangladesh, which fetched
grave consequences in regard to the country’s relationship with the Soviet Union.
Under the military regime of General Ziaur Rahman (1975–1981), Bangladesh’s
foreign policy substantially shifted towards the US, China, Pakistan, and the Arab
world, which resulted in serious disappointments for India and the Soviet Union.48
By banning pro-Soviet political parties, General Zia established closer ties with
China. At the official level, Bangladesh and China exchanged numerous visits during
General Zia’s regime, which caused irritation for the Soviet Union.49 Moreover,
General Zia’s position in line with the Islamic states against the 1979 Soviet invasion
of Afghanistan further deteriorated the relationship between Bangladesh and the
Soviet Union.50 When Soviet-supported Vietnamese troops occupied Cambodia in
late 1978, Bangladesh immediately condemned the occupation. During the Iranian
hostage crisis in 1979, Bangladesh played a strong role, which solidified Bangladesh-
US relations and naturally weakened its relations with the Soviets. In this way,
General Ziaur Rahman preferred to maintain a reluctant foreign policy towards the
Soviet Union which plunged the bilateral relations to a historic low.

The downturn in Bangladesh-Soviet relations reached its nadir with the seizure
of state power by General H. M. Ershad in 1982. General Ershad emulated mostly
General Ziaur Rahman’s foreign policy, except for resetting a working relationship
with India and revamping a closer partnership with Japan. Referring to the Soviet
Union in an interview with The New York Times, General Ershad stated that—

“We cannot trust them so much. They are very crude. They have such a
mighty military machine…We are really scared about what they may do next.”51

48
Rupak Bhattacharjee, “Growing Russia-Bangladesh Ties and Their Implications for South Asia,” Society for
Policy Studies Insight (2015): 1–2.
49
Mohammad Amjad Hossain, “Foreign Policy under Ziaur Rahman,” The Daily Star, May 31, 2008.
50
Andrio Drong, “The Effects of Political Changes in the Relationship between Bangladesh and Russia (USSR)
in 1971—2014,” RUDN University Journal Series of International Relations, no. 1 (2015): 188.
51
Colin Campbell, “Bangladesh Military Leader Says He Fears Soviet,” The New York Times, April 11, 1982.

102
 REVISITING BANGLADESH-RUSSIA RELATIONS

Figure 1: Soviet Union’s Trade with Bangladesh, 1981-91(in million US$)52

90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991
Import from Bangladesh Export to Bangladesh

In late 1983, charged with association with political elements, the Ershad
regime summoned Soviet Ambassador Valentin P. Stepanov and asked him to reduce
his diplomatic staff from 36 to 18, while the Soviet Cultural Centre in Dhaka was
ordered to close with immediate effect.53 However, the relations got better, if not
warm, in the following years. In 1984, a delegation visited the Soviet Union to attend
President Chernenko’s funeral, which initiated the rapprochement process in bilateral
relations. Following the visit, the Soviet Cultural Centre in Dhaka was reopened,
and the Soviet Union announced US$80 million worth of credit to Bangladesh for
developing electricity generation plants.54 The Bangladesh-Soviet bilateral trade
during 1981–1991 (Figure 1) reflects a moderate volume of trade with an inconsistent
trade balance. Although the Soviet Union’s exports to Bangladesh rose significantly
in 1986, the overall bilateral trade slowed down by 1991. In sum, like General Ziaur
Rahman, General Ershad was also personally reluctant to advance relations with the
Soviets. Both the leaders perceived India as the biggest threat to their regimes and
utilised the Cold War dynamics to maintain closer relations with the US so that an
external balancing could be possible against India.

The collapse of the Soviet Union brought a substantial shift at the systemic level
by turning the bipolar world order into a unipolar one led by the US. Consequently, the
Russian Federation emerged as the prime successor state, carrying the shadow of power
and influence of the former Soviet Union. However, in its initial years, Russia faced an
economic downturn and struggled through the transition from a command economy to

52
Prepared by the authors based on data collected from IMF Direction of Trade Statistics 1981-1991.
53
“Around the World; Bangladesh Said to Ask Soviet to Cut Embassy,” The New York Times, December 01,
1983.
54
Peter J. Bertocci, “Bangladesh in 1985: Resolute Against the Storms,” Asian Survey 26, no. 2 (1986): 232.

103
BIISS JOURNAL, VOL. 45, NO. 1, JANUARY 2024

a market-based one. The country also experienced unstable political conditions, ethnic
problems, and tensions posed by numerous administrative regions seeking greater
autonomy. Throughout the 1990s, Russia tried to redefine its identity as well as its
relationship with the US and the West. Under President Boris Yeltsin, Russia showed its
intention to build a new relationship with the West as an equal but independent power
with a voice to determine global policies and priorities. In reality, neither the West nor
Russia were able to do so. After Vladimir Putin’s ascendance to power in 1999, he also
attempted to reset favourable relations with the West. However, the expansion of the
NATO, along with events such as the bombing in Serbia, support for an independent
Kosovo, regime changes in Iraq and Libya, and US engagements in Syria, helped Putin
overhaul Russia’s foreign policy. Under the Putin administration, rebuilding Russia’s
position as a great power and creating resistance to the US and its Western allies have
been the Kremlin’s key foreign policy and national security objectives.

In 1991, democracy was restored in Bangladesh, and Begum Khaleda

Zia, wife of General Ziaur Rahman, was elected Prime Minister. On 29 December
1991, Bangladesh officially recognised the Russian Federation as a successor state
of the Soviet Union, while in January 1992, Mustafizur Rahman, the then Foreign
Minister of Bangladesh, emphasised expanding bilateral trade relations during his
visit to Moscow. The Begum Zia regime, however, maintained the foreign policy of
General Ziaur Rahman and less interest was shown in developing further relations
with Russia given the systemic transition to unipolarity. When Awami League leader
Sheikh Hasina, daughter of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, was elected
Prime Minister in 1996, Bangladesh-Russia relations began to take a better shape.
Based on historical trust and mutual benefits, both countries attempted to expand
their bilateral connections in the areas of defence, trade, investment, and energy. In
1999, Bangladesh purchased eight MiG-29 fighters from Russia for US$124 million,
attesting to emerging security cooperation between the countries.55

In the 2001 national elections, Begum Khaleda Zia was reelected. Her
Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) government brought corruption allegations
against its political archrival, the Awami League led by Sheikh Hasina, regarding
the purchase of MiG-29 aircraft and put those up for sale, claiming that Bangladesh
could not afford the maintenance cost. This gradually deteriorated Bangladesh’s
relationship with Russia. Begum Zia’s regime continued similar foreign policy
priorities as that of her first term by nurturing friendly relations with Pakistan, China,
the US, Japan, South Korea, and the Muslim countries. Later, the power transition
period in Bangladesh under the caretaker regime from 2007 to 2009 witnessed

55
Yasmin, “Bangladesh and the Great Powers,” 395–396.

104
 REVISITING BANGLADESH-RUSSIA RELATIONS

balanced relations with the major powers. A notable development during this period
was the signing of a consular agreement with Russia in 2007 by the then foreign
advisor of Bangladesh.56 While focusing on the bilateral trade between Bangladesh
and Russia since 1992 (see, Figure 2), it is observed that the overall trade volume
reached its lowest point in 2002. However, the trade volume kept growing in the
following years, except in 2009 and 2010. Although import volume from Russia has
been inconsistent throughout the years, exports to Russia have continued to grow
since 2006. Interestingly, it is difficult to understand Bangladesh’s overall relations
with Russia based on their bilateral trade.

Figure 2: Bangladesh’s Trade with Russia, 1992-2011 (in million US$)57

500

400

300

200

100

0
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Import from Russia Export To Russia

Since 2009, as Sheikh Hasina came to power through a democratic transition

with a huge majority, Bangladesh’s relations with Russia have resumed with greater
cooperation, particularly in the areas of defence, foreign assistance, trade, and energy.
During the International Tiger Conservation Forum in 2010, Prime Minister Sheikh
Hasina met President Putin on the sidelines and sought assistance from Russia for
building the Rooppur Nuclear Power Plant (NPP) in Bangladesh, signing a long-term
food-grain and fertiliser agreement, investing in natural gas exploration, and training
defence personnel.58 The Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Alexey N. Borodavkin met
former Foreign Minister Dipu Moni at the 40th anniversary of Bangladeshi independence
celebration ceremony in Moscow, where the Deputy Foreign Minister stated “We are
expecting Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina in Moscow shortly, and the relations will

56
Iftekhar Ahmed Chowdhury, “Dhaka-Moscow Relations: Old Ties Renewed,” ISAS Working Paper, no. 167
(2013): 10.
57
Prepared by the authors based on data collected from IMF Direction of Trade Statistics 1992-2011.
58
“Hasina Talks Nuke Plants with Putin,” The Daily Star, November 24, 2010.

105
BIISS JOURNAL, VOL. 45, NO. 1, JANUARY 2024

gain more momentum through her visit”.59 The statement signifies Russian interest in
strengthening mutual cooperation with Bangladesh. The bilateral trade relations also
entered a renaissance period after a lapse of many years when the Sheikh Hasina regime
called for profound attention towards Russia. Several business delegations paid visits
to Russia to expand trade opportunities. For instance, a delegation of the Bangladesh
Knitwear Manufacturers and Exporters Association (BKMEA) visited Moscow in 2012
and signed US$10 million in trade deals with Russian companies.60 From 2010 to 2011,
bilateral trade between Bangladesh and Russia increased by 40 per cent, while exports
to Russia observed massive growth (see, Figure 2).

Consequently, Sheikh Hasina paid an official visit to Russia in January

2013, the first-ever state visit by a Bangladeshi Prime Minister in 40 years after
Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman’s visit to Moscow in 1972. The visit worked
as an underpinning for concrete Bangladesh-Russia relations. The countries signed ten
agreements and memorandum of understanding (MoU) to establish cooperation in the
areas of nuclear energy, weaponry supply, oil and gas exploration, and space. After
signing the agreements, Sheikh Hasina stated at the joint press conference that—

“I believe the agreements would place our relationship on a firm footing and
help in taking practical initiatives in the future.”61

It was, however, not the systemic constraints alone that guided Bangladesh’s
foreign policy towards Russia during the last decade. In fact, if we closely analyse
Sheikh Hasina’s ‘development first’ approach, delineated initially under “Vision
2021” and later under “Vision 2041” policies, we see how the priority of leadership
shaped the foreign policy objectives of Bangladesh. Accordingly, Prime Minister
Sheikh Hasina has been pursuing an independent, proactive, balanced, non-aligned,
and peace-loving foreign policy approach.62 The approach has enabled Bangladesh to
extend hands of cooperation to Russia.

During the 2013 Russia visit of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, a US$1 billion
defence deal, the largest ever in Bangladesh’s history, was signed to purchase military
hardware on a 4.5 per cent interest rate and an 18-year repayment period.63 Dhaka
and Moscow also agreed to collaborate on counter-terrorism initiatives and establish
59
“Moscow for stronger ties with Dhaka,” The Daily Star, April 07, 2011.
60
Alexander A. Nikolaev, “The Russia-Bangladesh Relationship,” Dhaka Tribune, June 12, 2013.
61
Dadan Upadhyay, “Hasina’s Visit: Russia Edges Out China from Bangladesh,” Russia Beyond (January 18,
2013).
62
Sheikh Shams Morsalin, “From Cold War to ‘New Cold War’: Bangladesh Foreign Policy vis-à-vis the
United States and Russia,” The Journal of Bangladesh and Global Affairs 01, no. 01 (2022): 123–141.
63
Syed Fattahul Alim, “Diplomatic dimensions of Russian arms deal,” The Daily Star, January 21, 2013.

106
 REVISITING BANGLADESH-RUSSIA RELATIONS

a long-term defence partnership based on shared interests, trust, and credibility.64 In

2013, the Metis-M tank-destroyer missile was purchased from Russia to modernise
Bangladesh’s military.65 In accordance with its previous defence agreements,
Bangladesh signed a deal with Russia in April 2015 to purchase six Mil Mi-171Sh
combat transport helicopters, including one Mi-171E medium-lift transport aircraft.66
During 2015–16, 17 Russian Yak-130 trainers and six Russian MI161SH helicopters
were procured.67

It is worth mentioning that Russia has long been Bangladesh’s dependable

partner in the energy sector. The power plants in Ghorashal and Siddhirganj,
constructed with Soviet assistance, are still contributing almost 20 per cent of
Bangladesh’s electricity production. Following the signing of an agreement on the
construction of the Rooppur NPP at Dhaka in 2011, Russia concluded a deal in 2015
to provide around US$12 billion in credit to Bangladesh. Consequently, the Inter-
governmental Agreement on the Allocation of Loans for Funding the Construction of
the Main Phase of the NPP was signed in Moscow on 26 July 2016. Russian energy
giant Rosatom has provided the first shipment of uranium fuel in order to accelerate
the energy production in Rooppur Nuclear Plant in 2023.

Table 1: Basic Facts of Rooppur NPP68

Unit Type Capacity Construction Start Commercial Operation

Reactor 1 VVER-1200/V-523 1200MW 2017 2023/2024
Reactor 2 VVER-1200/V-523 1200MW 2018 2024/2025

In March 2018, a tripartite MoU on cooperation for developing the Rooppur

NPP was signed among Bangladesh, Russia, and India, allowing Indian experts and
mechanics to work on the project.69 In May 2020, Bangladesh and Russia signed
a US$287.49 million agreement to develop a physical protection system (PPS) for
Rooppur NPP.70 Earlier in 2012, based on the Russian commitment to ensure the
64
Bhattacharjee, “Growing Russia-Bangladesh Ties,” 1–2.
65
Pathik Hasan, “50 years of Russia-Bangladesh bilateral relations: Development, assistance and economic
ties,” The Independent, November 03, 2021.
66
Franz-Stefan Gady, “Bangladesh to Purchase 7 Combat-Transport Helicopters from Russia,” The Diplomat,
August 24, 2015.
67
Hasan, “50 years of Russia-Bangladesh bilateral relations.”
68
Hydrocarbon Unit, Energy and Mineral Resources Division, Ministry of Power, Energy and Mineral
Resources of Bangladesh, 2019.
69
“Bangladesh, India, Russia ink MoU for Rooppur Power Plant Implementation,” The Daily Star, March 02, 2018.
70
“Rooppur nuke plant: $287.49m deal signed for physical protection system,” The Financial Express, May 29,
2020.

107
BIISS JOURNAL, VOL. 45, NO. 1, JANUARY 2024

energy security of Bangladesh, two agreements between Petro-Bangla and Russian

Gazprom EP International were signed.71 Accordingly, Gazprom finished digging ten
wells in different gas fields in Bangladesh in 2014. Gazprom signed another deal
in 2015 to drill five more wells. Later in January 2020, Gazprom and Bangladesh
Petroleum Exploration and Production Company Limited (BAPEX) signed an MoU
for gas exploration in Shahbazpur and Bhola North. Recently, following the fuel price
hike caused by the Ukraine War, Bangladesh has been seriously pondering Russian
crude oil imports as a sustainable alternative solution to the country’s ever-increasing
energy demand. All these cooperation initiatives demonstrate Russia’s significant
position in Bangladesh’s foreign policy considerations.

Figure 3: Bangladesh-Russia Bilateral Trade, 2012-2019 (In million US$)72

700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Import from Russia Export To Russia

During Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina’s Russia visit in 2013, where two
agreements and six MoUs were signed in the areas of bilateral trade, investments, and
business, the Bangladeshi Prime Minister urged for quota-free access to the Russian
market. Following the visits of Bangladesh’s Foreign Minister to the UN headquarters
in 2016, Bangladesh’s trade with Russia started to show an increasing trend since
2016 (see, Figure 3). The trade relations were further advanced in 2017 through the
signing of an agreement with Russia to form the “Inter-governmental Commission on
Trade, Economic, Scientific, and Technical Cooperation”.73 Subsequently, Bangladesh
extended its economic diplomacy toward the US$52 billion Russian market.74 In May
2018, Bangladesh arranged a “Textile and Jute Fair” in Moscow, where Bangladesh
71
Mohammad Arifuzzaman, “Russia’s Gazprom gets priority over BAPEX,” The Prothom Alo, October 02,
2019.
72
Prepared by the authors based on data collected from IMF Direction of Trade Statistics 2012–2019.
73
“Bangladesh, Russia Sign Agreement to Open ‘New Horizon’ in Bilateral Relations,” bdnews24.com, March
01, 2017.
74
Mahfuz Nayem, “Bangladesh Targets to Catch Russia’s $50 Billion Clothing Market,” Textile Today, May 11,
2018.

108
 REVISITING BANGLADESH-RUSSIA RELATIONS

expressed its desire to expand not only bilateral trade relations with Russia but also
accelerate trade relations with the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS).75
In 2021, Bangladesh emerged as Russia’s major trading partner in South Asia, with
bilateral trade volume exceeding US$2.5 billion, indicating the Inter-Governmental
Commission’s success and a bourgeoning partnership between Bangladesh and Russia.76

Moreover, throughout the last decade, Bangladesh has extended

unprecedented diplomatic support to Russia on international platforms, particularly
at the UN bodies. Following the Russian annexation of Crimea, Bangladesh abstained
from voting against Russia regarding the UN resolution on the issue.77 In September
2016, Bangladesh signed an agreement with Russia on a “Visa-Free Visit for Persons
Holding Diplomatic and Official Passports,” which marked a crucial reinforcement
of diplomatic relations between the countries.78 The agreement came into force in
February 2017. During the consecutive visits of Bangladesh’s foreign minister to
Russia and in different diplomatic dialogues since 2017, Bangladesh expressed
grave concern regarding the forcibly displaced Rohingyas of Myanmar. The country
also urged the Russian government to mediate the repatriation process through a
“trilateral initiative,” given Moscow’s close relations with Naypyidaw.79 Russia,
however, voted against all the resolutions and statements relating to the Rohingya
issues and humanitarian conditions in Myanmar that were put forth at the UN
General Assembly (UNGA) and UNSC. Nevertheless, Bangladesh continued to view
Russia as an important player in resolving the Rohingya crisis and sought diplomatic
assistance from the country. Recently, in the face of the Ukraine War, Bangladesh has
proved its diplomatic commitment to Russia once again by taking a neutral stance.
Despite massive pressure from the West, Bangladesh abstained from voting against
Russia concerning the UNGA resolution in March 2022, which criticised the Russian
invasion of Ukraine.80 Later in April 2022, Bangladesh also refrained from voting on
suspending Russia’s membership in the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC).81 In
response, Alexander Mantytskiy, the Russian Ambassador to Bangladesh, expressed
special gratitude to Bangladesh for its ‘responsible and balanced’ attitude, which
hastens bilateral relations between the two countries further. From analysing the

75
“BD should utilize the possibility of long-term export opportunity in Russia,” Textile Today, May 28, 2018.
76
“Bangladesh Russia’s major trading partner in South Asia,” The Business Standard, January 24, 2022.
77
Arafat Kabir, “Crimea and Bangladesh: Behind the Controversy,” The Diplomat, April 10, 2014.
78
“Bangladesh, Russia agree on visa-free system for diplomats, officials,” bdnews24.com, September 23, 2016.
79
Mujib Mashal and Karan Deep Singh, “India and Russia Expand Defense Ties, Despite Prospect of U.S.
Sanctions,” The New York Times, December 06, 2021.
80
“Bangladesh abstains from UN resolution criticizing Russia’s invasion of Ukraine,” Dhaka Tribune, March
03, 2022.
81
“Bangladesh abstains from voting on suspending Russia’s membership of UN Human Rights Council,” The
Daily Star, April 08, 2022.

109
BIISS JOURNAL, VOL. 45, NO. 1, JANUARY 2024

historical overview of Bangladesh’s relations with Russia, it is clear that systemic

constraints and leadership factors play crucial roles regarding the foreign policy
behaviours of the states.

4. Factors that Influenced Bangladesh’s Foreign Policy toward Russia

The formulation of foreign policy is essential to any country’s worldwide

external goals and objectives. A country’s pursuit of a set of principles in the domain
of international politics is known as its foreign policy. Like the foreign policies
of other countries, Bangladesh is influenced by the dynamics of the international
system, domestic politics, and the key actors who shape it. This section examines
the significant international and domestic determinants that affected Bangladesh’s
foreign policy toward Russia in light of bilateral relations between the two countries.

4.1 Systemic Factors

Given the reality of international politics, the international system plays

a significant role in determining Bangladesh’s foreign policy towards Russia.
The systemic elements of the international order, such as the distribution of
world power, alliances, and institutions, influence Bangladesh’s foreign policy.82
The key takeaways are that all the regimes in Bangladesh that ruled during the
Cold War and post-Cold War eras were well aware of the systemic constraints
defined in terms of bipolarity and multipolarity, respectively.83 Since Vladimir
Putin’s return as President of Russia in 2012, following a four-year spell as
Prime Minister, the country has started to expand its global reach. To advance
its wide range of objectives in Europe and beyond, Russia relied not only on
military instruments but also on diplomacy, intelligence, energy, cyberspace,
trade, and different financial tools. In response to the mass protests of 2012 in
Moscow, which were viewed as Western propagation, President Putin decided to
go for a hardline policy against the US and the West. In 2014, Russia annexed
the strategically significant region of Crimea and launched an undeclared war in
Ukraine to continue to exert pressure on its new West-backed regime and keep
the region as a natural buffer zone for Russia. For other former Soviet Republics,
Russia holds a similar mindset and considers them a zone of fundamental Russian
interest where it would not allow any foreign dominance. In its National Security
Strategy document of 2015, Russia identified the US and its NATO allies as the
82
Dr. Delwar Hossain, Professor, Department of International Relations, University of Dhaka, interview with
the authors, June 16, 2023.
83
Dr. Muhammad Faridul Alam, interview with authors.

110
 REVISITING BANGLADESH-RUSSIA RELATIONS

main threats to the country and accused the West of depriving Russia of its fair
position in the international arena.84

Russia’s rise may also be realised through its active engagements in other
regions of the world. For instance, it has emerged as a prominent power in the Middle
East lately. Russia’s close ties with Iran and Syria have provided Russia with special
leverage in the region. Unlike his Soviet predecessors, President Putin is not attached to
any ideological agenda, which gives considerable flexibility to Russian foreign policy.
Moreover, Moscow has been able to establish good working relations with Turkey, Saudi
Arabia, and Israel. In Asia, Russia is closely cooperating with China to create a new
world order.85 Both countries prefer a multipolar world, opposing the primacy of the US
in global affairs. They are also supporting each other at the UN and other international
platforms while having growing trade relations and energy cooperation. However,
the cornerstone of the relationship has been a close personal bond between President
Putin and President Xi Jinping, as they both share a similar global vision for the near
future. Russia also cherishes historical ties with India. The Indo-Russian relationship is
primarily based on military-technical cooperation. In late 2021, President Putin visited
India and signed a ten-year defence cooperation deal along with 28 agreements across a
variety of sectors. The two countries also set an objective to increase their bilateral trade
to US$30 billion and their investments to US$50 billion by the year 2025.86 All these
examples represent Russia’s strong footing in the major regions of the world.

At the systemic level, the waning unipolar role of the US coupled with the
evolving importance of Russia, China, and India indicate the advent of multipolarity.
This new development has had a significant impact on Bangladesh’s foreign policy
outlook. After Vladimir Putin’s ascendance as Russian President, Bangladesh,
under the premiership of Sheikh Hasina, felt the urge to take bilateral relations to
a unique height. However, Bangladesh is aware of the power relationships in the
globalised world order and how they affect foreign policy decisions, especially in
light of Russia’s position as a major player in world politics.87 For instance, there was
a global outcry when Russia annexed Crimea, and many nations denounced Russia’s
aggressive action. However, Bangladesh adopted a neutral stance on the matter,
indicating that it was not in its best interest to enrage a strong nation like Russia.
In addition, Bangladesh decided to abstain from voting on the first UN resolution

84
Robert E. Berls Jr, “Strengthening Russia’s Influence in International Affairs, Part I: The Quest for
Great Power Status,” The Nuclear Threat Initiative, July 13, 2021, https://www.nti.org/analysis/articles/
strengthening-russias-influence-in-international-affairs-part-i-the-quest-for-great-power-status/.
85
Dr. Muhammad Faridul Alam, interview with authors.
86
Mashal and Singh, “India and Russia Expand Defense Ties.”
87
Dr. Muhammad Faridul Alam, interview with the authors.

111
BIISS JOURNAL, VOL. 45, NO. 1, JANUARY 2024

regarding Ukraine and to vote in favour of the second UNGA resolution regarding
Ukraine in order to avoid taking a stance that was too clear-cut, especially in light of
the country’s close historical and strategic ties with Russia.88

4.2 Domestic Factors—Particularly Leadership Issue

The perception and assessment of individual leaders played substantial

role in forming the country’s foreign policy choices and priorities. Leadership
factor is an intervening variable in Bangladesh’s foreign policy formulation and
decision-making process vis-à-vis Russia during the Cold War and Post-Cold
War eras.89 Under the leadership of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, Bangladesh
perceives the growing significance of Russia in the global power structure and
considers it to be an important actor in shaping the country’s foreign policy. The
personal rapport between Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina and President Vladimir
Putin is one of the crucial leadership aspects that influence relations between the
two countries.90 The fact that both the leaders have signed a number of MoUs and
agreements based on strategic and economic realities has been crucial in fostering
the bilateral relationship’s growing warmth. Following an extended meeting with
Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina in 2013, President Putin signed several agreements
concerning trade, energy, and defence cooperation. The agreements between
Bangladesh and Russia for the construction of the Rooppur NPP in 2017 are also
a result of Bangladesh’s outstanding foreign policy leadership.91 Additionally,
the regular official visits of Bangladesh’s Foreign Ministers to Russia are of
the utmost significance in regulating the two countries’ bilateral relations. The
Russian President and the Bangladeshi Foreign Ministers met in 2020, and their
talks were extremely productive, accelerating bilateral and regional development
cooperation in the areas of energy and defence. Abdul Momen, the former Foreign
Minister of Bangladesh, visited Russia and made the most of every opportunity to
interact with Russian officials, diplomats, and leaders in order to advance bilateral
cooperation. The regular official meetings of the Foreign Ministries of Russia and
Bangladesh further hasten bilateral relations between the two countries, particularly
during COVID-19, when the Russian government gave humanitarian assistance
to Bangladesh.92 Thus, the leadership factor plays a significant role in bilateral
relations between Bangladesh and Russia.
88
Md. Ali Siddique, Assistant Professor, Department of International Relations, University of Dhaka, interview
with the authors, June 05, 2023.
89
Md. Ali Siddique, interview with the authors.
90
Md. Ali Siddique, interview with the authors.
91
Md. Ali Siddique, interview with the authors.
92
Dr. Delwar Hossain, interview with the authors.

112
 REVISITING BANGLADESH-RUSSIA RELATIONS

5. Future Outlook of Bangladesh-Russia Relations

Although relations between Bangladesh and Russia have significantly

improved recently, much will depend on political circumstances in Bangladesh, such
as governmental changes and the country’s political environment. The relationship
between Bangladesh and Russia reached its highest level of cooperation under the
Awami League regimes, while it was at its lowest point under other regimes. As a
result of the leadership of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, in recent years, the bilateral
ties between the two countries have significantly improved in the areas of trade,
energy, and defence. The need for Bangladesh to broaden its strategic partners in Asia
and Russia’s increased interest in diversifying its strategic posture in the region will
likely drive further expansion and deepening of relations between the two nations
in the years to come, though future regime changes in Bangladesh will be crucial.
Bangladesh offers a compelling opportunity for Russia to increase its geopolitical clout
in the region due to its advantageous location in the Bay of Bengal and its potential
as a market for Russian investments.93 Additionally, Russia’s increasing tensions with
the Western nations, particularly the US and the European Union, are a contributing
factor in the country’s pivot towards Asia. Due to Russia’s 2014 annexation of Crimea
and ongoing involvement in the conflict in Ukraine, which led to the imposition of
economic sanctions by the Western nations on Russia, tensions have further escalated.
Thus, in order to lessen its reliance on the West and to show that it is capable of forging
strategic alliances outside of its conventional alliances, Russia can seek to strengthen
its economic ties with Asian countries, including Bangladesh.

Furthermore, there are a number of areas that both countries are eager to
develop and strengthen their bilateral ties. For instance, Russia’s exports to Bangladesh
have grown significantly over time and reached US$1.7 billion in 2020, indicating
a clear future for bilateral trade between the two countries. However, Bangladesh is
becoming more interested in importing Russian high-tech goods and equipment, which
presents a significant opportunity for the latter to diversify its exports to the former.
The joint venture of Rosatom and the Bangladesh Atomic Energy Commission to
build a nuclear power plant is a significant investment of US$12.65 billion that will
increase cooperation in the energy sector further. Russia’s desire to take an active role
in South Asia and Bangladesh’s mission to transform its economy will influence how
both nations conduct business and interact with one another in the future. Additionally,
Bangladesh has significant potential in the textile, pharmaceutical, and agricultural
industries, where both nations can support to develop their respective industries, while
Russia has expertise in the fields of energy, defence, and space technology.94 The two
93
Dr. Delwar Hossain, interview with the authors.
94
Dr. Muhammad Faridul Alam, interview with the authors.

113
BIISS JOURNAL, VOL. 45, NO. 1, JANUARY 2024

countries will harness their defence cooperation further, as they have already signed a
US$1 billion defence cooperation agreement.95 The student exchange programme can
harness people-to-people contact, which will accelerate business and technological
cooperation between the states, although Russia needs to address the restrictive visa
regime for Bangladesh. Last but not least, Bangladesh can harness its bilateral relations
with Russia in the sector of the blue economy, where Bangladesh can use Russian
technology in order to extract resources from the ocean.

6. Conclusion

Bangladesh and Russia celebrate five decades of their bilateral relations at

a time when the systemic and sub-systemic levels of international politics are taking
new shapes, particularly following the outbreak of the Ukraine War in February
2022. To study how Bangladesh would pursue its foreign policy vis-à-vis Russia
in the coming years under the given reality, this paper happens to be an interesting
reference point. Resorting to the theoretical framework of neoclassical realism, the
paper made an attempt to analyse Bangladesh’s foreign policy towards Russia (the
then Soviet Union) since 1971. Neoclassical realism, as it effectively synthesises
classical realism and neorealism, has been utilised here because of its greater ability
to examine a country’s foreign policy. The paper presents that the relative power
distribution at the systemic level historically created constraints on the foreign policy-
making process in Bangladesh. At the same time, domestic factors—the leadership
factor in this case—played a crucial intervening role in the ultimate shaping of the
country’s foreign policy. It is also observed that under a similar international power
structure, foreign policy choices and priorities considerably differed from leadership
to leadership. In general, the paper represents Bangladesh’s deep-rooted relationship
with Russia based on its critical role during the 1971 Liberation War. Despite this fact,
bilateral relations remained less productive compared to their potential. However,
under the premiership of Sheikh Hasina, bilateral relations started to experience a
renaissance in the areas of defence, energy, trade, and diplomatic cooperation. The
very answer to this change in the trajectory of bilateral relations lies in the shifting
global power structure and the domestic leadership factor, which the paper unwraps
throughout Bangladesh-Russia relations. Above all, the paper analyses how effective
neoclassical realism could act as a theoretical tool to understand a country’s foreign
policy behaviour towards another.

95
“Russia grants Bangladesh $1 billion loan for weapons: Putin,” Reuters, January 15, 2013, https://www.
reuters.com/article/us-russia-bangladesh-idUSBRE90E0HM20130115.

114

View publication stats