Public opinion is mixed regarding the tensions between India and Pakistan and their economic implications, particularly for Pakistan. While there is skepticism about heightened hostility towards India, some believe tensions will impact the economy in the short term, but economic interests will dominate in the long run. There are concerns about potential Narendra Modi-led policies, economic repercussions for investors, and shifts in regional trade. Additionally, there is a belief that the business community might prioritize economic interests over political issues.

India

Pakistan

Bangladesh

Politically both countries can hate each other but people supplying and buying products are businessmen. They won't let politics affect their wallets

Severe-Ad-6378

We are not hostile towards India, it’s India that has been spreading propaganda non-stop since August. And no why would foreign investors care about Bangladesh-India relations?

Musa-2219

Might be issue short term, better in long term if we stop relying on India.

&gt;will those foreign companies come to us knowing that we are hostile against a neighboring country

We are not hostile to India, India is hostile to us, and they are not treating us any better then Pakistan. Heck Pakistan is treated better and with respect. While Bengalis are seen as beggar cockroaches on the streets.

India is 22 times bigger then Bangladesh, but the GDP is only 8 times bigger. But anyways if Bangladeshis had any spine, or spec of self respect they wouldn't deal with India. But Bangladeshis are pathetic and low self respect that's why we will see posts like this.

https://preview.redd.it/acak7sw3x94e1.jpeg?width=526&amp;format=pjpg&amp;auto=webp&amp;s=400c23456382a0c93ff1535998a9fda0bc082d95

Master-Khalifa

Bangladesh's GDP stands at $437 billion, while the Indian state of Maharashtra alone surpasses this with a GDP of $481.46 billion. However, the remaining 33 Indian states and union territories have individual GDPs lower than Bangladesh. Tamil Nadu, India's second-highest GDP state at $324 billion, is $113 billion behind Bangladesh.

If Bangladesh were a part of India, it would rank as the second richest state, following Maharashtra. However, India often positions Bangladesh as a poorer country in discussions, framing economic exports from India as acts of charity, an approach tied to India's societal psyche and confidence-building narratives.

Bangladesh is a crucial trade partner for India, importing significant quantities of agricultural and energy products. For example, India's egg exports find a substantial market in Bangladesh. Without this, other Indian states would struggle to buy at competitive prices, impacting India's farmers and tax revenues. Similarly, India's energy exports, like the Adani Group's power sales from the Godda plant, rely heavily on Bangladesh.

Bangladesh's economic strength, compared to Maharashtra, emphasizes the need for respectful and mutually beneficial trade relations rather than condescension. In contrast, India's trade deficit heavily relies on remittances, of which $5 billion comes from Bangladesh.

The distinction between civilizational states, like China, and modern "patchwork" states highlights the challenges India faces in achieving economic coherence. China, with its history as an economic and technological hub, contrasts with India, whose claims to greatness rest primarily on Mughal-era history. As a result, India's trajectory towards a "superpower" identity lacks the civilizational foundation seen in other global powers.

tomas_mamud

taszid0001

Philippines have serious spars with China, and yet no foreign company avoids them.

WorriedBig2948

It is difficult to predict these things. As a nation we should have economic partnership with as many countries as possible. And, most importantly we should ramp up our production in the coming years since our labour cost is one of the lowest on earth. Had we done these things before, we would not have these concerns as we are having now.

Middle_Departure_811

In the long term I think Indians are smart enough to make the right decision. It would be too dumb of a geopolitical move for them to let Bangladesh become reliant on USA, China, Russia or really any other country. I just hope Bangladeshis are currently strong enough to withstand the impact of some emotionally motived short term poor decisions

rogsmith

Foreign companies mostly look at a country’s tax structure, market size, and other ease of doing business indices. I briefly worked for an IT company based in Europe that wanted to expand to South Asia(and eventually setup in India, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka before leaving during Covid). When we tried contacting BD, there was no clear information of tax structure anywhere online, and one of the government employees, we contacted, told us in a pretty straightforward way, that in order to obtain licenses we need to provide employment to the son of one of the MPs. I’m pretty sure some of those very “talented” children are on this subreddit with us. I find it odd how even BAL blamed India to cover up for their own corruption.

Also, Pakistan has way more foreign companies operating there than in Bangladesh. They even have services like iTunes Store, Google Pay, and will soon have PayPal before BD. Pakistan also has access to both GSP facilities in the US, and GSP+ in the EU. The only difference India makes is that the foreign company either sets up office in Pakistan, or use regional offices in Singapore or Dubai. The only deterrent to foreign investment in Pakistan is volatile domestic situation due to religious extremism and volatile foreign exchange. If BD needs to take note of anything, it’s those two factors.

LordVader568

How are we hostile towards India? Did we kill their citizens in the border? Did we put a psychopathic mass murderer on their throne? Did we try to incite religious violence in their country? Did we spread misinformation about their country? 

Burning or stepping on Flags is a common form of protest. I won't say it was wise what Buetians did, cause there's no benefit in mindlessly escalating the situation, but Bangladeshis have lots of reasons to hate India, people can't always be reasonable. 

Investors will invest if they think they can profit from Bangladesh. I don't think Whether we are angry at India or not will matter to them.

Hossain-99234

If India fully loses control over Bangladesh, they will try whatever they can to sabotage us. Because if we improve and the smaller states of India sees it they will try protest and become their own state because India treats them like shit, like those states are poor. The 7 sisters is the best example. That is why India is trying to control Bangladesh. 

XYLUS189

Whether we like it or not, India is going to be a major global player in the 21st century. They are a neighbouring country so it's just stupid not having good relations with them. Unless the Yunus regime cracks down on anti Hindu attacks this is going to place a huge strain on bilateral relations with a major trading partner.

Soil-Specific

There's also the question , what Will happen to India if there's no trade with Bangladesh? 

Bangladesh is One of the biggest buyers of Indian products . Their economy will drastically collapse if we don't buy their products. 

Increasing the suffering of farmers leading to a stressful situation in India.
Which may even cause the government to go down.

So , it's a hard decision for them to make. 

On the other hand it's not that hard for Bangladesh to find other alternatives, if we can Keep our foreign income as stable as now.

Nushan1306

Indian here, it's true that bangladeshi people hate India and online Indians also hate bangladesh. But our governments will be friendly with each other and it will be normal within a year I'm sure. Everyday life normal Indians don't even know what is going on in bangladesh and have no specific hatred, but Bangladeshis are going out of their way to spread hatred on India by putting flags in toilets etc., please avoid such moves.

Severe-Pen-1504

Pak er somossa holo, oder political r army class super corrupt. Pak 65 B loan niyeche China theke mega project korar jonno. E karone Pak economy er obostha kharap. Vatarir jonno na. BD er economic situation onek onek valo. Import Export balance thaka ucit. Over invoicing under invoicing kichuta bondho kora gele Export 20B barbe. On top of that yearly increament to hobey. Hundi bondho korle 10B per year remit barbe. Already export barche, remit barche, forex barche.

Pochattaor-Rises

Forget what India thinks. Look what will happen if World stops imports from Bangladesh.

One cue:- look at Bangladesh garments exports in the coming years.

SachinPatel23

Your post has been automatically put into the moderation queue for review, due to not meeting one (or more) of the subreddit rules. You can [message the moderators and share the link to your post (mandatory)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fbangladesh) if you do not receive a response within a day or two.

***
**Rule(s):** Your account should have at least 5 karma points in order to submit a post.
***

*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/bangladesh) if you have any questions or concerns.*

AutoModerator

Economic future! Think about your health care first.

DisasterAnnual5630

Sumedik

China's bad relationship with India had nothing to do with Pakistan. If China gives up Pakistan, it merely lose Pakistan, it won't gain India. Their conflict is mainly due to the border dispute with Bhutan and India.

GerryManDarling

Pakistan is able to provide an access to the sea for chinese goods that is on the west of Malacca's strait without being a potential competitor for China

leaningtoweravenger

Because China sees India as a potential economic/military rival in the near future, but not Pakistan.

disc_jockey77

China built a major naval harbor that, who could have thought, can also host chinese submarines. Pakistan is one of the few places that allow China to project power into the Indian Ocean.

Zestyclose_Jello6192

China is building a road that passes through Pakistan into western China. They are very dependent on oil imports and this gives them another route for importing oil other than shipping it over the ocean through a bunch of political entities that have various and changing relationships with China. 

The road only passes through Pakistan which should make it easier to keep good relations with them. Especially as a hedge against India. China will need to defend that road at the very least. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China%E2%80%93Pakistan_Economic_Corridor

Clyde_Three

Two reasons for the Chinese to not give up on Pakistan:  
1) They've invested a lot on the CPEC (China-Pakistan Economic Corridor), which will basically allow China to economically transport goods by land through Pakistan and then to the world through its ports. This achieves another goal of China's: to reduce its dependence on the Malacca Strait, which India or the US with its southeast Asian allies could choke in case of a US-China conflict in the future

2) By getting Pakistan to keep making trouble along the India-Pakistan border, India will have to spend a considerable amount to deal with that. Add to that the Pakistani sponsored separatist movements and terrorist organisation in Kashmir and India has a headache to deal with. This reduces India's capability to build up their strength along the Indo-China border, something which China wants

Lol8920

You're turning it around, the whole point of supporting Pakistan is to hem in India and keep a check on them.

silverionmox

The Enemy of my Enemy is my Friend.

EU and US -&gt; Russia.  
India and US -&gt; China.  
Pakistan and China -&gt; India.  
Russia and Iran -&gt; US.  
Saudi and US -&gt; Iran.  
and So on...

[deleted]

While I do believe that China loves realpolitik, I think people sometimes forget that China and Pakistan have a uniquely deep friendship and Pakistani people support China in high numbers. Why get rid of that especially when a lot of countries and their citizens don't like China? Plus, Pakistan lets China make huge investments in their economy with one belt one road and Pakistan has a strained relationship with the US. China would not want to give up and let the US swoop in. 

Meanwhile India and China have a pretty contentious history of border disputes and India used to support the ussr when China and ussr were enemies. Plus their people don't have a particularly good view of China. They prob won't get much out of trying to improving relations with then.

Ezeitgeist

China has already invested billions in Pakistani politicians, and is so unpopular in India that it's largely a lost cause.

The PRC and India are strategic adversaries. They are - from a long-range view - involved in a "struggle for the mastery of Asia". To that end, Pakistan plays an important role for the PRC as it keeps India somewhat preoccupied (particularly given the prospect of a potential 2-front war).

That said, if you review the strategic studies documentation and papers emerging from India till the late 1980s (and even in the 1990s), you would notice the preoccupation of Indians with Pakistan. The governments of those times did not help either and, frankly, not did the strategic-military establishment in India. This is evident in how skewed the Indian Armed Forces are in favour of the land forces. In fairness, it should also be mentioned that this was also reflective of what some have referred to as India's "continental mindset", which was a relic of the British Raj.

Times, however, have changed. Indian strategists increasingly view the country as one with dominant maritime interests and one can see how the naval/maritime capabilities of the country are improving (carrier battle groups being set up, SSBNs out on active patrols and a number of them being under construction, SSNs being designed and constructed, new mega naval bases being built etc). Pakistan is now considered as "an irritant" - a security threat no doubt, but not necessarily a "strategic threat". The story for Pakistan, of course, is different and it views India as a strategic threat but that's another discussion.

So, the reason why the PRC does not abandon Pakistan is because the latter is a tool/instrument by means of which the former is attempting to constrain India.

robothistorian

They fight over water. They fight over land. They will never see eye to eye. They dont trust each other. Pakistan is in a bad financial situation and is kinda hopeless. It needs a China to give it things and China will keep trying until it completely fails...

FrontBench5406

I mean short of India bending the knee to China there is a very obvious reason why they don’t give up on Pakistan. There are some Indian nationalists confused as to what the exact issue between China and India is, India wants to be a great power and respected whereas China might be looking to replace the United States as the regional hegemon in Asia. Those are two very different and conflicting goals.

Calfis

You know what I would say to China about making deals with Pakistan?..."good luck with that."

China will probably use Pakistan like how USA did. Great for proxy stuff like access to port, belt and road initiatives and more. Pakistan is a failed country.

Diligent_Driver_5049

India and China has similar natural endowment, population, and trade potential. Furthermore they compete for the same water source from the Himalayas and tibetan plateau that sustains their civilizations. The indo Pacific trade route is vital for both nation's trade and prosperity.

India is a regional hegemon to China, hence they're natural rivals.

Fearless-Moose4634

Pakistan is a nuclear power and a militarily, a regional power. It also has a stranglehold on Afghanistan and serves as a counter weight to Indias ambition in the region. And Pakistan has enormous potential for economic development. Something that has been ignored by you. I think it was in the 50s or 60s that Pakistan was on the same level as South Korea. 30 years from now, Pakistans economic outlook may be very different to now. And the Chinese generally think 30 to 50 years.the same time frame that people look at when thinking strategically.  Without Pakistans influence, China would have a much tougher time stopping Indias ambition in the region

thunderbolt851993

Even if china abandoned pakistan, they would not gain india. Because china and india have a dispute over land. That said I can't help but think that antagonizing india has been a massive mistake by china. 

They basically drive india closer towards the West and japan. India also has a large developing middle class with lots of consumers that china might not have access to.

plmukas

India is too big to be a puppet. China does not have friends or allies only vassals.

Cleftbutt

I read a good book called Prisoners of Geography about how geography shapes geopolitics. 

In that it discusses how Pakistani ports are important for China's oil imports from the Middle East as it gives a route that does not involve passing through the very narrow Malacca Strait which could easily be blockaded in a war situation. 

The coastline of India on the other hand is too shallow for the mostpart to have ports of significant enough depth to facilitate the large oil tankers. If India eventually builds out such infrastructure, and tensions between the two countries subside, then there may be less of a need for China to be so intertwined with Pakistan.

hhandley

“The enemy of my enemy is my friend” is not as simple and widespread as it’s presented. Just waking up one day and pulling the plug on Pakistan does not gain China friendship with India.  Not only are there long term issues with deep distrust between them, China is smart enough to know the implications with other relationships when you abandon an ally for their rival.

Rosemoorstreet

Pakistan is an unstable nuclear neighbour with many islamic guerrilla fighter/terrorist groups having various amounts of not only local power but influence within the government.

India could not exist and it would be in China's interest to keep propping it up. Pakistan falling apart is quite possibly every stable major powers biggest security threat. It's just been that for so long that it's not news.

WBUZ9

unused deserve school vegetable flowery swim nutty forgetful strong shrill

 *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*

ManOrangutan

I’m speaking from an Indian perspective here.

There was an attempt through the concept of Panchsheel/Five principles of peaceful coexistence by the first leader of our country, Jawaharlal Nehru, to have an amicable relationship with China. However, the Chinese invasion of Tibet, which Nehru envisioned as being a buffer between India’s and Chinas spheres of influence, as well as the disputes over the control of territories we have called Aksai Chin and parts of Arunchal Pradesh have caused differences between our two countries.

My understanding is that it was an attempt by china to reverse the damages that were caused by the century of humiliation and the subsequent warlord era(?) in Chinese history, by reinterpreting the relations with Tibet and retaking the lands lost to the British. However, the damage it has done to India-China relations will be difficult to fix.

It’s not that all is lost though. We do have a collaborative relationship in places where India is at loggerheads with the west, for starters the WTO tariff related issues. Also keep in mind that China is India’s largest trading partner.

That all being said, what you’re suggesting would be glaringly obvious if it weren’t for the border dispute. I think that both of our political leadership has a no compromise policy when it comes to territorial integrity, which makes it even harder to reconcile. I personally feel like there is more to gain from a cautious collaboration with china over the way things stand.

Interestingly, if I’m not mistaken, Pakistan did recognise some parts of what was then the Gilgit Baltistan territory as belonging to China and had

mastorofpuppies

Two reasons, both related to the nature of the CCP and autocracies in general.

China will never have great relations with any democracy as acknowledging the legitimacy of democratic governance is a threat to their ruling party.

China will only ever have good assymetric relations. That is, if they are clearly the dominant partner that can push the other around.

ThePensiveE

The enemy of your enemy is your friend. Both China and Pakistan have territorial disputes with India. Why should China give up Pakistan? Unless the Indians can properly resolve the territorial disputes with China and Pakistan, the problem is that Indians believe that southern Tibet is theirs, but they also believe that Aksai Chin and Kashmir are also theirs. In this way, the relationship between India and its neighbors will never improve.

Distinct-Macaroon158

Pakistan is just a tool of leverage for China to keep India in check, that's all. The Tibet affair generated mistrust in China regarding India, and successive Indian governments did nothing to find a solution to this. A give-and-take would have normalised things long ago, but India was rigid on its British-created boundaries, which after all gave birth to the country called India. Now things have gone too far for a reset in the near term, but geopolitical winds are shifting and the Indian government is getting closer to China (in spite of the outward rhetoric) given that U.S. power is waning and China's strength is increasing on the world stage.

greatbear8

Because China, at some level, wants to slowly encroach into India. Eroding the border in chunks with whatever nonsense claims. Close ties between China and Pakistan puts India into a box between two countries that have designs on at least some of India's territory.

manifestDensity

China or better to say CCP doesn't like prosperous democracies especially which could create some funny ideas among their own people. 

One of the main aim of CCP's foreign policy is to keep their domestic support intact. So they always use propoganda for their citizens showing those democracies as evil.

That is why CCP always try to show Taiwan, Japan and India, their Asian neighbours which follows democracy as  enemies. Friendly relationship with such countries could be bad for CCP influence inside China.

They have no love for Pakistan either. However, Pakistan is the friend in "my enemy's enemy" sense. Moreover, position of Pakistan is geopolitically important. Last but not the least important point : the government of Pakistan is always ready to be sold for a few billion dollars.

bikbar1

China isn't there for money. They want a slave country so they can get access too sea and not be challenged by pakistani people. They want pakistan to remain weak but not collapsed.


As for India, China will never accept another equal. What it wants is a servile neighbor. That's the Chinese way. It has always been that way since the imperial days. Or more accurately Chinese imperial society never ended to begin with.

safwan92

Nothing will happen..
They will just divide their own people..
They will never engage in war..
These politicians have big businesses they will do anything to save these businesses

Unlucky_Client_7118

Can't comment on other topics but it seems obvious to me we should stay neutral and push for peace (as much as we can).

jxx37

https://preview.redd.it/cp4sol5366xe1.jpeg?width=960&amp;format=pjpg&amp;auto=webp&amp;s=f8fd004d058a21d5c68c3507204ad510fdde0076

No impact. Bangladesh has nothing to do with all this.

Downtown-Bat-5493

&gt;If a conflict does erupt, what would be the potential implications for Bangladesh?

It would be more difficult for Bangladesh to normalize ties and trade relation with Pakistan which this government is trying to do. Plane tickets for going west might cost more as they will try to avoid conflict zone. 

&gt;Should Bangladesh remain neutral, or would it be compelled to align with a particular side?

Bangladesh should absolutely remain neutral. Aligning with Pakistan will only bring more problems for Bangladesh while aligning with India is not possible right now because of the current relation we have with India.

&gt;Could either India or Pakistan sustain a prolonged conflict, with or without external intervention?

India can sustain a longer conflict due to its stronger economy and greater resource capacity. Pakistan is really vulnerable right now in every way. They are dependent on the rivers coming from India. There is ongoing insurgency in Balochistan and northwest region. Pakistan's economy is shit even compared to Bangladesh and they got bailout by IMF last year. So, they are in no position to sustain a prolonged conflict.

&gt;What would be the economic fallout across the region?

India is the dominant trade partner for all the other countries in South Asia. So except for some trade disruption near the conflict zone, I don't think there would be any fallout across the region. 

&gt;Would one state be more likely to collapse under the weight of conflict?

Obviously Pakistan is more likely to collapse as I have already said they are in a more vulnerable position. 

&gt;Is there any scenario in which Bangladesh could position itself strategically or economically to benefit?

Yes, it is the perfect time for Bangladesh to focus on Arakan in Myanmar without involvement from India. I heard a rumor that Bangladesh is taking preparation for an operation in Arakan with the support of USA. If we can create a buffer zone there and return all the Rohingyas, it would greatly increase our security along the border and it would be a big step towards resolving the Rohingya issue.

itvus

To answer your questions: 

1. None whatsoever from a security point of view. There are economic considerations. See below. 

2. India doesn't need Bangladesh to do anything except being neutral. Taking the side of Pakistan is obviously a non-starter and it would be disastrous for future relations. There's no benefit there for Bangladesh to take the side of their former genocide perpetrators. 

3. India can sustain a prolonged conflict, with some damage, given its large domestic economy. Pakistan cannot sustain a war longer than two months at most without collapsing and that's being generous. 

4. SAARC trade levels are not massive. Foreign investments to India and Pakistan would suffer. Bangladesh would be fine. 

5. Pakistan could collapse within two months. They have a first-use of nuke policy if they are losing a conflict. Which itself would wipeout the country in case of a Indian nuclear retaliation. Even if nukes are not used, and if Pakistani military loses territory in the conflict, that might lead to break up of the country. It would certainly lead to more demands for redrawing the Durand Line from Pashtuns. 

6. Bangladesh stands to gain from taking Pakistan's market share in the textiles exports as well as general redirection of foreign direct investment in South Asia away from Pakistan.

mormegil1

If a war erupts, why don't we sell arms to both countries and get rich 😂

Hot-Priority3826

After the election of India these tensions will lossen up. The current government of India needs some issues to get vote from a particular type of demographic people.

AdministrationOwn972

I predicted this would happen. NOBODY listened to my predictions. 

If a conflict does erupt, what would be the potential implications for Bangladesh

Well Most of Pakistan's economy depends on the water of those rivers that they use for irrigation. This is something they knew and I know they probably wanted kashmir for this reason. Now with Modi removing access to these water sources, their aim would be on us to either re-establish relations, and use our jute/other resources, use our people to fight indians, or guilt us by saying how we're all desi muslims or get us to smuggle weapons to Assam. I saw this coming. I said it before it was all about water sources and nobody believed me. Now, the fact that bangladesh demanded billions of dollars was something I never expected and will prove to be a hurdle, but expect us to be mentioned in their media, and expect their ISI bots to target us, spread propoganda about us like they've been doing after 2020. 

  
Should Bangladesh remain neutral, or would it be compelled to align with a particular side?

We should remain neutral and never talk about it. I do wish my friends families are safe if war were to happen but I also don't want Bangladesh to be fighting in wars it doesn't need to. 

  
Could either India or Pakistan sustain a prolonged conflict, with or without external intervention?

China is going to side with Pakistan and America is going to side with india. I even guessed it might be another proxy war with the perfect time being started after the tarrifs but I also know Pakistani army has been trying to cause havoc on india for a really long time. But now that this happened, I'm 100 percent sure china and america is going to fight one another through india-pakistan. 

What would be the economic fallout across the region?

Pakistan's economy is going to suffer but they'll probably trade with Bangladesh. Bangladesh is going to fight its own to resist or allow Pakistani influence. USA already put tarrifs on Bangladesh, and I'm sure trade with india has decreased due to current events, so I don't know what's going to happen next in terms of Bangladesh's economy. We probably will trade with Pakistan but don't know if it'll cover anything. 

Would one state be more likely to collapse under the weight of conflict?

If there was a war, both india and pakistan will suffer. Both have nukes, both will not step down, and both have influenced another part of it's country to saperate and will leverage that. (India-kashmir and khalistan wants to saperate, pakistan-bolachistan). Now with the current events in bangladesh, I believe we'd be pressured to take a side. If we take pakistan's side, we'll be first told to influence and smuggle weapons to assam, and then maybe to fight indians. Which means, during the next few years expect a lot of propaganda, guilt-tripping, muslim-muslim-bhai-bhai rhetoric.

ZucchiniDifferent167

Bangladesh should remain neutral but I think won't remain neutral because of its own people. We don't have national unity like china, japan or other developed countries. We have some people who can deliberately conspire anything to put bangladesh in this conflict even if it can destroy the country. They only want to serve their political purpose nothing else!

Nirzak

It might actually benefit us. I've heard Pakistan is taking over in textile industry.

VapeyMoron

ফেসবুকে জামায়াতি পোস্ট আর জিওপলিটিক্স একনা, বিএনপি ২০০৪ এ পাকিস্তানি ফাঁদে পড়ে ১০ ট্রাক অস্ত্র পাচারে ধরা খেয়ে আজ ২০ বছর ক্ষমতার বাইরে, বাংলাদেশের যা অবস্থা তাতে ভারতের সাথে কনফ্লিক্টে জড়ালে ৭ দিনও টিকতে পারবো না, বিএনপি জামায়াতের ভারত ইস্যুতে বিশাল একটা ভোটভান্ডার আছে জন্য ওরাই এই ইস্যু নিয়ে নাড়াচাড়া করে বেশি

Responsible-Check-92

A starving Bangladesh will starve more unfortunately because Nunus is busy looking after his ego and the antiBangladesh rajakars and pedos

Friendly_Branch_3828

India has hostile attitude towards us...so when opportunity arises we should join other countries &amp; make sure India is neutralized

NaffyTaffyUwU

Honestly, I don’t think a war is likely, given how both countries operate and the current situation. But if it does happen, Sri Lanka’s going to feel it hard. We’ll be cooked.


	1.	We’re too close — A war up north could easily spill over. Even radiation from a nuke could drift down here depending on the wind.
	2.	Refugees — If people start fleeing, we might see boats arriving from India, especially coastal regions.
	3.	Economic chaos — Our trades that runs through India will be affected. If that’s disrupted, we’re in trouble—fuel, tourism, investments, everything.
	4.	Diplomatic heat — We’d be caught in the middle, pressured to take sides or stay quiet, and either way it could hurt our global standing.

Bottom line: even if we’re not part of the fight, we’d still get hit big time. Peace is in our best interest.

Haunting_Simple2262

if you confused about picking the side then i just saw an interview on sky news

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ir8pJbKE37U9:37](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ir8pJbKE37U9:37) 

Anchor: But you do admit that the Pakistan has had a long histroy of backing, supporting, training and funding these terrorist organisations?

Pakistan Defence minister: well we have been doing this dirty work for  US for 3 decades.

thank you sir that's all i wanted to hear.   
  
STRAIGHT FROM THE FUCKING HORSE'S MOUTH!

Brilla-Bose

I thought Trump was too direct, but looking at people like S. Jaishankar and Modhi Ji, he is like a Toddler.

Perfect-Dig-8765

No we dont get involved. Not our problem. Just wait and watch. We got too many issues to solve anyways

Trick-Education-6823

This is not a debate to start about religions etc but i get this sinking feeling we have seen this before 
It looks like every time they become friendly something happens in India to Hindus, all the time it's always in India Inside India controlled area to Hindu people and it's done by Muslims somehow always all the time, just as peace is about to come about and things become normalised to a certain degree but it's also funny millions of Hindus in middle east in a Muslim country and not a single terror attack happens funny how Hindus are safer in Muslim countries but not in India.
Who benefits from this attack? Who gets to push their narrative even further ? Definitely not Pakistan.

Present-Excuse-5180

JollyAstronomer5786

No war will happen between them. I have seen similar issues, and tensions, since I was a kid. It will eventually calm down.

SoloRisingKing

We might have to pick sides if it goes to an all out war, I'm thinking we'll side with India if push comes to shove. I don't think nukes will be a factor since, even the americans have standby teams to pounce on Pakistani nuke stockpile if war does breakout. Overall, I think we are going to make someone mad no matter who's side we choose.

Calling_left_final

Old_soul_G

AfraidTraining7067

It will be a gold mine as 2 moron states will start to attack each others trade ships so will have to sail with Sri Lankan flag.

alphagenome

I believe this is an orchestrated attack by BJP . The motive ? The waqf board of India is sitting on billions...yes lands , money , donations worth billions . How ? When Muslims were ruling parts of India over the last 1000 years , this wealth has been accumulating little by little . They are trying to include Hindus in the waqf board of India so that they can "over see" and potentially handle (put their hands on) the treasuries as well. They simple want to snatch it away or want a part of it. GREED. 

Keen to know your thoughts as well .

Icy_Cry4120

Escalating India-Pakistan tensions post the Pahalgam attack have visible impacts on Pakistan's economy, with warnings of possible financing impairments and economic growth constraints.

Impact of India-Pakistan Tensions on Economy

Why This Matters

Public Sentiment Summary

Highlighted Comments

Parties Involved

What the people want