On its face, the decision to ask Kolkata Knight Riders (KKR) to release Bangladesh’s left-arm fast bowler Mustafizur Rahman from the 2026 Indian Premier League (IPL) appears a sporting controversy.
But beneath that surface lies a deeper rupture in bilateral relations between Bangladesh and India that had, until very recently, shown signs of substantive thaw.
In early January, the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) directed KKR to remove Rahman from its squad despite having bought him for approximately 92 million rupees (a little over a million US dollars) – the most expensive Bangladeshi player in the auction.
Media reports indicate this instruction was issued without full consultation among all members of the BCCI’s governing council, and came amid spiking political tensions between India and Bangladesh rooted in events well beyond the cricket field.
Almost immediately, Dhaka responded. The country’s information ministry ordered a ban on IPL broadcasts in Bangladesh, while the Bangladesh Cricket Board wrote to the ICC seeking to move its upcoming T20 World Cup matches out of India to Sri Lanka, citing security concerns. The ICC rejected the request, and Bangladesh has so far taken no further steps on the matter.
To understand why this sports-related flashpoint has ignited a broader diplomatic crisis, we need to trace the wider context – and examine the reactions from voices in both countries that recognize how fragile this moment has become.
Just weeks ago, there were clear indications of a cautious reset in India–Bangladesh relations. After former Bangladeshi prime minister Khaleda Zia passed away in late December 2025, Indian External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar travelled to Dhaka and conveyed condolences to her son, Tarique Rahman, who had returned home only five days earlier after a 17-year political exile in London.
Soon after, Indian Defense Minister Rajnath Singh signed the condolence book at the Bangladesh High Commission in New Delhi.
These actions suggested New Delhi was willing to engage constructively even with elements of Bangladesh’s interim government and political figures, a necessary bridge after a period of strain following the dramatic ouster of Sheikh Hasina in 2024 and subsequent political turbulence in Dhaka.
But diplomacy, especially in South Asia, rarely moves in a straight line. Against this backdrop, the controversy over Rahman – and the manner in which it was handled – has struck an especially sensitive nerve.
This is because, across the subcontinent, cricket is not just a sport. It is a powerful cultural symbol and a surrogate arena for national pride and geopolitical signalling. The notion of cricket diplomacy – the idea that sporting ties can underpin or even improve interstate relations – has been repeatedly invoked over decades. But when relations are strained, the same sport quickly becomes collateral damage.
That is precisely what has happened here.
Critics argue that the decision to sideline Rahman was not rooted in sport but in broader political narratives. In India, certain political actors and commentators linked the bowler’s participation to domestic outrage over violence against minorities in Bangladesh – turning an individual player into a political symbol.
Indian parliamentarian and writer Shashi Tharoor was among the most vocal critics of the move. In a recent Indian Express column, Tharoor described the targeting of Rahman as a “self-inflicted wound” and a troubling example of politicizing sport.
He wrote that conflating internal political dynamics in Bangladesh with a blanket exclusion of its athletes not only “makes no sense” but betrays a failure of imagination and diplomatic foresight. In Tharoor’s view, Bangladesh is “not Pakistan” – and punishing a cricket player for his nationality undermines the very spirit of the IPL and broader regional engagement.
Indian journalist and presenter Vir Sanghvi has echoed similar concerns, arguing that the IPL’s global brand and appeal depend on its cosmopolitan ethos – one that is compromised when bilateral politics crowds out sporting merit.
From Dhaka’s perspective, the decision came as a shock. The Bangladesh Cricket Board and government officials see it as a symbol of disrespect and uneven treatment – especially at a time when Bangladesh expects assurances that its players and fans will be welcomed, not vilified.
In diplomatic terms, this is the opposite of cricket diplomacy – it is cricket-induced diplomatic backlash. Even more so considering the fact that the IPL is a cultural export and soft power tool of India and excluding a star player on the basis of nationality – or amid political pressures – undermines its claim to inclusivity and meritocracy.
Former Bangladesh Cricket team captain Rajin Saleh called the situation a “big loss for Bangladesh cricket,” arguing that politics should be kept out of the sport and that the absence of Bangladeshi players in the IPL damages the game’s spirit.
The stakes now obviously risk going farther. Bangladesh’s warning to skip T20 World Cup matches in India – along with the ban on IPL broadcasts – risks spiraling into broader cultural and diplomatic disengagement.
In an era when both nations face shared challenges ranging from water diplomacy to regional stability, allowing this incident to escalate into long-term resentment would be a strategic misstep.
The current trajectory suggests that if this dispute is not managed with sensitivity and strategic foresight, relations could cool further – with impacts that stretch beyond stadium boundaries to economics and cross-border cooperation.
Abu Jakir is a Dhaka-based journalist and analyst
