A growing pattern of political misunderstanding surrounding state institutions has become evident in recent diplomatic engagements in Bangladesh. There is a noticeable departure from established state protocol—long practiced by successive governments and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs—raising concerns about institutional clarity and effectiveness.
Recent courtesy calls between the prime minister and foreign envoys have particularly drawn attention. During such meetings, the presence of Foreign Minister Khalilur Rahman alongside the prime minister has raised eyebrows among those familiar with diplomatic norms. Similarly, the inclusion of Foreign Secretary Asad Alam Siam in meetings between the foreign minister and envoys has prompted questions about the necessity and appropriateness of such arrangements.
Analysts suggest these practices signal a weakening institutional understanding of the distinct roles of the foreign minister and foreign secretary, potentially diminishing their authority and effectiveness in managing foreign relations.
Understanding state protocol
State protocol refers to a set of formal rules, procedures, and diplomatic etiquette that govern interactions between states, high-ranking officials, and diplomatic representatives. It ensures order, mutual respect, and proper representation in international engagements.
Key elements of protocol include the organization of official meetings, delegation composition, seating arrangements, flag display, and observance of diplomatic hierarchy. Adherence to these norms reflects a country’s institutional maturity and respect for international conventions.
Deviations in practice
Concerns have intensified following a recent courtesy call by Pranay Verma, the high commissioner of India to Bangladesh, on Prime Minister Tarique Rahman.
Diplomatic observers noted that the Bangladeshi side fielded an unusually large and high-powered delegation, including the foreign minister and foreign adviser Humayun Kabir, in contrast to the Indian side, which was represented by the high commissioner and a small team.
Photographs of the meeting also revealed apparent deviations from standard protocol. The prime minister was seated on the right side, whereas customary practice dictates that the host sits on the left. Additionally, national flags were placed between the two sides—an arrangement typically reserved for formal bilateral meetings rather than courtesy calls, where flag display is generally avoided.
Sources indicate that similar protocol inconsistencies have occurred during other meetings with foreign envoys.
Implications for institutional dignity
State protocol is not merely ceremonial—it is central to preserving the dignity, sovereignty, and international standing of a nation. Deviations from these norms can carry broader implications.
Experts warn that such practices may inadvertently undermine Bangladesh’s diplomatic image. When senior political figures are visibly overrepresented in meetings with comparatively lower-ranking foreign officials, it can create an impression of imbalance and weaken the perceived negotiating position of the country.
There are also concerns about institutional erosion. The presence of the foreign minister in prime minister-level courtesy calls, where their role is minimal, could diminish the perceived importance of the office. Likewise, involving the foreign secretary in meetings where their participation is not required may signal reduced autonomy and influence of key diplomatic institutions.
Over time, such perceptions could affect how foreign counterparts engage with Bangladesh’s diplomatic leadership, potentially narrowing the country’s negotiation space.
Broader patterns and concerns
Diplomatic observers point to additional examples that reflect a broader pattern. Following the formation of the government on February 17, Bangladesh’s high commissioner in Delhi, Riaz Hamidullah, met Indian External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar on March 19 for the first time. In the intervening period, however, the Indian high commissioner in Dhaka held meetings with multiple cabinet members in Dhaka.
In another instance, a significant number of cabinet members attended an iftar hosted by the Indian High Commission in Dhaka—raising questions about adherence to protocol regarding participation in events organized by foreign missions. Diplomatic norms typically guide which officials should attend such engagements to maintain balance and decorum in foreign relations. It is worth mentioning that that India’s minister of state for external affairs Kirti Vardhan Singh was the chief guest of the Bangladesh national day reception held in Delhi on Mar 26.
The need to restore protocol discipline
Experts emphasize that upholding state protocol is the responsibility of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which must not only adhere to established norms but also guide other branches of government in doing so.
There is a growing consensus that restoring discipline in protocol practices is essential to safeguarding Bangladesh’s institutional integrity and diplomatic credibility. Without such corrective measures, repeated deviations risk normalizing practices that could weaken the country’s position in international affairs.
