Pradyot Kishore Urges Centre to Sever Diplomatic Ties with Bangladesh
Tipra Motha Party founder Pradyot Kishore Debbarman on Friday issued a strong appeal to the Government of India, urging it to cut all diplomatic ties with Bangladesh. He drew parallels with India’s firm response to Pakistan following the terror attack in Jammu and Kashmir’s Pahalgam and called for a similarly uncompromising approach towards Bangladesh.
Speaking to reporters after a yarn distribution event organized for beneficiaries of the Tripura Tribal Areas Autonomous District Council (TTAADC), Debbarman voiced serious concern over what he described as rising hostility and undemocratic developments in Bangladesh.
He questioned the legitimacy of the interim government headed by Md Yunus, asserting, “Md Yunus is not a democratically elected leader. India should not maintain diplomatic relations with a regime that lacks democratic credibility.” Citing alleged developments such as China constructing an airbase near North Bengal and a recent visit to Bangladesh by top officials of Pakistan’s ISI, he warned of a deteriorating geopolitical situation. “If they don’t respect our people, they don’t deserve our friendship,” he added.
|Also Read : Pradyot Manikya Alleges Pakistan-Backed Plan to Destabilise Northeast India |
Debbarman also highlighted the plight of religious minorities in Bangladesh, drawing historical parallels with atrocities faced by Hindus in regions like Noakhali, Cox’s Bazar, and Brahmanbaria—areas once under the princely state of Tripura. “Fundamentalism has no place in any society,” he asserted, signaling a toughening stance on the issue.
Taking aim at the opposition CPI(M), Debbarman questioned the party’s silence on the persecution of religious minorities in Bangladesh. “I want to ask the CPI(M) leadership why they had to flee their homeland and seek refuge in Tripura. They were targeted because of their religion,” he said. “It’s time we speak out against such ideologies.”
Despite his sharp criticism, Debbarman called for restraint, urging people not to target innocent individuals. He emphasized that economic vulnerabilities such as unemployment and poverty often make societies susceptible to extremist ideologies.
“India today is on the brink of becoming a global superpower, while countries like Bangladesh and Pakistan are far behind,” he stated confidently.
Unmoved by potential backlash from radical groups, Debbarman concluded by affirming his commitment to his stance: “I will not step back.”
|Also Read : Dr Manik Saha chairs all party meet on state’s development|
Pradyot Debbarman Supports ‘One Nation, One Election’ with Cautionary Note on Regional Impact
Debbarman also voiced his support for the concept of simultaneous elections, popularly known as “One Nation, One Election,” while also raising concerns about its potential impact on the political landscape—particularly for regional parties.
Speaking to media persons, Debbarman said he does not oppose the idea in principle and believes it could bring greater stability to governance. “I don’t disagree with the proposal of One Nation, One Election. Until 1967, India conducted simultaneous elections, and the system worked. Longer tenures for governments can shift the focus toward long-term development and public welfare instead of short-term gains ahead of frequent elections,” he explained.
However, Debbarman pointed out that the system may inadvertently favor larger, national political parties. “More than the regional parties, national political parties will reap the benefits of this model. But those national parties that are heavily dependent on alliances with regional parties might find themselves at a disadvantage,” he said, suggesting that the new structure could alter existing power dynamics.
Background on the Proposal
The “One Nation, One Election” proposal has been under active consideration by the central government, which argues that it would reduce the cost of elections, minimize policy paralysis caused by frequent polling cycles, and enable better governance. Proponents believe it would streamline the democratic process and bring uniformity, while critics have raised concerns about its feasibility, federal implications, and adverse effects on regional representation.
Pradyot Debbarman’s nuanced stance reflects a broader concern among regional political leaders that the proposal—while potentially efficient—might sideline the influence and autonomy of regional parties in a centrally dominated political framework.
