Wazed asserted that LeT’s Bangladesh chapter is directly involved in facilitating terror incidents in Delhi. This shift, he warns, transforms Bangladesh from a counter-terrorism partner into a potential launchpad for attacks against India. He also accused Pakistan’s ISI of supplying weapons to militants who infiltrated protests last year, citing video evidence of armed individuals among demonstrators.

Regarding the legal proceedings against his mother, Sheikh Hasina, Wazed described them as a “sham.” He detailed accusations of judicial manipulation, illegal law amendments, and the exclusion of defense attorneys, making any extradition request impossible under the current circumstances. Wazed expressed gratitude to Indian Prime Minister Modi for ensuring his mother’s safety, alleging a plot to assassinate her.

Furthermore, Wazed criticized the unelected interim government for its extended stay in power, labeling its actions as undemocratic. He also addressed corruption allegations, acknowledging its existence but emphasizing significant improvements under his mother’s leadership. The situation in Bangladesh raises urgent questions for India about the nation’s evolving role in South Asian security.

Earlier, Prime Minister Modi participated in a spiritual event, seeking blessings from Lord Buddha’s Holy Relics alongside Bhutan King Jigme Khesar Namgyel Wangchuck. These relics, sent from India, commemorated the Fourth King’s 70th birthday and a Global Peace Prayer Festival. This exchange underscored the profound civilizational, cultural, and spiritual bonds shared by the two nations.

The ongoing 50th anniversary of India-Bhutan diplomatic ties was also marked by the groundbreaking of a Bhutanese temple in Rajgir, India, presided over by Bhutan’s spiritual leader. Furthermore, a statue of Bhutan’s founder, Zhabdrung Ngawang Namgyal, on loan from Kolkata’s Asiatic Society, showcased the shared cultural heritage. Prime Minister Modi’s longstanding engagement with Bhutan, including his first foreign visit in 2014 and receiving the nation’s highest honor, the Order of the Druk Gyalpo, reflects the deep and enduring friendship between the two countries.

His extensive travels can be broadly categorized into four major journeys. The first Udasi led him eastward from Punjab through prominent cities like Delhi, Ayodhya, and Varanasi, reaching as far as Nepal. In Varanasi, he famously questioned rigid ritualistic practices, promoting dialogue centered on compassion over hollow traditions.

The second Udasi ventured south to regions including Sri Lanka and Kanchipuram, where Guru Nanak engaged with local spiritual figures and challenged prevalent superstitions. The third journey took him north and into Central Asia, covering areas like Kashmir, Tibet, and Tashkent. During this expedition, he conversed with yogis, Buddhist monks, and other spiritual leaders, championing justice and the concept of universal oneness.

His fourth and final major Udasi led him westward across Arabia, visiting holy sites like Mecca and Medina, and extending to Baghdad, Jerusalem, and Afghanistan. In these diverse lands, he confronted prejudice, advocating strongly for tolerance and universal brotherhood among people of all faiths.

A key characteristic of Guru Nanak’s Udasis was his deep commitment to interfaith dialogue. He respectfully engaged with Hindu pandits, Buddhist monks, Sufi mystics, and Islamic scholars, promoting an inclusive, non-sectarian spirituality that actively opposed the caste system, gender discrimination, and empty rituals. His humility and profound wisdom garnered followers from all walks of life.

After two decades of extensive travel covering tens of thousands of kilometers, Guru Nanak returned to settle in Kartarpur. Here, he continued to welcome spiritual seekers and played a crucial role in shaping the nascent Sikh faith. The impact of his Udasis was immense, laying the groundwork for Sikhism’s future spread and revitalizing spiritual and social reform movements across South Asia. Gurdwaras, sacred legends, and enduring teachings in each visited region serve as testaments to his transformative influence.

Ultimately, Guru Nanak’s Udasis were far more than just epic journeys; they represented a revolution in spiritual consciousness. By fearlessly crossing boundaries and challenging established dogma, Guru Nanak effectively redrew the spiritual map of South Asia, awakening generations to a powerful new vision of unity, compassion, and social justice.

While familial terms like ‘iron brotherhood’ have been used to describe the closeness between the two nations, this narrative has fostered unrealistic expectations in Pakistan. It has also cultivated a misconception that Chinese support is unconditional, regardless of Pakistan’s own performance or actions. This perspective was highlighted in a recent opinion piece, suggesting the need for a more pragmatic approach.

Historically, the China-Pakistan partnership has been rooted in mutual necessity. Pakistan’s strategic location, offering China access to the Arabian Sea via Gwadar Port, is a key component. Furthermore, China sees Pakistan as a vital ally within the Muslim world and a platform to advance its global initiatives. In return, China provides substantial economic support through major investments, most notably the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), alongside advanced weaponry and technological assistance, and diplomatic backing on the international stage.

The CPEC project, a cornerstone of the relationship, has become a focal point where grand pronouncements meet practical challenges. While the initial phase saw improvements in power generation and infrastructure, Pakistan has struggled with developing a complementary industrial base, bureaucratic hurdles, and contributing to its national debt. Chinese investors, though strategically committed, are increasingly wary of Pakistan’s macroeconomic instability.

With public debt surpassing 70% of GDP and strict fiscal measures under an IMF program, efficient project execution is paramount for Pakistan’s economic stability. Past delays in payments and regulatory issues have tempered initial enthusiasm, prompting Beijing to favor projects with predictable revenues and robust risk management. The era of unreserved financial aid is gradually giving way to demands for demonstrable fiscal responsibility and competent governance.

Security concerns, including attacks on Chinese nationals in Pakistan, are also a significant issue for China. Moreover, Pakistan’s recent diplomatic outreach to the United States, a key strategic rival of China, adds another layer of complexity. The notion that Pakistan can simultaneously achieve ‘win-win’ outcomes with both nations is increasingly viewed as an unattainable illusion.

Ultimately, the evolving global landscape necessitates a partnership grounded in tangible outcomes and strategic clarity. The ‘iron brotherhood’ is being reshaped by pragmatism, requiring Pakistan to critically assess China’s expectations: a stable, secure, and dependable partner. Relying on emotional language instead of consistent delivery risks significant strategic disappointment, a situation Pakistan can ill afford.

Meanwhile, Maulana Mamunul Haque, a leader of the Khilafat Majlis in Bangladesh, said in an interview that 70% to 80% of the country’s people wanted Sharia rule. Maulana cited a survey by the National Consensus Commission for this. However, the Consensus Commission denied this and said that there was no question related to Sharia law in the survey.

Maulana later admitted that he had mistakenly cited a survey conducted by the ‘Resolve Network’ in 2017 as a survey by the National Consensus Commission. After gaining power in August 2021, the Taliban implemented Sharia law in Afghanistan according to their interpretation. This included public executions, cutting off hands and feet, and flogging.

Why is there support for Sharia?

Now the question is why Sharia law is getting support in Bangladesh and Pakistan. Many times, political parties use it to strengthen their grip on power or to gain public support. Sometimes this issue is raised to gain political advantage.

Both countries face economic, social and political challenges, due to which many people want change. At the same time, some groups consider it a way to maintain religious identity and morality in society. However, there is also a very large section that considers it a threat to modern law and human rights.

What is Sharia law?

Sharia law can be called Islamic law. It is actually a principle derived from the words (Hadiths), actions (Sunnahs) and the Quran of the Prophet Muhammad. These principles govern various aspects of life. This law is fully implemented in some Muslim countries of the world, while it is partially implemented in many Muslim-majority countries. In most Muslim countries, Sharia law is applied only in personal matters such as marriage and inheritance. Laws made by governments are applied on other civil and criminal issues.

In how many countries is Sharia law implemented?

There are laws in approximately 50 Muslim-majority countries in the world that refer to Sharia, but they can be divided into three categories. The first category includes countries like Saudi Arabia, Iran, Sudan and Afghanistan, where Sharia law is strictly implemented and it is the supreme law. There are a total of about 7 to 10 countries. These include Yemen, Mauritania and Brunei.

The second category includes countries like Pakistan, Egypt, Iraq, Syria, Nigeria, Algeria, Morocco, Indonesia and Malaysia. Where Sharia is applied only in personal matters (marriage, divorce, inheritance), while in other cases civil law is followed.

The third category includes countries like India, Thailand, Philippines and Singapore where Sharia is applied to a limited extent in some special cases for Muslims only. In the modern era, most Muslim countries have adopted European legal systems and Sharia has been limited to personal laws.

Brendan Lynch serves as the Assistant U.S. Trade Representative for South and Central Asia. In this capacity, he oversees the development and implementation of U.S. trade policy across 15 countries in the region, including managing the U.S.-India Trade Policy Forum. He is also responsible for coordinating activities under Trade and Investment Framework Agreements with regional partners.

Previously, Lynch held the position of Deputy Assistant US Trade Representative for South and Central Asia, where he managed negotiations in various sectors, including agriculture, manufacturing, services, and intellectual property rights. Before that, he served as the United States Trade Representative (USTR)’s Director for India, overseeing the bilateral trade relationship with India.

Lynch’s career at USTR began in 2013 in the Office of Agricultural Affairs, where he promoted US agricultural trade interests in international forums. He managed bilateral agricultural negotiations with countries in South and Central Asia, as well as Taiwan, Israel, Central America, the Caribbean, Mexico, Canada, and Russia.

Prior to joining USTR, Lynch worked as an International Trade Analyst at the US International Trade Commission. He provided economic analysis of free trade agreements and advised Congressional committees and USTR on trade barriers impacting US exports in key sectors and markets. He earned a B.S. from Boston College and an M.B.A. from George Washington University.