Opinion Shashi Tharoor writes: Banning Mustafizur Rahman from IPL makes no sense. Bangladesh isn’t Pakistan
If we decide that Indian public outrage against Bangladesh determines eligibility, what happens to Bangladeshi Hindu cricketers like Litton Das or Soumya Sarkar?
Mustafizur Rahman. (AP Photo) The intersection of sports and diplomacy has always been a fraught one, particularly in our corner of the world. Yet, the recent reports of a BCCI directive to exclude Bangladeshi cricketer Mustafizur Rahman from the Indian Premier League (where he had been recruited by Kolkata Knight Readers) represent a troubling departure from both sporting meritocracy and strategic common sense. To conflate the complex internal dynamics of Bangladesh with something like the state-sponsored hostility of Pakistan is not merely a visceral overreaction; it is a diplomatic blunder that reveals a profound failure of imagination.
The decision to target an individual sportsman like Rahman as a response to political instability or reports of violence across the border is, frankly, appalling. It is an unnecessary politicisation of a sporting event that undermines the very essence of the IPL, a tournament built on a global congregation of talent. When a player is vetted, cleared, and placed in the auction pool by the BCCI, he becomes part of a professional ecosystem. To retroactively punish a franchise for selecting a player found eligible by the BCCI, or to force that player’s exit based on his passport, is to diminish the league’s integrity.
We must address the elephant in the room: The backdrop of strained ties and the deeply concerning reports of violence against minorities in Bangladesh. As the Chairperson of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on External Affairs, I am well aware of the delicate diplomatic tightrope the Indian government must walk. Our approach must be one of firm but sensitive diplomatic and political management. Yes, passions are high. Yes, there are groups in Bangladesh whose actions are reprehensible and should be curbed. Yes, India should urge the government to restore order and protect minorities. But to respond with a blanket boycott of their cricketers is to play into the hands of the extremists.
Our goal should be to promote normalcy and protect the voices of moderation. This is no doubt why External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar was in Dhaka last week to meet Tarique Rahman, the leader of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party and therefore the likely future prime minister. We have also, no doubt, communicated to the government in Dhaka that bullying and the intimidation of minorities in Bangladesh do not create an environment conducive to free and fair elections or long-term stability. However, sending a black-and-white message that “every Bangladeshi player is unwelcome” is the wrong signal. It punishes the innocent for the sins of a few and alienates a population with whom we share deep cultural and economic ties.
Consider the logical inconsistency of this stance. If we decide that Indian public outrage against Bangladesh determines eligibility, what happens to Bangladeshi Hindu cricketers like Litton Das or Soumya Sarkar? If they had been picked this year, as they were in past IPLs, would they too have been victimised by this reflexive rage? If not, who are we punishing — a country, an individual, or his religion? By signalling that we are an intolerant country that discriminates against Muslim Bangladeshis, we are not protecting Hindu minorities; we are abandoning the high ground.
Bangladesh is not Pakistan. Unlike our neighbour to the west, Bangladesh has not made the export of terror a pillar of state policy. While we have serious concerns and areas of sharp disagreement, our relationship is fundamentally different. It is a relationship of culture, of constructive negotiation, of shared history, and of a common future in the Bay of Bengal. To impose a “Pakistan-like” isolation on Bangladesh is to ignore the nuances of geopolitics. You cannot make a simple equation between the two.
Furthermore, there is a moral question at stake. Why must sports and cricket alone bear the burden of social media outrage? We continue to interact with Bangladesh through trade, transit, electricity supply and high-level diplomacy. Yet, we pick on a lone sportsman who has never condoned hate speech, never spoken against India, and never acted as anything other than a professional athlete. Who, exactly, are we victimising here?
To my mind, this entire episode reeks of a decision taken in haste to appease the loudest voices of social media outrage. It demeans us as a nation by suggesting that our diplomacy is so fragile that it can be upended by the presence of a left-arm pacer in a purple jersey. It demeans our cultural ethos of Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam: We are not behaving like a nation with a mind broad enough and a heart big enough.
As we look towards the future — including the upcoming T20 World Cup, where Bangladesh has officially requested that its scheduled matches in India be relocated to Sri Lanka —we must ask ourselves: Is this the precedent we want to set? Are we prepared to put the entire international cricketing calendar and India’s stature as a cricketing host nation at the mercy of the latest trending hashtag?
The Ministry of External Affairs often chooses a path of strategic silence or measured statements, and that is its prerogative. But as citizens and sports lovers, we must stand up for the principle that the playing field should remain a sanctuary for merit, not a theatre for performative nationalism. Let us engage with Bangladesh with the firmness that our national interest requires, but let us not sacrifice the spirit of the game on the altar of political convenience. It is time to let the players play and let the diplomats do the work of diplomacy. To do otherwise is not just appalling, it is a self-inflicted wound on India’s global image. As a cricket fan, I look forward to watching the World Cup. BCCI, don’t tarnish the trophy!
The writer is MP, Thiruvananthapuram, Lok Sabha, and chairman, Parliamentary Standing Committee on External Affairs
Share
