DP World: A Threat to National Security

Preparations are currently underway to finalize a long-term concession agreement to lease out Chittagong Port’s New Mooring Container Terminal (NCT). According to a report published in the Daily Inqilab, the lease agreement is set to be signed with DP World (Dubai Port World), a state-owned logistics giant based in the United Arab Emirates. Reports suggest that the controversial deal could be finalized as early as Thursday, October 8, or during the following week if any delays occur. Meanwhile, leaders of several protesting organizations actively opposing the lease still maintain hope that Prime Minister Tarique Rahman will intervene and withhold final approval for the agreement.

Observers and political analysts have expressed severe alarm over the fact that no comprehensive cost-benefit analysis or feasibility study was ever conducted prior to handing over this critical national asset to a foreign operator. Instead, the entire negotiation process has been wrapped in intense secrecy, keeping the potential terms, conditions, and operational framework strictly confidential. Senior officials from the Ministry of Shipping alongside the Chairman of the Chittagong Port Authority are reportedly pushing hard to finalize the deal, backed by an influential domestic business syndicate. Experts warn that surrendering control of the port’s most profitable terminal could lead to an annual revenue loss of roughly $92 million for Bangladesh, alongside severe risks to national sovereignty.

The initiative to lease out the NCT, which stands as Chittagong Port’s most active, capable, and highly profitable facility, originally gained momentum in 2024 during the regime of Sheikh Hasina. This drive proceeded despite the terminal being managed with remarkable efficiency, transparency, and operational agility by Chittagong Dry Dock Limited, an enterprise operated under the Bangladesh Navy. Critics emphasize that there was no practical or technical justification to hand over a fully self-sufficient terminal generating over 1,000 crore BDT annually to an external entity. Nevertheless, the political push to privatize and hand over the terminal to foreign interests persisted uninterrupted.

Following the fall of Hasina’s administration during the mass uprising, the interim government led by Chief Adviser Dr. Muhammad Yunus aggressively pursued the deal’s execution. However, facing widespread public outrage and sustained demonstrations from diverse civic and political groups, Dr. Yunus was eventually forced to suspend the signing process. The very same agreement has now re-emerged under the BNP administration. Critics continue to question the political rationale behind leasing the terminal to DP World, alleging that the firm lacks an unblemished operational record and acts as a strategic vehicle for foreign power dynamics.

Substantial concerns have also been raised regarding the organizational leadership and strategic alignment of DP World. Observers point out that seven key executives within the company’s senior management, including its Chief Executive Officer, are Indian citizens. Furthermore, a detailed research report presented by the Research Wing of Students for Sovereignty during a roundtable discussion at the National Press Club on September 30 identified DP World as a primary logistics partner of the US-Israel-India IMEC Corridor. The research group highlighted a geopolitical scheme designed to undermine the proposed China-Myanmar-Bangladesh corridor, effectively turning Chittagong Port into a dependent feeder port rather than an independent regional hub.

The firm’s international track record has drawn additional scrutiny from political analysts and security experts. Critics highlight that DP World has previously been embroiled in severe geopolitical controversies in nations such as Djibouti, Somalia, Somaliland, and Ukraine, where port concessions were followed by political instability, support for separatist movements, and erosion of state authority. Granting strategic operational control to a foreign entity in such proximity to the sensitive geography of the Chittagong Hill Tracts poses profound long-term risks to the territorial integrity and national defense of Bangladesh.

Critics argue that the lease agreement forms part of a broader, secretively executed foreign policy roadmap. Before this attempt, the interim government had already leased out two other facilities constructed with Chittagong Port’s internal funds, the Pangaon Terminal and the Laldiar Char Terminal, to foreign entities under long-term concession arrangements kept entirely hidden from public oversight. Observers allege that Dr. Yunus passed Sheikh Hasina’s operational formula straight to external actors, prioritizing diplomatic backing over core national interests, a framework that is now being pressed upon the current elected administration.

Within the current political administration, decisions regarding foreign leases and major asset acquisitions continue to face intense internal and external debate. Political commentators point to decisions such as the high-value procurement of Boeing aircraft running into thousands of crores of BDT as part of broader geopolitical concessions. Furthermore, key administration figures linked to the economic and diplomatic apparatus, including Foreign Minister Dr. Khalilur Rahman and Investment Board Chairman Ashik Chowdhury, face ongoing criticism over their performance, with critics noting that the investment board has failed to deliver significant domestic or foreign investment achievements since its appointment.

Ultimately, civic organizations, port workers, and policy analysts maintain that Chittagong Port is not merely a commercial facility, but an essential anchor of national independence and territorial security. Protesters demand that any decision regarding the long-term lease of strategic port terminals must be submitted to the National Parliament for full public debate and legislative oversight. Critics contend that if any concession is ever deemed necessary following parliamentary deliberation, it must be conducted through an open, transparent international competitive tender rather than secretive negotiations with controversial foreign entities.