This rebuttal is made in response to a recent statement circulated on social media on 8 October 2025, which claimed that “In Bangladesh, the DGFI clearly operates as an arm of the Indian deep state — a proven fact. It is time to dissolve this agency and establish a new intelligence organisation modelled after the KGB or Mossad — one that truly believes in the ‘Bangladesh First’ policy and works solely for the people and sovereignty of the nation,”.
The statement, while emotive and provocative, simplifies a complex institutional and geopolitical reality. It reflects frustration with Bangladesh’s intelligence community but misdiagnoses the problem and proposes a remedy that would gravely endanger national security.
The DGFI, like any intelligence organisation in a developing democracy, requires reform, modernisation, and improved oversight. However, to accuse it of acting as an “arm of a foreign state” without verifiable evidence, and to call for its wholesale dissolution, is neither strategic nor responsible. Such proposals, if implemented, would paralyse the nation’s intelligence architecture and compromise the very sovereignty they claim to defend.
Jashim (Oct 8, 2025):
“In Bangladesh, the DGFI clearly operates as an arm of the Indian deep state — a proven fact.
It is time to dissolve this agency and establish a new intelligence organisation modelled after the KGB or Mossad — one that truly believes in the ‘Bangladesh First’ policy and works solely for the people and sovereignty of the nation.”
It has become fashionable in some circles to accuse the Directorate General of Forces Intelligence (DGFI) of functioning as an “arm of the Indian deep state.” Such a sweeping accusation is neither analytically sound nor strategically useful. It rests more on political frustration and speculation than on a grounded understanding of how intelligence institutions operate within a modern sovereign state.
To begin with, cooperation between intelligence agencies across borders is not proof of subservience. Bangladesh’s geography and security realities demand limited intelligence coordination with neighbouring states — including India — on counterterrorism, transnational crime, and border security. This is standard practice across the world. Intelligence diplomacy, by design, is about controlled exchange, not submission. Suggesting otherwise is a misreading of how sovereign intelligence coordination functions in practice.
The Fallacy of “Disband and Rebuild”
Proposals to dissolve the DGFI and create a new organisation modelled on the KGB or Mossad reveal a serious misunderstanding of institutional continuity and national security architecture. If every time a mole is exposed or a unit compromised we simply disband the whole organisation, when does it end? By that logic, no state institution could ever mature or maintain institutional memory.
Disbanding an intelligence service is not an act of reform — it is an act of national self-harm. The DGFI maintains networks in all 64 districts of Bangladesh and has built human and technical intelligence links in neighbouring countries and regions far beyond South Asia. These capabilities are not administrative conveniences; they are the foundation of Bangladesh’s national security. To dismantle them would create a dangerous vacuum that adversaries would quickly exploit.
Reform, restructuring, and reorientation are valid and necessary. Disbandment, however, would erase decades of experience, disrupt counterintelligence continuity, and compromise ongoing operations. A strong state reforms its institutions from within; it does not destroy them at every sign of imperfection.
Institutional Reform Takes Time, Not Impatience
Bangladesh has undergone immense transformation since the revolution. Cleansing and modernising the state apparatus cannot be achieved overnight. In reality, it takes 10 to 15 years to recalibrate a system as complex as the intelligence community. True reform involves cultural change, professionalisation, improved vetting, and the strengthening of oversight — not political theatrics.
Those who demand instant “clean-ups” underestimate the time, discipline, and stability required to rebuild trust and efficiency. Real reform is rarely dramatic; it is gradual, methodical, and institutional. The impatience to destroy and rebuild reflects frustration and not strategy.
Armchair Generals and the Dangers of Naïve Proposals
The call for disbandment has become the favourite slogan of armchair generals — commentators who have never had to secure a border, protect a convoy, or manage field intelligence in volatile conditions. Intelligence reform cannot be achieved through slogans or by mimicking foreign models without understanding their historical context.
Recently, Pinaki Bhattacharjee made similarly naïve suggestions regarding security in the Chittagong Hill Tracts (CHT). Those of us familiar with the ground realities strongly objected. His proposals disregarded the fragile equilibrium that has been maintained through years of difficult negotiation and intelligence coordination. Such detachment from operational reality mirrors the same wishful thinking behind calls to “abolish” DGFI altogether.
A Practical Path Forward: Reform, Reorient, Strengthen
DGFI can certainly be improved and it should be. The organisation can be reoriented around a stronger “Bangladesh First” doctrine, its recruitment modernised, and its internal structure made more accountable. Sub-units can be reshaped or replaced, and oversight can be enhanced through parliamentary and executive frameworks.
But this evolution must come from within. Dismantling an entire intelligence architecture would be equivalent to doing the work of the nation’s adversaries. It would destroy the institutional memory, trained personnel, and field networks that underpin national defence. Moreover, such an act would signal instability to international partners and embolden hostile elements.
The path forward lies in reforming and reorienting DGFI to serve Bangladesh’s sovereign interests with renewed professionalism and not in tearing it down for the sake of appearances.
Concluding Remarks
Bangladesh does not need to emulate the KGB or Mossad to secure its sovereignty. Those agencies emerged from vastly different ideological, political, and historical circumstances. What Bangladesh needs is a more accountable, strategically autonomous DGFI. An organisation that reflects national priorities, protects the state from both internal and external threats, and operates firmly under democratic oversight.
Disbanding DGFI because of criticism or isolated failures is not patriotism, it is strategic folly. The real “Bangladesh First” approach is to build, reform, and modernise the nation’s intelligence institutions, not to dismantle them whenever public sentiment demands spectacle over substance.
No nation secures its future by destroying its shield. True reform is evolution, not erasure.
Khaled Ahmed is a seasoned former intelligence analyst and military expert from the Netherlands, bringing over 15 years of specialised experience in operational intelligence, threat analysis, and strategic defence planning. Having served in high-level, classified roles within Dutch military intelligence, he possesses rare expertise in European security architecture, NATO doctrine, and asymmetric warfare. Khaled’s deep operational insight and international perspective enable him to deliver precision-driven intelligence analysis and forward-looking strategic forecasts. A trusted contributor to high-level risk assessments and security briefings, he offers readers clarity on complex defence and security challenges. Khaled leads the National Security and Fact Analysis sections at BDMilitary. He holds a Master’s degree in International Relations from the University of Groningen, The Netherlands, and is fluent in Dutch, French, and Arabic — combining linguistic dexterity with operational expertise to analyse security issues across cultures and regions.
