Building a Defence Strategy for Bangladesh

Reading Time: 18 minutes

Military strategy is often reduced to the question of how to win a war. That definition is too narrow. Strategy is the process through which a state converts national power into political advantage. It determines how military capabilities are developed, positioned and employed to protect national interests, deter aggression and, if deterrence fails, defeat an adversary’s ability to achieve its objectives.

For Bangladesh, this distinction is particularly important. Bangladesh does not possess the economic, demographic or industrial scale of the largest military powers in its region, nor should it attempt simply to reproduce their force structures. Its military strategy must instead reflect its own geography, economic capacity, strategic interests, technological requirements and regional security environment. The objective should not be military dominance. It should be credible deterrence, national resilience and the ability to deny an adversary its objectives while retaining the ability to impose costs if deterrence fails.

Bangladesh’s publicly stated defence framework places the protection of sovereignty and territorial integrity at the centre of national defence. The Armed Forces Division (AFD) describes the Bangladesh Armed Forces as responsible for protecting the country’s national land, maritime areas, airspace and national cohesion against threats from within or outside. The AFD also functions as the joint coordinating headquarters for the three services and is intended to function as the Joint Command Centre during wartime. During peacetime, it coordinates matters relating to operations, plans, training, intelligence, civil-military relations, administration and logistics.

The strategic question for Bangladesh is therefore not simply how many aircraft, ships, tanks or missiles it possesses.

It is:

Can Bangladesh generate sufficient military power, resilience and strategic freedom of action to deter aggression and, if necessary, defeat the objectives of an adversary?

That is the real test of military strategy.

Strategy Begins Before the War

Military strategy begins long before hostilities. Every fighter aircraft acquired, radar installed, warship commissioned, artillery system fielded, military exercise conducted, defence partnership established and maintenance capability developed contributes to the strategic balance. These decisions affect not only the capabilities available to the Armed Forces but also the calculations of potential adversaries.

The same principle applies beyond the military sphere. Diplomatic relationships can create strategic depth. Economic resilience can sustain a prolonged crisis. Domestic defence production can reduce dependence upon vulnerable foreign supply chains. Strategic communications can protect public confidence. Cybersecurity can help preserve military command, government functions and critical infrastructure under pressure.

Consequently, military strategy cannot be separated completely from national strategy. The military is one instrument of national power, and its effectiveness depends partly upon the strength of the political, economic, diplomatic, technological and informational systems supporting it.

For Bangladesh, this means that defence planning should not be viewed simply as a process of acquiring weapons. It should be understood as a long-term effort to construct a national defence system capable of deterring aggression and remaining functional under pressure.

Strategic Culture and Political Will

Military capability alone does not constitute strategy. A state also requires a strategic culture capable of translating political objectives into coherent military priorities.

For Bangladesh, this means establishing a durable understanding of what the country is trying to protect, which threats matter most, what risks it is prepared to accept and which military capabilities are essential to its national interests. Such an approach requires continuity. Defence strategy should not be repeatedly redirected by individual procurement opportunities, changing fashions in military technology or short-term political considerations.

Political will is equally important. Deterrence depends not only upon possessing military capabilities but also upon convincing an adversary that Bangladesh would be willing and able to employ those capabilities if necessary. This does not mean seeking confrontation. On the contrary, the purpose of credible military power is to make confrontation less likely.

A potential adversary must believe that Bangladesh possesses the political determination to defend its sovereignty and the military resilience to sustain that decision under pressure. Strategic credibility is therefore produced by the combination of capability, preparedness, political will and consistency.

This is particularly important for a country whose military resources are finite. If a state repeatedly announces ambitious defence objectives but cannot sustain the associated capabilities, its deterrent credibility can suffer. Conversely, a coherent strategy maintained over decades can make even a comparatively modest military force strategically significant.

Bangladesh’s Strategic Environment

Bangladesh occupies a strategically important position in South Asia and the Bay of Bengal. Its geography creates both advantages and vulnerabilities. The country possesses extensive river systems, a densely populated national territory, a long coastline and important maritime approaches. Its location also places it within a regional environment containing major military powers, important trade routes and several potential strategic flashpoints.

Geography should therefore be one of the starting points for Bangladeshi military strategy.

Bangladesh does not need to control every possible battlespace or match every potential adversary platform for platform. Such an approach would impose enormous economic costs while potentially producing a force that remains vulnerable to qualitative and quantitative disadvantages.

Instead, Bangladesh should seek to exploit its own geographic advantages while denying an opponent the ability to exploit its vulnerabilities. This leads naturally towards a strategy based on deterrence through denial.

From Military Superiority to Military Denial

There is an important difference between military superiority and military denial.

Military superiority means possessing greater combat power than an opponent in the circumstances that matter. Military denial means making it difficult or impossible for an opponent to achieve its political or military objectives.

For Bangladesh, denial is likely to be a more realistic and sustainable strategic approach than attempting to achieve comprehensive military superiority over substantially larger powers.

A potential aggressor does not necessarily have to believe that Bangladesh can destroy its entire military. It must instead believe that achieving its objectives would be sufficiently difficult, costly and uncertain that military action becomes unattractive.

This requires more than individual weapons systems. It requires an integrated military system in which surveillance supports targeting, targeting supports precision fires, air defence protects critical assets, electronic warfare complicates hostile operations, cyber resilience preserves command and control, dispersal reduces vulnerability and logistics sustains combat operations.

The objective is therefore not simply to accumulate military hardware. It is to create a force that presents an adversary with a series of increasingly difficult problems.

Deterrence by Denial and Deterrence by Punishment

Bangladesh’s strategic deterrence should not be understood exclusively as denial. Two complementary concepts are particularly relevant: deterrence by denial and deterrence by punishment.

Deterrence by denial seeks to convince an adversary that it cannot achieve its objectives with acceptable confidence. Deterrence by punishment seeks to convince an adversary that, even if it achieves some initial military success, the costs imposed in response will be unacceptable.

For Bangladesh, denial should form the foundation. The country should seek to make its territory, airspace and maritime approaches difficult to penetrate and its military system difficult to neutralise. At the same time, credible capabilities for imposing costs can reinforce deterrence by ensuring that aggression carries consequences beyond the initial battlefield.

The two approaches are complementary. An adversary should face both a difficult path to victory and serious consequences if it attempts to pursue aggression.

The result is a more credible deterrent because the adversary must account for uncertainty at every stage of a potential conflict.

The Strategic Hierarchy

A useful way to understand Bangladesh’s defence strategy is to view it as a hierarchy:

National Objectives → Grand Strategy → Military Strategy → Operational Art → Tactics

At the highest level, political leadership determines national objectives. Grand strategy then combines diplomatic, economic, informational and military instruments in pursuit of those objectives. Military strategy determines how the Armed Forces contribute to the national effort. Operational art translates strategic objectives into campaigns and major operations, while tactics concern the employment of forces in individual engagements.

This distinction matters because tactical success does not automatically produce strategic success.

A military can win battles while failing to achieve the political objective for which the war was fought. Conversely, a state can achieve an important strategic objective without fighting a major war if its military capabilities are sufficiently credible to deter an adversary.

Military strategy therefore sits between politics and combat. It must translate political purpose into military action while ensuring that military action remains connected to the desired political outcome.

Ends, Ways, Means and Risk

Arthur F. Lykke Jr.’s influential formulation describes military strategy in terms of ends, ways and means: the objectives being pursued, the courses of action used to pursue them and the resources available to execute those courses of action (Lykke, 1989). The formulation has subsequently been debated and criticised, notably by Richard E. Berkebile, who argued that strategic analysis also needs to account more explicitly for the desired end state and the political environment in which military strategy operates (Berkebile, 2018).

For analysing Bangladesh’s defence, the framework is useful precisely because it forces strategic questions to be connected.

The ends concern what Bangladesh wants to achieve. At the most fundamental level, these include preserving sovereignty and territorial integrity. They also encompass protecting national airspace and maritime interests, safeguarding critical infrastructure and economic activity, maintaining national command and communications, preventing coercion and preserving the continuity of national decision-making during a crisis.

The ways describe how those objectives can be achieved. For Bangladesh, these can include deterrence, denial, territorial defence, air and missile defence, maritime surveillance, precision fires, mobility, dispersion, intelligence-led operations, cyber resilience, electronic warfare, joint operations and strategic communications.

The means are the resources available to implement those approaches. They include personnel, training, weapons, ammunition, infrastructure, intelligence, communications, logistics, industrial capacity and financial resources.

Risk then becomes the question that connects ambition to reality. Military commanders may be primarily concerned with the probability of mission failure, while political leaders must also consider casualties, economic disruption, escalation, diplomatic consequences and the political cost of prolonged conflict. A viable strategy must therefore balance ambition with resources and acceptable risk.

A strategy that cannot be financed, sustained or politically maintained is not a viable strategy.

Geography Should Shape the Force

Bangladesh’s geography should influence how military power is organised.

A densely populated country cannot afford to treat every location as equally important from a military perspective. Certain areas, however, have disproportionate strategic significance because of their relationship to government, military command, ports, air bases, logistics, communications, energy, transport and economic activity.

This makes survivability particularly important.

Modern surveillance and precision weapons have made large and predictable concentrations of military forces increasingly vulnerable. Bangladesh should therefore seek a balance between concentration and dispersion: forces must be capable of concentrating combat power when required while remaining sufficiently dispersed during periods of vulnerability.

Mobility, hardened facilities, alternate operating locations, redundant communications and distributed logistics can all contribute to this objective.

The purpose is not simply to survive an initial attack. It is to ensure that the military retains sufficient combat power and command cohesion to continue operating after that attack.

Air Power: Seeing and Surviving

Control of the airspace is fundamental to national defence.

For Bangladesh, air power should therefore be understood as considerably more than fighter aircraft. A modern air-defence architecture requires an integrated combination of surveillance, command and control, fighters, ground-based air defence, electronic warfare, passive protection, resilient communications and counter-UAS capabilities.

The strategic objective is not simply to shoot down aircraft. It is to deny an adversary freedom of action in the air.

An adversary that cannot confidently identify targets, penetrate air defences, maintain aircraft over hostile territory or protect its own forces from counter-action faces greater operational risk. Even when an air-defence system does not destroy every attacking platform, its ability to disrupt the attacker’s plan can have strategic value.

For Bangladesh, the importance of air defence therefore lies in the cumulative effect of the network. Sensors, command systems, interceptors, surface-to-air missiles, electronic warfare and passive protection must operate as parts of a single defensive architecture.

The AFD’s Operations and Plans Directorate is responsible for promulgating the National Air Defence Plan, illustrating the extent to which air defence is treated as a national and joint planning issue rather than simply a service-specific capability.

Long-Range Fires and Strategic Dilemmas

Long-range precision fires are increasingly important to modern military strategy because their effects can extend well beyond the immediate battlefield.

A credible precision-strike capability can force an adversary to disperse aircraft, relocate command facilities, protect logistics nodes and devote substantial resources to missile defence and counter-battery operations. In doing so, it can impose costs even before a weapon is fired.

This creates strategic dilemmas.

An opponent must spend resources protecting its forces and infrastructure while simultaneously attempting to maintain offensive capability. For a country with finite resources, this can provide an attractive form of asymmetric deterrence.

The objective should not therefore be to accumulate large numbers of long-range weapons simply because they have impressive ranges. Their strategic value lies in what they force an adversary to do, how they alter the opponent’s calculations and whether they contribute to the achievement of the national objective.

Land Power: Survivability and Mobility

The Bangladesh Army remains central to the defence of the country’s land territory. Yet contemporary land warfare increasingly rewards forces that can detect, decide, move and strike faster than their opponents.

Armour, artillery and infantry remain important, but their effectiveness increasingly depends upon reconnaissance, unmanned systems, electronic warfare, secure communications, precision fires, integrated air defence and reliable logistics.

A tank without reconnaissance can be exposed before it reaches the engagement area. Artillery without accurate targeting information cannot exploit its full potential. Infantry without communications, protection and intelligence can be isolated from the wider force.

The future battlefield is therefore less a contest between individual platforms than between integrated military systems.

For Bangladesh, this has an important implication: investment in enablers can sometimes generate greater strategic value than simply increasing the number of major platforms.

Maritime Strategy and the Bay of Bengal

Bangladesh’s strategic interests extend well beyond its land borders. The Bay of Bengal is essential to the country’s economic future, with maritime trade and port infrastructure playing a central role in national economic activity.

Maritime security should therefore be treated as an integral part of national defence rather than a specialised naval concern.

The Bangladesh Navy’s strategic role encompasses the protection of maritime approaches and sea lines of communication, maritime domain awareness, coastal defence, anti-surface and anti-submarine warfare, mine countermeasures, maritime patrol and the protection of offshore infrastructure.

Bangladesh does not necessarily need to seek control of the entire Bay of Bengal. A more realistic objective is to ensure that its maritime interests cannot easily be threatened or coerced.

That requires persistent awareness of activity at sea, sufficient naval and air capabilities to respond to threats, and the ability to maintain maritime operations during a prolonged crisis.

Intelligence Is the Foundation

A military cannot effectively defend what it cannot see, understand or anticipate.

Intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance are therefore foundational to military strategy.

Bangladesh requires an increasingly integrated intelligence picture combining ground-based radar, airborne surveillance, unmanned systems, maritime surveillance, electronic intelligence, satellite-derived information, human intelligence and cyber intelligence.

The purpose is not simply to collect more information. It is to transform information into decision advantage.

A force that detects a threat earlier has more time to prepare, disperse, reposition, mobilise and respond. A commander who understands the adversary’s intentions before an engagement can often achieve effects that would otherwise require considerably greater physical force.

The strategic principle is therefore simple:

See first. Understand first. Decide first.

Joint Warfare Is No Longer Optional

Modern warfare is increasingly joint.

Bangladesh’s Army, Navy and Air Force cannot be treated as three independent instruments that happen to fight in the same conflict. They must operate as components of a single national military system.

The AFD’s institutional responsibilities already reflect this requirement. Its Operations and Plans Directorate is responsible for joint and combined operations, defence policy and plans, implementation of the Forces Goal, organisational and equipment structures, procurement and standardisation, and the National Air Defence Plan.

Joint warfare requires more than placing representatives from three services in the same headquarters. It requires compatible communications, common operational procedures, shared intelligence, joint exercises, interoperable command systems and logistics arrangements that allow forces to operate together.

The objective should be one battlespace, one operational picture and one coherent military response.

This is particularly important for Bangladesh because many of the capabilities required for modern deterrence are inherently joint. Air defence depends upon national sensors and command networks. Long-range fires depend upon intelligence and targeting. Maritime operations increasingly depend upon air and space-based surveillance. Ground forces depend upon air defence and electronic warfare.

Jointness is therefore not simply an organisational preference. It is a source of combat power.

Defence Planning Must Be Capability-Based

Bangladesh’s Forces Goal provides an important institutional mechanism for connecting military requirements with organisational structures and equipment. The AFD states that its Operations and Plans Directorate is responsible for formulating and implementing the Forces Goal, developing Tables of Organisation and Equipment in accordance with it, and handling procurement and standardisation of equipment outside the established structures.

The strategic challenge is to ensure that defence planning remains capability-driven.

Procurement should begin with a military problem: what threat must be addressed? The next question should be what capability is required to address it. Only then should planners determine what combination of platforms, weapons, sensors, infrastructure, training and support provides that capability most effectively.

This approach prevents procurement from becoming an exercise in platform acquisition.

A modern military is not a collection of prestigious platforms. It is an interconnected system in which the value of each platform depends heavily upon the systems supporting it.

A fighter without weapons, maintenance, trained crews, intelligence and airbases is not a complete air-power capability. A warship without sensors, weapons, logistics and trained personnel is not a complete maritime capability.

Capability, rather than ownership, should therefore be the measure.

Defence Industry and Strategic Resilience

Military strategy does not end with procurement.

A weapon system that cannot be maintained, repaired or replenished during a crisis provides limited long-term strategic value. Sustainability is therefore a component of combat power.

Bangladesh should seek progressively greater capacity in maintenance, repair and overhaul, ammunition production, spare parts, secure communications, unmanned systems, electronics, sensors, military vehicles, naval support and selected areas of defence technology.

Complete self-sufficiency is neither necessary nor realistic. Strategic resilience is a more practical objective.

The country should be able to continue operating even if a foreign supplier becomes unavailable for an extended period.

This makes defence industry a strategic issue rather than merely an industrial-policy issue. The AFD’s Administration and Logistics Directorate is responsible for coordinating strategic and operational logistics issues and planning and coordinating administrative and logistics matters, including procurement.

The long-term objective should be to ensure that Bangladesh can maintain, repair, replenish and progressively upgrade critical capabilities even under adverse international conditions.

Logistics Is Strategy

One of the most frequently overlooked components of military power is logistics.

An army may possess thousands of vehicles, but without fuel and spare parts they become liabilities. An artillery force may possess large numbers of guns, but without ammunition it cannot sustain combat. Aircraft require maintenance, weapons and trained technicians, while warships require fuel, provisions, munitions and dockyard support.

The lesson is straightforward:

The ability to sustain combat power is itself combat power.

For Bangladesh, strategic logistics should therefore encompass protected and dispersed storage, redundant supply routes, resilient infrastructure, domestic maintenance capacity and appropriate contingency stocks.

Logistics should be considered at the beginning of capability development rather than after a major platform has been acquired.

A capability that is difficult to sustain may ultimately provide less strategic value than a slightly less sophisticated capability that Bangladesh can operate continuously and support independently.

Strategic Depth and National Resilience

Bangladesh’s physical geography provides limited strategic depth, which makes survivability particularly important.

Critical military assets cannot simply depend upon a small number of fixed locations. A resilient force requires dispersal, hardened facilities, alternate operating locations, redundant communications, mobile command posts, protected logistics and distributed sensors.

Strategic depth can also be created through time.

If an adversary expects to achieve its objectives rapidly but encounters a resilient military that continues functioning after the opening phase of conflict, the strategic calculation changes.

Time itself can become a strategic asset.

This is why national resilience is part of military strategy. A country that can continue operating its government, communications, transport, energy systems and military infrastructure under pressure is more difficult to defeat than one whose critical systems collapse early in a conflict.

Cyber, Electronic Warfare and Information

The modern battlefield increasingly depends upon networks.

Aircraft, ships, air-defence systems, drones, artillery and headquarters all depend upon information. Disrupt the information and the physical force can become significantly less effective.

Bangladesh therefore needs cyber resilience and electronic warfare capabilities as integral components of military strategy rather than specialist functions operating separately from conventional forces.

Information is equally important.

An adversary may attempt to undermine public confidence, create panic, distort battlefield perceptions or disrupt decision-making. Strategic communications should therefore contribute to national resilience by maintaining confidence in government institutions and ensuring that accurate information can continue to reach decision-makers and the public.

The objective is not simply to win an information campaign. It is to ensure that Bangladesh retains the ability to make rational strategic decisions while under pressure.

Defence Diplomacy as Strategic Power

Military power does not exist in isolation from diplomacy.

Defence diplomacy can provide access to training, technology, intelligence cooperation, exercises, maintenance support and alternative sources of military equipment. It can also reduce strategic dependence upon any single external power.

For Bangladesh, this has particular importance.

A balanced network of defence relationships can increase strategic autonomy by ensuring that Dhaka retains alternatives when geopolitical conditions change.

Strategic autonomy does not mean isolation. It means having sufficient choices to make sovereign decisions.

The strategic value of a defence partnership should therefore be measured not only by what equipment it provides but also by the training, technology, industrial cooperation, interoperability, diplomatic access and supply-chain resilience it creates.

Economic Power Determines Military Endurance

Ultimately, military power rests upon economic power.

A state cannot sustain a sophisticated military without a sustainable economic foundation. Bangladesh must therefore continually balance capability against affordability, modernisation against readiness, new platforms against sustainment and high-end systems against mass and resilience.

The most sophisticated platform is not necessarily the most strategically useful platform.

A less expensive capability that can be fielded in sufficient numbers, maintained domestically and integrated across the force may provide greater strategic value than a more advanced system that Bangladesh struggles to sustain.

This is why military strategy must remain connected to national economic strategy.

Defence expenditure should be judged not only by how much is spent, but by the strategic effect generated by that expenditure.

Mobilisation and the National Defence System

Military strategy should also consider what happens beyond the standing Armed Forces.

A prolonged national crisis places demands upon transport, communications, energy, ports, industry, medical services, food supply and civilian infrastructure. National resilience therefore becomes a defence capability in its own right.

For Bangladesh, this means considering how civilian infrastructure and national institutions can support defence operations during an extended crisis.

Ports, roads, railways, airports, telecommunications networks and energy infrastructure all have strategic significance. Their ability to continue operating — or to recover quickly after disruption — can influence the military balance.

The ability to repair damaged infrastructure, maintain essential services and move personnel and supplies can determine whether a country can sustain resistance.

A resilient national system therefore increases the credibility of military deterrence.

Strategic Autonomy and Supply-Chain Resilience

Strategic autonomy deserves particular attention because modern military forces are deeply dependent upon international supply chains.

Aircraft engines, radar components, electronics, missiles, communications equipment and specialised ammunition may originate from multiple countries. A geopolitical crisis can therefore become a logistics crisis.

Bangladesh should avoid unnecessary dependence upon a single external source for critical capabilities wherever practical. Diversification of suppliers, domestic MRO, local production of selected consumables, technology partnerships and strategic reserves can reduce vulnerability.

This does not mean abandoning international procurement. International partnerships will remain important for Bangladesh.

It means ensuring that procurement creates options rather than dependencies.

A defence relationship should therefore be assessed not only according to what it delivers today but also according to whether Bangladesh can maintain and upgrade the resulting capability tomorrow.

The Bangladesh Model: Deterrence Through Denial

Taken together, these considerations suggest a strategic model centred on deterrence through denial, reinforced by resilience and credible punishment.

The objective would be to ensure that an adversary cannot confidently expect a rapid and inexpensive victory.

Strategic awareness would allow Bangladesh to detect threats early. Survivability would ensure that the military could withstand an initial attack. Integrated air and missile defence would complicate attempts to achieve air superiority. Precision fires would create additional dilemmas for hostile forces. Maritime surveillance and naval capabilities would protect the country’s maritime interests. Cyber and electronic warfare would help preserve the integrity of the military information system. Logistics and industrial resilience would sustain operations. Defence diplomacy would reduce the danger of strategic isolation.

None of these elements is sufficient by itself.

Surveillance without weapons provides information without sufficient effect. Weapons without intelligence reduce effectiveness. Military capability without logistics cannot endure. Diplomacy without credible military power may lack deterrent weight. Punishment without survivability may lack credibility.

The strategy therefore has to be systemic.

What Should Bangladesh Prioritise?

The answer should not be a shopping list of individual platforms.

Bangladesh should prioritise the capabilities that produce the greatest strategic effect relative to their cost and sustainment burden.

Integrated air and missile defence should remain important because the survival of military and national infrastructure depends upon the ability to contest the airspace. ISR and battlefield awareness should receive sustained attention because decision advantage is increasingly decisive. Long-range precision fires can contribute to deterrence by creating uncertainty and imposing costs. Unmanned systems can expand surveillance and targeting capacity at comparatively lower cost than some traditional platforms.

At the same time, joint command and control, electronic warfare, cyber resilience, logistics, ammunition reserves, mobile forces and survivable infrastructure deserve the same strategic attention as major weapons systems. Maritime domain awareness and naval warfare capabilities are essential because Bangladesh’s economic future is inseparable from the Bay of Bengal.

Perhaps most importantly, Bangladesh needs to invest in people. Training, professional military education, joint exercises and strategic-level decision-making cannot be replaced by technology.

A sophisticated military system operated by inadequately trained personnel will not produce sophisticated military power.

Measuring Strategic Success

Military strategy should ultimately be judged by outcomes rather than inventories.

A useful strategic assessment for Bangladesh should therefore ask whether the country can detect a threat early enough, survive the opening phase of a conflict, deny an adversary its objectives, sustain military operations for as long as necessary and preserve political freedom of action until a favourable outcome is achieved.

These questions are more meaningful than simply asking how many platforms Bangladesh possesses.

A force with fewer platforms but superior integration, readiness, survivability, intelligence and logistics may generate greater strategic effect than a larger but poorly integrated force.

The true measure of military strength is therefore not the size of the inventory. It is the amount of usable, sustainable and strategically relevant combat power that the state can generate when it matters.

The Strategic Objective

The ultimate objective should be neither military prestige nor numerical parity with larger powers.

It should be strategic credibility.

A potential adversary should understand that Bangladesh possesses sufficient capability to make aggression uncertain, costly and potentially unsuccessful.

That requires a force that can see, decide, survive, deny, strike, sustain, recover and adapt.

But military capability alone is not enough.

The country must also possess the political will to employ that capability, the economic resilience to sustain it, the industrial capacity to replenish it and the diplomatic relationships necessary to prevent strategic isolation.

The strategic objective is therefore larger than battlefield victory.

It is to preserve Bangladesh’s ability to make sovereign political decisions despite external pressure.

Conclusion: Strategy for Bangladesh, Not Strategy Copied from Elsewhere

Bangladesh’s military strategy must ultimately reflect Bangladesh.

The country cannot simply copy the force structures of China, India, Pakistan, Türkiye, the United States or any other major military power. Those states possess different geography, resources, strategic objectives, industrial capacities and threat environments.

Bangladesh requires its own model.

That model should be built around deterrence, denial, survivability, jointness, intelligence, precision, maritime security, air defence, resilience, political will and strategic autonomy.

The country’s institutional framework already provides important foundations. The AFD is responsible for coordinating the three services and, through its Operations and Plans Directorate, addresses defence policy, joint operations, the Forces Goal, organisational and equipment structures, procurement and standardisation and national air-defence planning. Its Administration and Logistics Directorate also coordinates strategic and operational logistics and procurement matters.

The strategic challenge is to ensure that these institutional mechanisms develop into a coherent military system rather than a collection of individual capabilities.

Bangladesh should therefore judge every major defence decision against a simple strategic test:

Does this capability make Bangladesh harder to coerce, harder to attack, harder to defeat and better able to sustain its national objectives?

If the answer is yes, the investment has strategic value.

If the answer is no, its military value should be questioned regardless of how impressive the platform may appear.

The measure of success should not be how impressive Bangladesh’s order of battle appears on paper.

It should be whether an adversary looking at Bangladesh’s military can reasonably conclude:

“We may be able to attack Bangladesh, but we cannot be confident that we can achieve our objectives.”

That is deterrence.

That is strategy.

And for Bangladesh, credible deterrence through denial — backed by resilience, political will and the ability to impose costs — may ultimately be the most rational path to national defence.

References

Armed Forces Division (AFD) (n.d.) About Armed Forces Division. Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh.

Armed Forces Division (AFD) (n.d.) Defence Policy. Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh.

Armed Forces Division (AFD) (n.d.) Operations and Plans Directorate. Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh.

Armed Forces Division (AFD) (n.d.) Administration and Logistics Directorate. Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh.

Berkebile, R.E. (2018) ‘Military Strategy Revisited: A Critique of the Lykke Formulation’, Military Review, 7 May.

Clausewitz, C. von (1976) On War. Edited and translated by Michael Howard and Peter Paret. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Freedman, L. (2013) Strategy: A History. New York: Oxford University Press.

Gray, C.S. (1999) Modern Strategy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Liddell Hart, B.H. (1967) Strategy: The Indirect Approach. London: Faber and Faber.

Lykke, A.F. Jr. (1989) ‘Defining Military Strategy’, Military Review, 69(5), pp. 2–8.

Strachan, H. (2013) The Direction of War: Contemporary Strategy in Historical Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Sun Tzu (1963) The Art of War. Translated by Samuel B. Griffith. Oxford: Oxford University Press.