Ctg Port’s sovereignty should not be leased out 

The Chittagong Port is not merely a collection of docks, cranes and concrete; it is the beating heart of Bangladesh’s economy. It is the maritime gateway through which more than 90 per cent of our national trade flows. The port sits within a region of immense strategic importance overlooking the Bay of Bengal - a maritime space increasingly viewed as one of the world’s most consequential geopolitical theatres. 

For a nation that relies on the sea for its survival, the port is not an asset - it is a lifeline. Yet, as we navigate the uncertainties of mid-2026, this vital artery is being placed on an auction block, with global giants like Dubai-based DP World and Saudi Arabia’s Red Sea Gateway Terminal (RSGT) locked in a high-stakes competition for control over our most productive terminals.

Around the world, ports have become instruments of geopolitics as much as commerce. They are no longer simple cargo-handling facilities. They serve as nodes in global supply chains, centres of digital logistics, repositories of sensitive commercial information and, increasingly, strategic assets with implications extending far beyond trade. 

The congestion at Chittagong Port is not a failure of the dockworkers; it is a symptom of legacy customs systems, bureaucratic bottlenecks, and a systemic lack of integrated digital infrastructure - problems that lie with the regulators, not the workers on the wharf.

This is not a purely economic debate, nor is it a simple question of efficiency. It is a profound test of Bangladesh’s sovereignty, a confrontation between national security and the seductive, often hollow, promises of global privatisation.

The narrative propagated by those in favour of handing over the New Mooring Container Terminal (NCT) and the Chittagong Container Terminal (CCT) is one of manufactured incompetence. We are told that local management is sluggish, that vessel turnaround times are lagging, and that only a multinational corporation with global expertise can rescue us from the brink of inefficiency.

But this is a dangerous fabrication. The congestion at Chittagong Port is not a failure of the dockworkers; it is a symptom of legacy customs systems, bureaucratic bottlenecks, and a systemic lack of integrated digital infrastructure - problems that lie with the regulators, not the workers on the wharf. 

When a foreign company like DP World enters into a 30-year concession, we are not just signing a contract; we are outsourcing the sovereignty of our coastline. DP World is closely linked to US strategic interests and operates in key locations such as Somalia, where it supports US military logistics. The concern that DP World operates in jurisdictions where it aligns closely with American or other foreign military logistical needs is a matter of documented record. 

Does it serve the long-term national security interest of Bangladesh to have a foreign corporation act as the gatekeeper of our primary entry point? If the port is under foreign control, what leverage does the state truly retain in times of regional crisis or trade friction?

The G2G (Government-to-Government) nature of these proposals is equally troubling. Often shielded from the public gaze, these deals bypass the sunlight of competitive bidding. When national assets are partitioned in backroom negotiations, the public is left to pay the price - often in the form of increased handling charges, which inevitably drive up the cost of living for every single citizen in the country.

The Port Protection Committee and the Sramik Karmachari Oikya Parishad are defending their right to participate in the future of their own industry. Their strikes are not mere interruptions; they are the desperate cries of a workforce that knows that once their rights are signed away to a foreign conglomerate, they will never be recovered.

Every proposed lease or partnership must be subject to a national parliamentary debate, not sealed in a private, redacted contract. If we can afford the capital to pay foreign operators to modernise, we can afford the capital to modernise ourselves. Also, instead of fixing the blame on the workers, the government should focus on digitising the customs process and reducing the friction between the port authority and the National Board of Revenue.

This is not the first time that a proposal to place key elements of Chittagong Port under foreign management has ignited national controversy. In the mid-2000s, the prospect of the US-based Stevedoring Services of America (SSA) developing and operating a private container terminal triggered widespread public debate. 

The port is the crown jewel of our national sovereignty. Once we hand the keys to our most strategic maritime gateway to a foreign multinational, we cease to be the primary decision-makers in our own trade strategy. It is therefore imperative that every patriotic Bangladeshi must raise their voices about the “black box” nature of the agreement. The time is now to stand up for the Chittagong Port; once the contract is signed, it will be far too late to regret the loss of our independence and sovereignty.