Bangladesh now stands at a critical juncture as it prepares to graduate from Least Developing Country status in 2026. To sustain and accelerate its economic growth, Bangladesh must refine its foreign policy. Drawing some inspiration from Singapore’s successful strategies can be a good start. Why Singapore? 

Although differing in size and economic stature, Bangladesh and Singapore share similarities through their historical backgrounds stemming from British colonial rule, strategic geographic locations, and certain developmental aspirations. They’re both Commonwealth members, significantly influencing their legal modus operandi and administrative systems. 

They are small countries that geographically occupy strategic positions along major maritime trade routes—Bangladesh by the Bay of Bengal, tied to the open and free Indo-Pacific region, and Singapore along the Strait of Malacca.

Bangladesh’s foreign policy is simple: “Friendship to all, malice to none. “This statement umbrellas general foreign policy interests, but the primary emphasis is diplomacy. 

Singapore’s foreign policy is explicitly geared towards serving its economic interests. Its proactive engagement in free trade agreements (FTAs) and bilateral and multilateral engagements like the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), the European Union-Singapore Free Trade Agreement (EUSFTA), and the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) have shaped its development endeavors, much like Bangladesh’s current path.

Another cornerstone of Singapore’s foreign policy is its ability to attract substantial FDI. Singapore maintains a pro-business environment through low corporate tax rates, political stability, and efficient bureaucratic processes. This influx of FDI has diversified Singapore’s economy and reduced its dependency on any single sector. 

To do the same, Bangladesh can simplify investment processes through BIDA and establish a regulatory body that operates without political intervention. 

Mashfee Binte Shams, the rector of Foreign Service Academy Bangladesh, critiqued this economy-centric approach. She said, “When Bangladesh gets to the same economic standing and median income range as Singapore, we can think about a more economically aligned foreign policy instead of our current non-aligned one.” 

Admittedly, expecting Bangladesh to replicate Singapore’s foreign policy trajectory without addressing foundational differences is unrealistic. Singapore is renowned for its low corruption rates due to stringent anti-corruption laws and the establishment of independent bodies like the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB). International investors, hence, have immense trust in the country. 

For Bangladesh, inefficient bureaucracy and weak legal frameworks have always hindered foreign investment growth. Singapore, on the other hand, has always opted for economic growth-centric foreign policy. The establishment of the Economic Development Board (EDB) in 1961, even before independence, laid the groundwork for attracting FDI. Post-independence, the country actively sought multinational corporations to set up manufacturing bases. 

It can be argued that Singapore has gained economic success because it prioritized investment, specifically FDI, simply because its foreign policy, like all its other policies, is goal-oriented. 

Singapore’s economic alignment has also balanced relations with major powers like the United States and China. However, Bangladesh must ensure that any shift towards economic alignment does not result in reliance on a single partner, which could limit its ability to navigate geopolitical tensions and maintain balanced relationships across different regions. 

Singapore’s model of efficient administration and long-term policy planning is a critical factor in governance. The Singaporean government’s ability to implement consistent and forward-looking policies has provided stability and predictability. Bangladesh’s current focus on building a more efficient and transparent administrative system that can implement long-term strategies effectively is promising. 

The general belief is that the health of businesses dictates the overall shape of government and the systems it functions within. There needs to be a synergy between the private and the public sectors to extract the most from and utilize the resources and opportunities at our disposal. An open market with low political intervention can turn Bangladesh into a global manufacturing hub and a land of fair opportunities. A security alliance is also vital for successful ventures to be carried out. 

Singapore maintains a strong defense posture and invests in regional security initiatives to protect its economic interests and ensure the safety of vital trade routes. Similarly, Bangladesh must address its security challenges, including cybersecurity and regional instability. 

Dr. Anthony Saich from Harvard Kennedy School of Government, who previously served as the director for the Bangladesh Public Administration Projects, told the writer over a Zoom call, “Strengthening defense capabilities, enhancing regional security cooperation, and actively participating in security dialogues can help Bangladesh safeguard its strategic interests and maintain stability in volatile regions.”

“Singapore’s got the Strait of Malacca under its belt. Bangladesh, located at the head of the Bay of Bengal, also holds a strategic position that can be optimized to boost its economic and geopolitical influence. Enhancing maritime infrastructure, participating in regional connectivity projects like the Bay of Bengal Industrial Growth Belt (BIG-B), and engaging in strategic frameworks such as the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF), Bangladesh can strengthen its role in regional trade and security dynamics.” 

Despite their heavy import dependencies, both countries have pursued export-oriented economic ventures: Bangladesh has become a leading exporter of garments, whereas Singapore has diversified into finance, technology, and services. Since LDC is nearing, Bangladesh needs to refine its foreign policy to sustain and accelerate its economic growth. 

When a nation does not have clear rules of the game, other actors can capitalize on this situation to benefit themselves. Effective and long-term partnerships must have congruent and clear foreign policy objectives. 

At home, the absence of clear international priorities undermines public support because people may not appreciate how the government’s overseas activities reflect the nation’s interests, which can pose additional difficulties for policymakers and decision-makers. 

Summing up, flexibility is needed in foreign policy to respond to the international environment, but an overly broad approach weakens the foreign policy, makes it unpredictable, and may often fall short of accomplishing strategic objectives. 

As with any reform effort, the right delivery is built on solid foundations: good governance, commitment, good delivery plans, and a clear-eyed focus. At the heart is a culture of sustained ambition and rigor. When they get these basic principles right, governments set themselves and their people up for success.