GSOMIA and ACSA: What Bangladesh Must Ask Before Signing

Bangladesh is moving closer to signing two major defence agreements with the United States. These are the General Security of Military Information Agreement (GSOMIA) and the Acquisition and Cross-Servicing Agreement (ACSA).

On 23 May 2026, State Minister for Foreign Affairs Shama Obaed Islam confirmed that negotiations are active and promised that national interests would be protected. Constitution Watchdog respects that assurance. But a promise is not a process. The public must fully understand what is being signed before the government commits the nation.

What the Agreements Do

GSOMIA allows the two countries to share classified military intelligence securely. ACSA allows them to exchange logistical support, including fuel, supplies, and military services.

These are the first two steps in a standard four-part US defence cooperation framework. The next two steps cover joint weapons operations and sensitive drone and missile detection data. Smaller countries that have signed the first two agreements have historically found it very difficult to stop at that point. Each step creates dependencies that make the next step harder to refuse.

Why This Matters for Our Sovereignty

Since independence, Bangladesh has followed one clear foreign policy: friendship to all, malice towards none. This balanced approach has allowed us to maintain good relations with the United States, China, India, and Russia at the same time. That balance is a national achievement worth protecting.

“Signing these agreements could gradually pull Bangladesh into the strategic competition of a global superpower.”

Experts have warned that airports like Cox’s Bazar could become refuelling stops for US military operations across the Indo-Pacific. In comparable countries, intelligence shared under agreements like GSOMIA has been used for military operations that the smaller partner never approved or agreed to. These are not hypothetical risks. They are documented outcomes.

The Constitutional Gap That Must Be Closed

Article 145A of our Constitution requires that all treaties with foreign countries be placed before Parliament. Where national security is involved, this presentation happens in a secret parliamentary session. The government may argue that this provision covers everything and that the process is constitutionally sound.

Constitution Watchdog disagrees. Article 145A authorises a secret parliamentary session for presentation. It does not authorise secrecy in the decision itself. These are two entirely different things. The provision was designed to protect genuine operational military secrets, not to remove democratic accountability from consequential foreign policy decisions altogether.

Furthermore, Article 7 of the Constitution declares that all power belongs to the people. No provision designed for national security protection can be used as a permanent shield to exclude the people from decisions that will shape their country’s future for generations.

With an elected Parliament now sitting, there is no justification for bypassing it. Parliament must be consulted before signing, not simply notified afterward.

Our Demands

Constitution Watchdog calls on the government to take the following steps before any agreement is signed.

• Parliament must debate these agreements before any final signature. Presentation after signing is notification, not accountability.
• All non-classified terms, including the scope, duration, and exit conditions of both agreements, must be disclosed to the public. The existence and framework of a treaty is never a state secret.
• The government must confirm clearly and openly that no trade negotiations or economic pressure from the United States is conditioning the signing of these military agreements. Economic coercion and sovereign military decisions must never be mixed.
• Independent legal experts must review the agreements and report publicly on whether Bangladesh’s strategic autonomy, neutrality, and constitutional principles are fully protected.