Asia

Microsoft founder Bill Gates has cancelled his keynote speech at India’s flagship AI summit just hours before he was due to take the stage on Thursday.

Gates, who has faced renewed scrutiny over his past ties to the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, withdrew to “ensure the focus remains on the AI Summit’s key priorities”, the Gates Foundation said in a statement.

The five-day India AI Impact Summit 2026 was meant to showcase India’s ambitions in the booming sector, with the country expecting to attract more than $200bn in investment over the next two years.

India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi had billed the summit as an opportunity for India to shape the future of AI, drawing high-profile attendees, including French President Emmanuel Macron and Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva.

Instead, it has been dogged by controversy, from Gates’s abrupt exit to an incident in which an Indian university tried to pass off a Chinese-made robotic dog as its own innovation.

So, what exactly went wrong at India’s flagship AI gathering and why has it drawn such intense scrutiny?

Why Gates’s appearance became an issue

Bill Gates was due to deliver a short but high-profile speech highlighting the opportunities and risks posed by artificial intelligence.

However, in recent weeks, several opposition figures and commentators in Indian media weighed in after emails featuring his name were released in the Epstein files in late January, questioning whether his presence was appropriate.

Despite the discussion, all appeared to be proceeding as planned earlier in the week. On Tuesday, the Gates Foundation’s India office posted on X that Gates would attend the summit and “deliver his keynote as scheduled”.

Then, on Thursday, hours before the scheduled speech, it released a statement saying that “After careful consideration, and to ensure the focus remains on the AI Summit’s key priorities, Mr Gates will not be delivering his keynote address.”

It added that Ankur Vora, president of the Gates Foundation’s Africa and India offices, would deliver the speech instead.

What are the alleged links between Epstein and Gates?

Bill Gates was named in documents related to Epstein released in January by the US Department of Justice.

In a draft email included among the documents, Epstein alleged Gates had engaged in extramarital affairs and sought his help in procuring drugs “to deal with consequences of sex with Russian girls”.

It was unclear whether Epstein actually sent the email, and Gates denies any wrongdoing.

The Gates Foundation, in a statement to The New York Times, called the allegations “absolutely absurd and completely false”.

What has India’s government said?

Very little.

Despite criticism and calls from opposition figures to explain the invitation to Gates, the Indian government has not directly addressed the controversy that culminated in Gates’s withdrawal.

While unnamed government sources told local media he would not attend the summit, officials stopped short of explaining why.

Asked about Gates’s participation, Information Technology Minister Ashwini Vaishnaw declined to give a clear answer to reporters, while Modi made no reference to the issue in his public remarks.

Why are the Epstein files a sensitive subject for India?

The controversy surrounding Gates’s planned participation comes close on the heels of a series of disclosures in the Epstein files that have forced the Modi government on the backfoot.

In one email to an unidentified individual he referred to only as “Jabor Y”, Epstein referred to Modi’s historic visit – the first by an Indian prime minister – to Israel in July 2017.

Epstein wrote: “The Indian Prime minister modi took advice. and danced and sang in israel for the benefit of the US president. they had met a few weeks ago.. IT WORKED. !”

Modi’s visit to Israel – and his subsequent embrace of the Benjamin Netanyahu government, with military, intelligence and other ties strengthened over the past decade – had already drawn criticism from the opposition Congress party and others, who have accused him of reversing decades of Indian support for the Palestinian cause. India was the first non-Arab nation to recognise the Palestine Liberation Organization in 1974, and did not establish full diplomatic relations with Israel until 1992.

But the Epstein email turbocharged the opposition criticism of Modi’s Israel policy – with questions now also asked about whether it was influenced by Washington.

The Indian Ministry of External Affairs dismissed the Epstein email in an unusually sharply worded statement.

“Beyond the fact of the prime minister’s official visit to Israel in July 2017, the rest of the allusions in the email are little more than trashy ruminations by a convicted criminal, which deserve to be dismissed with the utmost contempt,” spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal said.

But the Epstein cloud continues to hover over India.

The files also show that India’s current oil minister, Hardeep Singh Puri, exchanged dozens of emails with Epstein after he joined Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party in 2014.

In many of them, Puti appears to be taking Epstein’s help in getting US investors, such as LinkedIn’s Reid Hoffman, to visit India. In others, he appears to suggest that he had a fairly comfortable personal relationship with Epstein.

“Please let me know when you are back from your exotic island,” Puri wrote in December 2014, for instance, asking to set up a meeting in which Puri could give Epstein some books to “excite an interest in India”.

Puri, in a new conference, has claimed that he only met Epstein “three or four times”, but the Congress party has argued that the emails suggest a much closer relationship.

Gates’s work in India

The Gates Foundation has long been a key partner in India’s public health and development sectors, backing major vaccination drives, disease prevention campaigns and sanitation programmes.

At the same time, he has had vocal critics, including environmental activist Vandana Shiva, who has argued that Gates’s brand of “philanthro-imperialism” uses wealth to control global food systems.

Gates also faced heavy criticism after a 2024 podcast in which he said India was “a kind of laboratory to try things … that then, when you prove them out in India, you can take to other places” when discussing development programmes and the foundation’s work there.

‘Orion’ the robodog and other controversies

Beyond the fallout over Bill Gates’s cancelled keynote, the AI Impact Summit has faced several controversies.

One incident involved a robotic dog named “Orion”, which Galgotias University, based in the New Delhi suburban town of Greater Noida, presented as its own innovation.

Online users quickly identified the machine as a commercially available Chinese-made model, prompting organisers to ask the institution to vacate its stall.

The event also drew criticism on its opening day after facing logistical issues, including long queues and confusion over entry procedures, according to local media.

On Wednesday, large crowds were seen walking for miles after police cordoned off roads for VIP access.

Dhananjay Yadav, the CEO of a company exhibiting high-tech wearables, made headlines after he reported on social media that devices had been stolen from the company’s stand.

The Times of India later reported that two maintenance workers at the event had been arrested for allegedly stealing the wearables.

BY THE NUMBERS

Spending on AI is forecast to skyrocket to $2.5 trillion in 2026, dwarfing even the largest scientific and infrastructure projects.

World leaders and tech executives are convening in New Delhi for the India-AI Impact Summit 2026, focusing on the role of artificial intelligence in governance, job disruption and global collaboration.

However, behind these discussions lies the financial reality. Over the past decade, AI has drawn one of the largest waves of private investment in modern history, totalling trillions of dollars.

According to Gartner, a United States-based business and technology insights company, worldwide spending on AI is forecast to total $2.5 trillion in 2026, a 44 percent increase over 2025.

To understand the magnitude of these investments, Al Jazeera visualises the staggering amounts by comparing them with some of the largest projects ever created by humanity. We also highlight which countries are spending the most on AI and provide insights into expenditures on data centres, models, services, and security.

What does $1bn look like?

To help understand a trillion dollars, it is useful to first visualise what millions and billions of dollars look like by using a stack of US dollar bills.

If you break these amounts down using $100 bills, here is how they stack up:

• $1,000 would form a stack about 1cm (0.393-inch) high.
• $10,000 would form a stack approximately 10cm (3.93-inch) high.
• $1m would fit inside a briefcase.
• $10m would fit inside a very large suitcase.
• $100m would fit on an industrial pallet stacked waist-high.
• $1bn would create a building approximately 5.2 metres (17 feet) high, with a width and a length of about 2 metres (6.6 feet) each.

Another way to think of it is if you spent $1 every second, it would take:

• 11.5 days to spend $1m
• 31 years to spend $1bn
• 31,000 years to spend $1 trillion

In more tangible terms, $1bn is roughly equivalent to:

• The estimated cost of the Grand Egyptian Museum in Giza, one of the largest archaeological museums in the world
• The cost of constructing two to three modern football stadiums, depending on size and design
• Buying 10 luxury private jets (at $100m each)
• Buying 6.3 tonnes of gold (at $5,000 per ounce)
• Buying 1 million high-end iPhones at retail price

$1.6 trillion already spent on AI

Over the past decade, AI-related investments have surged nearly 13-fold.

According to the 2025 AI Index Report by Stanford University, between 2013 and 2024, total global corporate investment in AI reached $1.6 trillion. This substantial expenditure dwarfs even the largest scientific and infrastructure projects of the 20th and 21st centuries.

To put the scale of AI investment into perspective, consider how it compares with some of the most ambitious and expensive projects in modern history. All figures are adjusted to 2024 US dollars:

• The Manhattan Project (1942-46): $36bn
• The International Space Station (1984-2011): $150bn
• The Apollo Program (1960-73): $250bn
• The US Interstate Highway System (1956-92): $620bn

In just over a decade, investment in AI has surpassed the cost of developing the first atomic bomb, landing humans on the moon and the decades-long effort to build the 75,440km (46,876-mile) US interstate highway network.

Unlike these landmark projects, AI funding has not been driven by a single government or wartime urgency. It has flowed through private markets, venture capital, corporate research and development, and global investors, making it one of the largest privately financed technological waves in history.

Global corporate investments in AI cover a vast array of operations, including mergers and acquisitions, minority stakes, private investments, and public offerings. These monumental expenditures highlight the extensive financial commitment to advance AI.

Which countries are spending the most on AI?

The AI investment surge is concentrated in just a few countries, where private capital has fuelled thousands of startups and shaped global innovation hubs.

The US has dominated AI spending, accounting for roughly 62 percent of total private AI funding since 2013. Between 2013 and 2024, US companies spent $471bn on AI. Chinese companies are the second-largest spenders at $119bn, followed by the United Kingdom at $28bn.

These figures exclude government spending, such as the US CHIPS Act or European national AI subsidies.

Global private investment in AI by country, 2013-24:

• US: $471bn, supporting 6,956 newly funded AI companies
• China: $119bn, 1,605 startups
• UK: $28bn, 885 startups
• Canada: $15bn, 481 startups
• Israel: $15bn, 492 startups
• Germany: $13bn, 394 startups
• India: $11bn, 434 startups
• France: $11bn, 468 startups
• South Korea: $9bn, 270 startups
• Singapore: $7bn, 239 startups
• Others: $58bn

AI spending to total $2.5 trillion in 2026

AI spending is forecast to skyrocket to $2.5 trillion in 2026, driven by a massive global build-out of data centres and services, according to Gartner.

The bulk of the spending is expected to go towards:

• AI infrastructure: $1.37 trillion
• AI services: $589bn
• AI software: $452bn
• AI cybersecurity: $51bn
• AI platforms for data science and machine learning: $31bn
• AI models: $26bn
• AI application development platforms: $8.4bn
• AI data: $3bn

By 2027, Gartner is forecasting that AI spending will surpass $3.3 trillion.

Shivan Dube shines as India warm up for South Africa by beating Netherlands in final group game at T20 World Cup.

India completed their clean sweep of Group A at the T20 World Cup by beating Netherlands by 17 runs in Ahmedabad.

The tournament co-hosts, along with Sri Lanka, had already secured their place at the Super Eights stage with wins in each of their opening three matches, but Wednesday’s win confirmed their form against a Netherlands side that nearly shocked Pakistan in their opening game.

Having won the toss, India recorded 193-6 with Shivam Dube top scoring with 66 off 31, including hitting 19 off the 16th over.

“I try to hit boundaries, and I enjoy hitting sixes, but the bowling was good, and I had to prepare myself,” Dube reflected.

“I know all the bowlers will not bowl me yorkers or length balls; they will bowl slower, short balls, and I have prepared for that [as well].

“The captain and coaches have told me I have to keep the strike rate high, that wasn’t the case when I came in, but we got there.”

As Dube alluded to, it was not such a steady start, with India opener Abhishek Sharma dismissed for his third duck in a row at the competition.

The left-handed Abhishek, the world’s number one T20 international batsman in the ICC rankings, had his stumps splattered third ball by off-spinner Aryan Dutt, leaving the home fans at the world’s biggest cricket stadium stunned.

The 25-year-old Abhishek is yet to score a run in the tournament in three appearances, having missed the second group-stage match against Namibia with a stomach infection.

Tilak Varma (31 off 27) and captain Suryakumar Yadav (34 off 28) had earlier given impetus to the innings with cameos, after Sharma’s opening partner Ishan Kishan also fell relatively cheaply for 18, although he did score at a strike rate of 257.

Hardik Pandya also continued his fine run with a late onslaught, hitting 30 off 21 as part of the inning’s highest partnership of 76 (in 5.5 overs) with Dube.

Wrist spinner Varun Chakravarthy’s 14-3 led the bowling performance as Netherlands were dismissed for 176-7. Dube was not to be left in the shadows in the field, however, as he claimed two wickets, including Netherlands top-scorer in the innings, Bas de Leede, for 33.

India’s next assignment is their first match in the Super Eights on Sunday against South Africa at the same Ahmedabad venue.

When India’s top court banned a controversial scheme in February 2024 that allowed individuals and corporates to make anonymous donations to political parties through opaque electoral bonds, many transparency activists hailed the judgement as a win for democracy.

Between 2018, when Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government introduced the electoral bonds, and when they were scrapped in 2024, secret donors funnelled nearly $2bn to parties.

More than half of that went to Modi’s Hindu majoritarian Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), which has held India’s central government since 2014, and also governs at least 20 Indian states and federally controlled territories, either directly or in coalition with allies.

In striking down the scheme, the Supreme Court said that “political contributions give a seat at the table to the contributor” and that “this access also translates into influence over policymaking”.

But two years later, data shows that big business continues to pump in millions of dollars in funding to political parties, with the BJP retaining its position as the biggest beneficiary, frequently raising serious concerns over a quid pro quo with donors.

The donors have returned to an older funding mechanism: electoral trusts. Introduced in 2013 by the Manmohan Singh government led by the Congress party that preceded Modi, the trusts, unlike bonds, require the donors to disclose their identities and the amount of money being given.

But that relative transparency is not dissuading companies from major mega-donations to parties directly positioned to benefit them through policies and contracts, an analysis of recent political funding by Al Jazeera reveals.

‘Money determines access’

In 2024-25, nine electoral trusts donated a total of $459.2m to political parties, with the BJP receiving $378.6 million — 83 percent of it. The main opposition Congress party got about $36m (8 percent), while other parties received the remaining amount.

This data is sourced from disclosures made during the first full year after the Supreme Court ban on bonds.

Two major corporations stood out, due to their significant financial scale and policy influence:  The Tata Group, founded in 1868 by Jamsetji Nusserwanji Tata, is a global conglomerate with more than 30 companies spanning steel, IT, automobiles, aviation, and more. Its aggregate revenue for FY 2024-25  exceeded $180bn. The Murugappa Group, founded in 1900 by A M Murugappa Chettiar as a money-lending business in Burma (now Myanmar), is a prominent Indian conglomerate with 29 businesses in engineering, agriculture, financial services and beyond. Its turnover stood at $8.53bn in 2024-25.

Documents submitted to the Election Commission of India in 2024-2025 show that the Progressive Electoral Trust, backed by 15 companies belonging to the Tata Group conglomerate, distributed approximately $110.2m to 10 political parties in the run-up to the 2024 general election.

The BJP received about $91.3m – again roughly 83 percent of the total fund – while the Congress got $9.31m, with smaller sums going to several regional parties. Tata made its contribution on April 2, 2024, while Murugappa did so on March 26, 2024.

India’s general elections began on April 19 and concluded on June 1, 2024.

The timing and scale of these donations are significant, say experts. Tata’s donations came within weeks of the government approving two semiconductor projects worth more than $15.2bn announced by the Tata Group in Gujarat and Assam – both BJP-ruled states.

The Modi government also provided additional support of about $5.3bn under India’s plans to promote semiconductor development.

Meanwhile, in February 2024, the Indian government approved a semiconductor assembly and testing facility proposed by CG Power and Industrial Solutions Ltd, a Murugappa Group company. The project, to be set up in Sanand, Gujarat, with an investment of approximately $870m, also received central and state government incentives.

In the same financial year, disclosures showed that yet another trust called Triumph Electoral Trust received $15.06m from Tube Investments of India Ltd, another Murugappa Group company. The entire money went to the BJP, with no contribution by Triumph to other parties.The scale of these donations surprised observers as the Murugappa Group had been a modest political donor over the previous decade.

“Electoral trusts may be legal, but they normalise a system where money determines access, policy, and electoral success,” Parayil Sreerag, a political strategist, told Al Jazeera. Sreerag argued that such a mechanism “favours the ruling party, marginalises smaller movements, and erodes democratic competition and public trust”.

To be sure, corporate funding in India has a long history.

The Birla group of companies was a major financier of Mahatma Gandhi in the years leading up to independence in 1947. Since then, other companies and parties have continued the practice.

“Business houses have traditionally supported ruling political parties,” G Gopa Kumar, former vice chancellor of the Central University of Kerala and a political strategist, told Al Jazeera.

India’s legal framework governing corporate donations to political parties has evolved alongside political shifts. The Companies Act, 1956, first regulated such contributions, barring government companies and young firms, while mandating disclosure of donations. Corporate funding was later banned in 1969 under Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. The ban was lifted in 1985.

A major overhaul came in 2013 with the introduction of Electoral Trusts and the Companies Act, 2013. The new law capped corporate donations at 7.5 percent of average net profits, required board approval, and mandated disclosure, marking a significant attempt at regulation and transparency.

But while the Modi-era electoral bonds between 2018 and 2024 drew the bulk of the criticism over electoral finance from transparency activists, the return to electoral trusts has coincided with what is, in effect, an increase in corporate funding for parties. Between 2018 and 2024, the electoral bonds led to an average of under $350m in total donations per year.

Trusts – to which corporates turned after the bonds were scrapped – donated more than $450m by contrast, in 2024-25.

“Left unchecked, it [soaring corporate funding] risks creating a duopoly between political power and corporate capital,” Sreerag said.

Al Jazeera reached out to the Tata Group, the Murugappa Group and the Election Commission of India for their responses to concerns over links between donations and influence, but it has not yet received any response.

Uncovering corruption in election funding

Transparency activists argue that the surge in corporate funding, especially for the ruling party, both reveals the access and influence enjoyed by major firms and sheds light on the disadvantages faced by smaller parties and independent candidates.

Shelly Mahajan, a researcher at the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR), a prominent Indian election watchdog, said unequal access to private donations undermines political participation and electoral competition.

“Despite decades of reform proposals, the nexus between money and politics persists in India due to weak enforcement and inadequate regulation,” she told Al Jazeera.

To many, the electoral bonds scheme came to epitomise that dark and cosy “nexus”.

In December, Nature magazine published a study on alleged corruption under the scheme, authored by academics Devendra Poola and Vinitha Anna John.

The authors found that newly incorporated companies made unusually large donations soon after their formation, pointing to expectations of gains from the government. In several cases, firms accused of tax evasion or other financial crimes donated after raids by India’s enforcement and investigating agencies, raising concerns of coercive political pressure: 26 entities under investigation bought bonds worth $624.7m, including $223.3m after raids by investigating agencies.

Bond purchases peaked around election cycles. That timing – around elections and after raids – was “significant”, Poola told Al Jazeera. “That sequencing is analytically difficult to dismiss as coincidence.” While the data cannot establish legal intent, Poola stressed that the pattern points to an “institutionalised quid pro quo ecosystem enabled by opacity”.

Yet critics say transparency alone does not resolve the link between public policy and political funding – as the data since the ban on electoral bonds shows.

‘What kind of democracy is this?’

Mahajan, the ADR researcher, said that in its decision to strike down the electoral bonds, the Supreme Court invoked the 2013 law on electoral trusts to reimpose a 7.5 percent cap on corporate donations based on their net profits.

Companies were ordered to disclose both the amounts and the recipients, creating greater scope for public scrutiny and detailed analysis. But that is not happening. Abhilash MR, a Supreme Court lawyer, said large corporate donations raise serious concerns, particularly under Article 14 of the Constitution of India, which guarantees political equality and administrative fairness.

He said there is mounting evidence of generous government incentives followed by large corporate donations.“When policy decisions appear calibrated to facilitate corporate funding, the very idea of a welfare state is undermined,” he told Al Jazeera, adding that proving corruption in courts remains extremely difficult.

“Temporal proximity between policy benefits and donations rarely meets the evidentiary threshold needed to trigger an independent judicial inquiry,” he said. “In such situations, accountability shifts from courtrooms to the public domain.”

Mini S, a politician from the Socialist Unity Centre of India (Communist) party, had hoped for that shift among voters when she contested the 2024 national elections from Thiruvananthapuram, the capital of the southern Kerala state.

She couldn’t fund air-conditioned vehicles, so her campaign during India’s notorious summer moved through neighbourhoods on hired motorbikes and autorickshaws. She hoped to unseat Shashi Tharoor, a former UN diplomat and politician from the opposition Congress party, who had been representing Thiruvananthapuram in parliament since 2009. When the votes were counted, Mini secured just 1,109 votes, while Tharoor won by a landslide. She also forfeited her $275 security deposit.

But for Mini, the outcome was less a personal defeat than an indictment of how Indian elections are fought. Her entire campaign ran on $5,500, she said, an amount much lower than the $105,000 limit set by the Election Commission of India on expenditure by a parliamentary candidate.

“India likes to call itself the world’s largest democracy, but it’s not,” Mini told Al Jazeera. “When corporate money openly funds mainstream parties – through electoral bonds and trusts, often in clear quid pro quo arrangements – and the Election Commission stays silent, what kind of democracy is this?”

In such a scenario, Mini said, government policies “serve corporate interests, not the constitution”.

“Ordinary people are sidelined, and the marginalised are pushed further into the margins. With money of this scale in elections, anyone without corporate backing, like us, is effectively locked out of politics,” she said.

China has previously criticised the role, accusing the US of interfering in China’s internal affairs.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has announced that the Trump administration has appointed an envoy to the position of United States special coordinator for Tibetan issues.

The role, which was created by the US Congress in 2002, will be filled by Riley Barnes, who is currently also serving as the assistant secretary of state for democracy, human rights, and labour.

Rubio announced Barnes’s appointment in a statement on the occasion of Losar, the Tibetan New Year, on Tuesday.

“On this first day of the Year of the Fire Horse, we celebrate the fortitude and resilience of Tibetans around the world,” Rubio said in a statement.

“The United States remains committed to supporting the unalienable rights of Tibetans and their distinct linguistic, cultural, and religious heritage,” he added.

The new appointment comes as the administration of US President Donald Trump has stepped back from speaking out on a range of human rights issues globally, and as the US has either intervened directly or threatened other countries, including Venezuela, Iran, Cuba, and Denmark’s Greenland.

The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs did not immediately respond to Rubio’s announcement, which comes during the Chinese New Year holiday, but Beijing has criticised similar appointments in the past.

“The setting up of the so-called coordinator for Tibetan issues is entirely out of political manipulation to interfere in China’s internal affairs and destabilise Tibet. China firmly opposes that,” Zhao Lijian, a spokesman at the Chinese Foreign Ministry, said after a similar appointment was made by the US State Department in 2020, during Trump’s first presidency .

“Tibet affairs are China’s internal affairs that allow no foreign interference,” Lijian had said.

China has governed the remote region of Tibet since 1951, after its military marched in and took control in what it called a “peaceful liberation”.

Exiled Tibetan leaders have long condemned China’s policies in Tibet, accusing Beijing of separating families in the Himalayan region, banning their language, and suppressing Tibetan culture.

China has denied any wrongdoing and says its intervention in Tibet ended “backward feudal serfdom”.

More than 80 percent of the Tibetan population is ethnic Tibetan, while Han Chinese make up the remainder. Most Tibetans are also Buddhists, and while China’s constitution allows for freedom of religion, the governing Communist Party adheres strictly to atheism.

Also on Tuesday, the head of the Washington-based Radio Free Asia announced that the US-government-funded news outlet has resumed broadcasting into China, after shutting down its news operations in October due to cuts from the Trump administration.

Radio Free Asia President and CEO Bay Fang wrote on social media that the resumed broadcast to audiences in China in “Mandarin, Tibetan, and Uyghur” languages was “due to private contracting with transmission services” and congressional funding approved by Trump.

Tarique Rahman, leader of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), which swept to a landslide victory in last week’s parliamentary elections, has been sworn in as the country’s first elected prime minister since deadly protests in 2024, which resulted in the ouster of the previous government and its prime minister, Sheikh Hasina.

The political alliance led by Rahman’s party won 212 seats in the Jatiya Sangsad, Bangladesh’s parliament, in Thursday’s elections, leaving its main competitor, the alliance led by Jamaat-e-Islami, with 77.

On Tuesday, Rahman took his oath of office, and newly elected MPs pledged loyalty to their country inside the oath room of the parliament building as they were sworn in by Chief Election Commissioner AMM Nasir Uddin.

Foreign officials, among them Pakistan’s foreign minister and the speaker of India’s Parliament, were also present.

Here is what we know about the people who will be running Bangladesh’s new government:

Who are the new cabinet members?

Twenty-five full ministers in the new cabinet took their oaths during a separate ceremony in Dhaka on Tuesday afternoon. The 25 have been drawn overwhelmingly from the BNP and its close allies.

Among the state (junior) ministers appointed to Rahman’s government are Nurul Haque and Zonayed Saki, first-time parliamentarians, who were prominent voices during the 2024 protests.

While members of the cabinet have been announced, the ministries they will be responsible for have not yet been confirmed. Here’s a look at who some of them are.

Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir

Alamgir, who has served as secretary-general of the BNP since 2016, was elected to his seat in parliament by the constituency of Thakurgaon-1, a district in northwestern Bangladesh.

Alamgir, 78, served as a member of parliament from 2001 to 2006 under the previous BNP government, led by Rahman’s late mother, Khaleda Zia, during which he was also state minister for agriculture and later for civil aviation and tourism.

After the end of that government’s term, a caretaker administration took over until elections in 2008, which Alamgir stood in but did not win. He remained a senior member of the BNP outside parliament.

In October 2023, Alamgir was detained by police the day after mass antigovernment protests swept through Dhaka when Hasina’s Awami League party was in power. The police said he had been detained for questioning in connection with the violence that erupted during those demonstrations.

When the BNP win was announced last week, Alamgir hailed the victory and called the BNP “a party of the people”.

Amir Khasru Mahmud Chowdhury

Chowdhury was elected from the Chattogram-11 constituency, which covers the Bandar and Patenga areas of Chattogram city in southeastern Bangladesh.

From 2001 to 2004, Chowdhury served as minister of commerce under the previous BNP administration. He is a member of the BNP’s standing committee.

Before last week’s vote, Chowdhury said that if elected, the BNP would govern by investing in people, “in health, in education and upskilling” and by supporting “artisans, the weavers” and small industries with credit as well as helping them access international markets, including by helping them with their branding.

Iqbal Hasan Mahmud Tuku

Tuku, 75, has been elected as a member of parliament for the Sirajganj-2 constituency in North Bengal.

Tuku is a member of the BNP Standing Committee, the party’s top policymaking body.

He is a veteran BNP figure who has been elected to parliament multiple times and has held important party roles. From 2001 to 2006, he served as the state minister for power. In 2006, he also briefly served as the state minister for agriculture.

In 2007, during the military-backed interim government, a special anticorruption court in Dhaka sentenced Tuku to nine years in prison in a case filed against him by the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC). The ACC accused Tuku of concealing information about assets worth 49.6 million takas (roughly $400,000).

The High Court upheld his conviction and jail sentence in 2023 after a lengthy appeal process. However, in September 2025, a year after the overthrow of the Awami League government, the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court acquitted Tuku.

Khalilur Rahman

Khalilur Rahman is a technocratic minister, appointed for his expertise rather than as a party politician. He is not a member of parliament.

He served as national security adviser in the interim administration headed by Muhammad Yunus, which took over to oversee a transition after Hasina’s ouster.

He also served as the government’s representative for the Rohingya issue during Yunus’s tenure. The refugee camps in Cox’s Bazar in southern Bangladesh are sheltering more than one million Rohingya refugees, most of whom fled Myanmar in 2017 to escape a military crackdown.

Afroza Khanam Rita

The only woman cabinet minister, Rita is a first-time member of parliament but comes from a political family: Her late father was a four-times MP. Rita is also the chairwoman of the Monno Group of Industries, a conglomerate whose firms produce ceramic ware, textiles and agricultural machinery – primarily for export.

Asaduzzaman

Asaduzzaman, was elected from the Jhenaidah-1 (Shailkupa) constituency, which covers Shailkupa upazila in Jhenaidah district in southwestern Bangladesh.

Dipen Dewan

Dewan, 62, a Chakma Buddhist leader, is expected to be named minister of Chittagong Hill Tracts affairs. Dewan won from the Rangamati constituency.

Chakma Buddhists are an ethnic group of Tibeto-Burman speaking people. They are indigenous to the Chittagong Hill Tracts of Bangladesh and parts of northeastern India.

Nitai Roy Chowdhury

Chowdhury, a Hindu leader, is widely expected to become the minister of cultural affairs.

Chowdhury, 77, has served as a senior adviser and strategist for the BNP’s top leaders.

How significant are these appointments?

During campaigning, the BNP pledged to meet the people’s demand for an elected government with real legitimacy. Therefore, ministers and cabinet members can expect a significant amount of scrutiny, experts said.

Khandakar Tahmid Rejwan, lecturer in global studies and governance at the Independent University, Bangladesh, told Al Jazeera: “The appointees in their respective fields will also face an invisible yet significant pressure to prove themselves more effective and distinctive than the previous administrations, both the interim government and, of course, the Awami League-led government under Sheikh Hasina.”

He added: “It will be particularly interesting to observe whether, after a youth-led mass uprising, the core of executive power is taken over by the old guard or by new faces that reflect diversity in terms of age, gender, ethnicity and religion.”

While two prominent figures from the 2024 student uprisings have been named as state ministers – Nurul Haque and Zonayed Saki – Rejwan added that leaders of the student-led National Citizen Party, which was founded after the 2024 uprising, had made a “strategic mistake” by allying with Jamaat instead of the BNP.

“They had the option to form an alliance with the BNP, which they later abandoned in favour of Jamaat. Given these political dynamics, it is unlikely that any student leaders will receive cabinet positions.”

Who attended the ceremony to swear in the new cabinet?

Several foreign delegations were in Bangladesh to attend the ceremony.

They included Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu and Bhutanese Prime Minister Tshering Tobgay.

India was represented by Om Birla, the speaker of its lower house in Parliament. Pakistani Federal Minister for Planning Ahsan Iqbal also attended.

Leaders and representatives from Nepal and the United Kingdom, China, Saudi Arabia, Turkiye, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar and Brunei were among those who were invited to attend.

A group of legendary former international cricketers has appealed to Pakistan’s government to provide “immediate and adequate medical attention” for Imran Khan, the country’s former cricket captain and prime minister, who has reportedly been denied appropriate medical treatment during his incarceration.

The 14 former captains, many of whom played against Khan, raised concerns over his deteriorating health and the alleged mistreatment during his imprisonment in a letter published by Australian media outlets on Tuesday.

“We write with deep concern regarding the reported treatment and incarceration conditions of Imran Khan, the distinguished former captain of Pakistan and a legendary figure in world cricket,” the letter read.

The signatories include Khan’s contemporaries and cricket’s Hall of Famers Sunil Gavaskar, Kapil Dev, Clive Lloyd, Allan Border, Greg Chappell, Ian Chappell, John Wright and David Gower.

Khan, a popular figure, represented Pakistan from 1971 to 1992 in 88 Test matches and 175 one-day internationals, leading the nation to its first World Cup win in 1992.

He is widely regarded as one of the greatest all-round players and arguably Pakistan’s greatest cricketer.

Ex-cricketers raise ‘profound concern’

The petition signed by the cricketers was drafted by Greg Chappell and delivered to Pakistan’s Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif on Tuesday afternoon, a report in The Age newspaper said.

“Recent reports concerning his health – particularly the alarming deterioration of his vision while in custody – and the conditions of his imprisonment over the past two and a half years have caused us profound concern,” the former cricketers wrote.

Last week, a court-appointed lawyer claimed that Khan had been left with just 15 percent vision in his right eye after authorities allegedly ignored his complaints for three months.

The lawyer’s report painted a troubling picture of the 73-year-old’s deteriorating health and prolonged isolation, since he was imprisoned in August 2023 on dozens of charges. It said Khan suffered rapid and substantial vision loss over the past three months while in custody.

“He [Khan] stated that he subsequently suffered a sudden and complete loss of vision in his right eye,” the report said.

A government-appointed medical board examining the jailed ex-leader reported a significant improvement in his eyesight, a claim rejected by Khan’s family.

“Without the physical presence of both his personal doctor and family representative, we categorically reject any claims made by the government regarding his examination, treatment or medical condition,” Aleema Khan, the former prime minister’s sister, told Al Jazeera.

Khan became prime minister in 2018 in elections that opponents alleged were rigged in his favour by the powerful military. Four years later, he was removed through a no-confidence vote that he claimed was orchestrated by the military, after their relationship soured, in collusion with Washington and Khan’s political rivals in Pakistan.

These allegations were denied by both the Pakistani military and the United States.

‘Uphold the principles of decency and justice’

The letter of appeal, which was also signed by former captains Michael Atherton, Michael Brearley, Belinda Clark, Kim Hughes, Nasser Hussain and Steve Waugh, stated that a person of Imran Khan’s stature deserved to be treated with the “dignity and basic human consideration befitting a former national leader and a global sporting icon”.

The former cricketers urged Pakistan’s government to ensure that Khan receives:

• Immediate, adequate and ongoing medical attention from qualified specialists of his choosing to address his reported health issues.
• Humane and dignified conditions of detention in line with international standards, including regular visits by close family members.
• Fair and transparent access to legal processes without undue delay or hindrance.

Khan’s supporters, members of his political party Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) and allies have held protests and sit-ins outside the Pakistani parliament in recent days, deploring the denial of access to his family and physicians recommended by them.

“Imran’s sons have been trying to visit Pakistan since last year and have applied several times, but their visa has not been processed. It is in limbo; they do not get a denial, nor an approval,” Khan’s sister said, referring to Kasim and Suleman, Khan’s two sons, who are nationals of the United Kingdom.

In their letter, the former captains said they were appealing to Sharif’s government to honour and uphold “the principles of decency and justice”.

“This appeal is made in the spirit of sportsmanship and common humanity, without prejudice to any legal proceedings,” the letter concluded.

Islamabad, Pakistan – The sister of former Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan has told Al Jazeera that the family has rejected a government board’s claims that the cricketer-turned-politician’s eyesight has improved since a court report last week said he had lost most vision in one eye.

A government-appointed medical board examining the jailed ex-leader reported a significant improvement in his eyesight after weeks of controversy over his deteriorating vision. Its medical report, seen by Al Jazeera, claims that Khan’s vision in his right eye has improved from 6/36 to 6/9. His left eye remains at 6/6 vision with the use of glasses.

In ophthalmic terms, 6/6 vision means the person’s eyesight is fine. A 6/9 reading means the person can see at 6 metres (20 feet) what someone with normal vision sees at 9 metres (30 ft).

The assessment was carried out on Sunday by a two-member board comprising doctors Nadeem Qureshi and Muhammad Arif Khan. The specialists conducted a detailed examination at Adiala jail in Rawalpindi, where the 73-year-old founder of the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) party has been imprisoned since August 2023.

But Khan’s family said it had “no trust” in the authorities.

His sister, Aleema Khan, described it as “extremely concerning and unacceptable” that the government had resisted allowing Khan’s personal doctor and a family representative to be present during the examination and treatment.

“Without the physical presence of both his personal doctor and family representative, we categorically reject any claims made by the government regarding his examination, treatment or medical condition,” Aleema told Al Jazeera.

Aasim Yusuf, chief medical officer of the Imran Khan-founded Shaukat Khanum Memorial Hospital and one of Khan’s personal physicians, said in a video message that he had held a 40-minute conversation with the two doctors who examined Khan on February 15.

In the video, shared by the PTI on social media, Yusuf said the visiting doctors briefed him on the treatment and future plan of care, adding that according to their latest assessment, “Khan had shown significant improvement as a result of treatment and his vision had improved significantly as well”.

“I would be extremely happy if I was able to confirm that this was the case. Unfortunately, because I have not seen him myself and have not been able to participate in his care or to talk to him, I am unable to either confirm or deny the veracity of what we have been told,” Yusuf said.

Disputed diagnosis

The latest examination comes after reports last month that authorities had taken Khan late at night to a government facility for a medical procedure without informing his family. Following the outcry, Pakistan’s Supreme Court appointed Barrister Salman Safdar as amicus curiae to meet Khan and assess his condition.

In a seven-page report filed last week, Safdar painted a troubling picture. He wrote that Khan had suffered rapid and substantial vision loss over the past three months and that despite repeated complaints of persistent blurred and hazy vision, “no action was taken by the jail authorities to address these complaints”.

Safdar quoted Khan as saying that “only 15 percent” vision remained in his right eye.

PTI General Secretary Salman Akram Raja told reporters in Islamabad on Monday that the two doctors, one of whom was recommended after consultations with Yusuf, confirmed that Khan’s vision had improved.

“The two doctors who met him in jail said that Khan confirmed to them that he was unable to see the clock on the wall for a few weeks, [but] can now not only see that, but also the clock hands. According to doctors, this was an incredible improvement in his vision,” Raja said.

Aleema, however, insisted that the family could not accept any medical report until Khan’s physician examined him in person. She renewed the demand that he be transferred to Shifa International Hospital in Islamabad.

She accused the government of repeatedly misleading the family about Khan’s health.

“After our protest and Salman Safdar’s report, we were told that he would be taken to Shifa International Hospital, along with [the] presence of his physician as well as a family member, but then, abruptly, they [the government] changed the plan. How can we be suddenly denied?” she asked.

Aleema said authorities had asked the family to provide the names of doctors and relatives who could accompany Khan, only to reject each proposal.

“There have been repeated back-and-forth phone calls. We gave them the names of his personal doctors, including Dr Aasim. Another name we gave was our sister, Uzma Khan, to represent the family. But the response from the government was that no sister will be allowed to meet him,” she claimed.

She added that her brother had no underlying medical conditions, such as diabetes or high blood pressure, and described him as a political prisoner.

“Our hearts are breaking, and we are so frustrated. This is deliberate. When Salman Safdar went there and came back, he told us the story, and we cried hearing about Khan’s current situation. This is not just criminal negligence, this is outright criminal and deliberate,” she said.

Standoff over medical access

The PTI and its allies, who are holding a sit-in outside parliament, have promised to continue their protest until their demands are met, including access to Khan and his transfer to Shifa International Hospital.

Sheikh Waqas Akram, the party’s central information secretary, said the demand was straightforward and focused on securing “specialised treatment” for Khan.

“When you deny the family access, or the physicians recommended by the family, and when you break promises, how can we trust? We don’t even know what they have done with him. We believe the government is certainly hiding something,” he told Al Jazeera.

Aleema said she would hold a news conference on Tuesday outside Adiala jail and added that the family had not sought any concessions from authorities beyond medical access.

“Imran’s sons have been trying to visit Pakistan since last year and have applied several times, but their visa has not been processed. It is in limbo, they do not get a denial, nor an approval,” she said, referring to Kasim and Suleman, Khan’s two sons, who are nationals of the United Kingdom.

The sons were born during Khan’s first marriage to Jemima Goldsmith. The couple divorced in 2004 after nine years of marriage. Both sons are based in London.

Government rejects negligence claims

The government, meanwhile, has defended the medical board’s work. Law Minister Azam Nazeer Tarar said the treatment provided to Khan had led to improvement and that the specialist team had expressed satisfaction with his progress.

Speaking at a public event on Monday, Tarar said opposition leaders and Khan’s personal doctors had been briefed.

Minister for Parliamentary Affairs Tariq Fazal Chaudhry also said the examination inside the jail was conducted “in accordance with government directives and with complete transparency”.

“The government provided every necessary facility on site to ensure no question of any negligence arises,” Chaudhry wrote on social media, adding that Gohar Ali Khan, the PTI chairman in Khan’s absence, had been kept informed.

Imran Khan, a former Pakistan cricket captain who led Pakistan to its 1992 World Cup victory, became prime minister in 2018.

He was removed in 2022 through a parliamentary no-confidence vote, which he said was orchestrated by the military in collusion with Washington and his political rivals. Both the military and the United States have denied the allegations.

Since his ouster, Khan has blamed Army Chief Field Marshal Asim Munir for his legal and political troubles and has repeatedly urged supporters to protest.

In June 2024, a United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention concluded that Khan’s detention “had no legal basis and appears to have been intended to disqualify him from running [for] political office”.

Nissanka’s unbeaten century batters former cricket champions Australia, who now need other results to go their way to survive.

Sri Lanka’s opener Pathum Nissanka scored the first century of the T20 World Cup to put his side into the Super Eights of the cricket tournament and leave Australia on the brink of elimination.

Nissanka scored 100 not out off 52 balls with five sixes and 10 fours as Sri Lanka, chasing Australia’s 181, reached 184-2 with two overs to spare in Kandy to win by eight wickets on Monday.

“We’re in the lap of the gods now, I think,” Australia captain Mitchell Marsh said after the match.

“Lot of emotions in the room right now,” he said of the 2021 champions. “Haven’t been at our best. Disappointed bunch at the moment.”

Nissanka was involved in a 97-run stand off 66 balls with Kusal Mendis for the second wicket, with the wicketkeeper-batsman posting his third fifty in the competition.

Nissanka became the first Sri Lankan to score two hundreds in T20 internationals.

After Mendis’s dismissal, Nissanka and Pavan Rathnayake put on 76 off 34 balls to see Sri Lanka to victory.

Nissanka played some glorious cover drives off the spinners and played some elegant flicks against the quicks.

Rathnayake hit the winning runs straight after Nissanka reached his century off 52 balls and was greeted by massive cheers in Pallekele International Stadium.

The packed crowd roared again one delivery later when Rathnayake finished the match with a boundary to deep square.

Sri Lanka came into the World Cup after a 3-0 drubbing at the hands of England, but have gained momentum and have won all three games so far.

Australia’s campaign has been plagued by injuries.

Their captain Marsh, who missed the first two games, returned and gave them a rollicking start by scoring 54.

Marsh and Travis Head (56) scored 104 runs off 51 balls for the first wicket.

With Australia eyeing a total in excess of 200, Sri Lanka’s slow bowlers kept them to 181 with leg spinner Dushan Hemantha picking up 3-37.

Australia collapsed as they looked for quick runs, losing their last six wickets for 21 in 24 balls.

Super Eights: Sri Lanka through; Australia on the brink of elimination

A victory by Zimbabwe over Ireland in Group B on Tuesday, or against Sri Lanka on Thursday, would eliminate Australia.

If Zimbabwe lose both matches, Australia will need to beat Oman in their final game on Friday by a big margin to get through on net run rate.

Meanwhile, Australia could fail to get out of the group stage for the first time since 2009 if unbeaten Zimbabwe beats Ireland on Tuesday.

England have also reached the Super Eights after surviving a scare from Italy in Kolkata. England came back from 105-5 to post 202-7. Italy were cut short on 178.

In New Delhi, Afghanistan shrugged off back-to-back defeats to finally register a win after beating the United Arab Emirates by five wickets. That helped them stay in the tournament and saw South Africa secure a spot in the Super Eights.

‘Let the practice of democracy continue,’ said Yunus, who has overseen the country’s post-uprising transition since 2024.

Bangladesh’s interim leader Muhammad Yunus has announced he is resigning to pave way for a new government elected several days ago.

Speaking in a farewell broadcast to the nation on Monday, Yunus said the interim government he oversees “is stepping down”.

“But let the practice of democracy, freedom of speech, and fundamental rights that has begun not be halted,” he said.

An 85-year-old Nobel Peace Prize winner, Yunus returned from self-imposed exile in August 2024 to serve as Bangladesh’s chief adviser after a student-led uprising toppled the government of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina.

Bangladesh held its first general elections since that uprising on February 12, and the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), led by Tarique Rahman, won a landslide victory.

Rahman, a scion of one of the country’s most powerful political dynasties, is set to serve as prime minister of the incoming government when it is sworn in on Tuesday, according to Bangladeshi media.

Yunus praised the recent elections, which European Union observers called “credible and competently managed” as a “benchmark for future elections”.

“The people, voters, political parties, and stakeholder institutions linked to the election have set a commendable example,” Yunus said.

‘We must remain united’

Rahman’s BNP-led alliance won at least 212 seats in the 300-seat parliament, giving it a strong mandate to lead. In second place was the Jamaat-e-Islami party, which won 77 seats, positioning it as the main opposition party. Hasina’s Awami League party was barred from participating.

Rahman appealed for unity in the wake of his party’s victory, saying “our paths and opinions may differ, but in the interest of the country, we must remain united”.

In addition to electing their new representatives, Bangladeshi voters also endorsed sweeping democratic reforms in a national referendum.

The lengthy document of reforms, known as the “July Charter” after the month when the uprising that toppled Hasina began, proposes term limits for prime ministers, the creation of an upper house of parliament, stronger presidential powers and greater judicial independence. It enshrines a key pillar of Yunus’s post-uprising transition agenda.

The referendum noted that approval would make the charter “binding on the parties that win” the election, obliging them to endorse it.

“Sweeping away the ruins, we rebuilt institutions and set the course for reforms,” said Yunus, praising the reforms.

However, several parties raised questions before the vote, and the reforms will still require ratification by the new parliament.

“The challenge now is to ensure good governance, law and order, and public safety, and to establish a rights-based state, which was at the heart of the aspirations of the 2024 mass uprising,” Rezaul Karim Rony, a Dhaka-based political analyst, told Al Jazeera.

French President Macron and Brazilian leader Lula expected to attend summit aimed to outline global AI governance and collaboration.

India is hosting an artificial intelligence summit this week, bringing together heads of state and tech executives with hot-button issues on the agenda, including job disruption and child safety.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi will on Monday afternoon inaugurate the five-day AI Impact Summit in New Delhi, which aims to declare a “shared roadmap for global AI governance and collaboration”.

“This occasion is further proof that our country is progressing rapidly in the field of science and technology,” and it “shows the capability of our country’s youth”, he said in an X post on Monday.

Touted as the biggest edition yet, the Indian government is expecting 250,000 visitors from across the sector, including 20 national leaders and 45 ministerial-level delegations.

It comes at a pivotal moment as AI rapidly transforms economies, reshapes labour markets and raises questions around regulations, security and ethics.

From generative AI tools that can produce text and images to advanced systems used in defence, healthcare and climate modelling, AI has become a central focus for governments and corporations across the world.

The summit, previously held in France, the United Kingdom and South Korea, has evolved far beyond its modest beginnings as a meeting tightly focused on the safety of cutting-edge AI systems into an all-purpose jamboree trade fair in which safety is just one aspect.

‘AI should be used for shaping humanity’

India – the world’s most populous nation and one of the fastest-growing digital markets – sees the summit as an opportunity to project itself as a bridge between advanced economies and the Global South.

Officials said the country’s experience in building large-scale digital public infrastructure, including digital identity and payment platforms, offers a model for deploying AI at scale while keeping costs low.

“The goal is clear: AI should be used for shaping humanity, inclusive growth and a sustainable future,” India’s Minister for Electronics and Information Technology Ashwini Vaishnaw said.

French President Emmanuel Macron and Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva are among the world leaders who are attending the summit.

Google Chief Executive Sundar Pichai, Qualcomm CEO Cristiano Amon, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, Microsoft President Brad Smith and AMI Labs Executive Chairman Yann LeCun are also expected to attend.

New Delhi declaration

The summit has the loose themes of “people, progress, planet” – dubbed the “three sutras”.

Like previous editions, the India AI Impact Summit is not expected to result in a joint binding political agreement. It is more likely that the event could end with a nonbinding pledge or declaration on goals for AI development.

Last year’s edition, the Paris AI Action Summit, was dominated by United States Vice President JD Vance’s speech in which he rebuked European efforts to curb AI’s risks by warning global leaders and tech industry executives against “excessive regulation” that could hobble the rapidly growing AI industry.

AI summits have evolved since the first meeting in November 2023, barely a year after the launch of ChatGPT, which stoked excitement and fear about the capabilities of generative artificial intelligence.

That meeting at a former code-breaking base north of London was attended only by official delegations from 28 countries and the European Union, along with a small number of AI executives and researchers, and was focused on keeping AI safe and reining in its potentially catastrophic risks.

Seth Hays, author of the Asia AI Policy Monitor newsletter, said talk at the summit would likely centre around “ensuring that governments put up some guardrails, but don’t throttle AI development”.

“There may be some announcements for more state investment in AI, but it may not move the needle much, as India needs partnerships to integrate on the international scene for AI,” Hays told the AFP news agency.

Defending champions India have thumped Pakistan by 61 runs in a grudge Group A match at the Twenty20 World Cup in Colombo, Sri Lanka, to secure their place in the Super Eight stage of the cricket tournament.

Suryakumar Yadav’s side made 175-7 after a flying start from Ishan Kishan’s superb 77, before bowling Pakistan out for 114 in 18 overs.

The defeat on Sunday extended Pakistan’s dismal record against India in World Cups.

India have now won eight of the sides’ nine meetings at T20 World Cups, as well as all eight of their encounters at ODI World Cups.

The cricket teams of the nuclear-armed, contentious neighbours only face each other in multi-nation tournaments at neutral venues under a longstanding compromise arrangement.

It has been more than 18 years since India and Pakistan last met in a Test match, and 13 years since either side crossed the border to play a bilateral series.

Ishan Kishan defies a tricky Colombo pitch with 77 as India beat Pakistan by 61 runs in Group A of cricket’s T20 World Cup.

Defending ‌champions India have thumped Pakistan by 61 runs in a grudge Group A match of the ⁠Twenty20 World Cup to ⁠secure their place in the Super Eight stage of the cricket tournament.

Ishan Kishan’s breakneck 77 powered India to 175-7 on Sunday at the R Premadasa Stadium, where Pakistan’s spin-heavy ⁠attack managed to apply the brakes to an extent after the opener’s exit.

The tournament co-hosts returned to bundle out Pakistan for 114 in 18 overs to register their third win in a row.

The ⁠match went ahead after Pakistan earlier reversed their decision to boycott the game in solidarity with Bangladesh, whose team refused to tour India over safety concerns and were replaced by Scotland.

Pakistan captain Salman Ali Agha and his India counterpart Suryakumar Yadav did not shake hands at the toss, though.

India were reinforced by the return of Abhishek Sharma, ‌who missed the first two matches with a stomach infection. But the opener could not make it count.

Pakistan’s Salman sprang a surprise by opening the attack himself, and the move paid off as the spinner trapped Abhishek lbw to remove the reigning number one batter in T20 Internationals.

Pakistan used three spinners in the powerplay to try and stem boundary flow, and India’s score of 52-1 after six overs suggested the ploy worked to an extent.

Kishan could not be contained, ⁠though, and the diminutive southpaw tore into the Pakistan attack with his ⁠take-no-prisoners batting.

The opener took only 27 balls to race to his second successive fifty of the tournament.

Saim Ayub ended Kishan’s 40-ball blitz, but India were 92-2 at the halfway stage of their innings.

Ayub (3-25) dismissed Tilak Varma (25) and Hardik Pandya with successive ⁠deliveries to turn the heat back on India.

Suryakumar (32) and Shivam Dube (27) could not quite provide the late flourish to take India past the 200-mark ⁠that had looked well within their reach at one stage.

Pakistan ⁠became the first team to employ six spinners in a T20 World Cup match, but the joy of having restricted India under 200 evaporated soon as they slumped to 13-3 in two overs in their chase.

Pandya removed Pakistan’s in-form opener Sahibzada Farhan ‌for a duck, and Jasprit Bumrah dismissed Ayub and Salman in the same over to pin down Pakistan.

Babar Azam (five) did not last long either, and Pakistan were gasping at 38-4 after the six powerplay ‌overs.

Usman ‌Khan (44) defied India for a while, but Axar Patel lured him out to be stumped to effectively snuff out Pakistan’s chances of an unlikely victory.

The landmark Bangladesh election held last week was ⁠triggered by a Gen Z-led uprising in 2024, yet a youth-led National Citizen Party (NCP) – born out of the uprising – managed to secure only six parliamentary seats out of the 297, the results of which are available.

The results, officially declared on Saturday, showed that voters overwhelmingly chose the long-established Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), which comfortably defeated a Jamaat-e-Islami-led alliance, of which the NCP is a key partner.

Tarique Rahman of the BNP, which has already governed the country three times, most recently from 2001 to 2006, is set to become prime minister following one of the most consequential elections in the country’s history.

Many young Bangladeshis who voted for the first time described the election as historic, but falling short of their expectations.

“As Generation Z, we didn’t get the expected representation and results after shedding so much blood and losing lives,” student Afsana Hossain Himi told Al Jazeera.

“Still, we are very hopeful. We have representatives from the younger generation, and we hope they will do something good,” she said, referring to the six NCP winners.

Many young Bangladeshis felt the NCP failed to build up a big enough support base in time for ‌the vote.

“They did not live up to the hopes and dreams people had after the 2024 uprising,” 23-year-old university student Sohanur Rahman said. “The NCP’s alignment with Jamaat felt like a betrayal, and many young voters like us chose not to support them.”

NCP spokesperson Asif Mahmud said the ⁠party would rebuild itself in opposition and focus on local government elections due in a year.

‘A new beginning’

The South Asian country of 173 million people has one of the world’s youngest populations, with approximately 44 percent of its vote bank – 56 million – between the ages of 18 and 37.

The election outcome is widely seen as a chance to restore stability after months of upheaval that followed the 2024 uprising, which toppled Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina. Security forces at the time, acting on her orders, killed more than 1,400 people, according to the United Nations. Hasina has since been handed a death sentence in absentia for the crackdown.

Hasina, currently living in exile in New Delhi, and Rahman’s mother, Khaleda Zia, have for decades towered over the country’s political landscape. Rahman’s father, Ziaur Rahman, a key figure in Bangladesh’s independence struggle, also led the nation from 1977 until his assassination in 1981.

Rahman, who is likely to be sworn in on Tuesday, has pledged that his administration will prioritise the rule of law.

“Our position is clear. Peace and order must be maintained at any cost. No wrongdoing or unlawful activity will be tolerated,” he said at a news conference on Saturday. “Regardless of party, religion, race, or differing opinions, under no circumstances will attacks by the strong against the weak be accepted. Justice will be our guiding principle.”

Shakil Ahmed, a government and politics professor at Jahangirnagar University, said ⁠the Jamaat-NCP alliance pushed away young voters who had wanted a new political class after the fall of Hasina.

“Many saw it as a retreat into old politics rather than a break from it,” Ahmed said. “This decision divided the youth vote and strengthened support for the BNP under Tarique Rahman, which appeared more organised and capable of governing.”

However, for student Farhan Ullash, the vote felt like a long-awaited break with the past.

“After all, the election was a kind of dream for us, a new beginning for Bangladesh,” he said. “I know already BNP is going to make the government. I hope they will listen to us.”

EXPLAINER

The dawn-to-dusk fast lasts anywhere from 11.5 to 15.5 hours, depending on where in the world you are.

The Muslim holy month of Ramadan is set to begin on February 18 or 19, depending on the sighting of the crescent moon.

During the month, which lasts 29 or 30 days, Muslims observing the fast will refrain from eating and drinking from dawn to dusk, typically for a period of 12 to 15 hours, depending on their location.

Muslims believe Ramadan is the month when the first verses of the Quran were revealed to the Prophet Muhammad more than 1,400 years ago.

The fast entails abstinence from eating, drinking, smoking and sexual relations during daylight hours to achieve greater “taqwa”, or consciousness of God.

Why does Ramadan start on different dates every year?

Ramadan begins 10 to 12 days earlier each year. This is because the Islamic calendar is based on the lunar Hijri calendar, with months that are 29 or 30 days long.

For nearly 90 percent of the world’s population living in the Northern Hemisphere, the number of fasting hours will be a bit shorter this year and will continue to decrease until 2031, when Ramadan will encompass the winter solstice, the shortest day of the year.

For fasting Muslims living south of the equator, the number of fasting hours will be longer than last year.

Because the lunar year is shorter than the solar year by 11 days, Ramadan will be observed twice in the year 2030 – first beginning on January 5 and then starting on December 26.

Fasting hours around the world

The number of daylight hours varies across the world.

Since it is winter in the Northern Hemisphere, this Ramadan, people living there will have the shortest fasts, lasting about 12 to 13 hours on the first day, with the duration increasing throughout the month.

People in southern countries like Chile, New Zealand, and South Africa will have the longest fasts, lasting about 14 to 15 hours on the first day. However, the number of fasting hours will decrease throughout the month.

Fasting times around the world

The table below shows the number of fasting hours, suhoor and iftar times on the first and last days of Ramadan 2026. Use the arrows or search box to find your city.

Ramadan greetings in different languages

Muslim-majority nations have various greetings in their native languages for Ramadan.

“Ramadan Mubarak” and “Ramadan Kareem” are the most common greetings exchanged in this period, wishing the recipient a blessed or generous month, respectively.

“In the interest of the country, we must remain united.” Bangladeshi Prime Minister-in-waiting Tarique Rahman urged opposition parties to work with the incoming BNP government after its landslide victory in the first elections since Sheikh Hasina’s ouster.

Pakistan on Monday reversed their decision to boycott their T20 World Cup match against India, but rain could intervene.

Indian captain Suryakumar ⁠Yadav said his players ⁠are not concerned about the threat of rain for Sunday’s Twenty20 World Cup clash with Pakistan, adding that the defending champions are focused on preparing for the showdown between ⁠bitter rivals.

Pakistan had initially boycotted the Group A fixture in Colombo over Bangladesh’s removal from the tournament for refusing to play in India over security concerns, but reversed their decision on Monday.

But weather forecasts have warned ⁠of heavy rain between Sunday afternoon and evening, casting new doubts over the match.

“Weather is something which is not in our control,” Suryakumar told reporters on Saturday.

No complacency from India against Pakistan

He said the clash would not be a routine game for the co-hosts.

“When you play an India vs Pakistan game it’s more about the occasion. It’s a ‌big platform, obviously. No matter how many times you say, it’s just another game … It’s human tendency, you know which game you’re about to play,” the 35-year-old said.

“Whatever we have worked hard on and practised, we try to execute them in the game.”

India and Pakistan have both won two games each in the tournament. While Pakistan played both their games in Colombo due to an agreement that they would play each other only on neutral venues, India arrived after a win over Namibia on Thursday.

Suryakumar said ⁠India would not be disadvantaged by unfamiliarity with the ground.

“We have similar wickets ⁠back home, and we’ve played a lot of cricket here during bilaterals against Sri Lanka, so we’re also very familiar with the conditions,” he said.

India and Pakistan most recently faced off in last year’s Asia Cup, where India won all three of their ⁠meetings, including the final.

“You can’t carry history into the ground, because it can cause complacency,” Suryakumar said.

India ready for Pakistan’s ‘out of syllabus’ Tariq

India have carried out preparations to ⁠face Usman Tariq, a spinner with an unorthodox action, who took ⁠three wickets for Pakistan during Tuesday’s win over the United States.

Pakistan captain Salman Ali Agha said earlier on Saturday that Tariq was a trump card against India.

“At an exam, when there’s an out-of-syllabus question, we can’t just skip it; we have to try something to ‌tackle it,” Suryakumar said about Tariq.

“We practise with similar bowlers, with similar actions. We’ll try to execute what we practise in the net sessions.”

Salman had also expressed hope that Indian opener Abhishek Sharma, who is the ‌highest-ranked ‌batter in the 20-over format, will play on Sunday after missing the previous game due to illness.

“All right, if (Salman) wants him to play, then we’ll play him tomorrow,” Suryakumar said about Sharma.

Captain Aiden Markram hits an unbeaten 86 in seven-wicket defeat of New Zealand in Ahmedabad.

South Africa are on the brink of reaching the Twenty20 World Cup’s Super Eight stage after captain Aiden Markram’s storming half-century led them to a dominant seven-wicket victory over New ⁠Zealand, securing their third straight Group D win.

New Zealand on Saturday suffered their first loss in the campaign after they posted 175-7 as South Africa’s Marco Jansen took four wickets.

In response, opener Markram hit four ⁠sixes and eight boundaries in his unbeaten knock of 86 off 44 balls, the highest by a South African captain in the tournament’s history, helping his team reach 178-3 with 17 balls to spare.

Last edition’s finalists South Africa chose to bowl first in Ahmedabad, India, and it immediately paid off as player of the match Jansen (4-40) dismissed most ‌of New Zealand’s top order by the seventh over.

Finn Allen (31 off 17 balls) tried to mitigate the damage after Tim Seifert and Rachin Ravindra fell to Jansen. But Jansen got Allen caught at mid-off in the sixth over, leaving New Zealand struggling at 58-3.

Mark Chapman (48) and Daryl Mitchell (32) turned things around with a 74-run partnership for the fifth wicket until Jansen got Chapman caught by Ryan Rickelton at backward point in the 14th.

New Zealand scored only 17 runs in the next four overs until James ⁠Neesham’s unbeaten 23 off 15 balls got them to a fighting total.

Markram’s magic seals the deal for South Africa

Chasing 176, South Africa got off to a fast start with Markram hitting three sixes and five boundaries to steer his team to 62-0 in four overs.

Losing fellow opener Quinton de Kock (20) did not affect Markram, who hit Mitchell Santner for a ⁠six down long-on to reach his half-century in just 19 balls. By the time Rickelton (21) fell in the eighth over, South Africa had already crossed ⁠the 100-run mark.

With the required run rate falling below six per over, Markram ⁠did not hit a single boundary in the next seven overs and focused on rotating the strike, getting South Africa within 28 runs of victory with 30 balls left.

“It’s about managing it through the right phases, I guess, but up front, you’ve seen how teams are ‌taking on the powerplay and we’d be silly not to try that. It’s not always going to come off, but when it does, … we can get ahead of the game,” Markram said.

David Miller, who scored an ‌unbeaten ‌24, cleared the mid-wicket boundary to bring up the winning runs.

South Africa will conclude their group campaign against the United Arab Emirates on Wednesday, a day after New Zealand play Canada.

Karachi, Pakistan – As rain and thunder threatened to disrupt their team’s T20 World Cup match against India on Sunday, Pakistan’s cricket fans are bracing for a different storm – the now-customary loss against their archrivals at global events.

Pakistan have not beaten India in the tournament since 2021 when they recorded a solitary win in eight T20 World Cup encounters against their formidable opponents.

Despondent fans have now shifted from anticipating a thrilling, unpredictable game to praying for a miracle as Salman Ali Agha’s team step on the field at the R Premadasa Stadium in Colombo, Sri Lanka.

Pakistan’s latest “win” came in the form of a move to boycott the match on political grounds. Despite the eventual reversal of the decision after weeklong negotiations with the International Cricket Council (ICC), the initial decision to not take the field against India was seen as a triumph by cricket fans in Pakistan.

Despondent or optimistic, fans still eager for match

Escalating political tensions between the South Asian neighbours have seen a decades-old sporting rivalry turn into an ugly debacle both on and off the pitch with customary handshakes avoided and light jibes replaced by controversial hand gestures invoking their most recent armed conflict in May.

Politics and sport blur boundaries on both sides of the border, making these fixtures an exhibition of nationalistic pride that can sometimes turn distasteful.

The pre-match jingoism in Pakistan, though, was short-lived. It has been replaced by bitterly disappointed fans airing their thoughts in the form of self-deprecating memes or reels depicting the “foolishness” of a section of fans expecting a win.

“We’ll have heartbreak on February 14 and 15,” read the captions of several social media posts set to melancholic songs on Valentine’s Day, the eve of the match.

Supporters – both hardcore and casual – will religiously watch the three-plus-hour encounters. Come 6:30pm (13:30 GMT) on Sunday, the public will be glued to screens across the country to watch the high-stakes match.

Roadside tea stalls will be thronged by male spectators filling up wooden benches, plastic chairs or squatting on their haunches in front of small TV screens.

Food delivery riders busy with an overflow of match-day meal orders will occasionally halt their journeys to catch a glimpse of the action on their phones or through restaurant windows.

Upscale eateries will bring in large screens and host groups of young fans and families.

Domestic responsibilities will be wrapped up before the start of the match, and extended families will gather around a living room TV with drinks, snacks and feasts of biryani.

The weekend – now the standard time that all India-Pakistan matches are played for economic and logistical reasons – will offer some respite from an otherwise hectic schedule of school and office routines that throw the heaving metropolis of Karachi into transport turbulence.

India favourites, but Usman Tariq could spin a win

Despite the days of anticipation and hours spent preparing for the showpiece, fans remain realistic in their expectations.

On a balmy late Friday afternoon in Karachi as life gradually returned to its normal pace after an hour-long pause for midday prayers at mosques across the city, a group of young law students picked up their kits for a local league match.

“It’s looking 70-30 in India’s favour,” Talha Bandayal, a law student, told Al Jazeera as he watched his teammates play a cricket match in their local lawyers league at the historic Karachi Parsi Institute on Friday.

Bandayal and his friends plan to watch the match at a restaurant in one of Karachi’s posh localities.

“It’s a Pakistan-India match. We’re excited regardless of the result!”

Syed Ahmed Shah, who officiated the league match as a third umpire, was more sceptical of the team’s chances and more in tune with the country’s overall opinion of Pakistan’s expected performance.

“Sport is just like politics in our country,” a bespectacled Shah opined dryly to everyone’s amusement, drawing comparisons between the nation’s two most favoured topics.

“India is far superior to us, not just in cricket but everything,” Shah told Al Jazeera.

Cricket analysts have appeared on national talk shows throughout the week, dissecting the team’s shortcomings, the Pakistan Cricket Board’s organisational failures and the squad’s weak mental fortitude for a match of this proportion.

Local cricketers like Bandayal have been analysing Pakistani players’ strengths and weaknesses. Usman Tariq’s unreadable spin action and variations are being seen as Pakistan’s secret weapon.

When life comes to a standstill

When it comes to off-field behaviour, though, India’s trend of avoiding handshakes with Pakistani teams has been frowned upon.

“Politics should strictly be kept separate from sports,” a local cricket coach who requested anonymity said of Suryakumar Yadav and his team’s controversial actions from the Asia Cup last year.

“But if India takes that stance, Pakistan also needs to have some self-respect and respond accordingly,” the 46-year-old coach said.

Admittedly, the handshake row has taken centre stage in a fixture that has historically been remembered for scintillating bowling performances, swashbuckling innings or nail-biting finishes.

When Pakistan awakes on Sunday morning, most cricket fans will begin their day by playing their own cricket games – whether in narrow neighbourhood streets or vast, dusty fields hosting multiple matches simultaneously. As the evening draws closer, the clothes will be dusted off and equipment packed away for the showdown in Colombo.

Just as the hustle and bustle of life gave way for prayers two days earlier, the India-Pakistan match will do the same.

After all, it’s only cricket and Friday prayers that can bring life to a standstill in Pakistan.

England beat Scotland by five wickets in India to recover position in group at 2026 T20 World Cup.

Tom Banton’s unbeaten 63 led England to a five-wicket T20 World Cup victory over Scotland in Kolkata on Saturday that kept Harry Brook’s side on course for the Super Eights.

Victory in their final Group C match against Italy on Monday at the same Eden Gardens stadium will see England safely into the next round.

After bowling Scotland out for 152, England racked up 155-5 in 18.2 overs, with Jacob Bethell scoring 32, Sam Curran 28 and Will Jacks (16 off 10 balls) hitting a six and a four to finish the job.

England wobbled at the start of their chase as the new white ball swung under the floodlights with the sun going down.

Phil Salt fell third ball to Brandon McMullen for just two and when Jos Buttler picked out McMullen off Brad Currie, they were 13-2.

Scotland bowled tightly until Bethell broke the shackles by hitting McMullen for a six and two fours in the fifth over.

Spinner Mark Watt also came in for some punishment, conceding 22 off his first over as Banton took him for three huge sixes.

A 66-run partnership ended when the left-handed Bethell, on 32, helped a leg-side delivery from Oliver Davidson into the grateful hands of Brad Wheal at short fine leg.

Captain Brook did not last long, scooping Michael Leask over his shoulder to Wheal to make it 86-4, but England were always in control and got home with 10 balls to spare.

Earlier, England’s bowlers found their mojo and vindicated Brook’s decision to field on winning the toss.

After being smacked to all parts of Mumbai’s Wankhede Stadium in conceding 196 to the West Indies on Wednesday, England’s attack exerted much more control at Eden Gardens.

Captain Richie Berrington top-scored for Scotland with 49 off 32 balls with five fours and two sixes.

He and Tom Bruce put on 71 for the fourth wicket, but it was their only notable partnership.

Spinner Liam Dawson ended it in the 13th over when Bruce was caught for 24, Curran providing the safe hands at deep square leg.

When Adil Rashid trapped Berrington lbw in the next over, Scotland collapsed, losing their last seven wickets for 39 runs from 113-3.

Jofra Archer had been expensive in the two previous outings but made the early breakthroughs before finishing with a brilliant 2-24 off his four overs.

In his second over, he hurried George Munsey into top-edging to Banton and two balls later had McMullen caught by Salt in the deep.

Michael Jones (33) holed out to Bethell off Curran, and Scotland were 42-3 at the end of the six-over power play and never threatened a competitive total.

Rashid was the best of the England bowlers with 3-36 from his four overs, while Dawson took 2-34.

Colombo, Sri Lanka — Almost 30 years ago today, India and Pakistan formed a combined cricket team to take on Sri Lanka ahead of the 1996 Cricket World Cup in an unprecedented moment of unity in the sport’s history.

The two age-old rivals put aside their differences and came together in an act of solidarity to support a fellow South Asian team, who faced the threat of match boycotts in a tournament they had battled hard to host.

India versus Pakistan is the most highly marketed fixture at every multination tournament – the World Cup, Asia Cup or Asian Games – whether it’s a men’s, women’s or Under-19 event.

Few sporting events globally carry the weight and anticipation of an India-Pakistan cricket match. So, when Pakistan’s government ordered its team not to face India at the ongoing T20 World Cup, the tournament was briefly pushed into a state of chaos.

It also left Sri Lanka, the designated host of the fixture, holding its collective breath.

A week of negotiations led to a dramatic late U-turn by the Pakistani government and the match will now take place as scheduled on Sunday at the R Premadasa International Cricket Stadium in Colombo.

But what if the boycott had gone ahead? The impact could have been catastrophic, not just for Pakistan, but also for the International Cricket Council (ICC), as well as Sri Lanka.

With the crisis seemingly averted, the island nation stands poised to reap the benefits in its financial landscape, diplomatic standing and community.

‘Massive impact’ on tourism

For a country that is still grappling with the aftermath of the economic crisis of 2022, an India-Pakistan cricket fixture at a World Cup could prove to be a godsend.

The tourism and hospitality industry was one of the hardest hit during Sri Lanka’s financial meltdown and this match will see an enormous influx of fans from India and Pakistan coming into the country.

Hotels in and around Colombo were fully booked out well ahead of the tournament but the industry braced itself for heavy losses after Pakistan threatened a boycott.

“There’s been a massive impact since the boycott was announced,” Sudarshana Pieris, who works in Sri Lanka’s hospitality sector, told Al Jazeera.

“All major hotels in Colombo were fully booked by Indian travel agencies well ahead [of the match] and once the boycott was announced, we lost almost all of those bookings,” he said.

“But after Pakistan reversed their decision, hotel room rates shot up by about 300-400 percent at five-star establishments in Colombo.”

It’s not just hotels but several other local businesses – from street vendors to high-end restaurants – who are hoping for an increased footfall and spending over the weekend.

These short trips and the experiences they offer could influence visitors to extend their stay or return to Sri Lanka on holiday, long after the game has ended, in a potential long-term benefit to the industry.

Another relatively underestimated impact of the game would be the employment opportunities it creates, albeit temporarily, in the media, event management, security and transportation industries.

Asanka Hadirampela, a freelance journalist and broadcaster currently working as a Sinhala language commentator for the World Cup, recognises the marquee match as a great opportunity from a personal standpoint.

“This is my first World Cup as a broadcaster,” Hadirampela said.

“The India-Pakistan fixture is the biggest and most-watched game of the tournament. So to get to work on such a match is exciting and I consider it a special achievement.”

A geopolitical win

The lines are always blurred between sport and politics in South Asia.

So while the financial gains are expected to be significant, the fixture’s impact on the region’s geopolitical environment cannot go amiss.

Pakistan’s boycott, too, was explicitly political, as confirmed by the country’s Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif when he said that they were offering support to Bangladesh after the Tigers were kicked out of the tournament by the ICC.

The reversal of Pakistan’s decision, which they said came after requests to reconsider the boycott by several regional “friends”, was steeped in politics, too.

Sri Lanka’s President Anura Kumara Dissanayake reportedly had a phone conversation with PM Sharif, urging his government to rethink their decision to boycott the game as the successful staging of this encounter would not only position Sri Lanka as a capable host of global sporting events but also reinforce its standing as a neutral mediator in a region fraught with geopolitical complexities.

Sri Lanka and Pakistan have always maintained strong diplomatic relations, which have extended to the cricket field as well.

Sri Lanka were one of the first teams to travel to Pakistan following their 10-year ostracisation from international cricket, which came as a result of a terrorist attack targeting the Sri Lankan team in March 2009.

When Al Jazeera reached out to Sri Lanka Cricket (SLC), its vice president Ravin Wickramaratne confirmed that SLC did, indeed, reach out to the Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) after the boycott was announced.

“We asked them to reconsider the decision,” Wickramaratne said.

“It [boycott] would have impacted Sri Lanka economically, whether directly or indirectly.

“We have always had a good relationship with the PCB and we have always supported them, so we’re happy with their decision.”

A little over 24 hours ahead of the match in Colombo, there is a sense of palpable excitement and a growing buzz around the fixture as it returns from the brink of cancellation.

As of Saturday morning, 28,000 tickets had been sold for the game but local organisers expect a capacity crowd of 40,000 to make it into the stands.

Come Sunday, thousands more will line the streets in and around Maligawatte, the bustling Colombo suburb that houses the famous Premadasa Stadium.

In the end, the 13th parliamentary election in Bangladesh was not a revolution. It was a reckoning.

When the ballots were counted, the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) had secured a decisive victory, returning to power after years in the political wilderness under Sheikh Hasina’s 15-year rule.

Most headlines framed it as a dramatic comeback, and rightfully so. But beneath the surface, this was less a tidal wave of voter choice than a carefully navigated current. This was a contest shaped by frustration and the arithmetic of first-past-the-post (FPTP).

To understand why BNP prevailed, one must first dispense with the lazy narrative that this was a Jamaat moment squandered. When the results became clear, Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami (JI) secured 68 seats, while the Jamaat-led bloc secured 77 seats in parliament. That is no small feat for a party whose previous best parliamentary showing was just 18 seats in 1991. Many analysts had suggested Jamaat’s support had grown in the run-up to the poll, and the data vindicated that claim. But in an FPTP system, a swelling vote share does not automatically translate into 151 seats out of 300 elected constituencies.

This election was not driven by any momentous revolution, even though it came on the back of a mass uprising that toppled Hasina’s autocracy in August 2024. But there was no deep ideological rupture, and no permanent reordering of voter loyalties, at least not on a scale that would rupture the very fabric of the country’s electoral mindset.

And of course, it was not a national wave election, in which a single mood sweeps towards a particular party across class, gender and region. What unfolded was a hybrid: Largely a normal election with significant deviations, but a predictable outcome.

Party loyalists mostly stayed home. Swing voters mattered. And in pockets of the country, frustration with BNP’s local leadership triggered temporary defections – many of them to Jamaat or NCP.

The anger was real. After August 5, BNP’s grassroots machinery performed abysmally. Petty leaders across districts were accused of corruption and extortion. In rural market towns and urban peripheries, resentment simmered.

Voters were not merely disappointed; they were, to use the language heard in tea stalls and union parishad courtyards, “really, really pissed off”. That fury explains Jamaat’s surge. A portion of BNP loyalists and a significant share of swing voters drifted towards the promise of an “honest alternative”.

But drift is not destiny.

BNP’s base, historically broader and organisationally deeper than Jamaat’s, did not collapse. Even after defections, it remained numerically larger. BNP’s nomination strategy proved unexpectedly shrewd.

Where Jamaat fielded relatively unknown but ideologically trusted figures, BNP leaned on its old guard – candidates with entrenched name recognition and dense informal networks.

That mattered, particularly in rural Bangladesh. Urban, educated voters may be thrilled by the rhetoric of ethical governance. For them, the idea of an incorruptible, ideologically disciplined candidate resonates as a moral reset.

But rural voters are pragmatic actors. They operate within intricate patronage webs. An MP is not an abstraction; he (and it is usually he) is a broker of safety nets, jobs, stability and dispute resolution. Honesty, in isolation, does not guarantee access. Familiarity does.

Thus emerged the central voter dilemma. Disgusted with BNP’s excesses, many considered a switch. In constituencies where Jamaat fielded a well-known leader, some made it. But elsewhere, voters encountered candidates they did not know, whose “honesty” they could not verify, and whose party offered little beyond moral branding.

Faced with uncertainty, they chose the “devil” they knew.

Jamaat compounded its structural limitations with strategic missteps. Its awkward posture on women’s issues – oscillating between reassurance and dog whistles – failed to convince large segments of female voters who have, over decades, carved out expanding public roles.

Bangladesh’s social transformation is not cosmetic, and women are central to its labour force, education system and microcredit economy. A party that cannot articulate a credible vision for gender equality cannot win a national wave.

More damaging was Jamaat’s revisionist flirtation with the memory of 1971. The Liberation War is the country’s moral founding document. Attempts to soften or reinterpret Jamaat’s historical role alienated voters far beyond the secular-liberal elite.

Even conservative families drew red lines around 1971. The prevailing mode of public sentiment was probably blunt: One may forgive; one does not forget.

Yet Jamaat’s performance was still historic. Jamaat-e-Islami and its allied coalition secured 77 seats, a testament not only to its disciplined cadre but also to BNP’s own misdeeds. Extortion scandals and local arrogance pushed voters into Jamaat’s arms.

In a tightly contested FPTP landscape, even a few percentage points can flip dozens of seats. Jamaat capitalised on that anger with precision in Rajshahi, Khulna and Rangpur divisions, where its organisational muscle is strongest.

But precision is not the same as breadth. Jamaat’s surge remained regionally concentrated. Its support varied sharply by class, gender, education and age. That is the opposite of a wave election. Without uniform national momentum, being a victor in FPTP is not an easy task.

Then there was the ghost in the machine: The Awami League (AL). Much commentary underestimated its residual vote. Surveys suggested a hardcore 5 to 7 percent would never defect, but beyond that lay a larger bloc – perhaps 20 to 25 percent – either undecided or unwilling to disclose preferences. In this election, that particular bloc mattered a lot.

Pre-election field research and multiple polls indicated that many non-hardcore AL voters were breaking towards the BNP – probably not out of ideological alignment but out of instrumental rationality. They believed BNP would form the government and wanted access to services through the winning MP.

In areas where BNP’s old guard had harassed AL supporters, some abstained or flirted with Jamaat. But nationally, the gravitational pull favoured BNP. Voters wanted to be on the side of the winner. Perception became a self-fulfilling prophecy.

The four plausible scenarios before election day clarified the stakes. Without significant AL turnout, BNP would likely secure a plurality in a tight race. With moderate AL support, it would win a comfortable majority. With overwhelming AL backing, even a two-thirds majority was conceivable. Only a full-blown Jamaat wave – a cross-class, cross-gender national embrace – could have reversed the equation.

That wave never materialised.

BNP’s victory, then, is a product of structural advantage, strategic candidate selection and the rational calculations of the country’s traditional voters. It was aided by Jamaat’s self-inflicted wounds on women’s rights and historical memory. It was enabled, paradoxically, by BNP’s own local misconduct, which inflated Jamaat’s vote share but not enough to overcome FPTP mathematics.

One more footnote of this election deserves attention: The emergence of the National Citizen Party (NCP), which captured five seats. For a new party born out of an uprising, in the highly polarised political environment of the South Asian nation, that is no small accomplishment.

It signals a hunger, however modest, for alternatives outside the new binary of BNP and Jamaat. Under proportional representation, such a party might flourish. Under FPTP, five seats is both a breakthrough and a ceiling.

Bangladesh’s 13th parliamentary election was, in the end, a story of limits: The limits of anger, the limits of moral branding, the limits of revisionism, and the enduring power of organisational depth in a winner-take-all system.

BNP won not because it inspired a nation, but because it understood it.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.