The 21st-century global economy is witnessing a reconfiguration driven by trade wars, technological rivalry, and reshoring of manufacturing. At the heart of this turbulence lies the intensifying US-China trade conflict, widening EU protectionism, and the weaponization of economic interdependence.
For an export-dependent economy like Bangladesh — with over 80% of its exports concentrated in garments and a narrow export destination base — this moment is critical.
To survive and thrive in such an environment, Bangladesh must not only diversify its export portfolio but also reform the very engine of its trade policy: Its bureaucracy.
Let us first understand the context of the current global trade warfare landscape in the context of developing economies.
Developing countries are facing significant challenges in the current trade warfare landscape, as escalating tensions between major economies, particularly the United States and China, disrupt global trade patterns and increase uncertainty.
These countries often rely heavily on exports, foreign investment, and stable access to global markets, all of which are undermined by rising tariffs, export bans, and shifting supply chain strategies.
Many lack the economic resilience or bargaining power to navigate the volatility caused by great power competition, making them susceptible to external shocks. Moreover, the push for reshoring and protectionist policies in advanced economies threatens to reduce demand for goods from developing nations.
At the same time, compliance with emerging trade standards tied to digital sovereignty, environmental rules, or national security concerns further complicates market access. Without strategic diversification and stronger regional cooperation, developing countries risk deeper marginalization in the evolving global trade order.
Now, look at the situation in Bangladesh. Over 65% of Bangladesh’s exports go to the EU and the US, two regions engaged in significant protectionist behaviour and stricter non-tariff barriers.
Besides, Bangladesh is facing intense competition from agile peers. Countries like Vietnam have signed over a dozen Free Trade Agreements (FTAs), including the CPTPP and EU-Vietnam FTA, giving them preferential access. Bangladesh lags far behind in bilateral trade negotiations.
Bangladesh is set to lose LDC-specific trade privileges by 2026, including duty-free access to the EU under the Everything but Arms (EBA) scheme. Moreover, the technological and regulatory barriers are getting more complicated. The rise of digital protectionism, green regulations, and ESG compliance means trade is no longer just about tariffs; it is about standards, data, and values.
Dealing with global trade issues effectively depends largely on proactive and forward-looking policy decisions. Here comes the role of bureaucracy. Bangladesh’s current bureaucratic apparatus is largely inward-looking and procedural. Decision-making often hinges on hierarchical chains, delaying responses to rapidly evolving trade situations.
Besides, there exists a lack of trade expertise, especially in the areas of international trade, WTO rules, and geoeconomics. Trade policy is seldom based on granular data or scenario modeling, necessary in today’s dynamic trade environment.
It is always better to learn from global experience. Singapore’s Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI) operates with deep integration between policy, legal, and economic arms. The Singaporean civil service nurtures trade specialists through tailored education, global postings, and intensive simulations.
Bangladesh can replicate MTI’s trade academy model to train bureaucrats in FTA negotiation, trade modelling, and digital economy strategy. Besides, Vietnam’s Inter-Ministerial Committee for International Economic Cooperation synchronizes diplomacy, industry needs, and legislative action — something Bangladesh’s often disjointed ministries fail to do effectively.
The Korea International Trade Association (KITA) and the Ministry of Trade, Industry, and Energy (MOTIE) rely on real-time trade intelligence, scenario forecasting, and simulation modeling to inform negotiations and domestic safeguards.
Bangladesh needs to invest in trade analytics and modeling capabilities, leveraging AI and predictive analytics to anticipate trade shocks. To navigate this high-stakes environment, it must evolve into a system that is adaptive, informed, and globally integrated. The reforms need to be initiated at multiple levels, including institutional and organizational levels.
At the institutional level, Bangladesh can think of establishing a Central Trade Intelligence Unit (CTIU). This entity should be autonomous and would monitor global trade developments, conduct risk assessments, and advise ministries.
Modelled after Singapore’s Trade Policy Division, it should be staffed with economists, data scientists, and trade lawyers, along with trained bureaucrats. Alongside, we can create Inter-Ministerial trade task forces. These ad hoc units can be activated during trade crises or negotiations, and can ensure faster response times and cohesive policy decisions.
We can establish export diversification and rapid-response teams within ministries to identify new product-market combinations when existing markets become inaccessible. Bangladesh may enact a Trade Governance and Strategy Act to mandate coordination, accountability, and long-term strategy in trade policymaking.
There is no alternative to human capital investment. Bangladesh can bring in trade specialization within the generalist bureaucracy by systematically creating a cluster of officers (with backgrounds in international trade and law, economics, business, and data science) for trade and commerce. Besides, Bangladesh needs to develop partnerships with global institutions. Agreements with the WTO, Harvard Kennedy school, INSEAD, and UNCTAD can be signed for fellowships and executive training programs.
Additionally, Bangladesh can launch the Global Secondments and Fellowships scheme under which mid-career bureaucrats can be placed in organizations like the WTO, UNCTAD, and OECD to gain real-world exposure.
Alongside, it is crucial to equip bureaucrats to handle digital trade negotiations and cross-border data flow regulations, carbon tariffs (CBAM), and digital services taxes, a growing arena of conflict in the trade war.
Furthermore, there is a need for an integrated digital infrastructure. We can develop a National Trade Dashboard to track tariffs, trade flows, regulatory barriers, and global sanctions using AI and satellite analytics. Building synergy between public and private entities can be instrumental. We need to formalize channels for consultation with exporters, chambers of commerce, and industry associations.
The global trade war is not a temporary disruption; it is a structural realignment of economic power. Bangladesh’s aspirations of becoming a middle-income economy depend significantly on how it maneuvers through this fractured global trade regime. A dynamic, forward-looking, and globally connected bureaucracy will be the linchpin in this effort. It is not just an administrative upgrade — it is a national strategic imperative.
Dr Mohammad Kamrul Hasan is a public administration and public policy analyst.
Images are for reference only.Images and contents gathered automatic from google or 3rd party sources.All rights on the images and contents are with their legal original owners.
