International cricket has weathered many storms throughout its history, navigating political tensions, security threats, and diplomatic standoffs. However, the unfolding crisis surrounding Bangladesh’s participation in the 2026 T20 World Cup represents something unprecedented: A situation where the International Cricket Council (ICC) appears to be asking a nation to send its cricketers, officials, journalists, and supporters into an environment that carries substantial risks.
So far, the concerns centre on Kolkata, where Bangladesh is scheduled to play three of their group matches. Yet this is not merely about cricket venues or match logistics.
Instead, the question has become a crucible where multiple combustible elements converge: A diplomatic freeze between two neighbouring nations, systematic visa restrictions, and the presence of exiled Awami League leaders and activists in Kolkata who harbour openly stated ambitions to destabilize Bangladesh’s current government.
If India’s own cricket board, with all its resources and influence, felt unable or unwilling to guarantee the security of Mustafizur Rahman against pressure from BJP politicians who celebrated his removal as “a victory for Hindus across the whole country,” then how could Bangladesh trust that adequate protection would be provided for an entire national team?
The answer, articulated clearly by Sports Adviser Asif Nazrul, is that they can’t. His statement that Bangladesh would not play the T20 World Cup 2026 on Indian soil while “compromising the security and dignity of its cricketers, spectators, and journalists” represents not diplomatic posturing but a fundamental assessment of risk that should concern anyone who cares about cricket’s future as a truly international sport.
Acknowledging risks while minimizing responsibilities
ICC’s security assessment stated that “the assessed risk to Bangladeshi nationals and supporters attending fixtures” in Kolkata would be “moderately high, particularly those wearing team colours and travelling in isolated groups to the stadium.”
This is not speculation from Bangladeshi officials. The report further notes that the presence of Mustafizur Rahman “may be problematic if religious extremism becomes kinetically engaged” -- bureaucratic language that translates to a very real possibility of violence.
Nevertheless, despite these acknowledged risks, the ICC’s conclusion remains that “the risk associated with Bangladesh’s scheduled fixtures in Kolkata and Mumbai is assessed as low, with no indication of risks that cannot be effectively managed through security planning.”
The question that must be asked is: Managed how, exactly? The assessment identifies the threats but offers no concrete roadmap for mitigation beyond generic references to “security planning.”
Cricket without supporters is not cricket
The diplomatic deadlock between Bangladesh and India since August 2024, has led to systematic visa restrictions that would effectively prevent Bangladeshi supporters from travelling to India for the World Cup matches.
Imagine a cricket match where the Bangladesh national team plays against opponents in Kolkata’s iconic Eden Gardens stadium with no Bangladeshi supporter in attendance.
The image is jarring because it violates something fundamental about international cricket: The sport thrives on the passionate support of fans who travel across borders, wave flags, sing songs, and create the atmosphere that transforms cricket from a game into a cultural phenomenon.
Equally, journalists covering Bangladesh’s World Cup campaign would face uncertain visa prospects. Cricket sponsors who need to attend matches for commercial obligations may be denied entry. Government officials who would normally accompany national teams for diplomatic protocol could be turned away.
Additionally, even if some Bangladeshi nationals managed to secure visas, their safety once in India remains questionable.
Recent reports indicate that hotels in various Indian cities have refused accommodation to Bangladeshi citizens, citing pretexts. How can a supporter plan to travel to India to enjoy a cricket match when basic accommodation cannot be guaranteed?
What makes Kolkata particularly problematic as a venue for Bangladesh’s matches is not merely general political tensions but the specific concentration of exiled Awami League leadership in the city. According to investigative reporting by The Print, approximately 1,300 Awami League leaders, supporters, and affiliated individuals have established themselves in Kolkata, primarily in the New Town area, since Sheikh Hasina's departure from Bangladesh in August 2024.
These are not passive refugees seeking shelter but politically active individuals who maintain an organizational structure, hold regular meetings, and explicitly state their goal of returning to power in Bangladesh.
The presence includes senior figures such as former Home Minister Asaduzzaman Khan Kamal, who maintains a spacious apartment in New Town where he “entertains regular visitors -- his party colleagues” and travels weekly to Delhi for party meetings and consultations with “high-level functionaries of the Indian establishment.” This is not speculation but documented reporting from credible Indian media outlets.
Bangladesh is expected to hold elections on February 12, 2026, just days after the T20 World Cup begins on February 7, 2026. During this sensitive electoral period, the national cricket team would be in a city where political opponents maintain an active, organized presence. While there is no evidence of specific plots against cricketers, the volatile combination of elements creates an environment where security cannot be assured with confidence.
Security planning can’t override political reality
The ICC’s position essentially asks Bangladesh to trust that “security planning” can overcome deeply rooted political animosity, religious extremism in mainstream politics, diplomatic hostility, and the presence of political opponents actively working to destabilize their government. This represents a fundamental misunderstanding of what security means in the context of international cricket.
Let’s consider a few practical scenarios that could unfold.
Bangladeshi journalists attempting to cover matches might encounter exiled Awami League supporters at restaurants, shopping areas, or transportation hubs in Kolkata.
Sports ministry officials accompanying the team could face confrontations from those who view the current Bangladesh government as illegitimate.
Cricket sponsors in Kolkata might find themselves navigating an environment where their national identity marks them as targets for harassment.
How can security forces prevent all possible confrontations between Bangladeshi cricket fans and hostile elements in a city of millions? How can they guarantee safety for journalists working outside the controlled environment of stadiums?
The answer is that they can’t, which is precisely why Bangladesh’s concerns can’t be dismissed as mere diplomatic posturing.
When a full ICC member nation presents evidence-backed security concerns, the governing body’s own security assessment can’t be a bureaucratic dismissal or appeals to logistical convenience.
The ball is now in the ICC’s court. The governing body faces a choice between upholding the principles of safety and setting a dangerous precedent that security concerns can be dismissed when they conflict with logistical convenience.
For Bangladesh, the position is clear: Kolkata, with all its cricketing history and iconic venues, has become a place where the pitch can’t be separated from the powder keg.
Zulker Naeen is Research Coordinator, FactWatch and Adjunct Faculty, Department of Media Studies and Journalism (MSJ), University of Liberal Arts Bangladesh (ULAB). Views expressed are the writer’s own.