The recent flurry of Chinese initiatives to ease medical access for Bangladeshi patients has cast a revealing light on both the promise of international health diplomacy and the gaps within Bangladesh’s own healthcare system. When India abruptly halted visa issuance in August last following the fall of the fascist Awami League regime in Bangladesh, thousands of patients were left in limbo. China’s swift response -- simplifying medical-treatment visas, offering a dedicated “Green Channel”, and welcoming Bangladeshi travellers into some of its most advanced hospitals -- was more than an act of goodwill. It was a calculated extension of Beijing’s broader diplomatic posture under President Xi Jinping, and a timely reminder that partnerships built on health can carry considerable strategic weight.

That said, Bangladesh must view China’s support not as a permanent safety valve, but as an impetus to strengthen its domestic capabilities. The Belt and Road Healthcare Centre in Dhaka, operated by Bangladeshi nationals, has already linked hundreds of patients to Chinese facilities, helping to demystify a foreign health system and offering a humane alternative at a difficult time. Beijing’s construction of a 1,000-bed hospital in Rangpur and donation of cutting-edge physiotherapy equipment likewise signal an investment in Bangladesh’s long-term health capacity. Yet the very fact that so many Bangladeshis feel compelled to travel abroad -- often for conditions that should be treatable at home -- underscores the persistent weaknesses in infrastructure, workforce planning, and regulatory oversight.

No doubt China’s medical industry provides high-quality treatment, reasonable prices, and care that benefits the patient, which is endorsed by doctors and longtime Bangladeshi tourists. The innovative use of technology in conjunction with Traditional Chinese Medicine has opened up new markets for the industry, bringing in people who are looking for cancer treatment, chronic disease control, rehab, and even aesthetic procedures. But public health authorities advise not to take such expensive care as a routine. A foreign treatment option always takes away the foreign currency, lowers the level of trust in local medical institutions, and creates a wider gap between patients. If there is indeed the possibility of a Chinese hospital being set up in Bangladesh and its diagnostics being sent to the surrounding hospitals, the government will have to step in to make sure that such quality and practice transfer to the local workers.

Straddling the razor’s edge, Bangladesh must now either let medical tourism outflow become a dual system or take this occasion to revolutionise its health care sector. The wiser course is clear: embrace Chinese goodwill, acknowledge the diplomatic maturity shown during a moment of regional strain, but channel this partnership toward self-reliance.