simple answer is radicalization and the military takeover.Story of bangladesh is same as pakistan ie military take over which supported the islamic parties and even after the death of general/president zia-ur-rehman her wife from BNP party rampantly supported J-e-I and other islamic parties under her prime ministership.Other main thing was after military takeover indira gandhi neglected BD and relations went cold for almost 10 yrs.
my question is are smaller nations i mean to say in size are more prone to militarily takeovers to then those bigger , there are lots of state in south america/post-pre world war 1 European nations, Indian sub-continent
if yes then there is thread where is is argued that splitted Pakistan is better for india
i would like to ask won`t the nations carved out of Pakistan would be prone to militrarat take overs (i am sorry i am deviatating form bangladesh here).
if yes is n`t their faith would be same as bangladesh or may be worse ?
on Bangladesh India argued and supported independence of Bangladesh because it`s leader was not allowed to rule pre -1971 pakistan.
Indra Gandhi sized opportunity and splitted pakistan .
if india had tried to absorb Bangladesh into India then this would have mate US/CHINA/PAKISTAN stronger in their argument plus leader of mukti bani would had never supported indians
i think if we had absorb Bangladesh into india we might have been facing a problem similar to kashmir