... advocate linkages between Dhaka, Washington, and London?
Bangla Nation has not sold out. For the positions advocated by Bangla Nation represent areas in which Dhaka-Washington-London have clearly identifiable and defensible interests. The way Bangla Nation sees it, many of the problems confronting Dhaka (but certainly not all) have a trans-border/trans-national, that is a geographic, nature to them.
But why not Beijing or Moscow? For the simple reason that neither of these states are representative democracies and thus their intentions are opaque, to whom do you answer if not your constituents? Bangla Nation may be based in Washington and it could be argued that it maintains a pro-Atlantic bias, but as Jyoti Rahman wrote recently in the Forum "we don't have to imagine a liberal democratic narrative for this Republic. It is the most truthful account of our history." To put it simply, Bangla Nation believes that similar political systems (representative democracies in this case) often find friendship.
This is not to suggest that a friendship should be one-sided. Regardless of the gentle reader's view of "neo-Western imperialism," Bangla Nation will be the first to point out the curious nature of an American position, such as seeking recognition of Kosovo despite withholding support for War Crimes Trials (see...).
From another perspective: The time is coming when Washington and London will seek Dhaka's advice and insights regarding programs like the border village watch (see...) and the socio-cultural war on extremism (see...).
Does the gentle reader desire additional information on Bangla Nation's positions? Ask!