I'm of the opinion though, its not just the hardware but also access to training, tactics, and people to people contact which will drive a culture shift towards better capability for the BAF that comes with Western equipment.
The Chinese are on the ascent yes. But West is best. Especially in training and modern methods of tactics.
Buying Western fighters would tap BD into that.
Rather than target towing and dropping dumb bombs and unguided rockets, move on to stand off guided munitions and BVR.
I would rather learn from the West than China.
I agree with you about India being the main potential adversary but honestly man the reality is the chance of that is almost nil, AND if it does come to pass, these fighters and conventional forces aren't gonna save Bangladesh but rather asymmetric warfare.
So I would really gear alot of this towards a far more likely border/sea scenarios with Myanmar.
While keeping an eye on the "fight" against India.
Also, small point, we really need to keep away from calling our friends from the southeast derogatory names.
As much as I hate their hand in the Rohingya situation, we should be consistent and stay away from ethnic a racial superiority themes if we complain about being the recipient.
This subsection sometimes degenerated into a cesspool of immaturity.
We at least should try to up the level of discourse here.
Western tech is better absolutely, however as we are not a petro economy we must do what we can.
I do not believe it is given that India can not be beaten. It has massive vulnarabilities that can be exploited. India is not the US and will never be.
Asymetric warfare is also a longterm game that will exact a heavy price for BD. Again this is not ideal.
BD need to prepare and develop strategies for a short sharp conflict. Conflict in itself would be a failure of diplomacy and BD is unlikely to allow things to come to that. However sometimes things turn out like that when illogicality like Hindutva fascism comes into the mix.
At the worst case scenario BD is beaten militarily but india can not hold it. Look what happened to IA in sri lanka. No one can hold BD with our population even a week....IA knew this in 1971. So have heart, BD is not so weak. Every country has strengths and weaknesses and between india and BD the balance sheet do not tilt towards india overwhelmingly in any arena.
BD greatest strength is that it is a democracy, its homogeneous and it accomodates plurality of belief. Demonisation of BD is difficult as we are a posterchild of emerging Muslim liberal democracy.
If you look up modern conflict theory, several things need now be present for actual conflict to occur, mainly
- democracy - democracies do not go to war with each other, period, due to needs of /dependance on the electorate to remain in power for leaders.
- economy- the more open and globally connected an economy the less likely such a country will go to war. Interdependency breeds stability
- media - the more open the media internally and more open it is to outside media the less likely the nation will enter into conflict.
- international reach - more connected you are to international finance and other organisations the less chance of conflict.
In all these cases BD and india shares the same trajectory. India simply can not engender a direct conflict with BD and expect to get away with it. BD is not Kashmir. India also can not afford a long war but BD can because we have no choice.
The calculus in every way possible is stalemate in the longrun. In the short term BD can also check india.
What if BAF buys J-10CE or JF-17 and calls it "high-performance" fighter plane and ends the MRCA saga there like the Mig-29. 
)
