Daily Online Alochona: Aug 6, 2008

Wednesday, August 6, 2008

[mukto-mona] Rights of the indigenous peoples

Dear Editor,

Hope you are doing well and thanks for publishing my previous write-ups

This is an article titled "Rights of the indigenous peoples". I will be highly honoured if you publish this article. I apprecite your time to read this article.

Thanks

Have a nice time

With Best Regards

Ripan Kumar Biswas
New York, U.S.A

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rights of the indigenous peoples

Ripan Kumar Biswas
Ripan.biswas@yahoo.com

Besides their other characteristics, indigenous peoples have contributed the least to world greenhouse gas emissions and have the smallest ecological footprints on earth. Yet they suffer the worst impacts not only of climate change, but also they face hardship in education, employment, health, human rights, social and economic development, and everyday life.

Precise estimates for the total population of the world's indigenous peoples are very difficult to compile but as of the start of the 21st century, there are at least 370 million indigenous people that includes 5000 distinct peoples, spread across 70 countries living relatively neutral or even carbon negative life styles. While not a large number when compared to the world population of 6 billion, it does have a substantial impact in lowering emissions. Compare this to the impact of the United States, with a population of 300 million -only 4% of the world's population – but responsible for about 25 percent of world greenhouse gas emissions. But the situation of the indigenous peoples in the world is not encouraging.

In order to put an end to their marginalization, their extreme poverty, the expropriation of their traditional lands and the other grave human rights abuses they have faced, and continue to encounter, the UN General Assembly decided to celebrate the International Day of the World's Indigenous People on August 9 every year during the International Decade of the World's Indigenous people by resolution 49/214 of 23rd December 1994 as this was the date of the first meeting in 1982 of the United Nations Working Group of Indigenous Populations of the Sub commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities of the Commission on Human Rights.

In recognition of indigenous peoples' particular vulnerability to climate change and their important role in responding to it, the UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues in its 2008 session will focus on "Climate change, bio-cultural diversity and livelihoods: the stewardship role of indigenous peoples and new challenges." UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has asked member states and indigenously people to come together in a spirit of mutual respect. "Indeed, the suffering of indigenous peoples includes some of the darkest episodes in human history," he mentioned in his special message on the eve of this year International Day of the World's Indigenous People.

Indigenous peoples have a past, a history, and a culture that will never die. They have a consciousness of culture and peoplehood, on the edge of each country's borders and marginal to each country's citizenship. But they continue to suffer discrimination, marginalization, extreme poverty and conflict. They face dispossession of their traditional lands and livelihoods, displacement, destruction of their belief systems, culture, language and way of life, and even the threat of extinction.

In identifying themselves as indigenous peoples, they do not mean to undermine the rights of anyone else, nor do they mean to undermine the global state system. According to Rebecca Adamson, an American Indian Rights activist, we are all indigenous people on this planet, and we have to reorganize to get along. All humankind is related to each other and each has a purpose, spirit, and sacredness. The rights of the indigenous peoples are the same as the rights of all human beings.

Indigenous Peoples have fought for over 500 years against genocide, displacement, colonization and forced assimilation. Throughout they have succeeded in preserving their cultures and their identities as distinct Peoples. But the ongoing fight over land and power has left Indigenous communities among the poorest and most marginalized in the world, alienated from state politics and under- or un-represented by national governments. Today, Indigenous Peoples, who occupy some of the last pristine environments on Earth, are at the forefront of the struggle against corporate globalization and privatization of natural resources.

They want to be recognized for who they are: distinct groups with their own unique cultures. They want the governments of the countries in which they live to respect their ability to determine for themselves their own destinies. They want to be protected from genocide, arbitrary execution, torture, forced relocation, or assimilation, and they want to enjoy their rights to freedom of expression, association, and religion. They want to be treated equally with respect to opportunities for education, health care, work, and other basic needs. Where such rights conflict with the needs of the state or other peoples, they want to participate as equals in an impartial and transparent process for resolving the conflict in a fair and respectful way.

But they are inevitably going to disappear and some populations are facing extinction sooner than later. 18 of the 28 indigenous groups in Colombia have less than 100 members, "and are suspended between life and death." 50 indigenous people were killed and other forced to move to neighboring villages, caves and mosques by the Ugandan Wildlife Authority in 2004 (UWA). Indigenous peoples in Malaysia and Indonesia have been uprooted by the aggressive expansion of oil palm plantations for biofuel production.

The recent cyclone Nargis that crashed into Myanmar or the earthquake measuring 7.9 on the Richter scale that struck Wenchuan County in southwest China's Sichuan Province, brought the world's attention on the plight of the indigenous peoples of the South and Central Asia for a brief moment. The Rakia of India, the Peripatetics of South Asia, the Bhil of central western India, the Tharu of Nepal, the Dom of Northern Pakistan, the peoples and cultures of the Kashmir Himalayas, the Hazara of Central Afghanistan, the Wakhi and Kirghiz of the Pamirian Knot, the Badakshani of Tajikistan, the Lezghi of the Caucasus mountain range, the people of Tibet, and the Minhe Mangghuer of China, are remain stubbornly amongst the poorest of the poor. They are rapidly disappearing not only from natural disasters, but also from processes associated with globalization and its sister processes of imperialism and capitalism.

Bangladesh is so culturally vast, that it is easy to lose sight of how many indigenous peoples inhabit the region. Approximately 2.5 million are Indigenous Peoples belonging to 45 different ethnic groups. But according to a study of Bangladesh Society for the Enforcement of Human Rights (BSEHR), 61.44 percent of indigenous people still face discrimination, 41.86 percent are victims of corruptions, and 18.67 percent evicted from their ancestors´ land. Around 1.2 million indigenous people of the country are yet to be recognized as special or indigenous communities constitutionally, they are deprived of enjoying their rights and facing discrimination.

For avoiding the path of armed conflict and finding a political solution to improve the condition of the indigenous peoples of Bangladesh, government set up a special ministry titled "Ministry of Chittagong Hill Tracts Affairs" on July 15th, 1998 following a peace accord that was signed between National Committee on Chittagong Hill Tracts Affairs and the Parbatya Chattagram Jana-Samhati Samiti on 2nd December 1997. Since the signing of the peace accord, there has been a catastrophic failure to implement the accord's terms, and human rights violations have increased since Emergency Rule was declared in January last year.

Arrests and intimidation of activists, rape of indigenous women and other human rights abuses remain rife. Land continues to be stolen from the indigenous people by both the some of government agencies and by settlers. There is none to put an end to human rights violations in the region and to ensure that those responsible for these violations are brought to justice.

Today, we have to acknowledge the contributions, which indigenous peoples make to humanity through their rich civilizations. We have to vigilantly uphold the respect for their human rights. They should be integrated in the international development agenda, including the Millennium Development Goals, in policies, programmes, and country-level projects. We have to acknowledge their special stewardship on issues related to the environment and climate change.

August 07, 2008, New York
Ripan Kumar Biswas is a freelance writer based in New York

__._,_.___

***************************************** Sign the Petition : Release the Arrested University Teachers Immediately : An Appeal to the Caretaker Government of Bangladesh http://www.mukto-mona.com/human_rights/university_teachers_arrest.htm ***************************************** Daily Star publishes an interview with Mukto-Mona http://www.mukto-mona.com/news/daily_star/daily_star_MM.pdf ***************************************** MM site is blocked in Islamic countries such as UAE. Members of those theocratic states, kindly use any proxy (such as http://proxy.org/) to access mukto-mona. ***************************************** Mukto-Mona Celebrates 5th Anniversary http://www.mukto-mona.com/Special_Event_/5_yrs_anniv/index.htm ***************************************** Mukto-Mona Celebrates Earth Day: http://www.mukto-mona.com/Special_Event_/Earth_day2006/index.htm ***************************************** Kansat Uprising : A Special Page from Mukto-Mona http://www.mukto-mona.com/human_rights/kansat2006/members/ ***************************************** MM Project : Grand assembly of local freedom fighters at Raumari http://www.mukto-mona.com/project/Roumari/freedom_fighters_union300306.htm ***************************************** German Bangla Radio Interviews Mukto-Mona Members: http://www.mukto-mona.com/Special_Event_/Darwin_day/german_radio/ Mukto-Mona Celebrates Darwin Day: http://www.mukto-mona.com/Special_Event_/Darwin_day/index.htm ***************************************** Some FAQ's about Mukto-Mona: http://www.mukto-mona.com/new_site/mukto-mona/faq_mm.htm **************************************************** VISIT MUKTO-MONA WEB-SITE : http://www.mukto-mona.com/ **************************************************** "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it". -Beatrice Hall [pseudonym: S.G. Tallentyre], 190

Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

[mukto-mona] Green housing

GRIHA – Green Building 'Design Evaluation System'

New Delhi: Wednesday, August 06, 2008.

What is a green building?

Buildings have major environmental impacts over their entire life cycle. Resources such as ground cover, forests, water, and energy are depleted to give way to buildings.

A green building depletes the natural resources to the minimum during its construction and operation. The aim of a green building design is to minimize the demand on non-renewable resources, maximize the utilization efficiency of these resources, when in use, and maximize the reuse, recycling, and utilization of renewable resources. It maximizes the use of efficient building materials and construction practices; optimizes the use of on-site sources and sinks by bio-climatic architectural practices; uses minimum energy to power itself; uses efficient equipment to meet its lighting, air-conditioning, and other needs; maximizes the use of renewable sources of energy; uses efficient waste and water management practices; and provides comfortable and hygienic indoor working conditions. In sum, the following aspects of the building design are looked into in an integrated way in a green building.

I. Site planning

II. Building envelope design

III. Building system design ((HVAC) heating ventilation and air conditioning, lighting, electrical, and water heating)

IV. Integration of renewable energy sources to generate energy onsite.

V. Water and waste management

VI. Selection of ecologically sustainable materials (with high recycled content, rapidly renewable resources with low emission potential, etc.).

VII. Indoor environmental quality (maintain indoor thermal and visual comfort, and air quality)

GRIHA- the green building rating system

The context

Internationally, voluntary building rating systems have been instrumental in raising awareness and popularizing green design. However, most of the internationally devised rating systems have been tailored to suit the building industry of the country where they were developed. In India a US based LEED rating system is under promotion by CII Green Business Centre, Hyderabad, which is more on energy efficiency measures in AC buildings. Keeping in view of the Indian agro-climatic conditions and in particular the preponderance of non-AC buildings, a National Rating System - GRIHA has been developed which is suitable for all kinds of building in different climatic zones of the country. The system was initially conceived and developed by TERI (The Energy & Resource Institute) as TERI-GRIHA, which has been modified to GRIHA as National Rating System after incorporating various modifications suggested by a group of architects and experts. It takes into account the provisions of the National Building Code 2005, the Energy Conservation Building Code 2007 announced by BEE and other IS codes, local bye-laws, other local standards and laws. The system, by its qualitative and quantitative assessment criteria, would be able to 'rate' a building on the degree of its 'greenness'. The rating would be applied to new and existing building stock of varied functions – commercial, institutional, and residential.

__._,_.___

***************************************** Sign the Petition : Release the Arrested University Teachers Immediately : An Appeal to the Caretaker Government of Bangladesh http://www.mukto-mona.com/human_rights/university_teachers_arrest.htm ***************************************** Daily Star publishes an interview with Mukto-Mona http://www.mukto-mona.com/news/daily_star/daily_star_MM.pdf ***************************************** MM site is blocked in Islamic countries such as UAE. Members of those theocratic states, kindly use any proxy (such as http://proxy.org/) to access mukto-mona. ***************************************** Mukto-Mona Celebrates 5th Anniversary http://www.mukto-mona.com/Special_Event_/5_yrs_anniv/index.htm ***************************************** Mukto-Mona Celebrates Earth Day: http://www.mukto-mona.com/Special_Event_/Earth_day2006/index.htm ***************************************** Kansat Uprising : A Special Page from Mukto-Mona http://www.mukto-mona.com/human_rights/kansat2006/members/ ***************************************** MM Project : Grand assembly of local freedom fighters at Raumari http://www.mukto-mona.com/project/Roumari/freedom_fighters_union300306.htm ***************************************** German Bangla Radio Interviews Mukto-Mona Members: http://www.mukto-mona.com/Special_Event_/Darwin_day/german_radio/ Mukto-Mona Celebrates Darwin Day: http://www.mukto-mona.com/Special_Event_/Darwin_day/index.htm ***************************************** Some FAQ's about Mukto-Mona: http://www.mukto-mona.com/new_site/mukto-mona/faq_mm.htm **************************************************** VISIT MUKTO-MONA WEB-SITE : http://www.mukto-mona.com/ **************************************************** "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it". -Beatrice Hall [pseudonym: S.G. Tallentyre], 190

__,_._,___

[mukto-mona] Eat nucl power

Let them eat nuclear energy by Radha Surya 27 Jul 08 (http://www.zcommunications.org/blog/view/1808)
communications
A startling even surreal headline appeared on the front page of the Times of India (TOI) online, a few hours after the conclusion of the tense political drama of the trust vote in Parliament (July 21-22, 2008). Rahul talks about Kalawati but she has not eaten in two days proclaimed the headline. The linking of the name of the Congress party heir apparent, Rahul Gandhi, with that of a complete unknown and the wrenching revelation about Kalawati together made for the kind of headline that causes the shocked and bewildered viewer to pause before clicking to access the story. Kalawati's story turns out to be one of bleak, probably lifelong, never-ending struggle for survival in the Vidarbha region which the stirring, conscience awakening journalism of P.Sainath has rendered into an emblem of the national crisis of agriculture in the era of neoliberal economic reforms. Kalawati was burdened with the responsibility of providing single-handedly for her children when her husband committed suicide to escape the pressures of indebtedness. She had not eaten in the last two days because there simply wasn't enough food to feed the family of five members. Rahul Gandhi came to know her story when he visited the village of Jalka on a fact finding mission in his capacity of Prime Minister in waiting and dropped by her hut. When his turn arrived to participate in the Lok Sabha debate that preceded the trust vote, the Congress Member of Parliament spoke at some length of the all but destitute Kalawati and claimed that she stood to benefit from nuclear energy!

Amid the ugly opportunism and rank political prostitution surrounding the trust vote, Rahul Gandhi's muddled logic might appear to be relatively innocuous as political misdeeds go. As against a victory engineered by buying the support of adversarial or fence-sitting political groups with favors to corporate cronies and promises of cabinet berths, granting jailbird Members of Parliament respite from incarceration for the purpose of casting their vote on the Prime Minister's behalf and poaching votes from Opposition groups with multimillion dollar bribes, the earnest, blundering efforts of the heir apparent to appear statesman-like might be regarded as mere clumsiness were it not part and parcel of the propaganda that has generated hysterical and, for the most part, uninformed support for the nuclear deal among India's ruling elites and US based NRIs (non-resident Indians). The latter in particular have come to exercise immense influence over India-US relations and hence Indian foreign policy. This influence is completely out of proportion to the numerical strength of the US-based NRI population and its non-entitlement to voting rights in Indian elections. The triumph of NRI lobbying on behalf of the nuclear deal in the corridors of power in Washington DC represents political muscle of the sort that the humble Indian voter might view as an obscenity, namely the prevalence of NRI financial clout and diaspora "nationalism" over the roti, kapada aur makan (bread, clothing and shelter) based priorities of the impoverished masses ranging from the poorest of the poor--slum dwellers, pavement dwellers, child laborers, rag pickers and others who are familiar with hunger and malnutrition--to the not so poor who may be somewhat less familiar with deprivation.
In the name of alleviating India's crying energy deficit, Indian and NRI elites have marketed and sold the nuclear deal. In vain have sober analysts demonstrated that nuclear energy will meet merely eight percent of India's energy needs in even the best case projections of enhanced power generation from nuclear sources. The voices of sanity have been drowned by the cacophony on behalf of nuclear energy. The invaluable catch phrase national interest has been wielded to devastating effect by the nuclear deal fanatics and proponents. Taking their cue from such places as the NRI owned mansions of Long Island and other enclaves of privilege, from the Indian embassy in Washington DC to the government offices of New Delhi (Prime Minister's Office, External Affairs Ministry etc) they are chanting the same slogan--Jai (victory) nuclear deal, Jai nuclear energy, George Bush Zindabad (long life). The noise is truly deafening. Because of the spectacular success of the propaganda on the nuclear deal in creating disinformation and concealing the modest benefits to be realized by expanding power generation from nuclear sources, some of these individuals may actually believe that Indian interests are being advanced by clinching the nuclear deal.
Amid much that is murky there is no question that the political crisis of July 2008 was precipitated by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh whose stubborn insistence on keeping his commitment to the US President led to his breaking faith with his Communist coalition allies. The Yuvaraj or crown prince (who by the way has said that he finds this title insulting) has merely joined the chorus and cannot be said to be guilty of being a prime mover. Still it is well that the diligent TOI reporter, Alok Tiwari, who visited Kalawati in the wake of her being spoken of in the Lok Sabha made a point of injecting some sanity into the situation by bringing out the fact that the principal need of the Kalawatis of the nation was food rather than nuclear energy. Her home lacked an electric connection because its installation was beyond her means. Directly taking issue with Rahul Gandhi, Alok Tiwari observed that Kalawati was unlikely to benefit even if India were to produce more electricity. Among India's English language daily newspapers, the TOI has taken the lead in unabashed promotion of the nuclear deal via editorials and opinion articles by strategic thinkers. Thank goodness that the corporate-friendly TOI at least retained a journalist who was willing to challenge official dogma.

One may add that, propaganda to the contrary notwithstanding, Kalawati would be ill-advised if she were to wait with bated breath for the promised nuclear energy. Despite the obscene haste with which the deal is being pursued, supplies of foreign uranium are not expected to arrive on the day following the approval of the 123 agreement by the US Congress. It's also necessary to allow for the fact that years will pass before the shiny new nuclear reactors start churning out the much sought after nuclear energy, that tantalizing object of desire for home-grown and NRI elites.

__._,_.___

***************************************** Sign the Petition : Release the Arrested University Teachers Immediately : An Appeal to the Caretaker Government of Bangladesh http://www.mukto-mona.com/human_rights/university_teachers_arrest.htm ***************************************** Daily Star publishes an interview with Mukto-Mona http://www.mukto-mona.com/news/daily_star/daily_star_MM.pdf ***************************************** MM site is blocked in Islamic countries such as UAE. Members of those theocratic states, kindly use any proxy (such as http://proxy.org/) to access mukto-mona. ***************************************** Mukto-Mona Celebrates 5th Anniversary http://www.mukto-mona.com/Special_Event_/5_yrs_anniv/index.htm ***************************************** Mukto-Mona Celebrates Earth Day: http://www.mukto-mona.com/Special_Event_/Earth_day2006/index.htm ***************************************** Kansat Uprising : A Special Page from Mukto-Mona http://www.mukto-mona.com/human_rights/kansat2006/members/ ***************************************** MM Project : Grand assembly of local freedom fighters at Raumari http://www.mukto-mona.com/project/Roumari/freedom_fighters_union300306.htm ***************************************** German Bangla Radio Interviews Mukto-Mona Members: http://www.mukto-mona.com/Special_Event_/Darwin_day/german_radio/ Mukto-Mona Celebrates Darwin Day: http://www.mukto-mona.com/Special_Event_/Darwin_day/index.htm ***************************************** Some FAQ's about Mukto-Mona: http://www.mukto-mona.com/new_site/mukto-mona/faq_mm.htm **************************************************** VISIT MUKTO-MONA WEB-SITE : http://www.mukto-mona.com/ **************************************************** "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it". -Beatrice Hall [pseudonym: S.G. Tallentyre], 190

__,_._,___

[ALOCHONA] The Third Platform

The Third Platform

Arif Syed reflects on the lessons to be learned from Dr. Yunus's brief foray into politics

SINCE 1/11, and shortly prior to that, there had been attempts to launch a third political platform beyond the Awami League and BNP/Jamaat coalition in Bangladesh politics. Long before the end of the BNP government's five-year tenure, there were murmurs about a "third force" taking over as people could predict the upcoming impasse.

What did people mean when they talked about the third force at that time? Was it: (a) an army coup (like Thailand), (b) a national coalition government heavily backed by civil/international society, or (c) an Iranian-style Islamic revolution?

As it turned out, a hybrid of (a) and (b) happened, with promises of a massive cleanup of corruption and holding of a free and fair election. (I don't know why it's always called "free and fair" -- free election should mean a fair one -- but I guess reality of power struggle is not that simple for us average citizens to understand.)

So a hybrid government came (I'm calling this government ''hybrid" for lack of a better term) and started a kind of cleanup and reform. It seemed they were going for the cleaning up of corruption first. At some point it seemed that the exit strategy of the hybrid government would involve creating a political platform. There were several new political groupings that started during this time. One of the attempts to create a political platform was taken by Dr. Muhammad Yunus under the banner of Nagorik Shokti (NS) but, after a couple of months of hectic and seemingly unorganised activity, he decided not to pursue it after all, and the whole initiative fell apart.

The reasons behind its failure
The whole movement seemed to have been centred on Dr. Yunus's public persona. The strategists (if there were any) behind NS might have calculated that they needed a public figure of national scale to attract people's attention and jump start this third platform.

Perhaps they didn't calculate the kind of attack opponents would launch against Dr. Yunus as a person. One of the criticisms of the existing political parties is that they are centred on public figures and are personality cults. The strategy to launch the "one-man show" failed because the criticism was centred on the same "one man." It seemed like an attempt to create yet another "personality" in our politics.

Over time, people have become aware of the politics of these personality-based cults, and perhaps they didn't see anything special here. The "Yunus Somorthok Gosthi" (Yunus Support Groups) raised the eyebrows of those who were looking for a different brand of politics.

In his attempt to engage the people in the process, Dr. Yunus invited and received thousands of letters from all over the country supporting his initiative.

While the brand value of Dr. Yunus's name in politics was proving to be a momentum gathering plus, the lack of discussion on ideology, history, organisation, etc. meant it was going to be another one-person show. In the Bangladeshi context, personality-based politics may give the third platform some early recognition and momentum; however, the lack of ideology and organisational structure made the new platform very similar to the existing large political forces.

What was Dr. Yunus's political ideology? Where did he or his camp stand on the question of our national identity or governance policy, or what views did they have about guiding principles for the society? Sure he was pro-democracy, pro-free market, and ultimately pro-good relations with the West. Fine.

However it is the "identity" related questions that define political ideology in most people's minds in Bangladesh. What did he think about the "spirit of the Liberation War," or "Islamic values," or "defending sovereignty" (representing the Awami, Islamic, and BNP quarters respectively)? The leftists seem to have abandoned him from the beginning, and he never cared for them either. But where did he fit in the spectrum?

In my observation, which made me hopeful at times, he seemed to have been talking about people power, people's initiatives, etc. His success with Grameen indicated that he was someone who would rather encourage citizens to solve their own problems without getting the government bureaucracy involved.

This less-government, more-citizen initiative approach could have been a great foundation for future policy discussions. This libertarian ideology could have set this movement apart from the rest.

Unfortunately, this was not articulated well enough. Dr. Yunus's life can be a great example of liberal ideology, however, the movement failed to understand the essence and promote this. The name, Nagorik Shokti, was right, but the meaning wasn't articulated to find the resonance with the people. People didn't get to understand clearly what his ideology would be. Lesson to learn -- failure to communicate the ideology can clearly cause failure in creating a niche.

There were a lot of rumours that his platform was being floated to become another King's Party, like BNP or JP in the past. If the "king" floats a new political party, some giddy politicians will definitely start licking their lips at the prospect of getting a piece of the "power."

Governmental positions, business deals, contracts, tenders, relief distribution, and photo ops are the matters that define power in Bangladesh. This is a dream come true for small-time politicians. Remember what happened to the leftist politicians of the 50s and 60s? They forgot their lifelong ideology and principles and became ready fodder of the army generals in the 70s and 80s. It benefited both sides. Power brought them riches that can only be acquired in dreams.

People are aware of this situation. While these turncoat politicians may draw some local votes, opportunists don't fare well in national politics. Was Dr. Yunus headed that way? It was the sight of the opportunists in his camp that made people uneasy.

It seemed like his platform was taking advantage of the caretaker government's silent approval in this bid to launch a third platform. When all kinds of political activity were banned, his activity seemed to have enjoyed a blind-eye from the authority. Ultimately, was this helpful in the perception of his platform? His political opponents capitalised on this.

For a successful campaign, you need a well thought out strategy and a group of people who can execute it efficiently. Even though it was an inside matter, and little was revealed to the public (understandably so), from outside it seemed almost chaotic. So who were his strategists? Who was advising him? At one point, there were rumours that Sirajul Alam Khan was advising him. There was his brother leading the discussions with the media types. There were rumours of foreign embassies influencing him. There was news of him putting together a group of advisers from the diaspora. Were there any co-ordinated efforts to bind all these enthusiasts together or to filter out the opportunists?

Enthusiasts wanted him to don the superhero suit and solve all the problems right then. However, some small details went missing. What was the strategy? How was he going to execute the strategy? Was he getting too much advice from too many people? It seemed he faltered in what seemed to be his strength. For someone who has built a mega-organisation like Grameen -- not to be able to float a political organisation with so much support amounted to a failure.

He floated several very practical ideas and was talking against the crippling feuds between the two major parties. People liked a voice of sanity in the middle. Then again, he was drawing too much from his experiences at Grameen. His proposals, like giving the management of Chittagong port to the Grameen women, were not realistic in any sense. Did he think that a Grameen model could be applied to solve all the problems we face?

Even though Dr. Yunus went to Shaheed Minar and Smritishoudho to pay homage to the liberation struggle martyrs, he never spoke clearly about the liberation war or Bangabandhu -- so suspicion grew quickly in the Awami camp. They never got the reassurance from him about the core values of the Liberation War that make them different from the others. It was surprising how effective Sheikh Hasina's "shudkhor" labeling was. Overnight, Dr. Yunus's Grameen became the target of fair and unfair scrutiny of the press.

The Islamic camp had long been criticising the NGO culture that Dr. Yunus and Grameen are synonymous with. Grameen and other NGOs have been targets of Islamist extremism and violence in the rural areas for years. (Though they didn't miss the photo op when he got the Nobel Prize. Chhatra Shibir president met him the day after and the Dainik Sangram didn't miss the opportunity to publish a picture of their meeting). People following BNP and JP were perhaps closer to Dr. Yunus in terms of politics. He is strongly pro-business and pro-Western and possibly non-Awami. However, their spirit was dampened when he talked about closer ties with India and a visa-free sub-continent.

The buzz that the Nobel Prize was given to him by the design of US interests started soon after he was awarded. It was said that he was being groomed for the eventual third force that was going to take power if the stalemate didn't end. This made an early dent in his popularity, and he never made any effort to counter such negative propaganda. The easy but paranoid equation being dished out by the perpetual India-haters was that India was implementing a grand US strategy (sic) to destabilise Bangladesh in order to create a pretext to invade.

Some people, such as the populist columnist Farhad Mazhar, conveniently saw a grand-scale US, Israeli, and Indian conspiracy to thwart Islam on a global scale, and they portrayed Dr. Yunus as a part of this grand imperial plot. Dr. Yunus and his camp never really made any attempt to counter these allegations. In Bangladesh, this Islam-in-danger rhetoric, especially involving India and Israel, is a surefire way of becoming an authority on the country's sovereignty and patriotism. Dr. Yunus and his team failed to understand the potency of such propaganda.

His vision of creating a prosperous, free, open, democratic country near two economic giants of the 21st century was a good one to start with. However, who was he looking for to join his political party? His target seemed to be the people who were tired of Awami League or BNP/Jamaat politics. Fine. However, how do you woo them to your platform? People may have been fed up with the prevalent politics but they also needed to go through some kind of political process themselves to be associated with a new platform.

Obviously, Dr. Yunus was vocal against the traditional hartal/ andolon, etc; however, we never got a clear picture of the alternatives. Were large public meetings on the way if the campaign got enough momentum? We heard a lot about being an alternative to traditional politics, but we never had anyone defining what these alternative political processes were. Did his success with Grameen lead him to think that he could solve any and every problem in Bangladesh?

There's a feeling in Bangladesh that politics has gone to the goons, and if good citizens didn't step up the country would go down the drain. This is an oversimplification of a complex situation. It is elitist thinking that only "good" foreign-educated people can be the messiahs of our country. Dr. Yunus's campaign got a lot of momentum among the educated elite, the upper class of the Bangladesh. His rhetoric of eliminating poverty from Bangladesh resonated well with the urban upper class. Why not, it sounded like a perfect appeal to the wealthy people with a bit of a social guilt. The coffee-sipping "development" thinkers of the green zones would like to see poverty gone from the country, especially because of someone whose method was hailed/approved by the West. Fine, the super-rich of Bangladesh liked him, and there's nothing wrong with that. And, obviously, his strength in organising the poor of the villages gave him good footing among the people at the lower end of the economic pole. His strength in creating huge networks among the poor and the overall hope for the poor was almost a natural advantage for him.

However, what was missing from this campaign was an effort to reach the middle class. He probably ignored the fact that the identity-politics-obsessed middle class has been the real opinion leader of the country. For some reason, he or his campaign had no appeal for the middle class psyche or values like ethnic or religious or cultural identity. His strategists had completely missed accounting for that. Perhaps his team didn't know how to reach this middle class and bring it into the fold. Capturing the middle class will be the key to any future attempts like this.

Power is a strange thing. We have been told that absolute power corrupts absolutely, yet, we are always lining up for it. When an accomplished person like Dr. Yunus wanted to get into politics, I, along with many others, wondered why. The answer seemed to be obvious. Being fed-up with the current political stalemate, and being able to choose between only a few choices, Bangladesh needed an alternative political platform that could rise above the mud-slinging and make substantial progress. So Dr. Yunus was convinced that he could float a political party, take power and save the nation. He made an attempt. There are many among us who want to get to power and fix the country. Nothing wrong with that -- we call this politics. We have placed enormous expectations around it. We have attached such emotions as patriotism, serving the country, love of the people, etc with it to glorify and justify the politics for power. If Dr. Yunus's achievement of empowering people can be translated into politics, it will mean less emphasis on "power of few."

Evaluating all the factors, it can be said that the bid for becoming an alternative to the existing political platforms is not a distant dream. If an ideology provides overall guidance, an unambiguous stand on history and the country's founding ideals is taken, a clear strategy is drawn and executed, and the right audience is courted, a new political force is not so unrealistic.

Arif Syed lives and works in New York and is a member of the Drishtipat Writers' Collective.

http://www.thedailystar.net/forum/2008/august/platform.htm

__._,_.___

[Disclaimer: ALOCHONA Management is not liable for information contained in this message. The author takes full responsibility.] To unsubscribe/subscribe, send request to alochona-owner@egroups.com

__,_._,___

[ALOCHONA] Everybody Should Care if Bangladesh Drowns

Everybody Should Care if Bangladesh Drowns

A. Hannan Ismail asks what the global North's lack of commitment to tackling climate problems might mean from a human rights perspective

Bangladeshis have long been known as a mobile people. In fact, you could say that it is in our blood to travel, move and explore. And yet, this wanderlust owes much more to another form of liquid substance: water.

Have boat, will travel
An earthquake-induced shift of the Jamuna river system made eastern Bengal both navigable and cultivable from the late sixteenth century. This change in waterways brought settlers from the west of the sub-continent: pioneers who introduced agricultural practices and non-liturgical Islamic rituals that intermingled with local religious customs. Some of these newcomers became semi-mythologised as pirs (holy men). The songs of Lalon, meandering across the late nineteenth century like so many of Bengal's rivers, celebrated the admixture of faith and farming that became their legacy.

That other big chunk of water, the Bay of Bengal, enabled maritime inhabitants of an earlier Bengal to explore and trade with Indochina and Java, and export variants of Buddhism and Hinduism to those parts of the world. All of this happened long before the Portuguese, the Dutch, the French and then the British commandeered the waterways. Water too carried agricultural labourers from greater Noakhali and Chittagong on seasonal treks to the tilling fields of Burma. Such excursions are why the old-timers of "Singapura" (Singapore) sometimes referred to people of south Asian descent as "Bangals."

Here today, gone tomorrow
The eastern part of historical Bengal is an active delta. Geological and hydro-morphological forces wash vast quantities of silt down from the Himalayas and this settles to become alluvial sediment. This stuff has built up over the last 6,000 years or so to form a territory that is, for the time being at least, home to about 150 million people. Seen through the telescope of time, Bangladesh is a geological infant. The gradients of the Himalayas and its piedmonts, combined with the monsoons, have made this plain land possible.

Conversely, no Himalayas means none of our big rivers: no Padma, no Jamuna and no Meghna: ergo no Bangladesh.

Given enough time, all this will come to an end. Man-made climate change will only accelerate us towards this conclusion. Thermal expansion of the Bay of Bengal, tectonic events stimulated by changes in temperature, increasingly erratic run-off from the estuaries, topsoil erosion where most of the bio-diversity lives and dies, more intense pulses of rainfall and a potential collapse of the monsoon cycle itself, saline penetration, aridity in the western part of the country, and so on.

We have pressed fast-forward to the inevitable, as documented so evocatively in Afsan Chowdhury's film Does Anybody Care if Bangladesh Drowns?

Eight centuries after water carried Bengali traders to the perimeters of the Indian Ocean, and four centuries after water again brought pioneers from upper-riparian reaches, water will again prompt Bangladeshis to set sail.

Awareness is good but not good enough
Many readers of Forum understand that the science is now pretty clear. Finally, fourth time round, the world is listening to the work of the United Nations and its Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). And with it, a new generation of Bangladeshis at home and overseas has tuned in.

The growing awareness has many converts, not all of whom you'd want your mother to meet. The Pentagon, for instance, produced a report in 2004 warning of the national security threat posed by climate change (the inevitable first filter for that most martial of governments). Conservative periodicals such as The Economist have finally caught up with 40 years of environmentalist lobbying on the matter.

Bangladeshis who have been on the climate change beat for decades continue to plug away, earning well-deserved plaudits for their efforts. Indeed, we are fortunate to have some well-regarded and well-placed experts at home and abroad. They are now being joined by a whole new generation of players. Young Bangladeshi journalists are beginning to pen their own news stories and analysis with increasing literacy. All sorts of neophytes are getting involved too, mobilizing, meeting, and engaging everywhere. The Bangladeshi blogosphere is buzzing, in its sometimes-silly and sometimes-useful way.

A growth in public awareness of climate change is a secular good. The progressive text book says that public awareness and mobilisation can induce both governments and the private sector to develop and deepen commitments to climate change action. It goes on to say that people as citizens can pressure their governments to act; while the same people, this time acting as consumers, can prompt similar responses from markets. Flipping to the chapter about empowering poor and marginalised people, we understand that deepening democracy and making markets more inclusive can bring power to still more people. Without informed and mobilised publics, both governments and the private sector will likely remain either too reactive or too slow, stuck-in-the mud throw backs rather than vanguards of transformative change.

But will public awareness be enough to save Bangladesh this time? I have already suggested an answer to this question, but it is worth burying false hopes and naïve defiance once and for all.

Optimism of the will, pessimism of the mind
Here is where we are today as described by actors worth listening to. Rajendra Pachauri, chair of the IPCC, has suggested that the international community has only seven years to pull its proverbial finger out and demonstrate meaningful action. Bleak becomes bleaker if you believe the World Wildlife Fund's assessment of the recent G8 summit outcome on climate change: "Pathetic."

Many readers will recall the recent remarks of former US vice-president Al Gore, who has called for his country to shift to 100 per cent renewable energy consumption within ten years. Veteran development thinker Susan George has weighed in to claim that bottom-up participatory approaches will not help us this time. She calls for a New Keynesian approach of directed top-down intervention to respond to the crisis. These are constructive but desperate calls. If you think they are radical ideas (they're not really), then listen to James Gustave Speth, former head of the United Nations Development Program. He contends that it's not very clever to expect the problem to become the solution. In his new book, The Bridge at the Edge of the World: Capitalism, the Environment, and Crossing from Crisis to Sustainability, he concludes that the costs of capitalism far outweigh its benefits. He argues that the world needs less rapacious and unsustainable approaches to creating value out of ecology and society. Put this one on your reading list.

My personal experience suggests that pessimism is entirely appropriate.

Right now I work in Zambia, sub-Saharan Africa. The team I work with has supported the government to develop a national climate change strategy, a national action plan of adaptation, a national climate change secretariat, the beginnings of in-depth economic analyses on the impacts of climate change, developed a proposal to "climate proof" the national development plan, and so on.

We have helped augment country-wide awareness campaigns and are trying to strengthen the capacity of Zambians to engage meaningfully in multilateral processes. Finally, we are debating the very debatable virtues of carbon trading.

In spite of this effort, climate change remains just one of the million issues vying for space within the consciousness of elected representatives and public officials. Who can blame them? This is a class of political and administrative elite that has been schooled and seduced and sold to the myths of the CO2 economy. Not unlike upper and middle class Bangladeshis. They are disciples of the narrowly economistic world views of the IMF and the World Bank, one which important bilateral donors such as the UK's Department for International Development have been only too happy to reinforce down the years.

Meanwhile mean surface temperatures have risen by fully one degree celsius in the last 30 years; the Kalahari Desert is remobilising northwards; aridity is becoming endemic; seasons are becoming less predictable and disrupting the agricultural cycle upon which the majority of the population depends; and natural disasters are more erratic and intense when they do occur. If this wasn't enough, here come the same donors again, sacks full of cash and this time talking the good talk about climate change.

What we miss
Is there a future for Bangladesh's bottom 145 million? In Bangladesh? No. Overseas? If this is about human rights, the answer should be: Yes.

Let me try to explain. We all have rights, either realised or denied. The Western mindset tends to obsess about civil and political rights, but there are also social, economic and cultural rights. There are rights to development and rights to habitat too. These rights can be inter-generational. This makes the rights-climate change relationship a Pandora's Box that most countries of the over-consuming global North would want to remain nailed shut. This alone suggests that it is a track worth taking.

Why? As we can see from the discussions around Kyoto and its successor arrangements, the over-consuming global North has yet to come close to acknowledging its historical role in creating economies, politics, institutions and cultures that depend on CO2-belching technologies. The G8 cannot even agree on the baseline year from which to measure current performance on emissions reduction. So, no accountability for the past and not much for the present either.

To establish "baselines" would imply responsibility. It's the foot in the door through which the moral case for compensation could enter. The Kyoto Protocol goes as far as to acknowledge differentiated responsibilities, but a human rights-based approach to climate change responsibility could take us further. Indeed, it could take us in the direction of legal action or reparations.

According to the Geneva-based International Council on Human Rights Policy, there are at least four issues that can be considered in bringing human rights into the climate change debate. Each has its merits.. First, looked at most simply, one can attribute responsibility to groups of people who dump CO2-equivalent gases into the atmosphere which have impacts on the current life chances of other groups of people. Second, slightly more complicated, there is the impact of current CO2-emitting activity that will lead to the loss of future life potential. Third, and here things get tricky, since climate change is global and will affect everyone, this raises a question of who is responsible for how much of the burden for finding solutions. Fourth, we can look at climate change in terms of entitlements for past, present and future usage.

It sounds complicated but only if you want to avoid taking responsibility. If a rights-based argument doesn't carry the weight it should, then perhaps the global North would prefer to apply some of its own tested approaches to remedying transgression. Take, for instance, the Nuremberg Principles.

The good bits went something like this: If you invade another country, you are responsible for everything that happens afterwards (civil and ethnic strife: yours; sectarianisation: yours; economic collapse: yours). Or to use former US Secretary of State Colin Powell's counsel to President George W. Bush before Iraq II: "If you break it, you own it." Now, translate this to climate change: if you emit without restraint, you are responsible for everything that happens after that. Britain and other Allied Forces applied this principle with a vengeance on the Axis Powers after World War II. There are contemporary efforts that take such an approach. I could cite, for example, the methods of assessed repayment of climate debt proffered by Friends of the Earth.

Pressing for justice and equity on climate change impacts from a human rights-based perspective means that we in the under-consuming global South must be ready to reverse the gaze and insist on the global North taking responsibility. Yet today, few countries in the global South have incorporated historical injustice into their calculations for a more just future. Some do try to distinguish between emissions deriving from conspicuous consumption as opposed to subsistence consumption. And there are indeed a handful of countries, especially the big ones like Brazil, China, India and South Africa, who have raised the matter of historical responsibility..

If we are serious about the human rights of Bangladeshis who will be hit hardest by climate change, then our positions need to be invigorated by a rights-based approach. Social, economic and cultural rights face obliteration. The rights to development and habitation are at mortal risk. Civil and political rights, which receive so much of the attention under the crude shorthand of "democracy," will be washed away. The rights-based approach means being serious about responsibilities. This is about more than "Our Common Future" (the title of the landmark Brundtland Report of 1987). It must begin with acknowledgment of responsibilities for our common past.

One-way ticket
Since the "international community" does not appear to be up to the task of shifting fast towards low-emitting systems of production, distribution and consumption, the next logical and humane step would be to start looking for new homes overseas for tens of millions of Bangladeshis.

To date, the effects of climate change have mostly produced internal displacement within the borders of Bangladesh, with India also taking some of the brunt. That is to say, its human impacts remain hidden from the view of the global North. The net of migration must now be cast wider.

If I was a policy wonk, I would suggest that such relocation would have two inter-related objectives: first, the protection of the rights of the people relocated reconciled with the responsibilities of receiving countries in lieu of actual repayment of climate debt; and second, the avoidance of tension and conflict likely to occur in the absence of such strategies. The first objective is the yin to the second objective's yang.

Sound crazy? It might, if you already haven't begun to think about it. But we're serious about human rights, aren't we?

It sounds nuts because today we live in a world defined by the prohibitions of nation-states, plus regional and global compacts more or less premised on the sovereignty of nation-states. This coercive apparatus, erected across the globe over the last one hundred years, is already over-loaded by toxic disputes involving nationalisms, class, ethnicity, religion, livelihoods and resources. It doesn't take too well to large-scale human movements. Then add tens of millions of Bangladeshis to the equation.

That's where we're headed because until the over-consuming global North in particular pulls its finger out, it's the right thing to do because it's the rights-based thing to pursue.

It won't be fun. The politically-sanctioned resettlement of entire populations is nothing new. They have been prompted by war and sometimes presented as a remedy to avert further war. Hundreds of thousands of Germans were resettled westwards after World War II as part of a political outcome framed by the Allies. The Jewish diaspora too needed accommodation after the horrors meted out during that same conflict. Were it not for the subsequent denial of Palestinian rights and the disastrous disregard for a status quo based on the 1967 borders, today's bloodshed in that region could have been much

reduced.

Large-scale resettlements are rarely handled well if handled abruptly or non-transparently. Had Clement Atlee's Labour government not been in such a hurry to run away from the Indian sub-continent (remember, it brought forward its withdrawal one year ahead of schedule), perhaps the appalling scale of massacre in the Punjab could have been averted. And going further back still, resettlement of Native Americans westwards, ahead of the advancing settlers, was marked by the treachery and betrayal of President Andrew Jackson and others. Indeed, it served as a thin veil for genocide until 1893, when the US census declared, with chilling banality, that the internal frontier was closed.

These precedents do not augur well for an evacuation of Bangladesh. But what are the humane alternatives?

A common refrain of south Asian immigrants growing up in Britain in the 1970s and 1980s was: "We are over here because you were over there." The influx of south Asians into Britain was intertwined with the British presence in south Asia for two centuries beforehand. The New Commonwealth Immigration Act of 1964 implicitly recognised this historical tie.

Today, people uprooted by climate change should be getting ready to move for an analogous reason. "We are coming over there because you have been emitting over, well, everywhere actually." You can call this blow-back, historical symmetry, reaping what you sow, or just desserts. But it is history balancing itself out and it cannot be avoided.

A fight for the right
The natural course of action for this human-induced catastrophe would be for people to up and move from A to B. People have done this throughout all of human history when confronted by environmental change. In pre-modern times there was of course no talk about human rights. But then again, there were no nation-states either.

I wasn't joking about applying Nuremburg-type principles.. Universal human rights offer a basis -- I would argue the only basis -- on which Bangladeshis can confront the restrictions and denials and obfuscations of the over-consuming global North. That means adding a third pillar to climate change responses alongside adaptation and mitigation: litigation.

Human rights can provide a vocabulary through which ethical and moral arguments can be fought to protect and promote the life chances of millions; it can generate grounds for solidarity between peoples who share common cause for inter-generational justice, and it can call to order those who would argue that the past is past, and we should now only focus on a Churchillian age of consequences.

If the G8 and other over-consuming emitters do not sort themselves out soon, then a real age of consequences will be upon us. Tens of millions of Bangladeshis will call upon the traditions of their maritime forebears and make their ways to more clement shores. They will demand their right to live.

And what will we do then?

A. Hannan Ismail lives in Zambia. You can contact him at: ahannanismail @yahoo.co.uk.

http://www.thedailystar.net/forum/2008/august/care.htm

__,_._,___

Re: [ALOCHONA] Re: tata's withdrawal - i am not sure.................

There is a positive thing that has come out of Tata deal.

We can do this our self but may take some time.

We have built all kind of industries in Bangladesh, we have man power

but lacks political will.

What we need is political stability and security at all cost.

We can do it.

--- On Wed, 8/6/08, Md. Shamim Iqbal <shmm777@yahoo.com> wrote:

From: Md. Shamim Iqbal <shmm777@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [ALOCHONA] Re: tata's withdrawal - i am not sure.................
To: alochona@yahoogroups.com, notun_bangladesh@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, August 6, 2008, 5:46 AM

these discussions are arising from insufficient accurate information about tata's proposal

asking assurance of energy (gas) is likely for a foreign investor but my intuition says NO to indians who considers bd as a prospective province, let me elaborate here considering we assure gas to them

they wanted to invest in steel, power, fertilizer and coal sector.

steel: their planned capacity was 2.3m tons/year when our maximum cumulative capacity has been 0.03m tons/year so far. we don't have supply shortage, so they could export and take away the foreign currency earned, if they were to sell here it could be easy to upset local producers by price benefit with that much capacity margin and eventually take over some leading local plants (50%acquisitionon plan), thus our market could be dependent on them

power: 1000mw would be the largest single facility in bd. we need power, would they sell to us? at which price? at other ipp's price? when we are loosing at those ipp's. if they were to export power to india we could turn into even BIGGER LOSER, follow this link to know about their power plans, they are producing in bhutan and supplying in india, they need more power for eastern region!!!

http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/2003/07/04/stories/2003070401940300.htm

fertilizer: 1m tons/year would be the single largest urea production facility in bd and close to 1.5 times than present largest kafco (0.68m tons/year). as far as 'urea fertlizer' supply and demand situation in concerned in bd, typical shortage is 0.5m tons/year. again, would they sell to us? at which price? at kafco's price? when we are loosing there. if they were to export all of it, again we could be LOSER

coal: we are yet to learn about coal resource management so nothing to consider from tata.

other questions are,

1. what about government or private participation provision at this investment?

2. what about public participation?

3. what about key man power hiring from bd

4. what about transport capacity within our infrastructure (port, roads, rails)

it just came into my mind, why tata wanted to invest that big in bd when we do not have enough reserve of gas, political stability and suitable infrastructure? if it is only gas they need, tata can still invest in myanmar where india has gas sector investment. after few years if bd cannot supply gas they will ask for gas from myanmar and once gas from myanmar is here, it won't take long to reach india 'through' bd. what else way we can put it?

--- On Wed, 8/6/08, M. <masud.cool@gmail.com> wrote:

From: M. <masud.cool@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [ALOCHONA] Re: tata's withdrawal - i am not sure.................
To: alochona@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, August 6, 2008, 1:40 AM

I dont know the complete demand of Tata which may be illogical. But the demand of gas is not illogical.
Think from your side. If you are an investor in industries you must need power.
Tata did not want electrical power which is very unstable in bangladesh. They wanted gas.
If you want to make a deal you must specify for how much year you are going to give gas. For tata it was 20 years.

IF YOU WANT TO RUN A HEAVY INDUSTRY YOU CAN NEVER RUN WITHOUT HEAVY ELECTRICITY OR GAS.

FYI, tata is not only interested in bangladesh. They are willing to expand their capacity. So they are setting up more steel plants all over the asia.

See from wikipedia

http://en.wikipedia .org/wiki/ Tata_Steel

"Tata Steel has set an ambitious target to achieve a capacity of 100 million tonne by 2015. Managing Director B Muthuraman stated that of the 100 million tonne, Tata Steel is planning a 50-50 balance between greenfield facilities and acquisitions

Tata Steel has lined up a series of greenfield projects in India and outside which includes ^[8]

6 million tonne plant in Orissa (India)

12 million tonne in Jharkhand (India)

5 million tonne in Chhattisgarh (India)

3-million tonne plant in Iran

2.4-million tonne plant in Bangladesh

5 million tonne capacity expansion at Jamshedpur (India)

4.5 million tonne plant in Vietnam (feasibility studies underway)"

It is our failure if we cannot join this adventure just for our bad bureaucracy.
If we have real trouble in gas then it is okey.

2008/8/5 mahathir of bd <wouldbemahathirofbd @yahoo.com>

If Tata could be logical and did not make mama'r barir abdar of gurantee of gas for 20 years, that would be good for Bangladesh.

If any conglomerate think of investment in Bangladesh, they must investigate the fact of tata's withdrawal. they will find the illogical demand of tata.

If any other conglomerate don't invest in bangladesh with such silly excuse, then we really don't need such investor.

আল্লাহ যাকে যখন ইচ্ছা ক্ষমতা দান করেন,মাইনাস টু ফরমুলায় তাই হাসেন

http://www.microsco piceye.blogspot. com/

--- On Mon, 8/4/08, Adhiraj Bose <swarnayogi@yahoo. co.in> wrote:

From: Adhiraj Bose <swarnayogi@yahoo. co.in>
Subject: [ALOCHONA] Re: tata's withdrawal - i am not sure........ .........
To: alochona@yahoogroup s.com
Date: Monday, August 4, 2008, 4:01 PM

Mr.Iqbal I dont understand your fears regarding indian conglomerates in
this regard. The Tata's billion dollar investment was supposed to be
the country's largest foreign investment till date. Economists in
Bangladesh have clearly lamented the withdrawal of this investmemt plan
saying it will be a clear deterent to any further investment in the
country. th withdrawal of this particular investment will not mean the
end of the world for fdi in bangladesh but the obvious reaction would
obviously be in the negative to such a withdrawal by a large
conglomerate. Here is what the Daily Star had to say in this regard.
http://www.thedaily star.net/ story.php? nid=48382

--- In alochona@yahoogroup s.com, "Md. Shamim Iqbal" <shmm777@... > wrote:
>
> i am not sure why am i happy to know about this withdrawal. may be
its because of the fear i have in mind about indians. since our
Independence they did little for us (if i have missed any) and
continuously putting us behind. $ 3 bn is a big fdi for us but as far
as we came to know, it was a one sided proposal. another 'east india
company' may be. we should not respond to such proposal(s) from now on.
>
> people of bd learned lesson from 'kafco' experience, so we are
getting aware of our rights, now we need to propagate this awareness to
other sectors to prosper ourselves.
>

--
*´¨)
¸.·´¸.·*´¨) ¸.·*¨)
(¸.·´ (¸.·` * Mun!M

Jackie Mason - "I have enough money to last me the rest of my life, unless I buy something."

__,_._,___

[Nagorik_Shokti] Earn $5000 for reading emails , 8/8/2008, 12:00 am

Reminder from:		Nagorik_Shokti Yahoo! Group

Title:		Earn $5000 for reading emails

Date:		Friday August 8, 2008
Time:		All Day
Repeats:		This event repeats every day.
Notes:		Dear Friend You can join us for free. We will pay you to view websites, $10 for paid EMAILS and $5 for PTC. You can recommend Depacco, we pay you $10 per every referral. Additionally we have referral program where you get profits from referral earnings (30%). Minimum payout for Free Members is $5000 we guarantee Easy and Quick Payout. http://depacco.com/pages/index.php?refid=thirupathi

Get reminders on your mobile, Yahoo! Messenger, and email. Edit reminder options

__,_._,___

[mukto-mona] Circus of SAARC

Circus of SAARC

-Biplab Pal, 8/6/2008

Washington DC

South Asian Association of regional co-operation (SAARC) just ended its summit. Endless scintillating flashes on our Prime ministers, resolution against terrorism, resolve for counter terrorism, cornering of Pakistan are all but gallant achievement of regional leaders while India, Afghanistan and Pakistan continue to bleed profusely from the wound called Islamic terrorism organized by none other than rogue Pakistani outfit-Inter Service Intelligence. Collaboration between ISI and Taliban are so real, even Bush had to call Gillani and give him ultimatum--control your outfit or pay the price for being one of the Taliban consort. In last three decades, Pakistan has never been pushed so hard to the wall as we all know the very country is the most fertile ground for global terrorism. Being in India, we just happened to be at its unfortunate doorstep. Millions of Soviet arms after the collapse of USSR have been dispersed among warring tribes of Afghanistan and North Eastern Provinces of Pakistan. Whether Taliban is an outcome of Islamic extremism for a planned game for necrotic business is between our rational and imaginative mind. But we all want to know what is the outcome of 10 Billion dollar US aid given to Pakistan by USA for eliminating terrorism? Instead of sign of relief, Swat valley is under the control of extremists despite heavy aerial bombing. How can you stop these Taliban when millions of them are produced in Pakistani Madrases on regular basis? Both America and Pakistan are doing nothing against mushrooms of terror incubators. Apparently , it is like burning a bush while spreading its seeds elsewhere so that multiple times more thickets can grow. And we call them to clean again by American tax payer's money! It is a vicious cycle of terrorism which can not be eliminated without eradication of its ideology of Khilafat, diluting the Taliban friendly Pakistani officials and addressing the genuine grievances of Muslims in Pakistan, India and Bangladesh.

Let ask ourselves point blank-what SAARC has done to ameliorate bilateral relation between India and Pakistan? Between India and Bangladesh?

We will do a simple case study on India-Bangladesh relation. Bangladesh is landlocked by India and upstream of all its major rivers are controlled by Indian territory. Strategically, for food, for water and even for medicine, Bangladesh is heavily dependant on India. Expectation of strong succorance from India has snowballed into a vulnerable relationship because Bangladesh does not have strategic asset to assert its interest on India. Take the case of Farrakka dam-India is supposed to supply a minimum of 34,000 cu secs during summer. Due to illegal extraction of water in UP & Bihar, the barrage is not receiving even 24,000 cu secs before it can even split the water for Bangladesh!

Now who would stop illegal extraction by UP farmers? If Bangladeshi people think, Indian Government should clean it-it will be a total Utopian concept since such action against farmers in India is nearly impossible. Even Jyoti Basu badly wanted this action against illegal canals in Bihar in 1987-solely for West Bengal. But he failed because Bihar and UP have more MP seats than West Bengal.

This single incident would tell you impractical nature of any treaty between India and Bangladesh since Bangladesh has no strategic control over India. We have never bothered to act in the best interest of Bangladesh after its birth because there is nothing to be forefeited from a fallout of bilateral relation. This is extremely unfortunate but hard truth that needs to be analyzed if we want any meaningful relation.

Many of Bangladeshi intellectuals have urged to raise the issue in UN for violating international river treaty by India .But most of them even do not understand that UN is another circus when it comes to take action against any super power since all the member countries are more interested to please the super powers for pocketing material benefit. Most of the UN members have no interest other than how their political elites would benefit by acceding to the desire of rich and powerful countries. Given the current status of India which has second highest economic growth and nearly all the world want to invest in its market, it is very unlikely that UN could take any resolution against India favoring Bangladesh.

Then what are the options left before Bangladesh to bring India to round table? Apparently none and exhaustion of tangible options works as the fastest catalyst for anti-India sentiment in Bangladesh. Existence of strong anti-India feelings has been exploited by ISI to recruit local Bangladeshi Jihadis for subversive terror activities in India. Question that SAARC must address-given such a huge disparity of strategic balance, how India and Bangladesh can go forward? Lip service of India-Bangla friendship could serve no purpose unless a strategic balance in the relationship is restored. Creation of such balance has never been discussed in SAARC.

Only option left to restore strategic balance is economic co-operation and creation of a free economic trade zone in SAARC countries. If Bangladesh workers and products have access to Indian market, Bangladesh economy would benefit from multitude of opportunities. At present, it is an arid destination for large FDI. But the moment such free zone would come to existence and the investors would sense that by setting up a factory in Bangaldesh their product can be marketed in India as well, prospect of FDI in Bangladesh would enhance by ten folds. India would benefit both politically and economically from free trade in South Asia. If Bangladesh becomes a lucrative investment destination for Indian capital, business lobby of India would protect the interest of Bangladesh in Indian politics to further their investment. This would restore some level of strategic balance for Bangladesh. At the same time, people of Bangladesh would grow their concern for Indian economy since their livelihood would depend on this integrated market. This would be propitious for India for eradicating terror outfits. In last two years, India Inc. invested more than 13 billions in North American market. It is therefore unfortunate, that despite Bangladesh being so close, India Inc could not be allured to Bangladesh for investment due to hostile anti-Indian sentiment. SAARC never addressed this issue-as the organization merely opted for a ceremonial existence.

Every modern theory in social science concludes the dissolution of nation states in future with the rise of information highway and transport facilities. Since in long run, neither India, nor Bangladesh nor Pakistan will exist as separate state and all of the countries in the world would merge into a single nation, sooner we would work towards this unification, better will be the future of our children. North Americans are merging through NAFTA--Europe through European union-but SAARC in last two decades failed miserably to gain any momentum towards meaningful unification. Blame game is easy to play-soul searching and analysis of the current situation is the name of the game we want in SAARC. There is no doubt India has failed to give leadership to SAARC by its indifferent stoic attitude towards the neighbors. Being a large mass it never felt the need for such integration. On the other hand, political leadership of our neighbors, although felt very strongly for economic integration, weighed their bait more balanced towards anti-Indianism for securing winning political support. They have exploited the anti-Indian emotion for securing political future at the expense of ruining a robust economic growth that was very real. I sincerely believe there is nothing wrong in taking anti-India stance politically since India has not done justice to them, but extending that anti-Indian politics to prevent Indian capital flow is disastrous and counter productive to their economy.

Idealism is always a set of ideals to look forward and not to leap backward.

__,_._,___

Daily Online Alochona

Banner Advertiser

Wednesday, August 6, 2008

[mukto-mona] Rights of the indigenous peoples

[mukto-mona] Green housing

[mukto-mona] Eat nucl power

[ALOCHONA] The Third Platform

[ALOCHONA] Everybody Should Care if Bangladesh Drowns

Re: [ALOCHONA] Re: tata's withdrawal - i am not sure.................

[Nagorik_Shokti] Earn $5000 for reading emails , 8/8/2008, 12:00 am

[mukto-mona] Circus of SAARC

Blog Archive

Link List

Addvertise

Reffaral Link