Dear Taj,
In your write-up, the "India-factor" in Indo-Bangladesh relationship seemed like a redundancy that was merely a rehash of superficialities that are hawked endlessly by MBI Munshi. Had you explained the India-factor in a Bhutan-Bangladesh treaty or Nepal-Bangladesh treaty I would have been very grateful, and so, I think, would the other fans of you for making sense.
Farida apa
Subject: RE: [TriTioMatra] Has Bangladesh given an all out transit to India?
What does "all out transit" mean? The anti-India paranoia is counterproductive in many ways. Nepal and Bhutan, two land-locked neighbors, had been begging Bangladesh to allow them access to sea-ports partly to escape the pressure of Indian domination of their trade outlets. Any transit to those countries could mean a huge earning for Bangladesh.
How long are we going to live with this childish, crude fear of India at the cost of genuine gain for the BD which is poised with a superb geographical position?
Farida Majid
How long are we going to live with this childish, crude fear of India at the cost of genuine gain for the BD which is poised with a superb geographical position?
Farida Majid
To: zoglul@hotmail.co.uk
From: bdmailer@gmail.com
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2010 06:59:57 +0600
Subject: [ALOCHONA] The India factor in Indo-Bangladesh Relations
The India factor in Indo-Bangladesh Relations
Taj Hashmi
An understanding of the 'India Factor' is essential for figuring out what went right or wrong in the recently signed Hasina-Manmohan MOU; and as to why Bangladeshis are again so polarised on the MOU. While pro-Awami Leaguers are gaga about the understanding between the two prime ministers, anti-Awami Leaguers, mainly BNP-Jamaat supporters, simply consider the deal a 'total sell-off to India'. For the right or wrong reasons, the Awami League is called 'pro-Indian' and BNP 'pro-Pakistani'
Recently one passionately loyal Awami League supporter abruptly asked me at a party in Honolulu, "Do you believe in Greater Bengal?" Before I could say 'yes' or 'no', the apparently urbane Bangladeshi-
At times rabidly loyal Awami supporters convey the wrong message to the detriment of their country, party and leader. Not only anti-Awami Leaguers consider the party "pro-Indian", but some immoderate supporters of the party unwittingly also give similar impression about their party. BNP supporters on the other hand, knowingly or unknowingly, give the impression that they prefer Pakistan to India, if not to Bangladesh.
In view of the widening gap between the pro- and anti-Awami Leaguers over the vague MOU, it seems the not-so- insightful Awami leaders either do not understand the "India Factor" in South Asian politics or are too eager to appease India and its overseas sponsors. Although the west has been traditionally enamoured by Indian religion, art and culture, and of late by its "secular democracy", market economy and economic growth; its neighbours in the Asia-Pacific and Muslim World are nervous about the ascending Indian behemoth.
Bangladesh should have given a second thought about the dire consequences of unilaterally giving so many concessions to India. Sheikh Hasina should have understood the implications of not addressing some pressing bilateral issues, such as the problematic Farakka Barrage; the proposed Tipaimukh Dam; the disputed Talpatti Island and corridor for Bangladeshi enclaves in India.
The MOU should have also resolved once for all the so-called 'push-back' of 'illegals' into Bangladesh from India and the presence of anti-Bangladesh militants in India who demand the so-called Swadhin Banga Bhumi to carve out Bangladeshi territory for Hindu refugees/immigrants from East Pakistan, presently living in India. We simply cannot believe the way PM Hasina defended her not raising the Tipaimukh issue with her Indian counterpart. She assured her people on the assurance of the Indian PM that 'no harm' would come to Bangladesh through Tipaimukh. She has turned us speechless by admitting that she personally does not know anything about Tipaimukh Dam; whether it is an irrigation barrage or a hydro-electric dam, she is not sure about it. If this is diplomacy to protect one's own country's interests from a traditionally unreliable neighbour like India, then Bangladeshis have reasons to be more reliant on God!
India's hegemonic behaviour in the past and its not-so-benign design to emerge as the new hegemon in the Indian Ocean are least acceptable to China, Pakistan, Myanmar, Indonesia and even Australia. The average Bangladeshi has tremendous misgivings about India as well. Keeping in view its long-term security interests, Bangladesh should not throw itself into the Indian orbit. Whatever one has managed to grasp from the MOU, it seems Bangladesh has unilaterally granted India access to its ports and an unimpeded transit to Indian goods and possibly soldiers to contain its rebellious North-East. It is not clear from the MOU if India is willing to give Nepal and Bhutan transit facilities to Chittagong and Mongla ports.
The Awami leadership seems to be too complacent and naïve to understand that what India might get away with, Bangladesh can ill-afford it. India might gain some leverage and respectability in the West by coming closer to America and Israel. Muslim-majority Bangladesh has more to lose than gain by coming too close for comfort to India; and to Israel via India.
Conversely, while the West is enthusiastic about India, it is at most lukewarm towards forging ties with economically and militarily insignificant Bangladesh. Consequently Bangladesh's alienating China and its regional allies by almost giving a blank cheque to India seems to be an ill wind that blows nobody good. Bangladesh is oblivious of the fact that India, by strictly adhering to Chanakya's advice, has hardly been friendly and helpful to any of its immediate neighbours (excepting tiny Maldives). On the same token, India may be the only country in the world having bad to very bad relations with all its immediate neighbours. In view of this stark reality, one is not sure if India will behave differently this time with Bangladesh.
One wonders as to why Sheikh Hasina and the admirers of her latest 'gesture of good will' towards India are not cognisant of the 'India Doctrine' at all. Cultivated assiduously by most Indian leaders from Nehru to Manmohan Singh (V P Singh and I K Gujral were possibly the only exceptions in this regard), this doctrine stands for two things:
a) establishing Vrihat Bharat (Greater India) with a view to asserting Indian hegemony in the Indian Ocean and b) to extract maximum economic benefits and political leverage from smaller neighbours by intimidating them on a regular basis.
As the act of not recalling Nehru's not-so-hidden desire to undo the Partition of 1947 is a political blunder, particularly for Pakistan and Bangladesh; so is forgetting about India's annexation of Kashmir (1947), Hyderabad (1948), Goa (1961) and even independent Sikkim (1975).
Bangladeshis' remaining grateful to India for the creation of their country is one thing; their paying no attention to India's unmistakably meddlesome approach towards their country is altogether a different matter. Bangladesh should not forget about India's harbouring, training and arming LTTE fighters to disintegrate Sri Lanka; arm twisting Nepal for befriending China; denying Bhutan the right to have formal diplomatic relations with China; and last but not least, promoting insurgencies in Pakistan through its missions in Afghanistan. Bangladesh has every reason to keep in mind India's direct involvement in the creation and promotion of Bangladeshi dissidents and criminals on both sides of the border since 1975. One may especially mention the separatist Shanti Bahini, nurtured by India for more than two decades up to 1996.
One cannot believe the way the government and its supporters are defending the MOU, which reflects the inept and clumsy handling of the bumpy Indo-Bangladesh relationship by the Bangladeshi team. Ignoring the global and regional implications of the 'India Doctrine' and the omnipresent 'India Factor' in Bangladesh politics amounts to abandoning the basic lessons of diplomacy. Bangladesh should pay heed to Reagan's "Trust, but verify" approach to the Soviet Union, in regard to its relation with India. To succeed politically, politicians here must learn how to play the 'India Card' to manage the 'India Factor', which is a life-blood for Awami League's main adversaries — the BNP, Islamists and some leftist groups and parties.
Politics, to a great extent is all about people's perceptions. If the average Bangladeshis continue to perceive the Awami League as "pro-Indian" (as many do), the Hasina Government will have difficulties in imposing a ban on religion-based politics and trying the War Criminals of 1971. Realpolitik or pragmatism demands that Bangladesh remain steadfast to the principle of positive neutrality. Putting all its eggs into the not-so-safe Indian basket might be too costly for not-so-rich and not self-reliant Bangladesh in the long run. As giving fillip to 'Islam-loving' parties is counter-productive, so is antagonising China and the Muslim World by coming so close to India, which has found new allies in the US and Israel.
Disclaimer: The views and opinions of the author expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof.
Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft's powerful SPAM protection. Sign up now.
__._,_.___
[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
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
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
__,_._,___