Banner Advertiser

Wednesday, November 23, 2011

[ALOCHONA] Form regional River Commission to resolve water debate



Form regional River Commission to resolve debate on Tipaimukh Dam project, suggests former UN water expert



Dhaka, Nov 24 (UNB) - With a view to resolving the ongoing debate on the Tipaimukd Dam project and also meet the water problems in South Asia, a regional river commission would have to be formed through mutual understanding among neighboring countries, suggests a former UN water expert.

A regional river commission may put an end to the ongoing Tipaimukh Dam debate. The commission would have to be formed involving China, India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Nepal and Bhutan to resolve the water problem in the region on the basis of equity," Dr SI Khan told UNB.

He said the Indian government seemed set to go ahead with its plan to build the controversial Tipaimukh Dam on the Barak River in the state of Manipur. But this is a violation of international laws.

"According to the international water related laws and conventions, no country can carry out such activity on common rivers, as there is always the chance of harming the downstream countries."

He mentioned that as per the World Convention on Dams, if a country wants to build a dam with height over 15 metres and minimum water reservoir capacity of 3 million cubic metres on a common river, the project must be acceptable not only to the government(s) but also people(s) of its river basin.

Dr Khan, also vice president of International Farakka Committee, said although the height of the proposed Tipaimukh Dam is 163 metres and its water reservoir capacity would be 1.5 billion cubic metres, India has not shown any willingness to negotiate with downstream Bangladesh.

"As Barak-Surma-Kushiara is an international river, Bangladesh should have equitable share of its waters and access to detailed information about any proposed project such as Tipaimukh Dam," he said.

The water expert mentioned that article 9 of the Ganges water sharing treaty, signed by Bangladesh and India in 1996, also states that both sides will implement a no-harm policy and refrain from taking unilateral steps concerning all shared rivers.

He also said that according to the Helsinki Convention, upper countries could not carry out any such activities that might adversely impact on environment and biodiversity of downstream counties. But India has taken a controversial move (Tipaimukh Dam project) that will spell environmental disaster for Bangladesh.

Referring to the Mekong River Commission, Dr Khan said there are many common rivers in the world and Mekong is such a common river in East Asia. Laos once tried to build a dam on Mekong River, but it was compelled to abandon the move following abjection by other countries in the region.

Meanwhile, many eminent environmentalists and water experts in the country have warned that the Tipaimukh Dam will spell disaster in the Meghna River Basin. Obstruction of its flow by the said dam will wreak environmental havoc in the eastern part of Bangladesh and cause severe damage to lives and livelihood of people. The proposed dam upstream of the Meghna signals unprecedented disaster for Bangladesh.

They said the deal to construct the dam has been signed at a time when dams and barrages are being decommissioned in the Western countries to restore the ecology of rivers to their original state.

Eminent water expert Dr Ainun Nishat recently said that according to international law, India cannot construct Tipaimukh Dam without a joint environmental assessment.

An impact assessment on the Surma-Kushiara river systems, conducted by the Institute of Water Modelling (IWM) of Bangladesh in 2005, says that a dam like Tipaimukh will surely cause long- and short-term effects.

"Some of the effects will be noticed even after a few hundred years," notes the study, titled "Hydrological Impact Study of Tipaimukh Dam Project".

The dam will certainly lead to the loss of riverine habitats and species. The free-flowing Surma and Kushiara will run dry and remain so for a major portion of the year (November-May), badly affecting agriculture, irrigation, navigation and drinking water supply, the impact assessment says.

The common Barak River enters Bangladesh as the Surma and Kushiara rivers. Reports emerged this week of a joint investment agreement on the construction of the Tipaimukh dam, along with a hydroelectric project for 1500 megawatts of electricity, having been signed among NHPC Ltd (National Hydroelectric Power Corporation, India's premier hydropower company), the Manipur state government and another state enterprise, the Satluj Jal Vidyut Nigam Ltd (SJVN) on October 22.

http://www.unbconnect.com/component/news/task-show/id-64166


__._,_.___


[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

__,_._,___

[ALOCHONA] RAW: India's External Intelligence Agency



RAW: India's External Intelligence Agency

by Jayshree Bajoria

Introduction

India's external intelligence agency, the Research and Analysis Wing (RAW), has long faced allegations of meddling in its neighbors' affairs. Founded in 1968, primarily to counter China's influence, over time it has shifted its focus to India's other traditional rival, Pakistan. RAW and Pakistan's spy agency, the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), have been engaged in covert operations against one other for over three decades. The ongoing dispute in Kashmir continues to fuel these clashes, but experts say Afghanistan may be emerging as the new battleground. Islamabad sees India's growing diplomatic initiatives in Afghanistan as a cover for RAW agents working to destabilize Pakistan. It accuses RAW of training and arming separatists in Pakistan's Balochistan Province along the Afghan border. RAW denies these charges, and in turn, accuses the ISI of the July 2008 bombing of the Indian embassy in Kabul.

The History of RAW

Until 1968, the Intelligence Bureau (IB), which is responsible for India's internal intelligence, also handled external intelligence. But after India's miserable performance in a 1962 border war with China, the need for a separate external intelligence agency was clear. During that conflict, "our intelligence failed to detect Chinese build up for the attack," writes Maj. Gen. VK Singh, a retired army officer who did a stint in RAW, in his 2007 book, India's External Intelligence: Secrets of Research and Analysis Wing.

As a result, India established a dedicated external intelligence agency, the Research and Analysis Wing (RAW). Founded mainly to focus on China and Pakistan, over the last forty years the organization has expanded its mandate and is credited with greatly increasing India's influence abroad. Experts say RAW's powers and its role in India's foreign policy have varied under different prime ministers. Successes that RAW claims it contributed to include:

the creation of Bangladesh in 1971;
India's growing influence in Afghanistan;
Sikkim's accession to India in the northeast in 1975;
the security of India's nuclear program;
the success of African liberation movements during the Cold War.

The first head of RAW, Rameshwar Nath Kao, who headed the IB's external intelligence division, led the agency until he retired in 1977. Many experts, including officers who worked with him, credit him with RAW's initial successes: India's triumph in the 1971 war with Pakistan, and India's covert assistance to the African National Congress's anti-apartheid struggle in South Africa. "To a large extent, it was Kao who raised RAW to the level of India's premier intelligence agency, with agents in virtually every major embassy and high commission," writes Singh. But the organization has been criticized for its lack of coordination with domestic intelligence and security agencies, weak analytical capabilities, and complete lack of transparency.

The Structure and Function of RAW

Not much is known regarding the structure of RAW, say experts. The organization started with 250 people and about $400,000. It has since expanded to several thousand personnel, but there is no clear estimate of its staffing or budget, as both remain secret. However, an estimate by the U.S.-based Federation of American Scientists suggests that in 2000, RAW had about eight to ten thousand agents and a budget that experts place at $145 million. Unlike the United States' Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) or Britain's MI6, RAW reports directly to the prime minister instead of the Ministry of Defense. The chief of RAW is designated secretary (research) in the Cabinet Secretariat, which is part of the prime minister's office. Some officers of RAW are members of a specialized service, the Research and Analysis Service, but several officers also serve on deputation from other services such as the Indian Police Service.

RAW had two priorities after its formation, writes B. Raman, a former RAW official, in the 2007 book ,The Kaoboys of R&AW: Down Memory Lane. The organization worked to strengthen its capability for intelligence gathering on Pakistan and China and for covert action in East Pakistan (now Bangladesh). Some experts say that RAW's efforts in East Pakistan, which was created from the partition of the Indian state of Bengal and completely separated from the rest of Pakistan, was aimed at fomenting independence sentiment. Over time, RAW's objectives have broadened to include:

Monitoring the political and military developments in adjoining countries, which have direct bearing on India's national security and in the formulation of its foreign policy.
Seeking the control and limitation of the supply of military hardware to Pakistan, mostly from European countries, the United States, and China.

Experts disagree on the amount of influence RAW asserts on India's foreign policy. Sumit Ganguly, a professor of political science at Indiana University, says the agency has no influence on foreign policy. However, Dipankar Banerjee, a retired army official and current director of the Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies, a New Delhi-based think tank, says the head of RAW has direct access to the head of state, to whom he provides input and analysis.

From the early days, RAW had a secret liaison relationship with the Mossad, Israel's external intelligence agency. The main purpose was to benefit from Israel's knowledge of West Asia and North Africa, and to learn from its counterterrorism techniques, say experts.

RAW's Role in Bangladesh, Myanmar, and Sri Lanka

RAW played a significant role in the formation of Bangladesh along with the Indian army and other Indian security and intelligence agencies. Besides providing intelligence to policymakers and the army, RAW trained and armed Mukti Bahini, a group of East Pakistanis fighting for the separate state of Bangladesh. Analysts say that RAW also facilitated the northeastern state of Sikkim's accession to India in 1975, and provided military assistance to groups hostile to the pro-China regime in Myanmar, such as the Kachin Independence Army.

But it was the support for the Tamil separatist group, Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) in Sri Lanka, that brought RAW much criticism from human rights organizations. RAW helped to train and arm the LTTE in the 1970s, but after the group's terrorist activities grew in the 1980s-including its alliances with separatist groups in the southern Indian state of Tamil Nadu-RAW withdrew this support. In 1987, New Delhi made a pact with the Sri Lankan government to send peacekeeping troops to the island and Indian forces ended up fighting the group RAW had armed. In 1991, Rajiv Gandhi, prime minister of India at the time of the peacekeeping force deployment, was assassinated by an LTTE suicide bomber.

Covert Action in Afghanistan, Pakistan

Since its inception in 1968, RAW has had a close liaison relationship with KHAD, the Afghan intelligence agency, due to the intelligence it has provided RAW on Pakistan. This relationship was further strengthened in the early 1980s when the foundation was laid for a trilateral cooperation involving the RAW, KHAD, and the Soviet KGB. Raman says RAW valued KHAD's cooperation for monitoring the activities of Sikh militants in Pakistan's tribal areas. Sikhs in the Indian state of Punjab were demanding an independent state of Khalistan. According to Raman, Pakistan's ISI set up clandestine camps for training and arming Khalistani recruits in Pakistan's Punjab Province and North West Frontier Province. During this time, the ISI received large sums from Saudi Arabia and the CIA for arming the Afghan mujahadeen against Soviet troops in Afghanistan. "The ISI diverted part of these funds and arms and ammunition to the Khalistani terrorists," alleges Raman.

In retaliation, in the mid-1980s, RAW set up two covert groups of its own, Counter Intelligence Team-X (CIT-X) and Counter Intelligence Team-J (CIT-J), the first targeting Pakistan in general and the second directed at Khalistani groups. The two groups were responsible for carrying out terrorist operations inside Pakistan (Newsline), writes Pakistani military expert Ayesha Siddiqa. Indian journalist and associate editor of Frontline magazine, Praveen Swami, writes that a "low-grade but steady campaign of bombings in major Pakistani cities, notably Karachi and Lahore" was carried out. This forced the head of ISI to meet his counterpart in RAW and agree on the rules of engagement as far as Punjab was concerned, writes Siddiqa. The negotiation was brokered by then-Jordanian Crown Prince Hassan bin-Talal, whose wife, Princess Sarvath, is of Pakistani origin. "It was agreed that Pakistan would not carry out activities in the Punjab as long as RAW refrained from creating mayhem and violence inside Pakistan," Siddiqa writes.

In the past, Pakistan also accused RAW of supporting Sindhi nationalists demanding a separate state, as well as Seraikis calling for a partition of Pakistan's Punjab to create a separate Seraiki state. India denies these charges. However, experts point out that India has supported insurgents in Pakistan's Balochistan, as well as anti-Pakistan forces in Afghanistan. But some experts say India no longer does this. As this Backgrounder explains, Pakistan is suspicious of India's influence in Afghanistan, which it views as a threat to its own interests in the region. Experts say although it is very likely that India has active intelligence gathering in Afghanistan, it is difficult to say whether it is also involved in covert operations.

Relations with the CIA

The CIA assisted in the creation of RAW, says South Asia expert Stephen P. Cohen of the Brookings Institution. However, India's intelligence relations with the CIA started even before the existence of RAW, note experts. After India's war with China in 1962, CIA instructors trained Establishment 22, a "covert organisation raised from among Tibetan refugees in India, to execute deep-penetration terror operations in China," writes Swami.

But the CIA's operations with the ISI to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan in the 1980s made RAW very wary. However, it did not stop RAW from seeking the CIA's assistance in counterterrorism training. Raman writes: "One had one more bizarre example of how international intelligence cooperation works." The CIA trained the officers of the ISI in the use of terrorism against an adversary, and at the same time, he writes, it trained RAW and IB officers "in some of the techniques of countering that terrorism." India's intelligence agencies also feel the lack of an equal relationship with the CIA, say experts. Swami says RAW's grievance is that there is little information they get on Pakistan from the United States; however, Washington expects New Delhi to provide it with intelligence on Afghanistan.

In 1997, Prime Minister I.K. Gujral shut down both the CITs aimed at Pakistan on moral grounds. Before Gujral, Prime Minister P.V. Narasimha Rao had ended RAW's eastern operations in the early 1990s, as part of his efforts to build bridges with China and Myanmar, say analysts.

Successive RAW leaders attempted to gain fresh authorization for deterrent covert operations, but without success, says Swami. Siddiqa writes: "The Indian government probably realized that encouraging covert warfare would not only destabilize bilateral relations but was also dangerous for the peace and stability of the entire region."

Weaknesses in RAW

The intrusion of Pakistan-backed armed forces into the Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir (GlobalSecurity) in 1999 prompted questions about RAW's efficacy. Some analysts saw the conflict as an intelligence failure. However, RAW officials argued they had provided the intelligence but political leadership had failed to act upon it. The Indian government constituted a committee to look into the reasons for the failure and recommend remedial measures. The report of the Kargil review committee was then examined by a group of ministers, established in 2000. The group recommended a formal written charter and pointed out lack of coordination and communication within various intelligence agencies.

Following the review, a new organization was set up-the National Technical Research Organization (NTRO)-modeled on the U.S. National Security Agency-which would be the repository of the nation's technical intelligence-spy satellites, unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), and spy planes. The government also decided to create a Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), whose head would be the adviser to the Chief of Staffs Committee and the defense minister. The DIA was empowered to conduct transborder operations.

However, the shakeup of the intelligence apparatus has not removed the problems that persisted, especially relating to the overlap of agency activities, say experts. Earlier, RAW was the only organization permitted to conduct espionage operations abroad. Now both the IB and DIA have also been given the authority to conduct such operations, writes Singh.

There have also been occasional media reports of penetration inside RAW by other agencies, in particular the CIA. Swami writes that RAW is exceptional amongst major spy agencies in maintaining no permanent distinction (Hindu) between covert operatives who execute secret tasks, and personnel who must liaise with services such as the CIA or public bodies, such as analysts and area specialists. "As a result, personnel with sensitive operational information are exposed to potentially compromising contacts," he writes.

http://www.cfr.org/india/raw-indias-external-intelligence-agency/p17707



__._,_.___


[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

__,_._,___

[ALOCHONA] Let`s Eliminate Indian Terrorists in Bangladesh



Let`s Eliminate Indian Terrorists in Bangladesh

By: Abu Zafar Mahmood

Hasina-Monmohan cry wolf jointly. As they could not eliminate the Mosques and transform the Islamic nation in Deen-e-Elahee, Could not impose Hindi instead of Bangla in Bangladesh. Indian interests are to keep Muslim countries unstable as it needs Bangladesh-Pakistan-Afghanistan under their knees for grabbing wealth. Moreover the rapid growth of Bangladesh in terms of modernization and wealth influences over the North-East border Indian districts. It also bring the Delhi`s discrimination to that huge region too. So, Indian strategy of collapsing Bangladesh becomes their one of prime Military agenda. That matches Indian expansionist design. But the USA-European flows of winds turn for Bangladesh. A slogan, "Let`s eliminate Indian Terrorists in Bangladesh" shines on posters.

The Bangladesh administration is controlled by Indian Intelligence-RAW. It already collapsed BDR, weakened Arm-forces. Highest to lowest courts run under the same control. Prime Minister office is treated as RAW regional co-coordinating office. Ministry of Home-Foreign Affairs are directly dictated by the Indian officers. Indian trained Four Lac Eighty six thousand Nine Hundred Sixty (4, 86,960) Fanatic Hindu terrorists are the key fighters that are engaged in Government positions to collapse the sovereignty and Independence at the time sabotage in USA interests. These terrorists are all Indian trained.They instigate the instability of Bangladesh from inside the government. A surprising technique!

India has a long history of using terrorists and sending the hordes across borders. It captured HyderabadJunagarh and Manvadar illegally through police actions. It forced many smaller states to join the Indian Union by force of arms. It sent its forces to illegally capture Srinagar, using a fake article of accession which it now claims is lost–as if it ever existed. It sent militants to Tibet and Aksai Chin instigating a ferocious attack from China. It sent terrorists into Sikkim, and Bhutan and eventually illegally occupied Sikkim. It sent LTTE terrorists into Lanka trying to bifurcate the small peaceful Buddhist Island. It even tried terrorism in Myanmar and Maldives. It motivated the Hindu youths in Refugee camps, armed and engaged the Mukti Bahinee guerrillagroups across the border into East Pakistan in 1971. It than tried to incorporate Bangladesh using the Rakshi Bahinee after Awami League climbed on the government.

Now, Whatever Hasina, Rehana, SajeebJoy, Dipu Moni, Sahara and Ashraf are painting as friendlier relation with India is in real annexation procedure with India that the Fakhruddin-Moinuddin-Iftekharinitiated. Obviously, India needs terrorist regiments as Pakistani Army and ISI are rock to them to defeat whereas Bangladesh is so rootless to them that it purchases the pillars as it needs. Indian officers train and control the civil and military officers in Bangladesh.

An article in one of Canada's national magazines, Macleans, reported on an interview with a Pakistani ISI spy Farouk, who claimed that India's intelligence services, Research and Analysis Wing (RAW), have "tens of thousands of RAW agents in Pakistan." Many officials inside Pakistan were convinced that, "India's endgame is nothing less than the breakup of Pakistan. And the RAW is no novice in that area. In the 1960s, it was actively involved in supporting separatists in Bangladesh, at the time East Pakistan. The eventual victory of Bangladeshi nationalism in 1971 was in large part credited to the support the RAW gave the secessionists."http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/04/23/new-delhi%E2%80%99s-endgame/

In September of 2008, the editor of Indian Defence Review wrote an article explaining that a stable Pakistan is not in India's interests: "With Pakistan on the brink of collapse due to massive internal as well as international contradictions, it is matter of time before it ceases to exist." He explained that Pakistan's collapse would bring "multiple benefits" to India, including preventing China from gaining a major port in the Indian Ocean, which is in the mutual interest of the United States. The author explained that this would be a "severe jolt" to China's expansionist aims, and further, "India's access to Central Asian energy routes will open up."http://www.indiandefencereview.com/2008/09/stable-pakistan-not-in-indias-interest.html

In August of 2009, Foreign Policy Journal published a report of an exclusive interview they held with former Pakistani ISI chief Lieutenant General Hamid Gul, who was Director General of the powerful intelligence services (ISI) between 1987 and 1989, at a time in which it was working closely with the CIA to fund and arm the Mujahedeen. Once a close ally of the US, he is now considered extremely controversial and the US even recommended the UN to put him on the international terrorist list. Gul explained that he felt that the American people have not been told the truth about 9/11, and that the 9/11 Commission was a "cover up," pointing out that, "They [the American government] haven't even proved the case that 9/11 was done by Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda." He said that the real reasons for the war on Afghanistan were that:

"The U.S. wanted to "reach out to the Central Asian oilfields" and "open the door there", which "was a requirement of corporate America, because the Taliban had not complied with their desire to allow an oil and gas pipeline to pass through Afghanistan. UNOCAL is a case in point. They wanted to keep the Chinese out. They wanted to give a wider security shield to the state of Israel, and they wanted to include this region into that shield. And that's why they were talking at that time very hotly about 'greater Middle East'. They were redrawing the map." http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2009/08/12/ex-isi-chief-says-purpose-of-new-afghan-intelligence-agency-rama-is-%E2%80%98to-destabilize-pakistan%E2%80%99/

He also stated that part of the reason for going into Afghanistan was "to go for Pakistan's nuclear capability," as the U.S. "signed this strategic deal with India, and this was brokered by Israel. So there is a nexus now between Washington, Tel Aviv, and New Delhi." When he was asked about the Pakistani Taliban, which the Pakistani government was being pressured to fight, and where the financing for that group came from; Gul stated:

"Yeah, of course they are getting it from across the Durand line, from Afghanistan. And the Mossad is sitting there, RAW is sitting there — the Indian intelligence agency — they have the umbrella of the U.S. And now they have created another organization which is called RAMA. It may be news to you that very soon this intelligence agency — of course, they have decided to keep it covert — but it is Research and Analysis Milli Afghanistan. That's the name. The Indians have helped create this organization, and its job is mainly to destabilize Pakistan."

He explained that the Chief of Staff of the Afghan Army had told him that he had gone to India to offer the Indians five bases in Afghanistan, three of which are along the Pakistani border. Gul was asked a question as to why, if the West was supporting the TTP (Pakistani Taliban), would a CIA drone have killed the leader of the TTP. Gul explained that while Pakistan was fighting directly against the TTP leader, Baitullah Mehsud, the Pakistani government would provide the Americans where Mehsud was, "three times the Pakistan intelligence tipped off America, but they did not attack him." So why all of a sudden did they attack?

Because there were some secret talks going on between Baitullah Mehsud and the Pakistani military establishment. They wanted to reach a peace agreement, and if you recall there is a long history of our tribal areas, whenever a tribal militant has reached a peace agreement with the government of Pakistan, Americans have without any hesitation struck that target.

... there was some kind of a deal which was about to be arrived at — they may have already cut a deal. I don't know. I don't have enough information on that. But this is my hunch, that Baitullah was killed because now he was trying to reach an agreement with the Pakistan army. And that's why there were no suicide attacks inside Pakistan for the past six or seven months.

Further, there were Indian consulates set up in Kandahar, the area of Afghanistan where Canadian troops are located, and which is strategically located next to the Pakistani province of Baluchistan, which is home to a virulent separatist movement, of which Pakistan claims is being supported by India. Macleans reported on the conclusions by Michel Chossudovsky, economics professor at University of Ottawa, that, "the region's massive gas and oil reserves are of strategic interest to the U.S. and India. A gas pipeline slated to be built from Iran to India, two countries that already enjoy close ties, would run through Baluchistan. The Baluch separatist movement, which is also active in Iran, offers an ideal proxy for both the U.S. and India to ensure their interests are met."

Even an Afghan government adviser told the media that India was using Afghan territory to destabilize Pakistan.http://www.app.com.pk/en_/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=72423&Itemid=2

In September of 2009, the Pakistan Daily reported that captured members and leaders of the Pakistani Taliban have admitted to being trained and armed by India through RAW or RAMA in Afghanistan in order to fight the Pakistani Army.http://www.daily.pk/proof-captured-ttp-terrorists-admit-to-being-indian-raw-agents-11015/

The Council on Foreign Relations published a backgrounder report on RAW, India's intelligence agency, founded in 1968 "primarily to counter China's influence, [however] over time it has shifted its focus to India's other traditional rival, Pakistan." For over three decades both Indian and Pakistani intelligence agencies have been involved in covert operations against one another. One of RAW's main successes was its covert operations in East Pakistan, now known as Bangladesh, which "aimed at fomenting independence sentiment" and ultimately led to the separation of Bangladesh by directly funding, arming and training the Pakistani separatists. Further, as the Council on Foreign Relations noted, "From the early days, RAW had a secret liaison relationship with the Mossad, Israel's external intelligence agency."http://www.cfr.org/publication/17707/

Bangladesh is in the endgame of destabilization. The Indian trained militants are already positioned to damage and eliminate the patriotic elements and collapse the sovereignty and independence of Bangladesh. The next scene is waiting to appear as it faces challenges. Indian terrorization and collapsing Bangladesh is far different than Pakistan-Afghan battle field in more cases.

Of course, the Obama administration has opened a new strategy on Bangladesh and it`s near that the real Bangladeshi nationalists are sourcing supports recently. Ex-Prime Minister Khaleda Zia`s significant visit in Washington DC,NewJersy and New York as the leader of the opposition in Bangladesh National parliament in last week will bring face to face the Indian terrorists and Bangladeshi nationalists inDhaka. The professionals and Journalists are desperate under the leadership of renowned Journalist Mahmudur Rahman called for up rise to topple down the government. The World super power prefers to see the down fall of the Hasina government soon that`s the observers assumption.India is taken in partnership on Afghanistan and Pakistan sector with NATO and on the other hand the Bangladesh and up to China will be controlled by USA direct. That will come up.

http://newsfrombangladesh.net/view.php?hidRecord=371157



__._,_.___


[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

__,_._,___

[ALOCHONA] Bangladesh submits totally to Indian hegemony



Bangladesh submits totally to Indian hegemony

By Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury

I categorically hate to fall in the line, where people are known as "anti India", while as a citizen of Bangladesh, I really cannot tolerate any action of New Delhi, which goes against the interest of my motherland. I always believe in keeping very friendly relations with India, but strongly oppose becoming a sycophant or unconditional slave of that country, though very unfortunately a large section of the politicians in Bangladesh, and of course those of the ruling party are desperately exhibiting their madly willingness of continuing as the champion lickers of feet of the Delhiwalas. Of course, people with such volatile tendencies are nothing more than enemies of the country.

When Sheikh Mujibur Rahman was in power during 1972-1975, New Delhi's policymakers very shrewdly took the written consent from Mujib in "testing the effectiveness" of the Farakka barrage, complete on a temporary basis. As anticipated by the political pundits and experts in Bangladesh, such "testing" of the Farakka barrage never ended and India continues to cause extreme sufferings to the people of Bangladesh as well as Poshchim Bangla, due to this demonic barrage. Bangladeshi rivers in particular are facing threats of getting dried, as a large number of rivers have already lost the minimum water level required for navigation. Farakka is the name of sorrow for millions of people in Bangladesh as well as in Poshchim Bangla. Many consider Farakka Barrage as New Delhi's heinous venture to punish the Bangla speaking millions as well as indigenous community both within Bangladesh and Poshchim Bangla.

Now, once again, the followers of Chanakya Doctrine have become frantically active in erecting one more barrage at Tipaimukh, which will not only add further sufferings to the people of Bangladesh, but will ultimately place Bangladesh into severe consequences, as the rivers will get quickly dried, while saline water from the Bay of Bengal will grab a large segment of the country, thus finally causing tremendous crisis of drinking water as well as completely destroying fertility of the agricultural lands.

Though Tipaimukh Barrage is going to cause severe natural and human catastrophe in Bangladesh, the foreign minister and the minister in charge of the water resources in Bangladesh are either behaving like duffers thus giving statements favorable to India, or even abetting such anti-Bangladesh actions of New Delhi, which definitely shows to us, how unpatriotic and power-greedy these elements are. It is a huge shame for Bangladesh that, a number of Bangladeshi ministers, including the foreign minister, is trying to act as advocate of Tipamukh Barrage, instead of putting any minimum reaction or protect with India as well as the international communities and the United Nations. Since independence, Bangladesh is for the first time is seeing a bunch of culprits politicians in power as well a large segment of equally culprit politicians in the opposition, who are not only failing to uphold the interest of Bangladesh, but are behaving like mere Indian agents, if not Indian slaves.

It is even rumored that Bangladeshi policymakers have secretly signed an agreement with India allowing New Delhi in erecting the Tipaimukh Barrage. I am not really willing to buy this rumor, as am not ready to consider our politicians as betrayers of that level, but of course, would like to surely investigate such serious allegations. If in real, any such secret agreement was at all signed, the signatories of such black documents will be labeled as "National Enemies" for such treacherous deeds. Whatever the political identities may be of any such politician, the heroic people of Bangladesh will ultimately stand up against such crime, if it has already been committed by signing the treaty.

Why the ruling elites of Bangladesh as well as a large segment of the civil society [shall I call them evil society] are maintaining tight-lip on this extremely important issue? While self-exiled writers like Abdul Gaffar Chowdhury are mum on this issue? Is there any special reason behind their silence? Have they already pledged their "voice", conscious and even minimum level of self-respect to policymakers in India, just for the sake of continuing as New Delhi's favored and "blessed" political concubines?

It is time for politicians and policymakers in New Delhi to immediately abandon the construction of the Tipaimukh Barrage. They should not feel that by managing few politicians and so-called civil society elites, it will be possibly to place such huge burden of acute sufferings on the people of Bangladesh. We Bangladeshis have fought against the repressive Pakistani forces in 1971, and if necessary, we shall begin another war against hegemonic forces of New Delhi if they will further proceed with such devastating project as Tipaimukh. It is clear that Tipaimukh barrage will actually put the entire Bangladesh in multiple sufferings and eventually will turn this beautiful country into a mere desert. Of course since independence, Bangladesh has tolerated enough, number of Indian hegemony and repressive actions. But, this time the entire nation will wake up. Each and every pet-dogs of India inside Bangladesh will be thrown into the Bay of Bengal. This is the high-time for New Delhi to decide – if they want a friendly Bangladesh to live with dignity or India wants Bangladesh to wage a new war. And, of course, New Delhi should note, Bangladeshis never learnt to lose any war. Because, this is the land of braves and heroes!

http://www.weeklyblitz.net/1955/bangladesh-submits-totally-to-indian-hegemony



__._,_.___


[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

__,_._,___

[ALOCHONA] Syria, Iran and the Balance of Power in the Middle East



Syria, Iran and the Balance of Power in the Middle East

By George Friedman

U.S. troops are in the process of completing their withdrawal from Iraq by the end-of-2011 deadline. We are now moving toward a reckoning with the consequences. The reckoning concerns the potential for a massive shift in the balance of power in the region, with Iran moving from a fairly marginal power to potentially a dominant power. As the process unfolds, the United States and Israel are making countermoves. We have discussed all of this extensively. Questions remain whether these countermoves will stabilize the region and whether or how far Iran will go in its response.

Iran has been preparing for the U.S. withdrawal. While it is unreasonable simply to say that Iran will dominate Iraq, it is fair to say Tehran will have tremendous influence in Baghdad to the point of being able to block Iraqi initiatives Iran opposes. This influence will increase as the U.S. withdrawal concludes and it becomes clear there will be no sudden reversal in the withdrawal policy. Iraqi politicians' calculus must account for the nearness of Iranian power and the increasing distance and irrelevance of American power.

Resisting Iran under these conditions likely would prove ineffective and dangerous. Some, like the Kurds, believe they have guarantees from the Americans and that substantial investment in Kurdish oil by American companies means those commitments will be honored. A look at the map, however, shows how difficult it would be for the United States to do so. The Baghdad regime has arrested Sunni leaders while the Shia, not all of whom are pro-Iranian by any means, know the price of overenthusiastic resistance.

Syria and Iran

The situation in Syria complicates all of this. The minority Alawite sect has dominated the Syrian government since 1970, when the current president's father — who headed the Syrian air force — staged a coup. The Alawites are a heterodox Muslim sect related to a Shiite offshoot and make up about 7 percent of the country's population, which is mostly Sunni. The new Alawite government was Nasserite in nature, meaning it was secular, socialist and built around the military. When Islam rose as a political force in the Arab world, the Syrians — alienated from the Sadat regime in Egypt — saw Iran as a bulwark. The Iranian Islamist regime gave the Syrian secular regime immunity against Shiite fundamentalists in Lebanon. The Iranians also gave Syria support in its external adventures in Lebanon, and more important, in its suppression of Syria's Sunni majority.

Syria and Iran were particularly aligned in Lebanon. In the early 1980s, after the Khomeini revolution, the Iranians sought to increase their influence in the Islamic world by supporting radical Shiite forces. Hezbollah was one of these. Syria had invaded Lebanon in 1975 on behalf of the Christians and opposed the Palestine Liberation Organization, to give you a sense of the complexity. Syria regarded Lebanon as historically part of Syria, and sought to assert its influence over it. Via Iran, Hezbollah became an instrument of Syrian power in Lebanon.

Iran and Syria, therefore, entered a long-term if not altogether stable alliance that has lasted to this day. In the current unrest in Syria, the Saudis and Turks in addition to the Americans all have been hostile to the regime of President Bashar al Assad. Iran is the one country that on the whole has remained supportive of the current Syrian government.

There is good reason for this. Prior to the uprising, the precise relationship between Syria and Iran was variable. Syria was able to act autonomously in its dealings with Iran and Iran's proxies in Lebanon. While an important backer of groups like Hezbollah, the al Assad regime in many ways checked Hezbollah's power in Lebanon, with the Syrians playing the dominant role there. The Syrian uprising has put the al Assad regime on the defensive, however, making it more interested in a firm, stable relationship with Iran. Damascus finds itself isolated in the Sunni world, with Turkey and the Arab League against it. Iran — and intriguingly, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki — have constituted al Assad's exterior support.

Thus far al Assad has resisted his enemies. Though some mid- to low-ranking Sunnis have defected, his military remains largely intact; this is because the Alawites control key units. Events in Libya drove home to an embattled Syrian leadership — and even to some of its adversaries within the military — the consequences of losing. The military has held together, and an unarmed or poorly armed populace, no matter how large, cannot defeat an intact military force. The key for those who would see al Assad fall is to divide the military.

If al Assad survives — and at the moment, wishful thinking by outsiders aside, he is surviving — Iran will be the big winner. If Iraq falls under substantial Iranian influence, and the al Assad regime — isolated from most countries but supported by Tehran — survives in Syria, then Iran could emerge with a sphere of influence stretching from western Afghanistan to the Mediterranean (the latter via Hezbollah). Achieving this would not require deploying Iranian conventional forces — al Assad's survival alone would suffice. However, the prospect of a Syrian regime beholden to Iran would open up the possibility of the westward deployment of Iranian forces, and that possibility alone would have significant repercussions.

Consider the map were this sphere of influence to exist. The northern borders of Saudi Arabia and Jordan would abut this sphere, as would Turkey's southern border. It remains unclear, of course, just how well Iran could manage this sphere, e.g., what type of force it could project into it. Maps alone will not provide an understanding of the problem. But they do point to the problem. And the problem is the potential — not certain — creation of a block under Iranian influence that would cut through a huge swath of strategic territory.

It should be remembered that in addition to Iran's covert network of militant proxies, Iran's conventional forces are substantial. While they could not confront U.S. armored divisions and survive, there are no U.S. armored divisions on the ground between Iran and Lebanon. Iran's ability to bring sufficient force to bear in such a sphere increases the risks to the Saudis in particular. Iran's goal is to increase the risk such that Saudi Arabia would calculate that accommodation is more prudent than resistance. Changing the map can help achieve this.

It follows that those frightened by this prospect — the United States, Israel, Saudi Arabia and Turkey — would seek to stymie it. At present, the place to block it no longer is Iraq, where Iran already has the upper hand. Instead, it is Syria. And the key move in Syria is to do everything possible to bring about al Assad's overthrow.

In the last week, the Syrian unrest appeared to take on a new dimension. Until recently, the most significant opposition activity appeared to be outside of Syria, with much of the resistance reported in the media coming from externally based opposition groups. The degree of effective opposition was never clear. Certainly, the Sunni majority opposes and hates the al Assad regime. But opposition and emotion do not bring down a regime consisting of men fighting for their lives. And it wasn't clear that the resistance was as strong as the outside propaganda claimed.

Last week, however, the Free Syrian Army — a group of Sunni defectors operating out of Turkey and Lebanon — claimed defectors carried out organized attacks on government facilities, ranging from an air force intelligence facility (a particularly sensitive point given the history of the regime) to Baath Party buildings in the greater Damascus area. These were not the first attacks claimed by the FSA, but they were heavily propagandized in the past week. Most significant about the attacks is that, while small-scale and likely exaggerated, they revealed that at least some defectors were willing to fight instead of defecting and staying in Turkey or Lebanon.

It is interesting that an apparent increase in activity from armed activists — or the introduction of new forces — occurred at the same time relations between Iran on one side and the United States and Israel on the other were deteriorating. The deterioration began with charges that an Iranian covert operation to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to the United States had been uncovered, followed by allegations by the Bahraini government of Iranian operatives organizing attacks in Bahrain. It proceeded to an International Atomic Energy Agency report on Iran's progress toward a nuclear device, followed by the Nov. 19 explosion at an Iranian missile facility that the Israelis have not-so-quietly hinted was their work. Whether any of these are true, the psychological pressure on Iran is building and appears to be orchestrated.

Of all the players in this game, Israel's position is the most complex. Israel has had a decent, albeit covert, working relationship with the Syrians going back to their mutual hostility toward Yasser Arafat. For Israel, Syria has been the devil they know. The idea of a Sunni government controlled by the Muslim Brotherhood on their northeastern frontier was frightening; they preferred al Assad. But given the shift in the regional balance of power, the Israeli view is also changing. The Sunni Islamist threat has weakened in the past decade relative to the Iranian Shiite threat. Playing things forward, the threat of a hostile Sunni force in Syria is less worrisome than an emboldened Iranian presence on Israel's northern frontier. This explains why the architects of Israel's foreign policy, such as Defense Minister Ehud Barak, have been saying that we are seeing an "acceleration toward the end of the regime." Regardless of its preferred outcome, Israel cannot influence events inside Syria. Instead, Israel is adjusting to a reality where the threat of Iran reshaping the politics of the region has become paramount.

Iran is, of course, used to psychological campaigns. We continue to believe that while Iran might be close to a nuclear device that could explode underground under carefully controlled conditions, its ability to create a stable, robust nuclear weapon that could function outside a laboratory setting (which is what an underground test is) is a ways off. This includes being able to load a fragile experimental system on a delivery vehicle and expecting it to explode. It might. It might not. It might even be intercepted and create a casus belli for a counterstrike.

The main Iranian threat is not nuclear. It might become so, but even without nuclear weapons, Iran remains a threat. The current escalation originated in the American decision to withdraw from Iraq and was intensified by events in Syria. If Iran abandoned its nuclear program tomorrow, the situation would remain as complex. Iran has the upper hand, and the United States, Israel, Turkey and Saudi Arabia all are looking at how to turn the tables.

At this point, they appear to be following a two-pronged strategy: Increase pressure on Iran to make it recalculate its vulnerability, and bring down the Syrian government to limit the consequences of Iranian influence in Iraq. Whether the Syrian regime can be brought down is problematic. Libya's Moammar Gadhafi would have survived if NATO hadn't intervened. NATO could intervene in Syria, but Syria is more complex than Libya. Moreover, a second NATO attack on an Arab state designed to change its government would have unintended consequences, no matter how much the Arabs fear the Iranians at the moment. Wars are unpredictable; they are not the first option.

Therefore the likely solution is covert support for the Sunni opposition funneled through Lebanon and possibly Turkey and Jordan. It will be interesting to see if the Turks participate. Far more interesting will be seeing whether this works. Syrian intelligence has penetrated its Sunni opposition effectively for decades. Mounting a secret campaign against the regime would be difficult, and its success by no means assured. Still, that is the next move.

But it is not the last move. To put Iran back into its box, something must be done about the Iraqi political situation. Given the U.S. withdrawal, Washington has little influence there. All of the relationships the United States built were predicated on American power protecting the relationships. With the Americans gone, the foundation of those relationships dissolves. And even with Syria, the balance of power is shifting.

The United States has three choices. Accept the evolution and try to live with what emerges. Attempt to make a deal with Iran — a very painful and costly one. Or go to war. The first assumes Washington can live with what emerges. The second depends on whether Iran is interested in dealing with the United States. The third depends on having enough power to wage a war and to absorb Iran's retaliatory strikes, particularly in the Strait of Hormuz. All are dubious, so toppling al Assad is critical. It changes the game and the momentum. But even that is enormously difficult and laden with risks.

We are now in the final act of Iraq, and it is even more painful than imagined. Laying this alongside the European crisis makes the idea of a systemic crisis in the global system very real.

Links:
[1] http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/friedman_on_geopolitics
[2] http://www.stratfor.com/analysis/20100215_special_coverage_us_withdrawal_iraq
[3] javascript:launchPlayer('if7fn34d', 'http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FcGFOorA2xg', 680, 383)
[4] http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20110425-iraq-iran-and-next-move
[5] http://www.stratfor.com/geopolitical_diary/20111006-weighing-extended-us-presence-iraqi-kurdistan
[6] http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20110504-making-sense-syrian-crisis
[7] http://www.stratfor.com/geopolitical_diary/20111116-syrias-place-irans-shiite-arc
[8] http://www.stratfor.com/analysis/20111020-libya-gadhafis-death-perspective
[9] http://web.stratfor.com/images/middleeast/map/Mid_East_800.jpg
[10] http://www.stratfor.com/analysis/20111004-shiite-unrest-saudi-arabia-and-iranian-ambitions
[11] http://www.stratfor.com/analysis/20111011-irans-alleged-plot-against-saudi-ambassador-united-states
[12] http://www.stratfor.com/analysis/nuclear_weapons_devices_and_deliverable_warheads
[13] http://www.stratfor.com/geopolitical_diary/20111107-irans-nuclear-program-and-its-nuclear-option
[14] http://www.stratfor.com/analysis/20100617_intelligence_services_iranian_intelligence_regime_preservation
[15] http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20111107-europe-international-system-and-generational-shift

http://www.stratfor.com/print/204974


__._,_.___


[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

__,_._,___