Let the heroic sacrifice of the Martyrs remain ever glowing in the "Akash Batash Nodi Prantor" of BANGLADESH n the Lal Sabuj Pataka to fly high with right dignity n honour forever n ever.
Hell with HINDU STAAANI Paa Chata Dalals n Paki Janwar's Doshors
BANGLADESH ZINDABAD
ZINDABAD BANGLADESH ZINDABAD
Faruque Alamgir
---------- Forwarded Message ----------
From: Isha Khan <bdmailer@gmail.com>
To: undisclosed-recipients:;
Subject: [notun_bangladesh] Re: Manmohan Singh's comment on Bangladesh raises eyebrows
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2011 15:04:40 +0600
Manmohan's incredible remarks
Barrister Harun ur Rashid
Dr Manmohan Singh, prime minister of India is an erudite person, having earned degrees from both Oxford and Cambridge. He is by nature a taciturn person and generally keeps his speech to the script. He is respected by world leaders for his prescription on the state of global economy because of his long innings in economical field. There is some predictability in his conduct and especially in his capacity as prime minister of India since 2004.On June 29, during an interaction with editors of five newspapers, he mentioned his plan to visit Dhaka without announcing any time frame. When his attention was drawn to India's neighbours, the prime minister reportedly said: "Well, neighbourhood worries me a great deal, quite frankly".
When the subject matter of Bangladesh came up, he said that Bangladesh government has gone out of its way to help his country in apprehending anti-India insurgents operating from inside Bangladesh for a long time and "that is why we have been generous in dealing with Bangladesh."
Thereafter, he has departed from his predictable measured words when he came up with the statement "We must reckon that at least 25% per cent of the population swear by the Jamiat-ul-Islami and they are very anti-Indian and there are in the clutches, many times of the ISI� So the political landscape in Bangladesh can change anytime�.. So a very uncertain neighbourhood."
South Asian region is a tension-torn region since the partition of British India in 1947 and no one can deny the fact. Furthermore the Kashmir territorial dispute between India and Pakistan has led to many adverse intended and unintended impacts on the region. In addition to that, the war in Afghanistan and the instable political situation in Nepal make the region volatile and India must be worried. To that extent, Prime Minister Dr. Singh appears to be right.
But what is surprising is the fact of his statement relating to Bangladesh. His statement on popular support of Jamat ul Islami in Bangladesh (JIB) was not only incorrect but also startling. It is assumed he must have been advised of by relevant Indian government agencies on the percentage of popular support of Jamat ul-Islami in Bangladesh.
Let us look at the elections since 1991 because the elections are the best criteria to judge the popular vote of each party in Bangladesh. There had been four parliamentary elections participated by all parties in the country: elections in 1991, 1996, 2001 and 2008.
The following percentage of votes of each party (Bangladesh Nationalist Party- BNP, Awami League Party-ALP and Jamat-ul Islami Bangladesh-JIB) is revealed from various sources:
All the above quoted figures show that nowhere the popular support of Jamat ul Islami in Bangladesh is 25% as indicated by prime minister of India.
The highest popular vote JIB received was in 8.61% in 1996 and the lowest 1.22% in 1991. Otherwise, on average, the popular support of JIB hovers below 5% (from 4.28% to 4.6%).
The above tiny percentage of support of people for JIB in Bangladesh where 88% are Muslims indicates that majority of people do not support use of religion for political purposes.. This attribute is embedded in Bengali culture and history, although in Bangladesh people of various faiths are deeply religious and most devoutly religious people are also the staunchest defenders of religious pluralism.
For Bangladesh people, the question is: who provided the grossly incorrect figure (25% of support to JIB) to the prime minister and why? Or did he misquote the figure?
There are other surprising elements about the statement of Prime Minister Dr. Singh on Bangladesh and some of them deserve mention below:
First, ordinarily a prime minister does not adversely comment on internal affairs of a neighbouring country, especially when a visit to that country is forthcoming. His statement that political landscape in Bangladesh can change "at any time" is extremely damaging as it contributes to destablising political situation in the country.
Second, it is reported that the External Affairs Minister of India SM Krishna is scheduled to visit Bangladesh on 6th July to prepare the visit of India's prime minister to Dhaka sometime in September and such statement emanating from India's prime minister on Bangladesh does not contribute to the healthy environment of bilateral relations.
Third, the purported link between Inter Service Intelligence (ISI) of Pakistan and Jamat ul Islami in Bangladesh as stated by the prime minister is at least a diplomatic faux pas. Pakistan will not take it easily and the apparent diplomatic effort to repair relations with Pakistan at the intended Foreign Minister's level talks in New Delhi some time this month seems to be indented by ventilating air of suspicion of the activities of Pakistan's spy agencies in a third country.
Obviously the above consequences are not something related to "space-science" and are evident to the Indian side and therefore the question is why did the Indian agencies use their prime minister to make these comments on Bangladesh and put it on in the government website until 2nd July?
Speculations are rife in Bangladesh as to their motivations. Some say it is a signal to Bangladesh government that in whatever matters they are engaged in politically with their opponents, they may prove to be counter-productive. Another view is that prime minister is not a politically savvy person and his comments were "off the record" for the editors but some how they had been inadvertently made public. Another analysis is that the prime minister's statement demonstrates ignorance of Indian governmental agencies on Bangladesh.
Whatever may be fallout from the statement, we welcome the forthcoming visit of Indian prime minister to Bangladesh and hope that the controversy raised out of his reported statement should not be allowed to cloud the political environment in which certain key bilateral issues need to be resolved for the mutual benefit of the people of two nations.
The writer is former Bangladesh Ambassador to the UN, Geneva
http://www.thedailystar.net/newDesign/news-details.php?nid=192974
On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 1:01 PM, Isha Khan <bdmailer@gmail.com> wrote:
Follow-up on Manmohan Singh�s Comments about BangladeshAfter evoking strong reactions, Dr. Manmohan Singh�s office has redacted his comments about Bangladesh from the official PMO website. Indian newspapers initially reported that the Indian High Commissioner to Bangladesh had been summoned to the Foreign Ministry to explain those comments, although both the Indian and Bangladeshi officials are denying that at present. It would be extremely out-of-character for the current government to make such a strong move over these comments; so we should probably, just this once, take Mijarul Quayes�s word for it.
While the �25% of Bangladeshis support Jamaat� portion grabbed the most interest, Dr. Singh�s comments about Indian aid to Bangladesh was also intriguing. Here is what he said:
And that is why we have been generous in dealing with Bangladesh. We are not a rich country. But we offered it a line of credit of one billion dollars, when Sheikh Hasina came here.
To Dr. Singh, one billion dollars in line of credit to Bangladesh seems extremely generous. Keep in mind, Bangladesh has not received a single of those billion dollars do far. Moreover, let�s compare India�s treatment of Bangladesh to its treatment of Afghanistan:
�$100 million grant
�$70 million grant to build the Zarang-Delaram Highway
�$200,000 to the World Bank�s Afghanistan Reconstruction Trust Fund
�$4 million grant to repair and build the Indira Gandhi Institute of Child Health in Kabul
�$4 million grant to build the Habibba School
�$52 million to the World Food Programme, for Afghanistan and Iraq
�$25 million to build the Afghan parliament in Kabul
�A gift of 3 Airbus airplanes to Ariana, the Afghan national carrier.While these don�t add up to a billion dollars, keep in mind that the aid given to Afghanistan is through grants, which does not have to be repaid. The line of credit extended to Bangladesh, on the other hand, is credit, that must be paid back, with interest. Moreover, virtually almost all the credit�has to be used to hire Indian firms and buy Indian goods.
How generous.
The Indian Foreign Minister, S. M. Krishna, is scheduled to visit Bangladesh soon, a point also mentioned by Manmohan in his comments. Yet, Krishna�s name figures high in the name of those who are expected to lose their jobs in the coming cabinet reshuffle. Intriguingly, part of the reason that Krishna may be fired comes from allegations of corruption regarding lines of credit extended by Indian to neighbouring countries, including Bangladesh:
The controversy (the [Ministry of External Affairs] has scarcely ever been dogged by the C-word) revolves around the award of contracts for projects and the line of credit, worth a few billions of rupees, extended to neighbouring countries, particularly Sri Lanka and Bangladesh, and in Africa. This is said to have led to the shifting out of joint secretary T.S. Tirumurti, who till recently headed the Bangladesh-Sri Lanka-Myanmar-Maldives division (commonly known as BSM)�
But soon enough, what had earlier just smelt fishy now began to toss up evidence of the actual corruption. A few days after [the construction of a housing project in Sri Lanka through an Indian line of credit] was given the green signal, senior officials from the other two public sector entities called the BSM enquiring whether the [Ministry] expected a cut from the project. When asked for reasons, PSU officials disclosed that a businessman, claiming to be close to [the Foreign Minister's advisor], was demanding a cut. The BSM division promptly replied that its expectations were a �zero cut� from the housing project, and the businessman was asked to buzz off�
MEA officials counter that [a Joint Secretary was removed] because he would have insisted on stringent scrutiny of another line of credit pending in Bangladesh, where India is scheduled to build a railway line. (A line of credit is an MEA programme which has India finance a project in another country, with 85 per cent of it executed by Indian companies.)
Despite what Manmohan Singh may think, Bangladesh can get along perfectly well without his precious line of credit. And, if it turns out, that the money of Bangladeshi taxpayers is going to fuel corruption in India, then it would probably be better to cancel the line of credit altogether.
Now, how about sending�some of that grant money our way?
On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 10:39 AM, Isha Khan <bdmailer@gmail.com> wrote:Indian analyst contradicts Indian High Commission press release on Dr. Singh�s comments on Bangladesh
Indian High Commission Press release July 2, 2011 �"Our attention has been drawn to some off the record remarks attributed to the Prime Minister during his interaction with Editors in New Delhi. It is clarified in this regard that these attributed remarks were by no means intended to be judgemental. The Prime Minister and his Government and the people of India have the greatest affection for the people of Bangladesh and hold our relations with Bangladesh to be of the highest importance.
India recognises the stability of the democratically elected Government and is committed to the non-interference in the internal affairs of sovereign states. In recent years, ties between India and Bangladesh have seen exceptional heights with close cooperation in a wide range of areas. The focus on both sides has been development cooperation, poverty alleviation, capacity building and education. It is in this context that the External Affairs Minister of India is undertaking an official visit to Bangladesh. We are fully committed to our bilateral relationship with the people and the Government of Bangladesh."Comments of Rajeev Sharma in SAAG (excerpts) �India must help Bangladesh urgently to strengthen the democratic process in the country and help the Awami League government� fight extremist and terrorist groups which threaten to convert Bangladesh into a `Taliban country`, a development which has grave consequences for India and the region as a whole. Bangladesh is one of India�s closest neighbours where it has deep strategic interests in terms of peace and stability of the region.India occupies a central place in the internal politics of Bangladesh. The bitter rivals of Sheikh Hasina, Bangladesh Nationalist Party and Jamaat-e-Islami, have built their political fortunes on supporting extremist elements and by opposing India at all levels. In a way, Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina is swimming against the tide in building bridges with India. The country is scheduled to go to elections in 2013 and with such a short time left, Hasina�s overtures, unless met substantially by India, could prove to be her undoing as far as her political life is concerned. India must ensure that Sheikh Hasina�s position is not compromised.�To a large extent, the key rests with India, more specifically the joint communiqu�nd its speedy implementation. The following actions could help in furthering India�s strategic interests in Bangladesh and its neighbourhood���Begum Zia�s second tenure was the worst for Indo-Bangla ties in decades. Her government was virtually a proxy of Islamabad and the ISI. In fact the Pakistani spy agency ISI was never more powerful in this country than Begum Zia�s second tenure as PM. This was also the time when China sank its teeth deeper into the Bangladesh pie.�Both Pakistan and China have one man to blame the present honeymoon between India and Bangladesh: Indian Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee. When Mukherjee was given Finance (on his own demand) in the UPA II, there was consternation in the Hasina government at all levels. Bangladeshi diplomats sent SOS messages to their MEA counterparts on why and how S M Krishna could not deliver whereas Mukherjee was a runaway success and the biggest Confidence Building Measure (CBM) between India and Bangladesh. Such is the level of synergy and proximity between Sheikh Hasina and Mukherjee that the two have family ties. In fact when Mukherjee took over as Finance Minister, Hasina set aside all protocol and rang him up to congratulate him. After Hasina had finished there was a long list of the Hasina household waiting to congratulate Mukherjee � and the links went on to the teenagers �..Original preliminary transcript of the Q & A session between the Indian PM and newspaper editors dated June 29, 2011 -�Q 1: Sir, you did not mention anything about our neighbourhood.A: Well, neighbourhood worries me a great deal, quite franklyWith Bangladesh, we have good relations. Bangladesh government has gone out of its way to help us in apprehending the anti-Indian insurgent groups which were operating from Bangladesh for a long time. And that is why we have been generous in dealing with Bangladesh. We are not a rich country. But we offered it a line of credit of one billion dollars, when Sheikh Hasina came here. We are also looking at ways and means of some further unilateral concessions. We are also looking at ways and means of finding a practical and pragmatic solution to the sharing of Teesta waters. I plan to go there myself. The external affairs minister is planning to go later this week. So, Bangladesh, our relations are quite good. So Bangladesh, our relations are quite good. But we must reckon that at least 25 percent of the population of Bangladesh swear by the Jamiat-ul-Islami and they are very anti-Indian, and they are in the clutches, many times, of the ISI. So, a political landscape in Bangladesh can change at any time. We do not know what these terrorist elements, who have a hold on the jamiat �e � islami elements in Bangladesh, can be upto.�So a very uncertain neighbourhood. A very uncertain international, economic environment. We have to swim and keep our heads high.
On Sat, Jul 2, 2011 at 1:19 PM, Isha Khan <bdmailer@gmail.com> wrote:Reactions
Former Foreign Minister M Morshed Khan on Friday said that the Indian Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh�s statement about Bangladesh�s politics would not go in favour of bilateral relations between the two countries.Khan said Jamaat must be happy with this figure of 25 percent of the Bangladesh population being anti-Indian. �How does he (Dr. Singh) know all Jamaatis are anti-Indian? How did he get this figure?�
http://www.unbconnect.com/component/news/task-show/id-51824
Agri Minister Matia Chowdhury yesterday termed Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's comment �irrelevant�.
�http://www.thedailystar.ne t/newDesign/news-details.p hp?nid=192504
Jamaat-e-Islami condemned Indian premier Manmohan Singh's remarks.
http://www.thedailystar.ne t/newDesign/news-details.p hp?nid=192467
Former Indian High Commissioner in Dhaka Veena Sikri wondered where the figure that 25 percent Bangladeshis swore by Jamaat had come from.
"One third of the votes go to the BNP and an equal number to the Awami League. Of the remaining 33 per cent, most of it is the floating vote that looks at issues independently. "I don't think you can say that 25 per cent are anti-Indian. Does it mean most of BNP's voters feel that way?" the former envoy continued. "One can't categorise in this manner just as one can't do the same with the people of Pakistan. Regimes and institutions can be characterised like this, not the people," she was further quoted as saying. http://bdnews24.com/details.php?id=199876&cid=2
On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 7:33 PM, Isha Khan <bdmailer@gmail.com> wrote:Manmohan Singh's comment on Bangladesh raises eyebrows
He stated in an interaction with editors that 25% of that country's
population was �anti-Indian'
The branding of a quarter of Bangladesh's population as �anti-Indian�
by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has raised diplomatic eyebrows here.
Former diplomats found it intriguing that during his interaction with
editors here on Wednesday, Dr. Singh, who is usually very careful with
his words, chose to conclude his generally positive remarks on
Bangladesh by observing that �we must reckon that at least 25 per cent
of the population of Bangladesh swears by the Jamiat-ul-Islami (sic)
and they are very anti-Indian and they are in the clutches, many times
of the ISI.�
They also took umbrage at his observations that followed � �the
political landscape in Bangladesh can change anytime. We do not know
what these terrorist elements, which have a hold on the
Jamiat-e-Islami (sic) elements in Bangladesh, can be up to.�
�I do not agree that 25 per cent population of Bangladesh supports the
Jamiat-e-Islami. If you look at the votes they had polled in the last
elections, it does not reflect so, although they contested elections
along with the right-wing Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) of Begum
Khaleda Zia,� said a close observer of politics in Bangladesh.
Not proper: Veena Sikri
India's former High Commissioner in Dhaka Veena Sikri was more
forthright. �I don't think it is proper to describe people of another
country in this manner,� she said while contextualising the BNP's
stand. �The BNP says the interests of Bangladesh are not served by
India. Sheikh Hasina on the other hand seeks to promote friendship
because she feels friendship with India is in Bangladesh's interest.�
On Dr. Singh's assertion that a quarter of the people of Bangladesh
swore by the Jamiat, Ms. Sikri wondered where the figure had come
from.
�One third of the votes go to the BNP and an equal number to the Awami
League. Of the remaining 33 per cent, most of it is the floating vote
that looks at issues independently. I don't think you can say that 25
per cent are anti-Indian. Does it mean most of BNP's voters feel that
way? One can't categorise in this manner just as one can't do the same
with the people of Pakistan. Regimes and institutions can be
characterised like this, not the people.�
The influence of the ISI, which has been trying to regain its hold
since the early days of an independent Bangladesh, was strong under
earlier regimes. But institutions such as the Bangladesh Army or the
Directorate General of Forces Intelligence, unlike the Pakistani ones,
are very sensitive to public opinion.
�They want a better life�
�When during the days of the army-led Caretaker Government, they saw
public opinion in favour of elections; they did a good job with them.
Certainly there is a big effort by the ISI to get back their
pre-partition influence. But the question is what do the people of
Bangladesh want? They desire a better life and many of them see that
happening by nurturing good ties with India,� said the veteran
diplomat.
http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article2148355.ece
____________________________________________________________
57 Year Old Mom Looks 27!
Mom Reveals $5 Wrinkle Trick That Has Angered Doctors!
ConsumerLifestyles.org
__._,_.___
[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
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
__,_._,___