Bangladesh News and Discussion

[Supratik]

Rajesh,

There has been a hardening of stance and more activism in the community. Previously they were more interested in running to India and then joining the Communist parties for trinkets (like voter card and ration card).

[RajeshA]

Use of vulnerable links in a nation state, like presence of an ostensibly "oppressed" community, is fair game in diplomatic relations...But major powers do it with finesse and subtlty...

Agree with you. The way to do this is to first build up an objective case on the oppression, increasingly publicize it until it becomes a major issue - and then use the objective data to pressure governments and societies in the right direction.

For example, India needs to come out with her own report on religious freedom by country - the equivalent of the US version. In this, India needs to consistently take a stand that certain or all Christian and Muslim sects don't measure up to India's standard of pluralism and are exclusivist in their orientation by claiming other Gods as False....Of course the incidences of violence and religion-related crimes also needs to be catalogued. A ranking of countries based on prevalence of such extremist sects would be useful. This annual report needs to be publicized widely first by the Indian media and thereupon through global media.

It is also a value, that we do not sit in judgment over others. Nobody likes to be judged by others. If India starts bringing out such a report, we would only make ourselves unpopular in the eyes of others, just like US is. The reason why others continue to interact with USA is not because of its moralizing stand, but despite it, because of American power. India does not have that kind of power, nor should we start sermonizing others even if we had. There are better ways to increase influence than stepping on other people's toes.

Of course, India can finance some organization like the Amnesty International, or Human Rights Watch, and such an organization can do the work you propose, without the Indian Government claiming ownership of such an organization or its work.

Indian State can however claim the ownership of the traditions of Indian Civilization, and all those who follow those traditions, and based on that claim, India rebuke those countries who allow abuse on the Dharmics.

As far as Hindus, Sikhs and Buddhists in Pakistan or Bangladesh are concerned, India has a much stronger case to demand their just treatment. For these two countries, it would be appropriate for India to have such a report and for India to act pon the prescriptions in the report.

[RajeshA]

There has been a hardening of stance and more activism in the community. Previously they were more interested in running to India and then joining the Communist parties for trinkets (like voter card and ration card).

That is very good news. Thanks

[somnath]

For example, India needs to come out with her own report on religious freedom by country - the equivalent of the US version

What works for the US may not work for India..Not when we are talking about countries sharing contiguous borders with us...But there are numerous other sources - NGOs, "hindutva" orgs, buddhist chakma groups...Keep them on an even keel, not too powerful, but not toothless loudmouths either...Further, develep sources within BD civil society - the "liberal" media, intelligentsia and so on...Also within the opposite spectrum - like of JEI! Just to get them to shoot their mouths off in an obnoxious manner hen we want them to...Psy-ops is a sophisiticated area in intel..Its naive to believe we are not doing at least some of this...

But all of this are simply levers, to retain strategic space within BD...Use these as a contrast to the sops on trade, credit, investments...

[Arjun]

It is also a value, that we do not sit in judgment over others. Nobody likes to be judged by others.

Well, the reality of the modern world is just the opposite. Every single individual, whether she is in academics, works in a firm, is a politician or is an entrepreneur is constantly being judged by others. This only becomes problematic when the judgement 'flow' is only one-way and is not reciprocal...

But I do agree that a report of this type would be better coming from some non-government source with credibility and repute...But in the interests of reciprocity India could come out with one specific to the US alone. After all, we can't afford to be non-judgemental on folks who are themselves explicitly judgemental, as evidenced by their annual religious freedom compilation !

[RajeshA]

Samudragupta ji,

I think, that

a Hindu Israel Model applied to Chittagong is the most desired model. 15 million Hindus caged in Bangladesh is twice the population of Israel.

In fact Bangladesh has once separated from India as East Pakistan in 1947, and then again from Pakistan in 1971. Its 1971 partition from Pakistan, just shows that the country does not see the concept of unity and territorial integrity of a country as something sacrosanct, and that was long after the UN had formulated the principles of respect for unity and national boundaries, etc..... So if Bangladeshi Hindus and Buddhists fight to have their own separate country in Bangladesh, Bangladesh does not really have some principle it can hold up, as to why the Bangladeshi Hindus and Buddhists cannot have their own state, neither the principle of inviolability of a country's unity nor the principle of unity of the country across religious groups.

The fun of the whole thing is, the Hindus can lay all the blame at the doorstep of BNP-JeI for their policies and those of its stooges. Secondly the Hindus can always say, that Bangladesh did nothing to bring justice to the perpetrators of the 1971 Genocide of mostly Hindus in Bangladesh by Pakistani forces, and in fact enjoys normal diplomatic relations with Pakistan.

In the end it is all a question of money and tactics.

[brihaspati]

Well - not knowing the underlying nuances of a culture and language while pretending knowledge in it, and arrogantly insulting others based on that flimsy pretension - is the real joke. Pretending that more formal events mainly initiated by the a particular government using "Rabindrasangeet" more is an indication of the real change in social theological attitudes in the society at large - is another height of deceptive propaganda - that galls. It galls, when the real lack of knowledge of "Rabindra-sahitya" comes out in the casual and arrogant dismissal of concepts of "mosahib/chatukaar/paarishad" in a poem by the poet himself - and this pontification about Raabindrik literature comes out. Empty vessels indeed make more noises.

It pains to see such p-sec pseudo-knowledgeable Congress-Left bootlickers selectively using Rabindranath's complex outpourings and make-up for their own political agenda - without even knowing his work in depth. I have managed to clear formal music degrees including "Rabindrasangeet" from two most relevant insititutions, have close connections to the main institution, and was actively involved in semi-professional theatre that also put up some of his plays. I do have some of his plays, most of his poems, songs, novels and even some essays by heart. It really galls to see such a mashing up of Rabindranath by p-secs for their dynastic bootlicking. It galls even more to see complete lack of touch with all aspects of the culture and language masquerading as super-comprehension of the Bengal-BD dynamics.

[brihaspati]

The tragedy and criminality of so-called Congress-Left [or Kongshaal - Kongrez+Nakshaal according to Bengalis] comes out in the logical contortions about nationhood of BD or Pak.

For example, as quoted above by me - the Loony in the Loony-Liaquat Pact, has been quoted to be loudly clamouring for not allowing "migration" of Hindu Bengalis from East-Pak - on various logic. He and his "gurudev" - who was instrumental in getting him the Kursi after his minion failed to get "elected" even within his own party - pushed the primary logic that if "population exchange" was accepted, then it would be agreeing to the Paki logic of "nationhood" based on theological nationhood. But isn't this an "ideological basis" for something that should have been looked at from the practical real-politik angle - that what islamists really were capable of and what their ntentions and modus operandi has always been?

All the Lahori-logic p-sec loonies who shout about the need for non-ideological basis for national politics and claim that onlee "loonies" want "ideological foundations" for a nation, of course then have to remain silent about their guru loonies - who used a purely ideological logic to justify their support of genocide of Bengali Hindus and also Punjabi Sikhs.

So when loony gurus of p-secs push for such Lahori-ideological-logic to justify nationhood, that is found to be okay by p-secs. But think of it - that sequence of logic also makes BD a non-nation. Because, BD shows that Pakistani logic of nationhood is false, but BD legitimacy [not necessarily legality] is based on Paki nationhood's legitimacy - which itself is based on a false nationhood.

Recognizing and supporting BD nationhood - which is only claimed on the basis of distinction of language and culture - on a civilizational basis, from the loony-Indian-p-sec side indicates that Indian p-secs recognize "culture" and "language" as basis for sovereignty and independence, but which they themselves are not ready to accept as foundation of nationhood of India!!

See where the self-delusion and criminal deception leads p-secs to?

[SRoy]

if "population exchange" was accepted, then it would be agreeing to the Paki logic of "nationhood" based on theological nationhood.

Jupiter,

I think a simpler explanantion should suffice.

"agreeing to the Paki logic of 'nationhood' " -> Why this is even worthy of debate or explanation? What is left to "agree" once the partition is done?

It's like a rape victim (however unfortunate) claiming to be virgin, because she didn't participate in intercourse willingly.

[brihaspati]

Yesterday, 13th July, Channel I from BD broadcast its popular topical debate - called "Tritio maatra" [the third dimension - not literal translation but sense usage - as some of our insular comrades might think literally from their rudimentary acquaintance with the language and then mock]. The BNP representative on this programme - claimed clearly and loudly that, it was in BD national interest that the "seven-sisters" become independent of India. That BD gov had made a blunder in handing over a few of the "freedom-fighters" from within India who had taken shelter in BD.

This is the inherent BD rashtryia thinking - and the BD social dynamics is such that this BNP-Jamaat section does represent nearly 50% strength of the population as has been shown by me many times before. The remaining 50% however need not be entirely against such thinking - just that many of them would be more flexible and opportunist to selectively and tactically use their hidden Islamism to extract concessions in exchange for temporary silence.

Greater integration through BD will over the long term be a road for BD to use its geographical advantages to bring over the EJ-sponsored separatism in the NE [the theology and the church provide the axis of a separate identity contradistinct from the core of India and helps maintain the spark of anti-India separatism] and become a regional hub to draw the centre of gravity into itself.

The BD inherent tendencies and persistent long term Islamist goals - are there for all to see. Our Kongshaal comrades of course cannot allow themselves to acknowledge that. Hidden feminine undercurrents in our comrades that sees their country and society as feminized and that makes them hanker for the robust masculinity of Islamism?

[RajeshA]

The article is so damning, so posting in full.

Published on Jul 15, 2011
By Kevin Rafferty
Kissinger blighted millions as U.S. jockeyed for position: Japan Times

HONG KONG — Henry Kissinger has distilled many words of wisdom from four millennia of Chinese civilization, and several centuries of Western diplomacy, including almost half a century of personal experience at the sharp end of power politics. He has captured headlines and captivated some of the world's best commentating minds with his 580-page book "On China."

Most reviews and comments have been favorable, though professor Andrew Nathan in the upcoming Foreign Affairs neatly dismisses the tome as "really neither history nor memoir. Its purpose is to argue that the United States should yield gracefully to China's rise in order to avoid a tragic conflict."

This month marks 40 years since Kissinger feigned sickness in Pakistan and made a secret flight to China to pave the way for President Richard Nixon's historic visit to the country the following year. For me, Kissinger's biggest failure is what he omits.

By the fawning way he used Pakistan as his launchpad, Kissinger's diplomacy was also helping to perpetrate one of the worst atrocities of the 20th century, the slaughter of about 1.5 million people and the flight of 10 million refugees whose only crime was to express their wish for democracy through the ballot box and peaceful protests.

Yet, there is no mention in the book, not a sentence of regret, not a word of apology, not even a passing note that the bloody birth of Bangladesh was brought about because Kissinger, reaching out to China, simultaneously encouraged the Pakistan military to butcher the people of East Pakistan, as it then was. It is their tragic 40th anniversary, too.

To set out the facts, in December 1970 the Bengalis of East Pakistan, separated by 1,600 km of Indian territory from West Pakistan, where the military lived and ruled, voted overwhelmingly in the freest and fairest elections Pakistan had seen for Sheikh Mujibur Rahman's Awami League, which stood on a platform of greater autonomy — not independence — from West Pakistan.

The Awami League won 160 of the 162 seats from East Pakistan, giving it an overall majority in the 300-member constituent assembly for Pakistan.

For the next three months there was deadlock as President General Yahya Khan and Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, leader of the People's Party, which had majorities in two of the four provinces of West Pakistan, played obstructionist games about the terms on which the assembly would meet to arrange a new civilian constitution.

The deadlock was broken when Yahya sent troops to arrest Mujib and his key lieutenants and let the army loose on East Pakistan. Tanks were sent to deal with Dhaka University students, who had been active in protests against the military regime. The army set fire to apartments and then mowed down their fleeing occupants. The military reign of terror spread far and wide beyond the cities. The World Bank said whole villages had just ceased to exist.

By all eyewitness accounts the soldiers conducted mass murder and rape. Estimates of the dead range up to 3 million. About 200,000 women were raped and almost 10 million Bengalis fled to refugee camps in India.

One gruesome picture showed a bloated crow hopping on piles of corpses, its glittering eye contrasting with the bulging sightless eyes of the dead.

The rest of the world condemned the atrocities and sent aid for the refugees. Nixon and Kissinger said nothing but kept supplying aid, including military aid, to West Pakistan and encouraged other countries to divert military hardware to Pakistan when public opinion and Congress tried to block U.S. military deliveries. Kissinger sent a message to Yahya praising his "delicacy and tact" in Operation Searchlight, as the Pakistan Army called the crackdown. In July 1971, Kissinger objected to the idea that the Pakistan army should get out of civilian administration in East Pakistan to help the relief efforts, claiming, "Why is it our business how they govern themselves?"

Archer Blood, the U.S. consul-general in East Pakistan, and his entire staff were so appalled at the callous attitude of their own government that, in April, Blood sent the rightly famous eponymous cable of dissent: "Our government has failed to denounce the suppression of democracy. Our government has failed to denounce atrocities ... Our government has evidenced what many will consider moral bankruptcy ... But we have chosen not to intervene, even morally, on the grounds that the Awami conflict, in which unfortunately the overworked term genocide is applicable, is purely an internal matter of a sovereign state..."

For his courage, Blood was called a "pansy" by Kissinger, silenced, recalled early and transferred.

Kissinger continued to support Yahya and the Pakistan military through thick and thin, beyond the need for Pakistan's good offices in opening the door to China. As war between Pakistan and India, strained by the costs of housing and feeding the refugees, loomed toward the end of 1971, Kissinger was urging China not to be "a silent spectator" at the impending dismemberment of its ally Pakistan.

Kissinger was wrong at almost every turn, even if he could justify the murder and mayhem of Bengali civilians, women and children to satisfy his diplomatic ego.

He was wrong to see India or Indira Gandhi as a Soviet stooge. Whatever her many faults, Gandhi was never anyone's stooge, and anyone with any understanding of India would see in it a civilization as rich and historic as China's.

He was wrong, and insulting to both countries, to imagine that East Pakistan "would become a Bhutan" — how shallow to compare a tiny Himalayan kingdom with a teeming country of 100 million people in the floodplain of the Ganga and Brahmaputra rivers.

He was wrong to assume that India would move on with Soviet backing to carve up West Pakistan and upset the political balance of the whole area as far as the Middle East.

He was wrong to regard Bangladesh as an eternal "basket-case" economy that would forever need foreign aid, although the original expression was not his.

Bangladesh will struggle to reach middle-income status, but is on the way there. Bangladeshis are proving that they may not be as intelligent as Kissinger, but they are brighter, more economically productive and less destructive than Pakistani generals.

He was wrong to support the Pakistan military. It is a mystery how someone as intelligent as Kissinger could support a group so stubborn and stupid as the top Pakistani generals under Yahya Khan. By doing so, he set the precedent for military might as a substitute for political negotiations, for Zulfikar Ali Bhutto to disregard the wishes of the electorates in Baluchistan and the North West Frontier Province, and later for the army to overthrow and execute Bhutto.

If the United States had persuaded Yahya Khan to concede autonomy and even independence to East Bengal, then it would have saved the deaths and devastation of one of the world's poorest areas that had been damaged by decades of misrule by the Pakistan military. It would have improved America's standing in the world, boosted its relations with India and changed the culture in Pakistan.

Perhaps then, the whole history of Pakistan's troubled frontier areas with Afghanistan would have been changed before Islamic extremists appeared on the scene.

Equally dangerously, a few years later in the mid-1970s Kissinger missed the signals coming from Afghanistan. Afghanistan's then President Sardar Mohammed Dauod gave me an interview, pleading for renewed American interest and investment to counteract the Soviet economic domination that Daoud himself had originally encouraged.

If he talked to a small-fry newspaper editor — I was founder-editor of Business Times in Malaysia — Daoud must have tried to get the message out to people who could influence politics and investment flows.

Was Kissinger asleep or just dreaming of his global realpolitik that he missed a chance to effect a practical change to a dangerous world?

Daoud was overthrown in 1978 by leftists who were a precursor to Soviet-backed communist rule, and to the creation of U.S.-fomented Islamic rebels using Pakistan as a base and Pakistan army and intelligence and U.S. supplies as their weapons. The rest is not merely history, but continues to haunt the whole world today.

Dr. Realpolitik Kissinger, in defiance of all the proud traditions of his adopted country, did not give a damn about democracy. He will no doubt reply that "On China" is about China, the differences between Chinese diplomacy based on the game of wei qi, which teaches the art of strategic encirclement, rather than chess (which Kissinger should know originated in India, 13 centuries before Clausewitz), with its concepts of clashes and total victory, and his meandering meetings with Chinese leaders over the past 40 years, and definitely not about Bengalis who got in the way.

But what is diplomacy that does not have regard for the people it affects, and who are diplomats who regard millions of victims as mere collateral damage?

Kissinger may not be the monster who was Mao Zedong, responsible for 40 million to 70 million deaths of his Chinese comrades. But it would have been good if in his declining years Kissinger had been humble enough to acknowledge and apologize to those whose lives he blighted by his pursuit of power.

Kevin Rafferty covered the East Pakistan cyclone and 1970 elections and the Bangladesh war of 1971 for the Financial Times.

[abhishek_sharma]

Mumbai blasts suspect may be in Bangladesh

[Stan_Savljevic]

Now there are 100.3 men against every 100 women, while the figure was 106.4 against 100 in 2001. “This deserves more research. But a reason behind the trend could be that a lot of people have migrated to other countries over the years, and most of them were men,” said BBS Director General Shahjahan Ali Mollah in his presentation at the press conference.

If you are a sensible person, you can ask how many of those have ended up in India? If you are SCM otoh, you can ask how many are in Spore or Malaysia or the Mid-east and quote some world bank pdfs to back your tripe.
http://www.thedailystar.net/newDesign/n ... nid=194590

[somnath]

Interesting interview of Mahfuz Alam, Editor of Daily Star..
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/manmo ... h/818488/0

On the positive side, Bangladesh is roughly a six-billion-dollar market for India--formal or informal. Now if with a per capita income of close to four hundred dollars, Bangladesh can be a market to you of close to six billion dollars, then if our per capita income goes up to six hundred dollars, whose market is it going to be? So look at Bangladesh as your prospective market and give us the respect of a market that buys six billion worth of your goods. You are not even looking at it as an issue of self interest. Then there is the issue of security in the North East, and other insurgency issues. With a prosperous Bangladesh, with a secure Bangladesh, your whole security situation changes. India-Bangladesh becomes a model bilateral relationship which you can then flaunt with Nepal, even all over the world.

[abhishek_sharma]

Man arrested with 10 crude bombs in Ahmedabad

Police Commissioner Sudhir Sinha said the bombs were meant to be used during the Lord Jagannath Rathyatra on July 3 to create communal tension in the city, but strong police bandobast might have deterred him from planting the bombs.

The police also recovered two country-made pistols and some live cartridges from Shahzad.

According to his wife, Reshma, Shahzad Ismail Rangrej was selling illicit firearms.

He used to smuggle country-made pistols from Jhansi and sell them to criminals in Ahmedabad and other parts of Gujarat. She named one of their neighbours, Yunus, and another person from Jhansi as Shahzad's accomplices.

A mother of two children and second wife of Shahzad, Reshma said her husband was inducted into bomb-manufacturing by some Bangladeshi Muslims who had come and stayed with them when they were living in Vatwa locality in the city some four years ago.

At that time Reshma had informed the police about the presence of Bangladeshis, who had entered the country illegally, and got them arrested.

[somnath]

Indira G to be given highest state honour of BD..
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/bdesh ... i/819579/0

[Stan_Savljevic]

Xpost

Bolsters the case for frequently targetted states like Maharashtra to invest in fencing off their border.

How influx of migrants, terror is interlinked
Riazul Sarkar alias Akash Khan, arrested from Kishanganj on Saturday night in connection with July 13 Mumbai blasts, is in all probability a Bangladeshi who intruded into India. His arrest throws light on the problem of illegal migrants and how they pose a security threat to the country.

[Philip]

http://news.in.msn.com/national/article ... id=5302601

Bangladesh's highest state honour for ex-PM Indira Gandhi
B'desh rights historical wrong; recognises Indira's & India's role in its liberation

More details in the link.This is a great act by the new Bangladeshi govt. and in great part erases the acts of the pro-Paki criminal leaders and generals who assassinated Mujib and conducted an anti-India campaign fro decades.A strong Indo-B'Desh relationship will go a long way in also rpeventing China from using that nation to encircle India.China is giving BD lots of arms and India should find ways and means of assisting the BD forces militarily as well as providing them with some iconic projects,the best being a fine arts centre for Bengali culture that will also cement ties between the people of WB and BD.

[somnath]

China is giving BD lots of arms and India should find ways and means of assisting the BD forces militarily as well as providing them with some iconic projects,the best being a fine arts centre for Bengali culture that will also cement ties between the people of WB and BD

Its a good point...CRM in an op-ed piece in IE today talks about a massive Chinese project for Lumbini in Nepal..

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/clint ... n/819789/0

Making Lumbini more accessible, turning its environs attractive, and leveraging it for Nepal’s rapid economic development are big ideas that have been around for a long while. Their time may now have come, given the rise of China and Beijing’s capacity to think big and execute mega projects on short order.

An atheist country appropriating the buddhist legacy! Cant get more ironic than that...

Wont be surprised if China sponsors a world Tagore university in Dhaka either one of these days...While we will be left twiddling our thumbs, fearing "islamist, jihadist, christian, maoist" threats...

It will be even more ironic if China manages to get that railway track integrated into BD before India does..Or indeed if they conclude an FTA before us....

But why bother? We have "indic" philosophies and grand conspiracy theories!

[Rahul M]

egged on by a fellow BRFite, this is an attempt to dissect hostile attitude towards India by our neighbours and causes for the same. Pak and china are left out because that is already dealt with in detail by others.
In particular this will deal with bangladesh (BD) and to a lesser extent nepal and sri lanka (SL).
relations with bhutan are mostly benign and I have too little knowledge of burma to try to analyze them.

Part - I
>>> The common factors which apply to all the countries.

>> emotional nature of population.
while this is certainly not limited to the sub-continent, poor literacy levels and a thriving culture of conspiracy theories, esp in media make subcontinental populace perfect receptors for CT's. India itself was not very different earlier, we had our own 'foreign countries are out to get us' paranoia in 60's and 70's, much of which was misplaced. the evolution of Indian media and politics coupled with a growing self-confidence has helped stem that tide.
both nepali and BD blogs/forums etc are similar to their paki counterparts in this respect. sri lanka, reflective of their better literacy standards are a shade better off in this respect.

>> Small country mentality.
most of us have heard of the oft repeated phrase 'poor mexico, so far from god and so close to america'. the first time I read it was in an article from 80's on IPKF, the context was a statement by then lankan president jr jayewardene (could be premadasa too, it's been a long time) that ran something like "we know that India has mirage-2000 fighters and T-72 tanks; it is not a comforting thought for us."

India, by virtue of being a country many times larger in size, population, military & economic power and increasing global influence, can't help eclipsing her neighbours in most fields by merely existing.
It is a fact that if India wishes to flex her muscle and undermine any of her neighbours, there is very little they can do to stop her.
sure, it is a far-fetched scenario and India would face its own share of problems in such a scenario but the great thing about creating a fear psychosis is that you do not need an watertight logical premise.
simply put, India 'threatens' these countries by merely existing, and unless their mindset changes, NOTHING we do will change this view.

the other side of this coin is insecurity and an inferiority complex. particularly true for nepal and BD, where the paucity of achievements in international arena and a relatively underdeveloped economy has created doubts about the viability of their respective nations going forward. any interaction with a foreign nation, in particular India is a 'sell-out'. (we have a same category in India albeit on a much much smaller scale) in such a situation only parties that 'can be trusted' are the ones hyper-aggressive towards India, BNP in BD and maoists in nepal.

add to this the various local and global sources of propaganda (more on that later), and you have a vicious cycle that feeds on itself, propaganda paints India as a malevolent entity and that in turn makes the next round of even more bizarre theory believable.

>> Identity crisis
again applies mostly to BD and nepal, sri lanka IMO has managed to create an identity it is comfortable with, although at the expense of including its minorities.
as for BD, there are 3 options, a bengali identity, a muslim identity and a combined bengali muslim identity. the bengali identity sans islam has inherent problems, for a secular bengali identity has little reason to exist outside the Indian umbrella. the estrangement from fellow muslims in 1971 and the continued existence and flourishing of the Indian bengali population next door is a daily reminder of this conundrum. this is also why there was a huge hope in BD post 1971 of 'greater bangladesh', including west bengal. as the partition generation with its romantic notions of going back to ancestral lands dies off, the idea of WB joining BD seems bleaker by the day, a pure muslim identity, while attractive to most muslim bangladeshis have a small but influential group of opponents. the result is a shaky compromise between bengali and muslim identity. please note that minorities do not have a natural niche in this identity.

nepal OTOH, divided by various ethnic tribes and language groups has a different kind of identity crisis, somewhat similar to afghanistan or pakistan. in many cases people of the same ethnicity live across the border in India. what unites nepal ? what defines a nepali ?

throughout centuries, national identity has often crystallized by identifying a proverbial 'other'. for both BD and nepal, India is the most convenient 'other' and large groups of people in both countries seek to define their nationality by anti-Indianism.

>> India's image in international media
By international media, I mean obviously, western media. Since independence India has received primarily hostile coverage due to a variety of issues which can't be covered in detail here. some of those reasons are bitterness over losing the empire, religious factors, unwillingness to join the US camp etc.
the influence of these media outlets, viz. bbc, NYT etc plays no small part in shaping India's image in the minds of the elites of our neighbours. in a hangover from colonial days, the western media is perceived to be the epitome of unbiased reporting when it relates to India (this is conveniently forgotten when their own countries are criticized but such double standards are to be expected)

>> The pakistan factor
over the decades pakistan has shown a single minded willingness to support groups (not necessarily terrorist, any political, social, religious or media group is welcome) with funds and support if it satisfies one criteria, oppose India. this is an open offer that is available for all and sundry. not surprisingly, a number of groups have taken up this offer, particularly in impoverished BD and nepal. china increasingly fulfills a similar role now although it seems to be more sophisticated in how it goes about its job. existence of a sino-pak cooperation in this field can't be ruled out. this is something that India can do as well, if we decide to spare funds and effort for the same, because a number of these groups do not have ingrained political leanings and are available for the highest bidder.

>>> Country specific local factors

>> bangladesh

> the continued existence of pro-pakis
after 1971, BD did not take any concrete steps to bring the perpetrators of the genocide to justice. in fact, only a few years after independence, mujib was assassinated and the pro-paki people themselves came to power and stayed there for the longest period, shaping BD's institutions and foreign policy in the process. let us not forget that for 25 years BD was part of the same bigoted brainwashing mechanism and subject to the same propaganda as west pakistan. these teachings have been imbibed and propagated by a very influential section of BD society. this is why BD behaves like mini-pakistan, a less virulent and powerful version of pakistan but essentially on the same themes.


> the religion factor
religion is the lens through which the majority of bangladeshis look at the world. India, in spite of being a secular country will always be a 'hindu country' unless all hindus die off magically (or better yet, convert).
the continued repression of the hindu minority post 1971 creates a subconscious guilt and the fear that the international community, led by India might do to BD what was done to pakistan in 1971. continuous harping on India's supposed expansionist motives also helps preempt any Indian move to pressurize BD to take care of its minorities, any such move would conveniently fall within the established storyline about India, allowing the islamists and assorted elements to say 'I told you so', cutting out popular support from any group that supports India.

the prevalence of the religion identity also makes it easy for people who are not otherwise anti-Indian to support groups like BNP and JeI, as long as they do not openly declare support for pak.

> water issues
previously, BD got all the water from the ganga but with the construction of farakka barrage India extracted some of the water for irrigation and to keep kolkata port navigable. a right to extract its share of water is granted to upper-riparian states, in this case India.
the farakka dispute has been so twisted by political posturing that finding even a single technical analysis from BD is difficult. it is possible that there have been misunderstandings on this issue but the end result has been blown way out of proportion.

> trade imbalance
this is a genuine issue but the root cause is the general underdeveloped state of BD industry, although this too is somehow spinned as India's fault. the double standards is clear from the fact that china, which has a much larger imbalance with BD is never targeted in the same way.

> border fence issue
there is not much to add to this well known problem except that most BD's are either in denial that this happens or consider it a right to cross the Indian border illegally. an Indian doing the opposite i.e crossing into BD is however considered a threat. most illegal migration into India is supported by firing from BDR who also assist the cattle lifters and smugglers who operate at the border. all these indicate that there is an undeclared understanding of the process of demographic aggression by the BD elites and tacit support for it. the state of denial by BD govt in the face of overwhelming evidence and the refusal to take back its own citizens confirm this.

> chittagong hill tracts and shanti-bahini
indeed, BD is not new to demographic aggression. the chakma hill tribes of CHT were repressed and muslims from the plains were soon pouring into the primarily buddhist lands and dominating the area, replacing the tribals, taking a leaf out of china's playbook for tibet. a tribal rights political movement was launched but when this was unsuccessful, an armed wing called the shanti-vahini was formed, allegedly with Indian assistance which clashed with BD forces. the impact was small and the movement died down by late 90's.

Part-II will cover nepal and sri lanka.

[RajeshA]

Rahul M ji,

Great going saar!

[brihaspati]

What a great acquaintance with the ground realities of Nepal or China? Anyone of them "atheist" as a "country"?!! I guess p-secs are so used to declaring what their "country" is, on behalf of their masters - that they now declare so also about other countries, without knowing much about such "countries".

The hatred of "Indic" philosophies of course must come out of p-seci mouths to prove loyalty to imperialist ideologies - but the Freudian slip even exposes the intense hatred in putting "Indic" with a lowercase "i". Try to belittle "Indic" as much as possible - that seems to be the Kongshaal brief! Oops - I should have written "kongshaal" or "congress-left".

Caution about the reality of half-and-half split of BD society, its consistent Islamist rashtryia machinery not-withstanding some India-favourable noises made when AL forms the gov, its consistent drive to tactically extract more from India while continuing to systematically eliminate the "Hindu" and replenish the Islamist networks - are "grand conspiracy theories".

Naturally, for the grand p-seci mind that even laughed at electoral data proving the Islamist reality of BD - anything that goes against the current congrezi-leftie propaganda - is a "grand conspiracy theory"! Was not someone admiring the "factual" basis of this p-seci outpouring sometime ago?....

[brihaspati]

Those who can follow the language can keep a track on the political statements and the agitation going on in BD - against "transit", against "border" redrawing or "exchange", and "collaboration" with India in general. Nothing will ever satisfy the majority Islamists of BD - whatever be the gestures or "inputs" from India. Moreover, increasingly the Islamist opposition activists seem to be openly reviving the call for encouraging NE separatists -as dismembering India is supposedly in BD interest.

That society supported ML for Partition because they wanted the "Hindu" land and women minus the men. When that benefit was not obvious, they separated from their western Muslim brethren - but again it was for greater control over that very old Islamist agenda. This was why for most of their existence they had Islamists in power - including its army. That society has never swerved from that long term agenda.

Of course they should recognize Indira ji's efforts. She was passionate and gifted them a separate Islamist enclave as a brilliant tactician but rather a dumb move in long term strategic viewpoint. Even when Pakis disintegrate further, and there are international or "local" moves that takes care of the Pakis in the only way they understand - Islamists will have a safe base in BD pretending "secularism" as and when pressure grows too much - to survive and grow back on the subcontinent.

[Stan_Savljevic]

Meanwhile, Meghalaya asked the Central Government to persuade Bangladesh to arrest Champion R Sangma, the ‘chairman’ of Garo National Liberation Army (GNLA) who has been camping in Bangladesh for several months in search of support, states Sentinel.

[abhishek_sharma]

Sleuths probe HuJI-B link to blasts

[brihaspati]

BD is gaining a net of 40 sq. km. in the enclave exchange programme. SG visiting Dhaka today. See, concessions to Islamic expansion - is never really jeopardized - be it AL or BNP.

[chetak]

BD is gaining a net of 40 sq. km. in the enclave exchange programme. SG visiting Dhaka today. See, concessions to Islamic expansion - is never really jeopardized - be it AL or BNP.

So one medal=40 sq kms?

Nice!

[RamaY]

That is 40x224 acres ~ 10,000 acres. Didi kicked out Nano project for mere 100+ acres. Bloody politics...

[Anindya]

How does this help? What is Chidamabaram's intention in announcing this?

BSF directed to fire only in self defence at Indo-Bangla border: Chidambaram

[Stan_Savljevic]

Some kinda quid pro quo. The BGB is not preventing people from coming close to the zero line, and even encouraging them to cross over to claim adverse possessions or do smuggling. The shootings by BSF used to target primarily these smuggling cabals. If PC is saying no shootouts from the BSF side, there must be some kinda agreement that BGB will do its job unlike the past. In return, the BSF will just guard the borders and not go aggressively at shooting smugglers. That is the best guess as to what is going on.

[SwamyG]

PC is cooling down BD. He is saying BD is not the same as Pakistan. He implies, BD can be trusted but not Pakistan. If you have two gangs of rowdies in your colony, and you walk to one and say "boss, you are better than them." Do you think the rowdies will not like that? Either the gang that you walked to was truly better than the other or they had something you wanted.

BD will one day become a friendly neighbor. It has no choice, and there are signs that this is slowly happening. If not for its size and population, it would become like Nepal or Bhutan. But one day....things will become better and we would not have to worry as much of the neighbor on the East. India has no choice either, if it wants to influence Burma, India needs to pocket BD. Period.

Rahul babu: That is a nice writeup. Hopefully, sometime in the future you analyze if India had any role to play in creating the hatred/animosity? It is quite possible actions & inaction deliberately or inadvertently could have help nurture an environment of mistrust.

[brihaspati]

PC is cooling down BD. He is saying BD is not the same as Pakistan. He implies, BD can be trusted but not Pakistan. If you have two gangs of rowdies in your colony, and you walk to one and say "boss, you are better than them." Do you think the rowdies will not like that? Either the gang that you walked to was truly better than the other or they had something you wanted.

BD will one day become a friendly neighbor. It has no choice, and there are signs that this is slowly happening. If not for its size and population, it would become like Nepal or Bhutan. But one day....things will become better and we would not have to worry as much of the neighbor on the East. India has no choice either, if it wants to influence Burma, India needs to pocket BD. Period.

Rahul babu: That is a nice writeup. Hopefully, sometime in the future you analyze if India had any role to play in creating the hatred/animosity? It is quite possible actions & inaction deliberately or inadvertently could have help nurture an environment of mistrust.

It is quite possible actions and & inaction deliberately or inadvertently could have helped nurture an environment of mistrust - with Pak?

Why is it that Indians always fall for the propaganda, that because Pak and proto-BD went to war with each other on certain issues, or that they have differences in language or some aspects of culture - means that they differ from each other in all other aspects too?

Where India is concerned, for both Pak and BD - India is "Hindu" - hence its mere existence is automatically an environment of mistrust. I have quoted a tv-chat round where a BNP leader openly accused the AL representative on show of damaging BD interest - by "turning over Indian freedom-fighters from NE" into GOI hands. He was quite clear that he felt it was in BD interest that the NE states of India gained freedom. As long as India exists with a majority non-Muslim population - BD and Pak will have "problems of dissatisfaction" with India.

It is time people really looked up the history and leadership of the movement that led to the creation of BD - it was a continuous process of Islamist clearing of land off non-Muslim men in stages and then intra-Islam factional infighting to lord it over those freed agro-biological resources.As long as Muslims remain the majority with Islamic infrastructure intact - where India is concerned - Pak and BD long term attitude is not essentially going to differ. BD may appear to be more cooperative from time to time - but we will see relatively little change from continuous decrease or non-increase of Hindu/Buddhist populations, and a steady stream of concessions from India extracted under the guise of that "cooperation". And BD will still collaborate with China and any one else willing to undermine India - especially in the NE.

[brihaspati]

Some people point out love for "Tagore" and "Bengali language" as some kind of sign of BD overlap in identity with India. Wrong. the main reason behind that show of appreciation for aspects that appear to overlap with WB - comes from a historical underlying feeling in BD Islamists that all of "historical" Bengal "belongs" to Islmists. Their concession to this language/culture [apart from usefulness in rallying the leftist radical youth of late 60's to become the cannon fodder for '71, and gaining sympathy of India and then WB sympathizers] is solidly linked to a continuously discernible consciousness of this claim on "greater Bengal" as evidenced in many of their academic and polemical works.

They take great pains to distinguish BD "Bangla" from WB "Bangla" by trying to strictly avoid certain words that they feel characterize "Hindus" - like they will never use "jala" but always "paani", and non-Sanskrit root words for close relations etc. So their use of language is tactical and political - and does not come out of any great cultural identification. Cultural identification through language is also problematic, because many of the common phrases of the language have "Hindu anusanga" - and they show their tactical/political stress by trying to eliminate such "Hindu anusang" as much as possible.

[SwamyG]

Why is it that Indians always fall for the propaganda, that because Pak and proto-BD went to war with each other on certain issues, or that they have differences in language or some aspects of culture - means that they differ from each other in all other aspects too?

Why is it some Indians, like you, jump to conclusions time ?

[brihaspati]

Nah, I keep it general - while some, like you, jump to make it personal!

[brihaspati]

There are already strong noises being made on the possibility of BD losing "highly fertile" 500 acres on the Sylhet border. It is now being claimed that it could become a security issue for BD in the BD papers. On the other hand - biz interests like the stone cutters/crushers on the Akhaura-Ashuganj sector who used to buy stones from Indian side - process it and then take it to Tripura at a profit [60 cost -25 profit] are threatening to obstruct the transit.

It is an indication of more issues to gain concessions. Even the gestures of recognition to IG recently is a diplomatic minefield. The pressure is on the GOI to deliver and reciprocate such "warm" feelings - in land and other terms.

The danger is that AL related forces are evenly tied with the BNP-Jamaat axis. The Islamists are being activated again, so next time around things could tilt the other way. With the underlying Islamist plans of territorial expansion at the cost of India, a pseudo-peace and tie-up that seems to be happening onlee between two political dynasties is a rather dangerously stupid hallucination of security.

[SwamyG]

Nah, I keep it general - while some, like you, jump to make it personal!

Personal is better. You take my point and extrapolate/generalize to include "Indians". With verbal gymnastics, you make it appear that you are above personality, you are not Your whatever-reason led you to hastily generalize; if you had seen the first 3 lines of Rahul's post he talks about how he plans to write about not just BD but Nepal and Srilanka too. So why conclude that I was talking about just BD? Did it not occur to you that I might have interests in the other two country too?
You say

Why is it that Indians always fall for the propaganda, that because Pak and proto-BD went to war with each other on certain issues, or that they have differences in language or some aspects of culture - means that they differ from each other in all other aspects too?

You highlight differences in language which is specific and then add the words "some aspects". 'Some' is not quanitified; then you complicate or should I say make it vague by using the word 'all' in the next sentence. You deliberately are not specific because it suits your line of argument. Oh wait a minute you already used the words "certain issues". So what are these "certain", "some" and "all" saying to us?

Irrespective of Islam or not, India needs to pocket BD. It is in India's interest to always keep its neighbors friendly. Is it fair? Not. But that is reality.

[Samudragupta]

It is in India's interest to always keep its neighbors friendly

And at what cost...giving up ur land...sorry India be better be feared than loved if this is what we meant by friend.....

[SwamyG]

^^^
Why put words in my mouth, huh? Did I ever ever ever ever say or imply that? Why argue with me based on what someone might have said inside or outside this forum? Or you are just creating strawmen and taking the pleasure to knock it down.

[Samudragupta]

Swamy Ji,

I have just taken ur words to make the point to some posters who actually thinks on this line.....no offence please.....