Bangladesh News and Discussion

[UBanerjee]

That article is so one-sided and biased against India that it is not even worth mentioning. The article didn't even acknowledge the deaths of BSF and attempted killings against BSF in the past which prompted a stronger stance on the border.

Typical lefty trash rhetoric.

[shyamd]

India fears sudden change in Bangladesh
bdnews24.com/corr/bd/1549h

Thu, Jun 30th, 2011 3:57 pm BdST
New Delhi, June 30 (bdnews24.com)—Ahead of his proposed visit to Dhaka, Indian prime minister Manmohan Singh has said Bangladesh's political landscape could 'change anytime'.

He also said 25 percent of Bangladesh's population count on anti-India Jamaat-e-Islami, which was often influenced by the Pakistani spy agency Inter Services Intelligence.

"Our relations (with Bangladesh) are quite good. But we must reckon that at least 25 percent of the population of Bangladesh swear by the [Jamaat-e-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 [Jamaat-e-Islami] elements in Bangladesh, can be up to," said Singh.

He made the remark while interacting with some of the senior editors of Indian newspapers on Wednesday. His office made public the full transcript of the Question and Answer session.

Though India recognises that its relation with Bangladesh significantly improved after Sheikh Hasina took over as prime minister, Singh's remark apparently reflected New Delhi's concerns over vulnerability of the Awami League government in Dhaka.

The Indian prime minister made the remark at a time when Dhaka is set to play host to a number of dignitaries from Delhi.

India's external affairs minister S M Krishna is likely to reach Dhaka on July 6 next for a visit to Bangladesh.

Water resources minister Salman Khurshid may also visit Dhaka soon for a meeting with his counterpart Ramesh Chandra Sen. Sen and Khurshid are expected to give final touches to an interim agreement on sharing of water of Teesta.

President of India's ruling Congress party, Sonia Gandhi, is also expected to be in Dhaka on July 25 next to attend a special conference on disabled and autistic children.

Gandhi, who also chairs the ruling United Progressive Alliance, accepted an invitation from Hasina to attend the conference.

Singh, who himself is also likely to go to Dhaka on a state visit to Bangladesh within the next few months, made the remark on Bangladesh, when he was asked by a senior editor to comment on the situation in the neighbourhood of India.

He started his reply to the question admitting that he was worried by the situation in the neighbourhood. "Well, neighbourhood worries me a great deal, quite frankly."

He lauded the Awami League government in Dhaka for going out of its way to detain the leaders of the Indian insurgent organizations from Bangladesh and hand them over to India in 2009 and 2010.

"With 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," said Singh.

He was obviously referring to the tacit cooperation between Dhaka and Delhi that led to the arrest of several top leaders of the Indian insurgent organisations like United Liberation Front of Assam and National Democratic Front of Bodoland along the border in November and December 2009 as well as in May 2010.

The arrested militant leaders included ULFA chairman Arabinda Rajkhowa and NDFB chief Ranjan Daimary.

Neither Dhaka nor New Delhi, however, recognised the role of Bangladeshi agencies in creating the situations that led to the arrests of the top militant leaders. But, according to New Delhi's official versions, all of them were arrested after the Border Security Force personnel spotted them near the Bangladesh-India border.

New Delhi has since long been alleging that insurgents active in India's North-East have bases and training facilities in Bangladesh and many leaders of its proscribed militant organisations live in its eastern neighbour.

"We are not a rich country. But we offered it a line of credit of one billion dollars, when Sheikh Hasina came here (Delhi). We are also looking at ways and means of some further unilateral concessions," he added.

Singh said that New Delhi and Dhaka were also "looking at ways and means of finding a practical and pragmatic solution to the sharing of water of Teesta". "I plan to go there myself," he said, referring to his proposed visit to Bangladesh.

Indian prime minister's remark on the ISI's influence on Jamat-e-Islami also came at a time when the testimony of terror-plotter David Coleman Headley during the trial of his childhood friend and accomplice Tahawwur Hussain Rana in a court in Chicago exposed the Pakistani spy agency's role in the November 26, 2008 terrorist attacks in Mumbai.

The carnage perpetrated by 10 terrorists of the Lashkar-e-Tayyiba left at least 174 killed and many others injured.

Both Headley and Rana were arrested by the US Federal Bureau of Investigation in Chicago in October 2009 for plotting the terror-attacks in Mumbai and Denmark

[Stan_Savljevic]

We are looking at a 10,000 acre loss if one sees the BD side as the winner. I am not sure what is reality on the ground, but the lack of clarity is just that. Much of it is pristine and fertile land. That has to go through Parliament for ratification. Hope both sides of the well dont sleep at the wheel and let another monstrous calamity go through for the sake of good neighborliness. We have shed enough territory by harboring illegal immigrants, cant get away with one more splurge.

Seems like 50K of the 4 lakh people in Maldives are BDs, 25K of which are illegal. Umma umma.

[sum]

Prime Minister's comment on Bangladesh raises eyebrows

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.

[RajeshA]

We are looking at a 10,000 acre loss if one sees the BD side as the winner. I am not sure what is reality on the ground, but the lack of clarity is just that. Much of it is pristine and fertile land. That has to go through Parliament for ratification. Hope both sides of the well dont sleep at the wheel and let another monstrous calamity go through for the sake of good neighborliness. We have shed enough territory by harboring illegal immigrants, cant get away with one more splurge.

Seems like 50K of the 4 lakh people in Maldives are BDs, 25K of which are illegal. Umma umma.

Published on Feb 09, 2011
India to lose 10,000 acres in land swap deal with Bangladesh: NDTV

India has 111 enclaves or nearly 17,000 acres of land within Bangladesh.

Bangladesh, meanwhile, has 51 enclaves or 7,000 acres within India.

Since India has more land in Bangladesh than Bangladesh has in India, India is going to lose about 10,000 acres of land.

Stan_Savljevic ji,

I too am not sure about the situation on the ground, but if by this land swap, India is able

• to build a more robust fence to keep Bangladeshis out, and
• allow a more efficient patrolling
• with fewer skirmishes between BSF and BDR
• and less loss of life on both sides

wouldn't it be worth it! Otherwise more Bangladeshis would keep on coming into India, and considering that with global warming, rise of sea level, population explosion, damming of the Brahmaputra in China, etc. more Bangladeshis would have the motivation to sneak in.

[Stan_Savljevic]

to build a more robust fence to keep Bangladeshis out, and
allow a more efficient patrolling
with fewer skirmishes between BSF and BDR
and less loss of life on both sides

Disclaimer: I need extensive data to back what I say, but that is always a pain to dig out right away. So modulo that hard part, my responses with some hope that I will fill in with data down the line. In any case, I do have some initial data: http://dharma-yuddham.blogspot.com/2010 ... stion.html

Assam has 27 administrative districts. On p. 51 and p. 296, the Sachar Committee also reports that six of those districts have 50-75% of the population coming from one religion, Islam. These are Dhubri - 74.3%, Barpeta - 59.4%, Hailakandi - 57.6%, Goalpara - 53.7%, Karimganj - 52.3%, Nagaon - 51%. Apart from Jammu and Kashmir, this is by far the biggest fraction of administrative districts with >50% Muslim population in India. There are 10 such districts in all of India, 1 each from Kerala, Bihar and West Bengal, along with Lakshadweep. Four more districts in Assam have >25% but less than 50% population (Marigaon at 47.6%, Bongaigaon at 38.5%, Cachar at 36.1% and Darrang at 35.5%).

My points: Fencing is just the temporary tourniquet, it is not the be-all and by-all for labor shortage, economics-based immigration and lebensraum motivations. WB and Assam are at ~30% Muslim population per 2001 census, border districts of WB and Lower Assam report higher numbers. Many "tribal homelands" such as the Barak Valley sustain Muslims and AIUDF now somuchso that even mainstream parties have to field Muslims as candidates to be not left out. That is the case for AGP and INC, and even BJP will follow this trend in the next elections if one has to read the coded message of senior leader, Kabindra Purkayastha. In any case, if BJP does nt follow this route, we will see yet another washout in its supposed stronghold. Elsewhere, Tripura has gone from majority Tripuris (if such a thing ever existed, but what I mean is that segment that has enough takleef to sustain ATTF and NLFT) to majority Hindu Bengalis from Bangladesh pushed out due to economic as well as religious reasons in the last forty years. And with that increase in % and some accommodation from Bengalis to the Tripuris by singing paens to Tagore and the Manikya dynasty bonhomie days + the writing on the wall means that NLFT is coming out in more and more numbers than ever before. In another 10 years, NLFT will be history only to be replaced by some remnant of it that will rename itself and substitute extortion in the form of a business as an ideological casus belli for terrorism. Elsewhere in Meghalaya (esp. Langpih, Pyrdiwah and surrounding regions), we have seen major problems in terms of border issues with BD. The TFR for Muslims goes from slightly higher to very high when compared with Hindus, if you just take these border districts as your region of interest.

The bottomline is Demography == Destiny. To put that in context, there are already enough illegal Bangladeshis in India and the mainstream parties are finding ways to legalize them under different pretexts. D-voters, AGP's wavering stand, ULFA's acceptance of realpolitik, dilution of IMDT Act, Gawhati HC judgments, civil society's and NGO's clamor for accepting BD's lebensraum motivations, Tripura's return of love to BD and the directions in which trade relations are moving up -- all these are just examples of different manoeuvres under which illegal immigration has become legalized, organized and accepted as status quo-ist. And this segment that was illegal in 1971, but de facto legal now, is growing at a higher rate than the rest of the population, so you dont need any external sustenance to CRE this phenomenon in the form of border fences.

Someone posted that take by Shyam Saran a few days back that India has to think and weigh carefully as to what it means for India and its border regions as its border areas start developing cross-border contacts that are better than intra-country contacts. In short, there is a debate in the policy circles as we sit and weigh the consequences of our actions (or rather inactions). Kaladan has been sitting back as we wait for the junta to be benevolent, but Akhaura-Agartala, Chittagong as a border port for NE, Bhutan and Nepal, border haats, etc. is moving ahead. We want to swap territory (or at the very least, we are being advised to swap territory) to legalize the border which is short in only 6.5km of it. Exactly, who stands to lose by status quo is a question that noone has answered properly here. We dont have fences in that 6.5km that is under debate, but illegal immigration happens in riverine areas that cannot be fenced. And even when there are fences, Indians are not uncorruptible saints to know when to take care of their country (in other words, bribes and corruption works in these matters). So we are being pointed to some muck somewhere and asked to throw away 10,000 acres to solve a problem that cannot be solved unless the Brahmaputra reduces to a line on the ground.

My point is we dont want to lose 10,000 acres to supposedly keep BDs out. They are already in, we need to regulate that with controlled economic immigration to account for labor shortages. We need a Green Card type system, you cant do away without that. There is no way to fence, sit back and relax. This is a system that will and can fail at multiple points to create a disaster, all you need is one point of failure to make it a big fricking disaster. You cant expect everyone to chip in here, you have to engineer solutions under realistic conditions of human idiocy and selfishness. In short, you, me and everyone else want BD to prosper. What we want is not uncontrolled prosperity as that always leads to individualistic and identity-based assertions (e.g., what happens in West Asia with the oil induced bonhomie). What we want is synergistic prosperity that makes it an eco-system of mutual dependence where one does not have to lose his identity to become accepting of the fact that there needs to be two to tango. Losing 10,000 acres is not a solution to meet this objective.

When someone throws the claim that losing 10,000 acres is a panacea for all our border woes, it is a pie in the sky with little basis to reality of how dramatic changes have been in the ground and how dramatic they will be with the TFR differential in the short- to long-term future. This 10,000 will become 100,000 in another 20 years and 1,000,000 in 40 and the whole concept of Bangassam of Maulana Bhasani (who is honored with an airport, a university and a pet bilge theme for both BAL and BNP cliques) will become normal matters of discourse with hand-wrining that we Indians are good at doing. We have lost territory enough, another Katcchatheevu to please the electoral fortunes of one party should stop. It is not Indian, even if it has become acceptable to throw away territory as if it is one's fiefdom. Let the BJP, AGP and Opposition parties stop the Parliament and bring the nation to a standstill if this amendment ever sees a bit of daylight. It is not chankian to lose territory, it is as un-Indian as it can get.

[abhishek_sharma]

Indian envoy summoned in Dhaka over PM's 'gaffe'

[chetak]

Indian envoy summoned in Dhaka over PM's 'gaffe'

MMS is certainly growing a pair.

[Kati]

Apparently MMS made a few other "off the record" comments in his discussion with the
media. But how this Jamait related comment got into the limelight is a puzzle. Anyway,
the infamous note has been removed by the MEA after 30 hours. Was it a warning shot to
Hasina about the impending danger she might be facing in near future? AL second-rung
leadership is a squabbling lot, and public is getting tired of this squabbling. jamait-BNP
combine recently wanted to test its strength through 'hartaal'. Dhaka may express its
official anger for public consumption, but the fact that BD Govt didn't mind much was
obvious from Syed Ashraful Islam's (AL Gen Sec) attitude. Other than that, the bengali
BD media is not playing it up.
Chapter closed.

[chetak]

to build a more robust fence to keep Bangladeshis out, and
allow a more efficient patrolling
with fewer skirmishes between BSF and BDR
and less loss of life on both sides

Disclaimer: I need extensive data to back what I say, but that is always a pain to dig out right away. So modulo that hard part, my responses with some hope that I will fill in with data down the line. In any case, I do have some initial data: http://dharma-yuddham.blogspot.com/2010 ... stion.html

Assam has 27 administrative districts. On p. 51 and p. 296, the Sachar Committee also reports that six of those districts have 50-75% of the population coming from one religion, Islam. These are Dhubri - 74.3%, Barpeta - 59.4%, Hailakandi - 57.6%, Goalpara - 53.7%, Karimganj - 52.3%, Nagaon - 51%. Apart from Jammu and Kashmir, this is by far the biggest fraction of administrative districts with >50% Muslim population in India. There are 10 such districts in all of India, 1 each from Kerala, Bihar and West Bengal, along with Lakshadweep. Four more districts in Assam have >25% but less than 50% population (Marigaon at 47.6%, Bongaigaon at 38.5%, Cachar at 36.1% and Darrang at 35.5%).

My points: Fencing is just the temporary tourniquet, it is not the be-all and by-all for labor shortage, economics-based immigration and lebensraum motivations. WB and Assam are at ~30% Muslim population per 2001 census, border districts of WB and Lower Assam report higher numbers. Many "tribal homelands" such as the Barak Valley sustain Muslims and AIUDF now somuchso that even mainstream parties have to field Muslims as candidates to be not left out. That is the case for AGP and INC, and even BJP will follow this trend in the next elections if one has to read the coded message of senior leader, Kabindra Purkayastha. In any case, if BJP does nt follow this route, we will see yet another washout in its supposed stronghold. Elsewhere, Tripura has gone from majority Tripuris (if such a thing ever existed, but what I mean is that segment that has enough takleef to sustain ATTF and NLFT) to majority Hindu Bengalis from Bangladesh pushed out due to economic as well as religious reasons in the last forty years. And with that increase in % and some accommodation from Bengalis to the Tripuris by singing paens to Tagore and the Manikya dynasty bonhomie days + the writing on the wall means that NLFT is coming out in more and more numbers than ever before. In another 10 years, NLFT will be history only to be replaced by some remnant of it that will rename itself and substitute extortion in the form of a business as an ideological casus belli for terrorism. Elsewhere in Meghalaya (esp. Langpih, Pyrdiwah and surrounding regions), we have seen major problems in terms of border issues with BD. The TFR for Muslims goes from slightly higher to very high when compared with Hindus, if you just take these border districts as your region of interest.

The bottomline is Demography == Destiny. To put that in context, there are already enough illegal Bangladeshis in India and the mainstream parties are finding ways to legalize them under different pretexts. D-voters, AGP's wavering stand, ULFA's acceptance of realpolitik, dilution of IMDT Act, Gawhati HC judgments, civil society's and NGO's clamor for accepting BD's lebensraum motivations, Tripura's return of love to BD and the directions in which trade relations are moving up -- all these are just examples of different manoeuvres under which illegal immigration has become legalized, organized and accepted as status quo-ist. And this segment that was illegal in 1971, but de facto legal now, is growing at a higher rate than the rest of the population, so you dont need any external sustenance to CRE this phenomenon in the form of border fences.

Someone posted that take by Shyam Saran a few days back that India has to think and weigh carefully as to what it means for India and its border regions as its border areas start developing cross-border contacts that are better than intra-country contacts. In short, there is a debate in the policy circles as we sit and weigh the consequences of our actions (or rather inactions). Kaladan has been sitting back as we wait for the junta to be benevolent, but Akhaura-Agartala, Chittagong as a border port for NE, Bhutan and Nepal, border haats, etc. is moving ahead. We want to swap territory (or at the very least, we are being advised to swap territory) to legalize the border which is short in only 6.5km of it. Exactly, who stands to lose by status quo is a question that noone has answered properly here. We dont have fences in that 6.5km that is under debate, but illegal immigration happens in riverine areas that cannot be fenced. And even when there are fences, Indians are not uncorruptible saints to know when to take care of their country (in other words, bribes and corruption works in these matters). So we are being pointed to some muck somewhere and asked to throw away 10,000 acres to solve a problem that cannot be solved unless the Brahmaputra reduces to a line on the ground.

My point is we dont want to lose 10,000 acres to supposedly keep BDs out. They are already in, we need to regulate that with controlled economic immigration to account for labor shortages. We need a Green Card type system, you cant do away without that. There is no way to fence, sit back and relax. This is a system that will and can fail at multiple points to create a disaster, all you need is one point of failure to make it a big fricking disaster. You cant expect everyone to chip in here, you have to engineer solutions under realistic conditions of human idiocy and selfishness. In short, you, me and everyone else want BD to prosper. What we want is not uncontrolled prosperity as that always leads to individualistic and identity-based assertions (e.g., what happens in West Asia with the oil induced bonhomie). What we want is synergistic prosperity that makes it an eco-system of mutual dependence where one does not have to lose his identity to become accepting of the fact that there needs to be two to tango. Losing 10,000 acres is not a solution to meet this objective.

When someone throws the claim that losing 10,000 acres is a panacea for all our border woes, it is a pie in the sky with little basis to reality of how dramatic changes have been in the ground and how dramatic they will be with the TFR differential in the short- to long-term future. This 10,000 will become 100,000 in another 20 years and 1,000,000 in 40 and the whole concept of Bangassam of Maulana Bhasani (who is honored with an airport, a university and a pet bilge theme for both BAL and BNP cliques) will become normal matters of discourse with hand-wrining that we Indians are good at doing. We have lost territory enough, another Katcchatheevu to please the electoral fortunes of one party should stop. It is not Indian, even if it has become acceptable to throw away territory as if it is one's fiefdom. Let the BJP, AGP and Opposition parties stop the Parliament and bring the nation to a standstill if this amendment ever sees a bit of daylight. It is not chankian to lose territory, it is as un-Indian as it can get.

Thin edge of the wedge onlee.

Next, the chipandas will stroll in asking for very much more than 10k acres.

If we compromise with the BDs then where will it end?

Why not the pakis next?

Serious discussions in parliament is a must.

[brihaspati]

I have always maintained that BD electorate should be seen as 50-50 split between pro-Islamist and therefore anti-India [whatever our dear Islamophiles want to beat their drums about, from the Islamist side - India is not under Islamist rule and Hindu majority - hence an enemy] , and the other 50 neutral as well as opportunist - so they will lean over to India if it helps their objectives.

BNP group and AL group more or less match in strength. So the assessment that roughly 1/3 goes to each side directly is approximately correct. However roughly 1/2 of the remaining 1/3 swings [I showed a rough 10-12% swing in the last few elections]. By the law of averages to calculate "expected/average" support, we have to assign half the 33%, approximately to each political grouping - and that leads to a roughly 50-50 split between the islamists and the neutral.

There is already strong moves by political forces to prevent even joint surveys along disputed borders from the BD side. They declare that no land will be ceded to India. In that sector Indian Islamophiles are pushing for a soft treatment which means one way net concession of land.

The exchange of land will not solve the real problem of silent conquest by infiltration and religious breeding. What was perhaps needed, but politically costly on both country - was exchange of population. If land has to be exchanged - then it must at least be based on equal land expanse base and not just on enclave count. On the Indian side, there is no strong Indian political opposition against concessions. This would be crucial.

The reason that India cannot do anything here even after understanding what Islam really is targeting on the subcontinent - is because of the wonderful logic pushed by the Nehruvian apologists - that it was soooo important to score an ideological point by trying to show that Indin mix of specially protected and encouraged significant minority of Muslims to flourish beside non-Muslims, disproves Paki founders claims.

I have always maintained that this splitting of populations or the ulema into two apparently distinct factions/viewpoints is a very old and recognized tactic in Islam. What the Islamist population and ulema in India served as was a hedge base to keep a foothold within India for future political growth, in case the Pak experiment failed.

The effectiveness of this political ploy is obvious now that the mere presence and flourishing of this Islamist base in India has essentially kept the rashtra in ransom, with all its major political groupings gradually surrendering to Islamist demands both from within as well as from across the borders. The very insistence on tolerance of diversity and extension of democratic rights has bound Indian state within a paralysis - so that India fears to take action or stance across the borders because it is mortally afraid of political backlash from the Islamist inside.

[Kati]

When MMS lands in Dhaka in near future, he needs to carry some goodies with him, not just promise.
It has been reported in vernacular media that four years ago when cyclone devastated south bengal
Pranab Mukherjee promised 5 lakh metric ton rice for the displaced people in BD. Not a single grain
of that promise has reached there. (Is it true?????). He also promised to build a village as a model
village. Nothing happened to that promise too........So this time around, not just promise, hard gifts
must be delivered before China delivers.

[Suppiah]

Indian envoy summoned in Dhaka over PM's 'gaffe'

MMS is certainly growing a pair.

The core of our babudom is thankfully patriotic, not WKK type and MMS too has his heart in the right place...that is the message one gets from this episode...

[Rony]

Now a days every Islamic nation wants to show how "modern" they are by having a token women or two in their Military ads.


Bangladesh Army TV Commercial

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WDDAaowR ... re=related

[somnath]

A very good analysis of the current state of Indo-BD relations, especially in light of the PM's somewhat strange utterances..

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/the-d ... e/812740/0

Ends quite interestingly..

But they don’t quote Faiz enough. So they will never, perhaps, have quite enough mindspace here in New Delhi, where poets from the other Punjab are worshipped, and inherited nostalgia for lost homes on that side of the border colours every political interaction. Another common culture, one perhaps richer, definitely shared by more Indians, spreads across the eastern border — but in this Punjabi-dominated city, that will never quite give relations the shove they need.

Perhaps the time has come to outsource Bangladesh foreign policy to Mamata Banerjee? At least the railway connections might get built.

[Stan_Savljevic]

At least the railway connections might get built.

Given that she is called Railway Mantri in absentia, how many new lines have exactly been built in her tenure?!

A tired old bullshit that gets paraded is that the secular constituency in BD is increasing whenever BAL comes to rule. Reality, right from the days of Mujib to Sh. Hasina Wajed have been far from different. It is always a case of one evil better than the other in terms of relations with India, not a question of one party more secular than the other. OTOH, if one wants to argue unto infinity that life is all fair and square in BD everytime a BAL govt comes into place and ergo, India needs to make sacrifices in terms of its borders to prop this constituency, then its all bullshit parade unto infinity too.

[chetak]

The core of our babudom is thankfully patriotic, not WKK type and MMS too has his heart in the right place...that is the message one gets from this episode...

You mean his cold and nobel prize calculating babu heart?

[Samudragupta]

A very good analysis of the current state of Indo-BD relations, especially in light of the PM's somewhat strange utterances..

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/the-d ... e/812740/0

Ends quite interestingly..

But they don’t quote Faiz enough. So they will never, perhaps, have quite enough mindspace here in New Delhi, where poets from the other Punjab are worshipped, and inherited nostalgia for lost homes on that side of the border colours every political interaction. Another common culture, one perhaps richer, definitely shared by more Indians, spreads across the eastern border — but in this Punjabi-dominated city, that will never quite give relations the shove they need.

Perhaps the time has come to outsource Bangladesh foreign policy to Mamata Banerjee? At least the railway connections might get built.

Somnath...

U have struck a beehive....the problems of the East is much more complex than we realize....the writer of the article is well aware of the problems of the East/West and South of the subcontinent....but Punjabi vs Bengali bickering is not the need of the hour...while to a certain extent we have created an "Iron Dome" in the West...we are actually loosing our assets in the East to an entity which actually is considered inferior in the power circles of Delhi......

We fail to realize that more is at stake than just the relationship between the two countries...but outsourcing the relationship to West Bengal specially at this precarious situation will be disastrous....I agree that probably West Bengal may be the best people to deal with the East Bengal...but 35 years of Left rule have taken out almost all the capital(not just economics) to control and subdue the East....

The GOI needs to think seriously abt Bangladesh and needs to adopt an unified approach not just West Bengal but all the seven sisters needs to be brought under an unified command to deal with Bangladesh....
When Bangladesh asks for Market access we can allow the market for this unit...and not the whole of India...the entire region needs a "Marshall Plan" to sustain itself against the Bangladeshi assault.......the sercualr/non secular question nis not going to help us... the overwhelming priority of the Bnagladeshi state is to increase its land and to stake claim over the Bengali identiry and Bay Of Bengal....make no mistake the creeping assault is part of the same strategy....

[sum]

India needs to go the extra mile, ensuring market access for Bangladesh, visibly demonstrating enthusiasm for détente, and not just on our terms.

Why does India keep have to going extra miles for all and sundry, whether it is a smaller neighbor ( BD, nepal, Pak etc) or bigger neighbor ( China) or superpower ( US etc)?

[Rahul M]

I am more and more convinced that BD is a lost case and any concessions we give them is going to bite us in the future.

[abhishek_sharma]

Why does India keep have to going extra miles for all and sundry, whether it is a smaller neighbor ( BD, nepal, Pak etc) or bigger neighbor ( China) or superpower ( US etc)?

It is our normal dhimmi policy which is sold as "confidence" and "creativity".

[somnath]

but outsourcing the relationship to West Bengal specially at this precarious situation will be disastrous....I agree that probably West Bengal may be the best people to deal with the East Bengal.

To be fair, I think the author was merely making a rhetorical point about Mamta Bannerjee...But on the substantive issue of getting our states involved in at least some aspects of policy-making towards neighbours, there is some merit in it...As it is, Tamil politics already has a big influence over our Sri Lanka policy...Given that common markets is one of the cornerstones of external relations today, and cultural confluences are retaining some of their flavours, inputs from state govts in policy-making isnt a bad idea..Of course, without missing the big picture, which has tended to happen in the Sri Lanka case often...

On the larger issue of BD, the question on whether they are secular, or proto-islamic, or fundamentally islamic is played up a lot more than the elements on how and what business India can do with BD...Land swap, if it happens, can be the culmination of many other initiatives...

Till then, there is transit access as the big agenda, something that can transform India's NE..There is illegal immigration as the other big agenda - instead of continually cavilling over the issue, is there a game in creating a "work permit" scheme for bangladeshis? (something that was discussed in another thread)..Can that be used as a bargaining chip to enter into a comprehensive agreement on transit?

There is export of natgas as the other big agenda..Is there a sop posible in terms of greater trade access, culminating in an FTA as a quid pro quo for natgas from BD?

Whoever gave that "25% JUI" number to the PM, did he also update the same number for Pak? Is it 75%? Or 95%? Have we therefore stopped trying to deal with Pak? As Mihir Sharma says, BD is a bit of a success story comapred to Pak...The initiative should be to max cooperative inter-linkages with India..

Endless prognostications and fantasizing of the islamisation of BD serves no practical purpose..JMT..

[Samudragupta]

Whoever gave that "25% JUI" number to the PM, did he also update the same number for Pak? Is it 75%? Or 95%? Have we therefore stopped trying to deal with Pak? As Mihir Sharma says, BD is a bit of a success story comapred to Pak...The initiative should be to max cooperative inter-linkages with India..
quote

I don't think we understand the role TSPA and Paki millitarism in this matter...we are dealing with Pakis because we are forced to do so....Pakis does not provide us anything without which we cannot survive...

[Samudragupta]

The problem with FTA or any economic agreement with Bangladesh is that the elite in the country is completely fractured in accordance with ideological/opportunist tendencies....this fracture of the poliety in Bangladesh does not allow it to take concerete steps towards its national interets..actually i have a doubt if Bangladesh does actaully have a national interest?under this situation the GOI is not sure actually whom to deal with and how?
The second effect of this fractured poleity is completely irresponsible behaviour of the leaders wrt its polpulation...the result of which there is forced migration....under this condition isn't it the best policy to deal with individual leaders of the Bangladesh irrespective of the ideological mindset and cut off a chunk of interets in Bnagladesh...
It is very important for India to open and channel with the second and third rung leaders of BNP...because BNP may be drifting towards post Zia period.....

[RajeshA]

Dealing with Illegal Immigration

1) If the East Germans were able to control their population from just running over to West Germany, then Indians too can build a fence, a wall, a barrier, which does not allow any Bangladeshi to come into India illegally. This is a priority. Let's remember that the Chinese built the Great Wall to keep undesired elements out.

Let's invest as much as it takes to build the best wall possible with the best technology and experience from all over the world has to offer.

2) Secondly we should declare all Bengali speaking residents of India, who are Muslims, as potential Bangladeshi illegal migrants to India, unless they can prove that in the 50s, their ancestors were living in India, and they were born in Indian territory or to Indian parents outside the Subcontinent.

3) Thirdly we should have a nation-wide policy of taking Bangladeshis illegally in India into custody, and deporting them to Bangladesh. Now this deportation would not work, because Bangladesh will not cooperate. The best thing to do is to put them on ships, and to dump them on boats just outside the international waters off Bangladesh. In fact, we can pay Bangladeshi fishermen, or those who have boats to come just outside Bangladeshi waters into international waters, and collect their compatriots from there. If the deportees do not behave they should be sedated and then transported. Those who cooperate, they would be paid, a 1000 by an agent in Bangladesh.

4) Only those Bangladeshi illegal migrants who are Hindus or Buddhists would be allowed to stay in India. For this they need a certificate from a registered (for the purpose) temple every 6 months for the next 10 years for themselves and their dependents in India. Secondly they need to register with the Indian authorities, that they are Bangladeshi "Hindus/Buddhists" already in India and have a certificate from a Hindu temple. Any Bangladeshi illegal migrant, suspected to be a Muslim, who has not registered himself with the authorities and the "temple order", when apprehended would be sent back.

5) India has to recognize that neither Pakistan nor Bangladesh are going to provide Hindus and Buddhists with sufficient free space to prosper in their societies. There will always be pressure to proselytize them. Hindus and Buddhists are simply not safe in Bangladesh. India needs to provide the facility of asylum to them. They should be allowed to apply for that in Bangladesh itself in some Indian consulates. Some credible mechanism has to be established on how to ascertain that they are Hindus or Buddhists. It can be

1. their various documents
2. pants-down method
3. certificate from some temple order
4. interrogation by some Hindu theologists at the Indian consulates, who know of the traditions of Hindus in Bengal.

With that they would be given a stay permit.

[Stan_Savljevic]

But on the substantive issue of getting our states involved in at least some aspects of policy-making towards neighbours, there is some merit in it...As it is, Tamil politics already has a big influence over our Sri Lanka policy...

The TN whinefest is that it hardly (if ever) gets consulted in decision making by South Block. Whether it was IPKF or training for TULF/LTTE or the recent non-involvement in the final assault on LTTE, TN govt has had essentially no say in the matter. MGR kept complaining about this and that and there is a famous move by which GoI brought VP to NDelhi and isolated the LTTE from the TN body politic as well as his advisors. So much for TN's influence in GoI policymaking wrt SL. It is just the whinefest of people who really have no clue as to how the South Block really functions. If TN had its say completely in SL matters, we would have had Katchhathheevu retrieved from the bequest of Indira Gandhi to Sirimavo, Sethusamudram would have seen the light of day, Colombo port would nt have become the biggest trans-shipment terminal for "South Asia", Vallarpadam and other terminals would nt have been left sucking their thumbs, and TN fishermen would have been happily fishing in those waters.

Even if that is the case, why was this bullshit argument about WB govt getting involved in policy making for BD matters get much push when Jyoti Basu and Buddhadeb Dasgupta were around? In short, the person who is commentating is batting openly for UPA and its alliance partners and it is expected that such drivel is meant to be a great commentary on India-BD relations. Not only is that idiot batting for UPA+, he is also batting as if Mamta Banerjee did a great job in the Railway Ministry. She is now the CM of WB, in charge of nine major ministries and still (to the best of my knowledge) in charge of Railways. Now being the superwoman that she is, she can frame policies for BD. What a piece of utter nincompoop that gets passed along as Class A analysis?

Land swap, if it happens, can be the culmination of many other initiatives...

Here comes more drivel. Why should it be India that should always give up its land and lead to "culmination of many other initiatives"? Why cant it be BD that gives up? After all, we have had ULFA leaders, NDFB leaders, KLO, NLFT, ATTF, not to mention NNC in its initial stages and then NSCN of different hues that have held siege of BD land. We then have had religious extermination of one type where people have been flooding into India. Not to mention that illegal immigration of the other religion is also happening and border districts are all predominantly Islamist today. So why again should India give up and culminate so many of these initiatives???

As Mihir Sharma says, BD is a bit of a success story comapred to Pak...The initiative should be to max cooperative inter-linkages with India..

Just because BD is not taking a gun and pointing to its head does nt mean that India has to give up its land to ensure that BD does nt become another rabid dog in the neighborhood. BD can become the rabid dog if it so chooses, just let them do it in their own land instead of spreading the rabies virus in the neighborhood.

[Stan_Savljevic]

Sharma had just implied that a minor hike in Bangladesh’s textile quota was a giant favour. It wasn’t a fraction of what Bangladesh had a right to expect. The Tamil Nadu textile lobby, in particular, based around Coimbatore and Salem, has been particularly vocal in demanding continued protection from Bangladeshi imports, and seems to be able to twist India’s trade policy — and its foreign policy — around its little finger.

Look at the cho***** that gets passed along for Class A analysis. Here is a State of the Indian Union that is asking for its trade prospects not to be overwhelmed by cheap BD imports (all of which get the benefit of Indian cotton that gets exported to BD and where BD suffers from cotton deficits), and that is not right for this author, but expecting normalization and opening up of the Indian economy for BD exports is somehow the right thing to do. How about asking the same of WB? Let WB allow BD rice exports and give away its profits in return for happy go biraderhood relations with same language speaking BD. Is that too hard for this bozo to prescribe as a policy option? Why should it be TN which suffers? I am pretty sure all the Junglis in Jangal Mahal will be happy with that eventuality.

[Stan_Savljevic]

Here are the same Mihir Sharma's Class A analyses during the last few years:
1)

26/11 is not India's 9/11

So why push to replicate — artificially, inaccurately, in miniature, and in bad taste — the trappings of America’s grief? Why the human chains, the painted walls (variously described as “art” and “graffiti” by people with differing aesthetic standards), why the endless exhortations to stay angry, to stay sad, to “never forget”? Remember, 9/11 was unique for America. More may have died in the attacks on Mumbai than have in other terrorist attacks in India, but too many had died already. And it would be absurdly optimistic to expect that no others will die in the years to come. Will we memorialise every attack?
...
But shouting won’t help. India just doesn’t feel the same way that America did about 9/11, and no number of borrowed phrases — “Lest We Forget”, anyone? — will change that. And we should be glad of that.

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/the-v ... t/546859/0
2)

Why fuss over NDM-1, elate over it instead

The naming of the bug — New Delhi metallo-beta-lactamase-1, gently abbreviated NDM-1 by everyone except the more choleric residents of New Delhi — was a studied insult! Give us back our dignity, and the Kohinoor with it! Each step of this reaction was ridiculous, and more important, dangerous. Let’s start with the paper.

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/the-b ... ug/661663/
3) I did nt post Mihir Sharma's take on Babri verdict. Its there in the IE website to read. It is titled, "I did nt care two hoots about the verdict till now, but now that it has gone one way, I have a strong opinion on it though."

Reminds me of the central axiom "pigs of the same ilk thrive in the same sewer." And yes, I am uncivil and actually, more...

[somnath]

It is just the whinefest of people who really have no clue as to how the South Block really functions. If TN had its say completely in SL matters, we would have had Katchhathheevu retrieved from the bequest of Indira Gandhi to Sirimavo, Sethusamudram would have seen the light of day, Colombo port would nt have become the biggest trans-shipment terminal for "South Asia", Vallarpadam and other terminals would nt have been left sucking their thumbs, and TN fishermen would have been happily fishing in those waters

Presumably you do?! Maybe you can then explain why New Delhi left wide open strategic spaces in Colombo for Beijing and Islamabad to occupy by refusing any military aid during the fight against LTTE...Sethusamudram would've been reality by now if mythical considerations did not trump strategic ones...Colombo port would not have flourished as much if Indian internal policies on infrastructure kept pace....

Anyway, none of this is relevant to BD..

Now being the superwoman that she is, she can frame policies for BD. What a piece of utter nincompoop that gets passed along as Class A analysis?

That was a rhetorical parting shot -you missed the entire gist of the article..The point is different - typically, bengali state politicians have not gotten involved in providing inputs for our BD policy (barring islolated cases like Jyoti Basu facilitating the Ganga waters treaty during Gujral's time)..there is no harm, indeed, some pluses if they do, as long as the big picture isnt being queered.

Here comes more drivel. Why should it be India that should always give up its land and lead to "culmination of many other initiatives"? Why cant it be BD that gives up? After all, we have had ULFA leaders, NDFB leaders, KLO, NLFT, ATTF, not to mention NNC in its initial stages and then NSCN of different hues that have held siege of BD land. We then have had religious extermination of one type where people have been flooding into India. Not to mention that illegal immigration of the other religion is also happening and border districts are all predominantly Islamist today. So why again should India give up and culminate so many of these initiatives???

Wonder who's dealing in drivel - who has spoken of "giving up" land? A "swap" involves an exchange, by deifinition..Now, by some indications it seems as if India might be a net loser in a swap..But who knows till those discussions happen?

Till then, hyperventilating about islamism, immigration et al - does it get us anywhere? We have built the fence to keep out immigration...Is it enough? Most imimgratio is economic in nature...Should we then venture into making legal routes of work permits for BD workers, thereby build stakes within BD to preserve the legal route, rather than the illegal one? Or is sloganeering on islamism more value adding?

Just because BD is not taking a gun and pointing to its head does nt mean that India has to give up its land to ensure that BD does nt become another rabid dog in the neighborhood. BD can become the rabid dog if it so chooses, just let them do it in their own land instead of spreading the rabies virus in the neighborhood

Again, who is talking about "giving up land"? All initiatives being talked about have as much, if not more, for India than they have for BD in payoffs...(In another thread, I had referenced a study done on SAFTA - showed that bulk of the payoffs (trade, macro) come to India)...The easiest (and laziest) thing to do is to fall back on slogans where opportunities beckon for greater things...

[Stan_Savljevic]

Wonder who's dealing in drivel - who has spoken of "giving up" land? A "swap" involves an exchange, by deifinition..Now, by some indications it seems as if India might be a net loser in a swap..But who knows till those discussions happen?

Sorry, I dont know the language of Super-comprehensionistas who presumably are glued in to South Block and the way it functions, one where swap corresponds to there being a net loser and that net loser being India. I always assumed that in Queen's English, swap means exchange of == portions, not one where 10,000 acres are lost in perpetuity to prop up a supposedly India-friendly government. Now if only all of India's mythical powers can help in ensuring that assholes dont throw away Indian land in the name of realpolitik, we can all sing kumbayya and do a Laal Salaam to boot.

[RajeshA]

Till then, hyperventilating about islamism, immigration et al - does it get us anywhere? We have built the fence to keep out immigration...Is it enough? Most imimgration is economic in nature...Should we then venture into making legal routes of work permits for BD workers, thereby build stakes within BD to preserve the legal route, rather than the illegal one? Or is sloganeering on islamism more value adding?

No legal route for work permits for BD workers either. There is no need.

Make asylum for Hindus/Buddhists in Bangladesh, the legal route for migration of Bangladeshis into India. De-facto Conversion.

[somnath]

How about asking the same of WB? Let WB allow BD rice exports and give away its profits in return for happy go biraderhood relations with same language speaking BD. Is that too hard for this bozo to prescribe as a policy option? Why should it be TN which suffers? I am pretty sure all the Junglis in Jangal Mahal will be happy with that eventuality.

congratulations - you have converted this into a WB v/s TN issue!

I always assumed that in Queen's English, swap means exchange of == portions, not one where 10,000 acres are lost in perpetuity to prop up a supposedly India-friendly government

And who exactly suggested that?

[Stan_Savljevic]

Maybe you can then explain why New Delhi left wide open strategic spaces in Colombo for Beijing and Islamabad to occupy by refusing any military aid during the fight against LTTE...

GoI's official policy is to ensure that military supplies are not provided when civilian casualties in what is perceived to be a civil war are most likely. This was the case with the civil war in Nepal, this was the case when GoI intervened and dropped food packets in SL in 1987, this was the case when India supported and provided succor for the Mukti Bahini forces in the erstwhile East Pakistan, and this was the case with the civil war in SL. If and when GoI has participated in armed actions in non-Indian territories, it has been under the explicit request of the said government in consideration (e.g., Maldives in 89, SL in 87, etc.).

It is not the GoTN's fault for reminding GoI of its official policy. GoTN does not shake GoI in its boots, but GoTN does provide counsel to GoI as is often common in a federal polity, and the GoI refuses or obliges with such counsel as the wisdom of the counsel is. What this Class A bozo (in the name of Mihir Sharma) wants is GoWB to not only provide counsel to the GoI, but he also wants Mamta didi and her wise-ass to frame policies for the GoI. She can, for that she should be a part of the Union government, not as a CM of WB. Since you are the Lord Labakkudas of Constitutional propriety with agmark brand qualifications in Legalese, I am damn sure you can get that difference.

I did not convert this into a TN vs WB spectacle. You did. You brought in drivel by one Mihir Sharma and claimed that every line of his droppings was so sagely and wise. He brought in the rubbish of how GoTN is shaking GoI. Ergo, you are responsible for this needless spectacle.

[sum]

And who exactly suggested that?

From the mouthpiece of the "liberals" itself ( not a communal, bigoted source) :
India to lose 10,000 acres in land swap deal with Bangladesh

[Stan_Savljevic]

Sum, only in the last week or so have Indian media picked this news up. This news has been floating around in BD media for the last 4-5 months. This could nt have happened without some assurances from the BD politicians who should have been assured by the BD babus and Indian babus that such things will be accommodated as time for such an eventuality comes through.

There have been precedents. Before handing over Katchathheevu to SL, India, SL and BD had been locked in a pita water boundary issue over this islands chain which was under Indian control. IIRC, the then Water Tribunals Chairperson SK Rasgotra has a book on this. India solved this issue by handing over the Islands, thereby making it a bilateral issue (one where India net-lost territory). The unofficial reason bandied about was that IG wanted to prop up Sirimavo. But due to the == distance formula for EEZ, SL claimed priority over BD and they became non-issues in the subsequent statement to the UN. I am damn sure I have a gif pic of how the sea boundary claims changed due to the handing over in some deep corner of my HDD. Retrieving Katchathheevu will mean this issue will come to the fore again, the legalities will be challenged all the way to the Hague tribunals, etc.

What we see are trial balloons again. India, BD and Burma are locked in settling their water boundaries and EEZs. Conoco Phillips has been unable to explore BD/Indian blocks due to disputes by both sides. Burma is not giving up on its claims. IIRC, 2011 is the time-frame for UNSCLOS filing of sea boundary claims. India and BD both have appointed their legal counsels in this matter. Burma has time till 2013 (iirc). What could be happening is a third-party brokering by the US to arrive at a consensus wherein India loses land territory in the enclaves so that our claims in the seas can be left to us, so that these oil majors can explore oil and loot wealth in our blocks. Its a big CT hat, but all indications are most of these things are connected. It could well be other non-US oil majors such as BP too, but whatever it is, there could be some non-governmental interference in brokering truce.

[somnath]

GoI's official policy is to ensure that military supplies are not provided when civilian casualties in what is perceived to be a civil war are most likely

Oh really..So we thought that LTTE would be only using the guns and training for fancy dress parties whe we trained/armed them? What nonsense to justify a non-issue...

There is really nothing unnatural about states having borders with neighbours to have a POV on issues concerning neighbours...And as a democratic polity, its but natural that the Central Govt will be sensitive to such concerns..All that is being suggested is that there should be greater inputs of this nature, without losing the big picture focus..

Here is another, similar perspective on the issue..
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/india ... d/806162/0

I dont think any sane person reading that article would discern a "TN v/s WB" slant...

Its strange - first you claimed some special insights in the "way South Bock works", gave some more special insights on things completely unrelated as sethusamudram and Colombo port, then went on to claim further insight on Indian "policy on civil wars" - all to abuse a possible policy action (accpeting a net loss of territory) that neither that article nor my post mentioned...

From the mouthpiece of the "liberals" itself ( not a communal, bigoted source) :
India to lose 10,000 acres in land swap deal with Bangladesh

The proposal's been in the air for many years - presumably the Home minister's visit came and went (the article is dated Feb 9)! People have various views on this, but the agenda outside of the land swap is large, and promising...Why not concentrate on them, rather than fearing what might happen in a land swap?

[Stan_Savljevic]

The proposal's been in the air for many years - presumably the Home minister's visit came and went (the article is dated Feb 9)! People have various views on this, but the agenda outside of the land swap is large, and promising...Why not concentrate on them, rather than fearing what might happen in a land swap?

Hic, once you are off your super comprehension kool-aid, welcome back to madre earth.

The "agreement" has been getting enormous attention of late, and without fire, nothing cooks. The supposed agreement was/is supposed to be finalized before PM's visit and there have been multiple trips back and forth (Nirupama Rao, Pranab Mukherjee, Dipu Moni, Anand Sharma, Dilip Barua -- off the top of my head) on formalizing an agreement along these lines. In fact, PMO has postponed MMS' trip to BD 2-3 times in the past just to ensure that some agreement is hammered out. I can pull up these articles, but with your googal mode on, you should be able to do it better.

If this issue is so contentious, why not keep it aside for the future gen, instead of trying to resolve it right away. After all, the Pak and china boundaries are getting nowhere, so why the hurry in settling a 6.5km (onlee) boundary. Why by giving away the enclaves and adverse possessions? Why this sudden fit to become a Nobel Peace contender by selling off sovereign Indian territory? Now there are no oversights for dealing with enclaves and adverse possessions as compared to de jure Indian territory, so I am even wondering if Parliament approval will be sought in handing over these 10,000 acres? Exactly, whose territory is that, INC's or MMS'? Or is it rather the civil society's?

[sum]

People have various views on this, but the agenda outside of the land swap is large, and promising...Why not concentrate on them, rather than fearing what might happen in a land swap?

Huh?

So now that there is imminent land swap ( all DDM seems to have picked it up), we should not bother since agenda outside of this is large and promising?

Wonder why this logic never applies to our counterparts and only Desh seems to be saddled with this need to show "big heartedness"

[Stan_Savljevic]

Boundary Issues: - Keeping in mind the joint communiqué, the India-Bangladesh Joint Boundary Working Group (JBWG) met in Delhi on November 10-11, 2010. The significant outcome of the meeting was the decision to exchange enclaves. There are 111 Indian enclaves in Bangladesh's territory while there are 51 Bangladeshi enclaves within India. With the handing over of enclaves a long standing issue will be resolved.

On the issue of adverse possession, both sides agreed that there was a need to find pragmatic solution to the issue keeping in mind the spirit of the Land Boundary Agreement and also in the light of ground realities. In this regard, both sides agreed to jointly assess the areas on the lines of the joint exercise undertaken in 1996-97. As per of the understanding, both sides agreed to take up the APLs in the Mehgalaya sides on a priority basis.

http://www.orfonline.org/cms/sites/orfo ... maid=21132
So the 10,000 acres have already been written away. The claim is it was written away with the 74 agreement between Mujib and Indira, but things are more murkier than the claim. Somehow this agreement is missing from the MEA update though: http://mea.gov.in/mystart.php?id=50042439 It is also missing from the MHA update for Jan 2011.

[somnath]

The "agreement" has been getting enormous attention of late, and without fire, nothing cooks

So basically, according to you, because there is a land swap talks underway, everything else on Indo-BD front should be kept abegging till there is clarity on the same...Anyone talking of expanding the scope of cooperative framework on 100s of other fronts is a #$#%#...And you claimed that you knew how "South Bloc" works! Sure, pretty similar to your insights on Idnia's policies on "arms supplies in civil wars"....