Why Aren't Indo-Bangla Ties Warmer?

[Al-zakir]

March 24, 2009
Vinod Joseph

Before I did the research that forms the basis of this article, I used to wonder why India and Bangladesh aren’t the closest of friends. Consider this: India was responsible for the creation of Bangladesh. If Indian troops hadn’t invaded East Pakistan in defence of the Mukti Bahini, it is very unlikely that Pakistan would have allowed its eastern wing to break free. India lost around 2500 soldiers in the course of the 1971 war. Around 2 million Bengalis were killed and a couple of hundred thousand Bengali women raped by Pakistani soldiers in the events leading to Bangladeshi independence. Despite all this, Bangladesh seems to be at least as much friendly with Pakistan as it is with India!

One of the reasons for this frosty state of affairs on India’s eastern borders used to be the dispute over sharing of the waters of the Ganges. This dispute has now been resolved with the signing of a treaty in 1996. At present Sheikh Hasina’s Awami League is in power in Bangladesh and traditionally, the Awami League has been much closer to India than the other major political party, Begum Khalida Zia’s Bangladesh National Party. However, despite a friendly government being in power in Dhaka, there has been no change in popular perception in each country of the other. The average Bangladeshi on the street doesn’t seem to like India all that much and the average Indian on the street doesn’t give two hoots about Bangladesh. Why is this so?

In my opinion, there are various reasons for this state of affairs.

To start with, Indians tend to (wrongly) assume that because East Pakistan revolted against West Pakistani domination, it has given up its aspiration to be an Islamic country. Bangladesh is doubtless proud of its Bengali culture, but it never gave up its Islamic character either. Consider these facts: Sheikh Mujib-ur Rahman, the father of the Bangladeshi nation, was a member of the All India Muslim Students Federation since 1940. Mujib-ur Rahman was very close to Huseyn Suhrawardy, a leading member of the Bengal Muslim League, who worked actively for the cause of Pakistan. Mujib-ur Rahman was based in Kolkata in 1946, working under Suhrawardy’s guidance, when the Muslim League organised Direct Action Day, leading to large scale communal violence and deaths.

The East Pakistani fight against West Pakistani and especially Punjabi domination commenced soon after Pakistan’s independence when Jinnah announced that Urdu would be the national language for the whole of Pakistan. Mujib-ur Rahman led the Muslim Students League as it launched an East Pakistan wide agitation. Ever since then, Mujib-ur Rahman and other East Pakistani politicians were at loggerheads with politicians from West Pakistan. Their quarrel over the language issue was accentuated manifold when West Pakistani politicians tried every ruse in the book to prevent Bengali leaders from holding positions of power at the national level, not an easy task since East Pakistan had a larger population than West Pakistan.

In order to offset East Pakistan’s electoral strength, all four provinces in West Pakistan, namely Punjab, Sindh, Baluchistan and the North-West Frontier Province, were sought to be treated as a single political unit. When East Pakistani politicians such as Khawaja Nazimuddin, Muhammad Ali Bogra and Huseyn Suhrawardy become Prime Ministers of Pakistan, they did not stay in power for long before they were deposed by the President, backed by Pakistan’s powerful Punjabi-Pakhtun dominated military.

In the 1970 elections, when Mujib-ur Rahman and his Awami League (originally founded by Huseyn Suhrawardy) won a majority of the parliamentary seats, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto proposed that Pakistan should have two Prime Ministers, one for each wing! When Mujib-ur Rahman refused, he was imprisoned and marital law was declared. The Pakistani army launched Operation Searchlight with the intention of teaching Bengalis a harsh lesson they wouldn’t forget easily. Politicians don’t like to lose power, especially just after they have legitimately won an election. Sheikh Mujib-ur Rahman’s declaration of independence was smuggled out to Chittagong and read over the radio by Major Zia-ur Rahman. The rest is history. The day Mujib-ur Rahman made the declaration of independence (26 March 1971) is treated as Bangladesh’s independence day, though it was not until 16 December 1971 that Bangladesh was actually liberated from Pakistani troops.

Would East Pakistan have revolted against West Pakistan if Bengalis were allowed to hold office after wining elections? I don’t think so. Mere imposition of Urdu as the national language would not have made East Pakistanis break off from their co-religionists in the West. Even in 1965 when India and Pakistan went to war, East Pakistan stood fast with West Pakistan though they complained that the Pakistani army was not present in strength in East Pakistan to defend it in case of an attack by India.

It must not be forgotten that even when the Pakistani army was systematically murdering hundreds of thousands of civilians, many thousands of Bengalis collaborated with the Pakistani army. Doubtless such people were fired by their Islamic zeal, which made them want Pakistan to remain unified as a single Islamic nation.

Bangladesh’s Islamic nature started to reassert itself soon after independence. After a brief ban for suspected collaboration with Pakistani forces, the Islamic Academy was revived. Bangladesh sought membership of the Organisation of Islamic Conference (OIC) and the Islamic Development Bank. In 1974, less than 3 years after independence, Mujib-ur Rahman made a trip to Lahore to attend an OIC conference and patch up ties with Pakistan. After Zia-ur Rahman came to power, Bangladesh moved much further into the Islamic camp.

Even now, Bangladesh has an Islamic fundamentalist base which fights for stronger ties with Pakistan and other Islamic states, rather than with India. In my opinion, it is wrong to assume that this core group of Islamic fundamentalists is something new. Bangladesh always had this hardcore chunk, for without them, East Bengal would not have voted to break off from West Bengal and the rest of India.

A fact which is easily forgotten when discussing the deaths of around 2 million Bengalis as a result of the Pakistani army pogrom is that a disproportionate number of the victims were Hindus. Most surviving family members of the victims fled to India as refugees. Currently Hindus account for around 10% of Bangladesh’s population, as opposed to around 28% in 1941 and approximately 15% before the Pakistani army pogrom. I am not for a moment suggesting that Bengali Muslims did not suffer under the Pakistani army. They did and most of the rebels who formed the Mukti Bahini were Muslims. However the present day population of Bangladesh doesn’t have among them as many victims and families of victims as such a large-scale genocide would otherwise have warranted. This is one reason why Bangladesh has been able to largely forgive Pakistan and not press for reparations or compensation.

Indians assume that Bangladeshis will be eternally grateful to India for its intervention in Bangladesh, which led to Bangladeshi independence. I feel that it ought to be the other way around. India ought to be grateful to Bangladesh for giving India a chance to split its arch rival Pakistan into two pieces! As a result of Indians assuming that Bangladesh has chosen to be just a Bengali nation that will intrinsically be friendly towards India, rather than an Islamic-Bengali state (which is what Bangladesh is), Indians expect a lot from Bangladesh without putting in the necessary effort. For example, Indians are disappointed when Bangladesh doesn’t crackdown on insurgents from India’s north-east sheltering there, even though India hasn’t exactly been ladling out favours to Bangladesh after its creation.

I feel it is very important that Indians realise they should not take Bangladesh for granted. Instead for every favour India seeks from Bangladesh, India must be willing to pay back in double measure. India needs to fill Bangladeshi media with sound bytes about how deeply India cares for friendship with Bangladesh. India could provide scholarships for Bangladeshi students to study in India. It could be made easy for Bangladeshi commodities (like jute) and goods (like garments) to be sold in India. Leaders from Bangladesh, irrespective of the party they belong to, should be invited to India and treated with honour and respect.

Instead of treating all Bangladeshi leaders impartially and well, India has been taking sides in what’s called the ‘Battle of the Begums’. For those unfamiliar with the rivalry between Sheikh Hasina and Begum Khalida Zia, let me briefly summarise the reasons for the animosity between these two great leaders.

Sheikh Hasina is the daughter of Sheikh Mujib-ur Rahman, the founder of Bangladesh. Post independence, after a brief honeymoon period, Mujib-ur Rahman became more and more autocratic. In January 1975 he declared himself to be the absolute ruler of Bangladesh and President for Life. In August 1975, a few army officers staged a coup and took over power. They killed Mujib-ur Rahman and all his family members who were present in Bangladesh. Sheikh Hasina was in Germany at that time and escaped death. She stayed in exile for 6 years and returned to Bangladesh in 1981 as head of the Awami League, when Bangladesh was under General Ershad. Democracy was reinstated in Bangladesh only in 1991 and in 1996, Sheikh Hasina and the Awami League came to power.

Begun Khalida Zia (who heads the Bangladesh National Party) is the widow of Zia-ur Rahman, the army officer who had read Mujib-ur Rahman’s call for independence over the radio. Though a Bengali, Zia-ur Rahman grew up in West Pakistan and joined the Pakistani army, winning various awards and decorations for gallantry during the 1965 war between India and Pakistan. The Pakistani army had very few Bengalis, especially in the non-administrative officer class, and Zia-ur Rahman was in a small minority. When Mujib-ur Rahman gave the call for Bengalis to rise up against oppression by West Pakistan, Zia-ur Rahman was one of the Bengali army officers who answered his call. Zia-ur Rahman distinguished himself during the Bangladeshi war of independence.

After Mujib-ur Rahman was deposed in a coup, there were a series of counter coups and Zia-ur Rahman became the Chief Martial Law administrator of Bangladesh and later its 6th President. Zia-ur Rahman founded the Bangladesh National Party. One of the things Zia-ur Rahman did after coming to power was to pardon many of those involved in the coup that overthrew and killed Mujib-ur Rahman. It has never been proved if Zia-ur Rahman himself was involved in that coup. Zia-ur Rahman reversed many of Mujib-ur Rahman’s policies. Whilst Mujib-ur Rahman was a socialist, Zia-ur Rahman promoted the private sector. Zia-ur Rahman moved Bangladesh away from the Soviet Union and started to develop close ties with the USA and later China. Bangladeshi demands for reparations and compensation from Pakistan were dropped. Many individuals accused of collaborating with Pakistan during the war of independence were rehabilitated. Close ties were forged with Saudi Arabia and other Islamic states. The constitution was amended to give it an Islamic slant. Zia-ur Rahman talked of a Bangladeshi identity rather than a Bengali one, seeking to integrate various minorities such as the Chakmas and Urdu speaking Biharis. He ruthlessly crushed all political opposition and in 1981, he was murdered by a group of army officers.

Unlike Mujib-ur Rahman who was dogged by allegations of nepotism and corruption, Zia-ur Rahman was known as Mr. Clean, even among his enemies. All his actions seem to have been motivated by a love for Bangladesh and ideology, rather than any personal vested interest.

As it would be obvious to anyone, the Indian establishment considers Sheikh Hasina and the Awami League to be much more India friendly than Khaleda Zia and the Bangladesh National Party. Most Bangladeshis believe that India does its best to keep the Awami League in power. The net result is that even when the Awami League is in power, there is not much warmth towards India from the average Bangladeshi.

In my opinion, India should not take sides in the Battle of the Begums. Even though it is unlikely that Begum Khaleda Zia and the BNP will ever be as friendly towards India as Sheikh Hasina and the BNP, India ought to treat both the ladies and their respective parties the same. Even more importantly, the average Bangladeshi on the street should not get the impression that India is partial towards one party. Not only should India be impartial, India must also be seen to be impartial. Currently, an Awami League victory in the elections is treated as a victory for India and a victory for the BNP is treated as a victory for Pakistan. Islamic fundamentalists inimical to India have an incentive in undermining the Awami League. It is even possible that the recent mutiny by soldiers of the Bangladesh Rifles was instigated by Islamic fundamentalists who feel that by making Bangladesh unstable when the Awami League is in power, they are sending a message to India.

Another reason for the average Bangladeshi on the street to hate India is India’s treatment of Bangladeshi immigrants. As we all know, immigrant inflows and outflows are dictated largely by supply and demand. Poverty stricken Bangladesh has a large number of people willing to work very hard just to make enough to eat two square meals a day. India, despite its poverty and other problems, has many areas where an individual willing to work hard can make an honest living. And so a large number of Bangladeshis cross the border illegally to live and work in India.

India doesn’t have a system of giving work permits to unskilled workers from anywhere in the world, except to people from Nepal (who don’t need a work permit). However, India’s borders, especially its eastern borders are porous and India doesn’t have the sophisticated technology needed to prevent the inflow from Bangladesh. To be honest, not a single country in the world has been able to put a total stop to immigration.

Once the Bangladeshis are inside India, having the run the gauntlet of corrupt border security forces and cops, they are at risk of deportation at any time if they are caught. One assumes that these illegal immigrants develop no love for India during their stay in this country. In various parts of India’s north-east, immigration from Bangladesh has taken place over many decades, even prior to independence. It is common for many landlords in Assam and Tripura to lease out their lands to hardworking Bangladeshi immigrants and take from them a part of the crop as rent. Many such immigrants have Indian ID cards and therefore have voting rights.

Since (as mentioned earlier) Bangladesh has always had a component of fundamentalist Muslims, it is only fair to assume that some of the illegal immigrants to India are fundamentalist Muslims. Not all fundamentalist Muslims are terrorists, or even supporters of terrorism, but some of the Bangladeshi immigrants in India are capable of causing trouble. I have no idea what percentage such people comprise. I assume it is not very large.

To be very honest, there is no clear-cut answer to the problem of illegal immigration from Bangladesh. In my opinion (and this is only an opinion), rather than having an outright ban on illegal immigrants, India should permit a fixed number of workers from Bangladesh to work in India on fixed-term, renewable, work permits. Work permits should be issued through employers or labour contractors who must shoulder some of the responsibility for the migrants once they are in India. Those given work permits will have their finger-prints and DNA on file and I assume it will be relatively easy to keep a tab on their whereabouts.

Legal immigrants have an incentive to be law abiding, irrespective of their personal ideology. Also, they will not be able to obtain fake Indian ID and vote in Indian elections. Regulating Bangladeshi immigration, rather than banning it outright, will also generate some goodwill towards India. It is very possible that some of those who come to India on work permits may indulge in acts that are harmful towards India. However, such individuals will not be stopped from entering India even if there is no work permit scheme in place.

As long as religion plays a major role in the life of the average Bangladeshi and the common Indian on the street, I don’t think Indo-Bangla ties will get warmer beyond a point. One could say the same for Indo-Pakistani relations, but that’s for another post.

Desicritics.org: Why Aren't Indo-Bangla Ties Warmer?

 

[BanglaBhoot]

General Shankar’s threat to Bangladesh’s Sovereignty

1.General Shankar’s clear threat to Bangladesh
Indian former Army Chief General. Shankar’s interview published originally in the Indian daily Asian Age on the 24th and lifted in Bengali translation in the daily Noya Dignata on the 26th March in Dhaka though an unofficial viewpoint from the stalwart may not be seen by some as anything serious, but certainly gives a clear danger signal for the sovereignty of Bangladesh. However, his frank opinion in the matter should be appreciated.

2.Shankar’s verbatim
His verbatim, “DELHI CAN’T AFFORD TO LET DHAKA SLIP OF ITS RADAR THIS TIME” not only gave a very clear ominous message in its clarity but also for the timing Bangladeshis have been mourning the brutal massacre of over five dozens of brilliant patriotic army officers of the country on the 25-26 mayhem in full knowledge of the P.M. and her colleagues in the cabinet at the BDR Peelkhana head quarter. Thus Gen. Shanker has further added to the account of critical worry for Bangladesh’s sovereignty.

3.Ominous signals from Delhi and now from Shankar
Since the very inception of the mayhem ominous signals had been pouring in Dhaka from Indian government and their media, Shankar’s one being the latest of the tirades against the smaller peaceful neighbor Bangladesh.
Was it of any dignity of Shanker that he threatened Dhaka, on the one hand, and advised Delhi to keep Bangladesh in her full control, on the other? One must wonder if the same BDR massacre had been planned and engineered for Delhi by Delhi to make an excuse of the control over Bangladesh’s sovereignty tighter than as had been ever? How should the government having overwhelming majority member in the Parliament need Delhi’s support for management of its own affairs? Or did India make a ploy of the mayhem to destroy Bangladesh’s patriotic army and the BDR?

4.Great Game
The General has referred to the ‘great game’ of India Pakistan rivalry. He was right in this assertion, but that goes back in history not just of the post 1947 period, much less of the post 1971 period. The rivalry was there in historical elements embedded in faith, culture and day- to- day way of life of two main peoples of the Indian subcontinent. Incidentally, Bangladesh shares little from the caste ridden Indian Brahmanism. Instead Muslim egalitarianism is the main essence of Bangladeshi people that made them somewhat closer to Pakistani people, but not less with the Indian Muslims, as well.

5.1975 August coup misrepresented
Gen Shankar’s open mind need be appreciated first for the fact that 1971 was a winning game for his own country India. But it is curious and mysterious to know from him that the August 1975 coup of Dhaka was a defeat for India and victory for Pakistan. Pakistan had nothing to do in August 1975 political change in Dhaka. That was India’s defeat in the sense that India’s lackey had been ousted but in no way was victory of Pakistan. The victory was for Bangladesh. The successful coup of August was brought about not by anybody from outside but by the heroic freedom fighters of 1971 and by the Bangladesh Army followed immediately by jubilation by the common people in Bangladesh. Because, Mujib by then in little over three years of misrule had become a liability for Bangladesh’s freedom and sovereignty. His becoming liability had many onus of Delhi that the people confused in 1971 but finally discovered the real hegemonic designs of the Brahmanist Indians who never ever accepted the 1947 partition of the then British India, and so stood against the existence of Pakistan after 1947 and then particularly, Bangladesh in post 1971 period now nearly four decades.

6.Indemnity was inherent in the August coup
The August coup of 1975 have not failed but was a victorious one, and so had no liability of any wrongdoing in the coup operation according legal maxim of FACTUM VALET. That was how the coup operators enjoyed indemnity and freedom. After 21 years, in 1996 Sheikh Hasina getting saddled in power of the country went in frenzy to hang those heroes of 1975 August coup. She could not finish the job in deep vengeance though engineered in the process gross miscarriage of justice by abuse of power in her extreme vengeance during 1996-2001 that she now has undertaken to accomplish in the second term.

7.Bangladesh’s sense of identity misrepresented
Bangladesh is an overwhelmingly Muslim nation not only by population strength but also for past traditions. But such identity issue is blamed by Indian quarters as Pakistani. The General presumed that many Bangladeshi army officers in job are repatriates from Pakistan He lost his sense of simple arithmetic. The latest repatriation from Pakistan was made in late 1973-74 or 35 years ago. Anyone in service then at the age of, say, 25 years as fresher must have already reached over 57 years, the retiring age of Bangladesh civil and military personnel. All personnel now in 2009 representing in services of civil and military have all been recruits of the Bangladesh period and none of the Pakistan period, and so no question of being brainwashed in Pakistani outlook.

8.Bangladesh determined to survive with dignity
Bangladesh’s real game is for dignified survival of the country free from caste ridden Brahmanism but nothing to be confused with anything Pakistan. In the 1975 August change this element had been a dominant one among some others for pluralism in politics, bare economic issues of everyday life and living. India was then perceived rightly putting hindrances in all these basic issues, apart from total control in a hegemonic nature.

9.Hasina’s Vengeance in the BDR Massacre suspected
There is an opinion here that she showed her teeth of vengeance as a token by massacring the brilliant army officers on the 25-26 February wherein she had many of her party stalwarts and cadres. That is why the enquiry being conducted being diverted and making smokescreen by her own appointed minister. Her vengeance against the 1975 August military heroes is well known. The massacre perpetrated for long 33 hours in full depth knowledge of Hasina, Home Minter Sahara, and State Minister Nanak etc. should only speak clear of their liability in the mayhem at the BDR Head Quarter at Peelkhana.

10.RAW’s hand in the BDR massacre
In the mayhem Shankar has admitted that if there was any hand of India the possibility is remote. That proved that he has not altogether denied India’s involvement. That the hand of Indian Intelligence R&AW was there is well talked about by many in Bangladesh as many facts on this point have already been unveiled. In 1971, Delhi expected that her eastern front, after the end of the December war, would not only be calm but also be of no military threat in future. But the Bangladesh Army organized in the past decades since late 1970s has been a matter of frustration and suspicion for India and the R&AW.

About R&AW’s past activities Shankar further stated in the interview that they fed Mujib with lot of information for saving his life prior to the coup in 1975, but were of no use. But very curiously he did not throw any light on the fact that how effectively R&AW had planned well and managed to kill President Zia in May 1981 that later on one Indian weekly (most probably India Today) made public. Not only that, there was also a news how one P.M. rejected the killing proposal and another, next one, (Indira) accorded the approval.

11.Let India be Bangladesh’s friend and not Hasina’s alone
As a much bigger country compared to Bangladesh, India would be well advised for making permanent friendship with the State of neighbor Bangladesh and not with Hasina alone. International norms as well, India knows well, speak for friendship with country concerned for durable world peace.

Author: Dr. M.T. Hussain

Untold Facts Blog Archive General Shankar?s threat to Bangladesh?s Sovereignty

 

[rubyjackass]

Indians assume that Bangladeshis will be eternally grateful to India for its intervention in Bangladesh, which led to Bangladeshi independence. I feel that it ought to be the other way around. India ought to be grateful to Bangladesh for giving India a chance to split its arch rival Pakistan into two pieces! As a result of Indians assuming that Bangladesh has chosen to be just a Bengali nation that will intrinsically be friendly towards India, rather than an Islamic-Bengali state (which is what Bangladesh is), Indians expect a lot from Bangladesh without putting in the necessary effort. For example, Indians are disappointed when Bangladesh doesn’t crackdown on insurgents from India’s north-east sheltering there, even though India hasn’t exactly been ladling out favours to Bangladesh after its creation.

I feel it is very important that Indians realise they should not take Bangladesh for granted. Instead for every favour India seeks from Bangladesh, India must be willing to pay back in double measure. India needs to fill Bangladeshi media with sound bytes about how deeply India cares for friendship with Bangladesh. India could provide scholarships for Bangladeshi students to study in India. It could be made easy for Bangladeshi commodities (like jute) and goods (like garments) to be sold in India. Leaders from Bangladesh, irrespective of the party they belong to, should be invited to India and treated with honour and respect.

Instead of treating all Bangladeshi leaders impartially and well, India has been taking sides in what’s called the ‘Battle of the Begums’. For those unfamiliar with the rivalry between Sheikh Hasina and Begum Khalida Zia, let me briefly summarise the reasons for the animosity between these two great leaders.

I totally agree about the scholar ship and friendship part.

I am not quite sure if Khaleda Zia distanced herself from India or the vice versa happened. Please help me here...

I have believed, from my stay on this forum, that the Bangladesh governments kept India at a safe distance to satisfy the hardliners. Any signs of goodwill towards Indians may weaken the governments. Dont you think? And since Khaleda Zia is closer to ssuch elements, it explains everything.

In the mayhem Shankar has admitted that if there was any hand of India the possibility is remote. That proved that he has not altogether denied India’s involvement. That the hand of Indian Intelligence R&AW was there is well talked about by many in Bangladesh as many facts on this point have already been unveiled. In 1971, Delhi expected that her eastern front, after the end of the December war, would not only be calm but also be of no military threat in future. But the Bangladesh Army organized in the past decades since late 1970s has been a matter of frustration and suspicion for India and the R&AW.


As a much bigger country compared to Bangladesh, India would be well advised for making permanent friendship with the State of neighbor Bangladesh and not with Hasina alone. International norms as well, India knows well, speak for friendship with country concerned for durable world peace.

This is the most twisted argument I have ever seen.

 

[idune]

Proof of this came during a closed-door meeting of a motley group of about 50 Congress leaders hailing from different states earlier this week. Addressing them in the capital’s Mavalankar Hall, foreign minister Pranab Mukherjee disclosed a conspiracy was afoot to destabilise the elected governments in Bangladesh and Pakistan. He let out a hitherto unknown fact to the audience: "I had to go out of my way to issue a stern warning to those trying to destabilise the Sheikh Hasina government in Bangladesh that if they continued with their attempts, then India would not sit idle." In other words, New Delhi had conveyed it was willing to take counter-measures in the Great Game, including the possibility of direct intervention.
.
.
A senior diplomat told Outlook that New Delhi advised Hasina and the Bangladesh army to tread cautiously and avoid creating a 1975-like situation, when most members of the country’s founder Mujibur Rahman’s family were gunned down. That was perhaps the reason why Hasina announced general amnesty to secure the surrender of BDR mutineers.

http://outlookindia.com/full.asp?fodname=20090316&fname=Cover+Story&sid=1&pn=2

 

[rubyjackass]

Do you think General Amnesty was a mistake? Tell me how else the govt cud hav handled the situation.

 

[leonblack08]

Do you think General Amnesty was a mistake? Tell me how else the govt cud hav handled the situation.

At first I was in support of the peaceful process by Sheikh Hasina.But now after hearing from war veterans like Major General (rtd.) Mir Shawkat Ali,who was one of the sector commanders of liberation war,I am quite convinced military action could have and should have been taken.When the army claimed they were ready to crack why did our PM stop them?Talking of civilian casualty,when the army would move in there would not be any civilian in the vicinity.Still there would be damage to civilians but that would have been the price to be paid for saving our brilliant officers.At least if army moved in,we could have saved those who were killed after the initial massacre.

PM Sheikh Hasina took too long to act to a situation which needed fast solution.We shall know in due time,or may not know, whether she was following someone's directives or was it her own personal vengeance.

And about general amnesty,it does not even matter I think.Her late action just made roads wider for the actual culprit,who fled the scene on the first day while she gave the speech on the second day.

To me if 1500 BDR rebels were to be killed for 15 honest officers,then that should have been done.Better patriots than traitors(read fools,because the traitors already fled the scene.)

 

[TopCat]

Do you think General Amnesty was a mistake? Tell me how else the govt cud hav handled the situation.

If you have taken a decission you must have the capacity to execute it. When she took the path of political solution she should have done it right. Offering general amnesty without even asking the actual condition of the captives was a wrong decission. She must have kept few arsenal in her disposal before starting the real negotiation and amnesty was one of them. Second, she must had employed experinced expert of hostage situation to deal with the negotiation. Also she must had quaraintined the whole area so that, the civilians in the surrounding areas were safe as well as nobody escapes.

Now what is the end result? They killed whatever they wanted, then they escaped freely (without giving a dam about Hasina's amnesty) and vanished in the fog. The killers are 100% successfull and till this day none of the actual killers are captured.

 

[BanglaBhoot]

The killers are 100% successfull and till this day none of the actual killers are captured.

They are unlikely ever to be captured. But why are we presuming that Hasina and the others are innocent and were not part of the conspiracy? Their behavior during and after the mutiny appears extremely suspicious.

 

[idune]

As typical Indian, r jackass actually played a trick on us by dodging central issue of the link and statement I had posted. That is - when Indian govt issued threat of intervention and prepared invading force there is NO room left for any warmer tie. Except few in govt who had been Indian stooge alll along. India covertly in war against elements of Bangladesh Independence.

Proof of this came during a closed-door meeting of a motley group of about 50 Congress leaders hailing from different states earlier this week. Addressing them in the capital’s Mavalankar Hall, foreign minister Pranab Mukherjee disclosed a conspiracy was afoot to destabilise the elected governments in Bangladesh and Pakistan. He let out a hitherto unknown fact to the audience: "I had to go out of my way to issue a stern warning to those trying to destabilise the Sheikh Hasina government in Bangladesh that if they continued with their attempts, then India would not sit idle." In other words, New Delhi had conveyed it was willing to take counter-measures in the Great Game, including the possibility of direct intervention.

 

[BanglaBhoot]

Warmth of Bangladesh-India Relations

By Shabbir A. Bashar

It was both amusing and irritating to read Vinod Joseph's analysis (http://desicritics..org/2009/03/24/095016.php) of why Bangladesh-India relations are not warmer. Amusing because Joseph starts off by saying that he “researched†before embarking on his write-up yet totally fails to cite any references. It is irritating because it's one-sided, patronizing and full of immature assumptions typical of a disingenuous arm-chair theorist.

For example, Joseph conveniently overlooks the fact that the Indian army looted everything from ceiling fans to military equipment, utensils to water taps†from the newly formed Bangladesh after the surrender of Pakistani forces in 1971 (RAW and Bangladesh). Thousands of Indian Army vehicles were used to carry looted goods back home. It is said that the scale of these cruel and heinous plunders could not have been possible without connivance of higher Indian authorities.

Let's cut to the chase and face the real issues behind Bangladesh-India relations. India has a 20:1 trade imbalance with Bangladesh and yet does everything in its power to prevent Bangladeshi goods being sold in its markets. India refuses to allow transit and thus trade between Bangladesh and land-locked Nepal, Sikkim and Bhutan. India defies all international norms and protocols when it comes to sharing the waters of the Ganges that flows through three countries.

India maintains and seeks to create new disputes over Bangladeshi maritime boundaries and encroaches on our mineral wealths. The facts show that India behaves as the regional bully not only with Bangladesh but also with Nepal and Sri Lanka – having already annexed SSikkim. Relations between India and Pakistan aren’t exactly the warmest. A pattern is obvious. India needs to stop behaving like a belligerent big brother if it wants to earn the respect of its neighbors.

Today we live in an interconnected and inter-dependent world with a multitude of trade and business opportunities for everyone. If India fails to see the benefit of maintaining good relations with its neighbors, pretty soon it will find that those neighbors are turning to quarters that make more economic sense for them. For instance, we see that China is cozying up with Nepal given how badly India treats the Himalyan Kingdom (eKantipur.com - Nepal's No.1 News Portal).

The claim that Bangladeshis illegally immigrate to India for work overlooks the fact that a huge chunk (to the tune of billions of dollars) of our income comes from remittance of our overseas workers not based in India but in countries afar like Saudi Arabia, UAE, Malaysia etc.; On the other hand, there’s no shortage of reports on Bangladeshi political criminals illegally crossing the border to India to take refuge from our laws. May be this is why many Bangladeshis do not see India in such high esteem: India simply is no where near a positively meaningful country as it could be to Bangladesh. Contrast this with the relationship between US, Canada and Mexico. The facts speak for themselves.

Bangladesh is a majority Muslim country. It is no historical accident but rather a direct outcome of our geographical terrain. When Islam was brought to South Asia primarily by the seafaring Yemenese, they found today’s Bangladesh to be much more of a fertile ground for converts than other parts of India. The vast Ganges delta with its deep waters in Bangladesh was easier for them to penetrate while its myriad of islands was harder to administer by the Hindu hierarchical cast system.

The hitherto mostly lower caste Hindu inhabitants of today's Bangladesh found greater personal freedom in embracing Islam than being subjugated to the whims of the upper caste Hindu Zamindars. Contrast this with the arid parts of India where water – a major ingredient of human survival - from a well would be under the direct control of the village administrator making it hard for outsiders (spreaders of Islam in this case) to influence the lower class population. Thus, today's Bangladesh is a convolution of both its language and its majority religion. To lose sight of this basic fact is to disregard our inherent national identity.

The fertile plains of the Ganges have attracted immigrants from other parts of the subcontinent for centuries; we are the descendants of people who were willing to venture out to uncharted territories to find a better living for themselves. This explains the resilience of the Bangladeshi character. We are not afraid to seek out better living standards for ourselves no matter where that may be and it is therefore little wonder that we take any kind of patronization and subjugation with a great deal of offence.

Perhaps irked by these facts, many West Bengalis often try to paint Bangladesh as a den of communalism yet Bangladeshis have never voted a communalist party like India’s BJP into power. West Bengal, the former capital of the British Raj, is all but a sad reflection of its glorious past. Today's Kolkata is several decades behind Dhaka in terms of modern development; Kolkata's roads are full of potholes while many of its middle class neighborhoods are like shanty towns and its central shopping areas are but a shadow of provincial Bangladeshi townships. Dogged by centuries of clerical mentality (a direct effect of being the underdogs of the British occupiers), West Bengalis have forgotten what it is like to take responsibility and make a decision for themselves.

Many successful businesses in Kolkata are in fact run by the more entrepreneurial minded Indians from its west and southern parts. Kolkata’s “Bengali Babus are stuck in a time trap and the only way they can get any attention these days is by mud-slinging at Bangladeshis. They forget that while we share the same language, we are less interested in being clerks than we are being owners of our own lives. They forget that the embracing of Islam by the majority of Bangladeshis was a way out of being the slaves of upper class Hindus for the rest of our lives. Bangladeshis, like all other peoples of the world, are far more interested in an equitable life rather than ornamental alliances of language or religion. Bengali Babus, like Pakistanis, should come to terms these facts.

Those who collaborated with the Pakistani army and actively colluded in the murder, looting and rapes of our citizens in 1971 will soon be tried as war criminals. The question is, who will try the Indian army soldiers and officers who responsible for looting our wealth in the name of liberating us? Along with the war-criminals of 1971 in Bangladesh, there is also a section of so called misguided intellectuals who even today continue to act as no more than Indian agents. Perhaps our history will be the true witness to their menacing misdeeds. Bangladesh will indeed get past both of these parasitical by-products of our past and move on.

Vinod Joseph deserves praise for pointing out that India should stop toying with the internal politics of Bangladesh. Both the Awami League and the Bangladesh Nationalist Party were born out of a need of our people to stand up against subjugation and mistreatment. The Indian Government would be better off paying less attention to West Bengali propaganda and start thinking more of Bangladesh as a sovereign nation. It is laughable to note Pranab Mukherjee, the Indian Foreign Minister (incidentally from West Bengal) did not have time to meet with our Leader of the Opposition when he visited Dhaka to greet our Prime Minister after the recent general elections. This was a gross violation of international protocol. When a majority party headed by an Italian born woman can see the wisdom in appointing an intelligent Indian born Sikh as its Prime Minister, I have faith that one day the majority of Indians will indeed stop pandering to the clerical West Bengali mentality. India will have moved on past its British Raj mentality.

Both Sheikh Mujib and Ziaur Rahman were two of our great national leaders and we don't need any endorsement or explanation from the likes of an ill informed Indian to decipher our history. Given half a chance, no sane foreign country – be that India or Pakistan - will ever put its own interest behind that of another nation. Let us be and leave us alone when it comes to showing respect for our own leaders; these are matters for Bangladeshis and Bangladeshis alone to think about. Show some respect and don’t try to inject malice in our national politics. We know and understand your motives very well.

The best way to warm up to Bangladesh for any nation, be that India, Pakistan, China or the United States is to trade with us in an equitable fashion. If the US and its often warm but most importantly a workable relationship with Canada and Mexico is anything to go by, India would do well to learn that maintaining good relations with its neighbors will not only enhance its own economic standing but also allow it to focus on playing a more mature and positive regional role – something it is acutely failing to do by constantly anttagonizing all of its neighbors. Majority of Bangladeshis have little interest in either religious militancy or indeed the sycophancy towards West Bengal. Start to see Bangladesh beyond our majority religion and our language and recognize us with actions as a willing partner in trade and very soon you will see how quickly Bangladesh-India relations truly warm up.

Shabbir A. Bashar, PhD
Vancouver, USA

http://newsfrombangladesh.net/view.php?hidRecord=254744

 

[HK-47]

Do you think General Amnesty was a mistake? Tell me how else the govt cud hav handled the situation.

Revolts are meant to be crushed by governments.Governments which are functioning especially.
Something like the Indian 2008 terrorist standoff.as one Israeli said,you have to lose some people to catch the bad guys.The real ones.

as for India-BD relations it will all start with the rivers and the border coastal lands;India as the larger and more powerful country has to take some initiatives instead of telling everyone else to do what or not.

 

[Jako]

Hk47 sir,what kind of initiatives do you think india sd take?? Kindly elaborate......thnx