Featured BD not interested in US defence deal under Indo-Pacific strategy

[bluesky]

This is so ridiculous, just like US blaming China for their trade deficit.
The reason BD has trade surplus with US , is because the manufacturers especially those transferred from Chinese manufacturers ,imports raw materials from China for manufacturing , to be exported to the US . Without the import of raw materials from china( which results in trade deficits with china) bd wouldn’t have the same trade surplus with the US.The stuff that BD imports are way more vital for BD industry in comparison to China’s .

You are too worried about BD trade surplus with the USA. Please say also something on the Indian trade surplus with BD.

 

[Taimoor Khan]

Multipolar Cold War era wasn't good either, if not worse.

I grew up in Pakistan when my country was in direct conflict with one of the two super powers, yet never felt any insecurity or effects of proxy wars within Pakistan. And then I have seen how my country was hit with foreign sponsored terrorism when it didn't agree with the sole super power.

Multi polar world is always much better then unipolar, you will never be facing a choice of "either you are with us or against us".

 

[Species]

I grew up in Pakistan when my country was in direct conflict with one of the two super powers, yet never felt any insecurity or effects of proxy wars within Pakistan. And then I have seen how my country was hit with foreign sponsored terrorism when it didn't agree with the sole super power.

Well, Pakistan did face the biggest tragedy in its history during the Cold War.

The communists were the main threat for the West during the Cold War while Islamic militants are the primary threat now. Considering Pakistan's socio-cultural profile, communism didn't have much room to grow but Islamic militancy had enough potential which could explain the difference you are claiming.

you will never be facing a choice of "either you are with us or against us"

That part is true but unipolar world also has its own perks, less anarchy for example.

 

[Taimoor Khan]

Well, Pakistan did face the biggest tragedy in its history during the Cold War.

The communists were the main threat for the West during the Cold War while Islamic militants are the primary threat now. Considering Pakistan's socio-cultural profile, communism didn't have much room to grow but Islamic militancy had enough potential which could explain the difference you are claiming.

I am telling you from personal experience while living in Pakistan. Pakistan had no issues facing soviet union in Afghanistan as it had backing of the western and Islamic world. Infact after soviet withdrawl, we managed pretty well with militants as well, so much so that when Taliban came into power, and ruled Afghanistan for more then 5 years, there was no terrorism in Pakistan. Goes to show that so called "Islamic militancy" was never the issue. Its only when the only sole power decided to make Islam as enemy, without any opposing power to curb American intentions and agenda, Pakistan saw proxy wars brought into its borders through Afghan soil, and that happen when America and its allies like India got hold of Afghan affairs.

That part is true but unipolar world also has its own perks, less anarchy for example.

I don't think you can say that with straight face about the anarchy bit. Look around you. Country after country, mostly Muslim, were trampled in one pretext or another. World need balance of power. If it goes too much in favour of one nation, you see the anarchy all over.

 

[Leishangthem]

You are too worried about BD trade surplus with the USA. Please say also something on the Indian trade surplus with BD.

BD imports a lot of raw materials from India too, so no wonder India has trade surplus with BD.

 

[SpaceMan18]

Long story short Bangladesh made a great decision not joining on the American side to go against China.

It's good to stay neutral and benefit from both of them , if America cared about the Royinga situation they would of already solved it.

America's end goal is to stop the CCP ( which is ok ) and also make India weak in the process.

Bangladesh should be like Switzerland and watch everything go downhill while it grows.

 

[nahtanbob]

Long story short Bangladesh made a great decision not joining on the American side to go against China.

It's good to stay neutral and benefit from both of them , if America cared about the Royinga situation they would of already solved it.

another confused soul. You need to decide what is important for you - Rohaniyas or China. Myanmar would move closer to China in response to American pressure

 

[jamal18]

Stay out of military blocs. American investment isn't always without costs. USAID is a cancerous branch of the CIA, keep them out.
Focus on building up the country.

 

[bluesky]

I grew up in Pakistan when my country was in direct conflict with one of the two super powers, yet never felt any insecurity or effects of proxy wars within Pakistan. And then I have seen how my country was hit with foreign sponsored terrorism when it didn't agree with the sole super power.

Multi polar world is always much better then unipolar, you will never be facing a choice of "either you are with us or against us".

Excuse me Sir, was not it Pakistan that sponsored Taleban in its soil on the promise that Taleban will help Pakistan on the Kashmir issue once they are in power in Afghanistan?

Now, it is the Taleban that is sponsoring terrorism in Pakistan with the financial encouragement from India. You have slapped your own face and are now blaming others for the devil you are facing.

BD imports a lot of raw materials from India too, so no wonder India has trade surplus with BD.

And America imports too many garments from Bangladesh to hide their skin from cold. So, there is a trade balance in BD's favor.

 

[Bengal71]

Momen is the FM, BD isn't saying anything constructive, as long as he's the one doing the talking.


I mean, do I need to go into detail, I bet we all know by now what he is.... None of it is good.


Our Foreign policy is a joke, our chief diplomat is the whole circus act in one bloated package.

Rest assured he is not the one doing the talking or even making the decisions. Final word will come from Hasina.

 

[The Ronin]

You cannot say you care about it and then sign deals with countries that protect Myanmar from UN Security Council resolutions and turn around & expect others to do your dirty work.

Excuse me!! Our dirty work?! You sound like these Rohingyas are part of some kind of CIA black op or Mexican drug cartel. I thought it was always the other way around for USA. Ethnic groups including Rohingyas in Burma are suffering more than two decades. The EU at least maintains arms embargo on Myanmar.

Tell me again what USA has done so far except putting sanctions on some Burmese military officers? It was quite clear that the west can't do shit in UN while China, Russia protect Myanmar. In the meanwhile your closest allies are investing, supplying weapons and even supporting Myanmar in UN.

Your humanitarian groups can't do anything in Myanmar while obstructing our plans to relocate these Rohingya ingrates to Bhashan Char and encouraging these refugees not repatriate unless MM gives them citizenship. That complicates this issue more and makes our locals life harder. Now you are making 10 years plan for Rohingya and telling us to wait till Myanmar's general election.

What can you possibly achieve after the election when your dearest Suu Kyi talks exactly like those general about ethnic cleansing? If Myanmar still wants to come on your side you will welcome that country with open arms. You can't do anything like you can't with Iran, NK. You slap arms and economic embargo more quickly for WMD which haven't killed a single life after WW2 but it takes you forever to take action about genocide or ethnic cleansing.

All you can do is weaponizing your dollar, selling weapon and pulling political strings on others. You are no match for China-Japan in our economic-infrastructure development in BD. We can still weapons from Europe. We never had to worry about that before when you refused to sell and we won't have to worry about it in future either. Before doing our "dirty work", how about you do some of our legal works first? Like other unsolved issues mentioned in the first thread or sending back Mujib's killer. Sheltering a killer of a democratic country's elected president..........whose dirty work are you doing here actually?

Anyway if your IPS is suppose to make us anti-china then you can keep dreaming and consulting with your minion India before "resetting" ties with us.

P.S:- If we don't become anti-China please don't get upset and start destabilizing BD and another proxy war here like you do in ME.

What is so funny? 160 units (To arm each army division with a 16-unit squadron) by 2035 is certainly affordable especially with ToT. Whether we actually do it is a seperate discussion.

Attack helicopters are essential for BA given how difficult most of BD terrain is for tank and troop movement. They will make any land invasion of BD an impossible task for the enemy.

UAVs tech has not yet matured enough to offer the firepower that helicopters can provide.

You answered your own question with one line. You sound like the BAF version of me, dreaming about 160 attack helicopters for BA like the 10 squadrons of fighters. You didn't show the math so i guess you want army to order 10-12 aircraft per every year which unlikely to happen. Army Aviation's whole fleet is small, their helicopter fleet is even smaller and they are based at Dhaka. I don't see them talking about having 10 helicopter per division. They haven't even started the process to buy six more Mi-171 helicopter. Attack helicopter is just plan for now and no suitable option is available except American ones,

More importantly i doubt army thinks that they require 160 attack helicopters while BAF wants to operate it too. Even if we get TOT, it will be transferred to BAF. Army doesn't have any infrastructure or personnel to absorb that and same goes for BAF right now. It funny to see you talking about attack helicopter's TOT while call BAF's aircraft production plan a vanity project.

One UCAV may not provide the firepower a helicopter does but with the price of one Apache you can buy at least five Wing Long 2 which provides more firepower and UCAV has more types of weapon with longer range than attack helicopter. So at cheaper price, operational cost and without risking precious pilots lives we can use UCAV more efficiently than attack helicopter. Armenian-Azerbaijan conflict showed the usefulness of UCAV. When your adversaries have VSHORAD and SHORAD capabilities you wouldn't risk using attack helicopter.

Army has enough anti-tank weapons so besides UCAV we can use our trainers, F-7 to destroy enemy armor. Also new Mi-171sh-VN/Black Hawk can take out enemy armor while transporting troops. So 160 or less attack helicopters with ToT isn't really necessary right now, instead we can get ToT for UCAV, ATGM and combat-transport helicopter like Mi-171VN to do that job.

You misunderstood me...sorry that's my fault because of my choice of words...what I'm trying to say is FM said "সামরিক সহযোগিতার বিষয়ে যুক্তরাষ্ট্রের আগ্রহের বিষয়ে জানতে চাইলে তিনি বলেন , " যুক্তরাষ্ট্র ডিফেন্সে যেতে চায় , ইক্যুইপমেন্ট বিক্রি করতে চায় , কিন্তু আমরা মারামারিতে নাই । সুতরাং ওই বিষয়গুলোতে আমাদের অনীহা আছে " । But Bangladesh itself made initial request for US made weapons (fighter jets,missile systems,attack helicopter) back in 2018
I'm sure Bangladesh knew the pros and cons of buying US weapons and still made that request. Now US is responding to that request and FM is saying "amra mara mari te nai, amader oniha ase ei sheei"...so yeah..its very very confusing what Bangladesh actually wants.

That idiot said the same thing during Turkey tour. Our procurement doesn't match with his statement. I guess he is trying to say we will not be too aggressive or part of any rivalry. Probably an eyewash while continuing to purchase arms. Anyway even if we don't buy any major weapon systems it shouldn't be a problem, like it never did before contrary what some other people saying here. At the end it's up to the military what we buy while FM, PM handles the rest.

The money for paying the Chinese comes from textile exports to USA, Japan & Europe.
At some point expect USA, Japan and European countries are going to tell you to buy their products and stop subsidizing China or lose access to their textile markets.

Now who's being dirty? Show us an example where the west actually did it.

You need to decide what is important for you - Rohaniyas or China.

Both are greatly important beside the west block. Both need to agree to solve the Rohingya issue. If you are thinking weapon and Rohingya issue is everything here then you are mistaken.

 

[Bengal71]

Bangladesh's foreign policy in a nutshell:
"Build us stuff, hire our labor or buy our T-shirts otherwise F*** off.
You are either for our T-shirts or against our T-shirts."

Bangladesh wants the US and China to fight over who builds the airport in Noakhali for example.

Not a bad foreign policy I must say.

Bangladesh needs to decide whether they care about the Rohingya issue.

You cannot say you care about it and then sign deals with countries that protect Myanmar from UN Security Council resolutions and turn around & expect others to do your dirty work.

On a side note Bangladesh would be better off looking at F-16s or equivalent frontline fighter aircraft rather than Apaches or attack helicopters

@idune @Atlas @bluesky @The Ronin @DalalErMaNodi

What stopped the US from solving the Rohingya issue so far then? It only takes one phone call from the US president and a bit of cowboy talk for the Burmese junta to go back to his hole and take back the Rohingya.

 

[nahtanbob]

Excuse me!! Our dirty work?! You sound like these Rohingyas are part of some kind of CIA black op or Mexican drug cartel. I thought it was always the other way around for USA. Ethnic groups including Rohingyas in Burma are suffering more than two decades. The EU at least maintains arms embargo on Myanmar.

Excuse me - are you suggesting USA does not have an arms embargo on Myanmar ?

Tell me again what USA has done so far except putting sanctions on some Burmese military officers? It was quite clear that the west can't do shit in UN while China, Russia protect Myanmar. In the meanwhile your closest allies are investing, supplying weapons and even supporting Myanmar in UN.

Let us get one thing clear. The biggest supporter of Myanmar is China. They cast the veto on economic sanctions.

P.S:- If we don't become anti-China please don't become upset and start destabilizing BD and another proxy war here like you do in ME.

I could care less what Bangladesh does with China. Do not complain to do more about the Rohaniyas while you want to happily do business with the primary backers of the butchers of Rohaniyas. How hard is it for you to comprehend ?

Not a bad foreign policy I must say.


What stopped the US from solving the Rohingya issue so far then? It only takes one phone from the US president and bit of cowboy talk for the Burmese junta to go back to his hole and take back the Rohingya.

I doubt the Myanmar junta will listen. they have been a reclusive bunch for a long time.

 

[Bengal71]

Excuse me - are you suggesting USA does not have an arms embargo on Myanmar ?



Let us get one thing clear. The biggest supporter of Myanmar is China. They cast the veto on economic sanctions.



I could care less what Bangladesh does with China. Do not complain to do more about the Rohaniyas while you want to happily do business with the primary backers of the butchers of Rohaniyas. How hard is it for you to comprehend ?


I doubt the Myanmar junta will listen. they have been a reclusive bunch for a long time.

Cowboy talk is not exactly known as making a plea. So them listeing or not is not even a consideration. They need to be told what to do and shoved down their throats.

The truth is both China and USA want to exploit the Rohingya issue and try to get Burma on their side. None of these two powers have any interest in solving it for us because there is no benefit in it for them.

 

[idune]

Bangladesh defense forces are already way behind catching up in previous generation of arms and equipments, not to mention current generation. Instead of listening to some petty arms selling agency posing as "expert" ,defense forces could think and concentrate on educating, planning and investin in future tech and warfare. Loitering munition is one such platform. Its cost effective,extremely accurate and easily obtainable and adaptable. It is imperative for defense forces with small budget to have such capability than looking for $40 million a piece hardware so that some people can brag. Additionally, defense forces has to have capability of facing such system from enemy. It is guaranteed enemy around Bangladesh will have such system. Current air defense is NO answer for these type of Loitering munition.