What's new

FM’s stance likely to hamper Bangladesh interests

The Ronin

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Mar 24, 2017
Messages
3,386
Reaction score
0
Country
Bangladesh
Location
Bangladesh
Foreign minister AK Abdul Momen’s position for withdrawing objections lodged with the United Nations on the disputes with India and Myanmar involving Bangladesh’s claim in deep sea is likely to compromise the country’s interests, according to diplomats in New York.

After his meeting with Indian external affairs minister S Jaishankar on August 20, Momen told journalists at his office that they had discussed how to resolve disputes related to the claims on the continental shelf in the Bay of Bengal and both the countries would ‘mutually withdraw their objections lodged with the United Nations.’

A diplomat at the Bangladesh Permanent Mission in New York said that they were surprised when they came to know about the statement made by foreign minister Momen involving the disputes with India [and Myanmar].

‘It would be a disastrous decision if Bangladesh withdraws the objections without specific solutions to the claims we as a country have made on the deep sea,’ a senior diplomat in New York said.

‘Bangladesh may put its claims on about 10,000 square kilometres of areas in deep sea at risk and another dispute over a coordinate set by India along the Bangladesh border may remain unresolved.’

The disputes popped up as India, in 2009, submitted its claim on the continental shelf of the Bay of the Bengal cutting off Bangladesh’s access to the deep sea and creating a dispute over 9,000 square kilometres of areas claimed by Bangladesh.

India, in 2009, created another dispute by setting a coordinate 2.3 miles inside the Bangladesh territory on the official maps.

Bangladesh immediately lodged separate objections with the UN on the matters as the maritime boundary delimitation between the two countries was unresolved back in 2009.

Bangladesh submitted, on 25 February 2011, to the Commission on the Limits on the Continental Shelf information on the limits of the continental shelf within 200 nautical miles from the baseline from which the breadth of the territorial sea is measured.

India put an objection on record against Bangladesh’s claims, according to documents available at the UN website.

An arbitration proceeding with India came to an end in 2014 with a verdict fixing Bangladesh’s maritime border with the country.

Bangladesh, in accordance with the verdict, published a gazette in 2015 declaring its baseline, territorial sea and exclusive economic zone.

It said that the limits of the territorial sea of Bangladesh would be 12 nautical miles measured seaward from the baselines.

The outer limit of the exclusive economic zone of Bangladesh is traced in such a manner that every point of the outer limit mentioned is at a distance of two hundred nautical miles from the nearest baseline point.

Bangladesh, on 30 March 2016, submitted a list of geographical coordinates of points concerning the straight baseline for measuring the breadth of the territorial sea.

The coordinates of points are Land Boundary Terminus (with India), Putney Island, Dakhin Bhasan Char, Cox’s Bazar and Southern end of St. Martin’s Island.

After two years of publishing the Bangladesh government document, India in 2017 raised its objections to the UN claiming that the base points used by Bangladesh for drawing the straight baselines ‘are at variance’ with the base points used in the award dated 7 July 2014 by the arbitral tribunal in the matter of Bay of Bengal maritime boundary arbitration between Bangladesh and India.

India also claimed that the exclusive economic zone of Bangladesh measured from the baselines using base points Putney Island Southern end of St. Martin’s Island ‘results in seaward shift of Bangladesh’s exclusive economic zone and consequently encroaches into the Indian exclusive economic zone in the grey area recognised by the tribunal’.

Myanmar also lodged a submission to the UN, in December 2008, to establish its claim in deep sea from the west coast abutting the Bay of Bengal, including around the Preparis and Co Co Islands, which Bangladesh disputes.

Bangladesh objected to the Myanmar submission claiming that the areas Myanmar was seeking in the outer continental shelf form part of the natural prolongation of Bangladesh.

The cases on objections recorded by Bangladesh, India and Myanmar are still pending with the UN.

http://www.newagebd.net/article/822...WoGDlpRNJTLGB3PGWiKeEHUFOM46DFRNEISSpzTLJZXZw
 
.
In simple words Bharati b★stards wants to cut off Bangladesh & blockade us at the deep sea

& this cuck has agreed to it.

What kind of rat as*s b★stardis is this. Did he even read Bangladesh Navy's long term strategic projection?


Did this cuck consult the Navy brass before unilaterally agreeing to this?
Hasina seriously need to clean her house ! But how ? ঠগ বাছতে আবার গ্রাম না উজাড় হয়ে যায় ! আমাদের আসলে ভাই কিছু বিকল্প শক্তিশালী আর দেশ প্রেমিক রাজনৈতিক দল দরকার কি বলেন ? আওয়ামী লীগের ছত্রছায়াতেই এরা বেড়ে উঠবে তবে তবে পরে ধরাশায়ী করবে তাদের দরকার হলে ।

অনেকটা , " তোমারে বধিবে যেই , গোকুলে বাড়িছে সেই।" এর মত অবস্থা ;)

Al ministers are acting as ***.holes !
 
Last edited:
.
Murkho Jahel lokjon kemne montri hoy?

I am 110% sure this guy never read the maritime boundary issue in detail.

Navy is the sole responsible party who works with the physical & technical aspect of this issue.

Without consulting them he should not even open his trap.

Did he consult the National assembly on the matter? No, he just go on doing stupid shit.He should have given the Protocol response.

It's a matter of national sovereignty. Without consulting cabinet & assembly why did he do it?

That dalal foreign secretary is responsible too.
But now what is going to happen bro ?How can we recover this mistake made by this idiot?
 
Last edited:
.
Hasina seriously need to clean her house ! But how ? ঠগ বাছতে আবার গ্রাম না উজাড় হয়ে যায় !
Hasina herself is the main ghost in the mustard seed. So, how do you then blow away the ghost by the Mustard Seed Power? BD will do better without her, without BAL and with functional democracy.

She has hijacked democracy to suit her interest and the result is seen in her choice for the post of FM who has probably little knowledge on the term, "Continental Shelf".
 
Last edited:
. .
How can we get this functional democracy ? Are you talking about democracy under a caretaker govt?
She hijacked the CTG system to suit her and her master, India. It was BAL that forced BNP to concede to their demand and introduce the CTG, and it is again BAL itself that destroyed the system.

She has many lame excuses for successfully annihilated the system. In reality, she did it to hide her role in the Pilkhana BDR carnage. A judicial system under a democratically elected govt would have immediately found the real culprits behind BDR rebellion.

Study the roles played by Taposh, Guru Nanak and Matiya Chowdhury. Note also the picture showing a microbus waiting at the opposite of the Durbar Hall main door across the road. Check also why did they fire and killed General Shakil. Who are these guys that initiated the killings? Why that microbus was allowed to leave the place immediately? Ask Taposh to get the answers.
 
.
She hijacked the CTG system to suit her and her master, India.
She actually applied the theory successfully . Before Khaleda Zia also applied it but failed ! So if someone is guilty then not Hasina alone .
It was BAL that forced BNP to concede to their demand and introduce the CTG, and it is again BAL itself that destroyed the system.
Yes agree , same as Khaleda Zia started it but failed , and when Hasina remove it , then BNP also started movement for her own interest . However in this war , hasina won, !

She has many lame excuses for successfully annihilated the system. In reality, she did it to hide her role in the Pilkhana BDR carnage.

This part is extremely dangerous and sensitive ! You need to provide concrete evidences in this case !
 
.
Murkho Jahel lokjon kemne montri hoy?

I am 110% sure this guy never read the maritime boundary issue in detail.

Navy is the sole responsible party who works with the physical & technical aspect of this issue.

Without consulting them he should not even open his trap.

Did he consult the National assembly on the matter? No, he just go on doing stupid shit.He should have given the Protocol response.

It's a matter of national sovereignty. Without consulting cabinet & assembly why did he do it?

That dalal foreign secretary is responsible too.
Sure so wht u mean, any BD official who ill take stand for BD* rights against India is a traitor???? Wow nice
 
.
Hasina seriously need to clean her house ! But how ? ঠগ বাছতে আবার গ্রাম না উজাড় হয়ে যায় ! আমাদের আসলে ভাই কিছু বিকল্প শক্তিশালী আর দেশ প্রেমিক রাজনৈতিক দল দরকার কি বলেন ? আওয়ামী লীগের ছত্রছায়াতেই এরা বেড়ে উঠবে তবে তবে পরে ধরাশায়ী করবে তাদের দরকার হলে ।

অনেকটা , " তোমারে বধিবে যেই , গোকুলে বাড়িছে সেই।" এর মত অবস্থা ;)

Al ministers are acting as ***.holes !


:hitwall::hitwall::hitwall::hitwall::hitwall:
 
. .
Ok guys. Since I have cooled down a bit, I am retracting my initial outburst & harsh words. Here is some points on this matter in my view.

First & foremost Bangladesh shall NEVER retract the litigations from UN.


Reason 1: You should never give up leverage on any situation where national interest is at stake.

2. Giving up this litigation would mean going back to square one.

3. In last 50 years India never gave us our fare share of river water. Teasta deal is still a far fetched idea. They wouldn't have solved the sea boundary issue too if not then caretaker government & our defence establishment went to UN court and establish our rightful claim.

4. India had always envisioned to cut Bangladesh of deep sea/continental shelf in a bid to blocked Bangladesh in sea & make us depend on them.

5. To Achieve no.4 they found an ally in the savage junta in our south. Together they laid their claims in a way that BD would be completely blocked from deep sea/international water & encircled by this two hostile nations if they succeeded.

6.Thanks to brave step by caretaker government & our defence establishment we defeated this hostile conspiracy against our nation & won in the UN courts.

7. This time too both india & their dog has laid their claims in a way it will significantly harm our interest in continental shelf.

8. If they succeed in their bid, our access to the sea will reduced/narrowed & we will lose/reduce our claims on the marine recourse in deep sea.

This is a matter of national interest & we don't afford this blunders. National interest is above all.
 
Last edited:
.
I never liked this guy, seems like he would agree to cuckoldry if the Indian FM requested it. What a bitch

Ok guys. Since I have cooled down a bit, I am retracting my initial outburst & harsh words. Here is some points on this matter in my view.

First & foremost Bangladesh shall NEVER retract the litigations from UN.


Reason 1: You should never give up leverage on any situation where national interest is at stake.

2. Giving up this litigation would mean going back to square one.

3. In last 50 years India never gave us our fare share of river water. Teasta deal is still a far fetched idea. They wouldn't have solved the sea boundary issue too if not then caretaker government & our defence establishment went to UN court and establish our rightful claim.

4. India had always envisioned to cut Bangladesh of deep sea/continental shelf in a bid to blocked Bangladesh in sea & make us depend on them.

5. To Achieve no.4 they found an ally in the savage junta in our south. Together they laid their claims in a way that BD would be completely blocked from deep sea/international water & encircled by this two hostile nations if they succeeded.

6.Thanks to brave step by caretaker government & our defence establishment we defeated this hostile conspiracy against our nation & won in the UN courts.

7. This time too both india & their dog has laid their claims in a way it will significantly harm our interest in continental shelf.

8. If they succeed in their bid, our access to the sea will reduced/narrowed & we will lose/reduce our claims on the marine recourse in deep sea.

This is a matter of national interest & we don't afford this blunders. National interest is above all.
Wouldn’t mean shit if this cuck had already signed something or is going to
 
.
He is an Economist. Why he was tasked to manage foreign relations is beyond me...
 
.
Back
Top Bottom