Govt. Focuses on Deep Sea Port

[genmirajborgza786]

The author of these words is an officer of Bangladesh Army.

in fact the Chinese have been quiet interested on Chittagong & sonadia ports remember Khaleda Zia's last visit to china in 2005

Bangladeshi PM kicks off 5-day offical visit to China

Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao (L) holds a ceremony to welcome visiting Bangladeshi Prime Minister Khaleda Zia in the Great Hall of the People in Beijing, capital of China, August 18, 2005.

People's Daily Online -- Bangladeshi PM kicks off 5-day offical visit to China

& after sometime only disturbances started brewing in Bangladesh & by Oct 2006 Khaleda Zia was out & then a whole new Pandora's box was opened by Moeen u Ahmed/Fakhruddin Ahmed & since then nothing has been the same again, join the dots of these events & you will clearly see a pattern emerges from the grey , in short it was a masterstroke delivered by India where by they fooled both the army & the west (prof yunus & the minus two formula anybody ? ) , now that was some strategy ! whatever one says but the fact remains that India's diplomacy is miles ahead of both Pakistan & Bangladesh ( both of whose foreign affairs departments have always been managed by complete duffers no two thoughts about that)

 

[eastwatch]

1) We are an independent country and we should not be that calleous so as to give away a part of our sovereignty to any country including China. 80% of Bangladesh population will oppose it. It is very strange to see how people here are ready to give away our sovereignty to a foreign country only to win a debate contest.

2) The reality is China has never approached BD to give away its sovereignty by allowing to build its Naval facilities, but here the posters are drumming up that. Issue in this thread is not to build a Chinese naval base. The issue is if China will ever use the proposed port for transporting itsgoods to and from Sonadia. I have never crossed a news that said Burma agreed to a BD-China transit.

3) Someone referred to Nagoya which has a deep seaport and is handling only a limited shipment. But, is Nagoya port a $7 billion port built by foreign countries? We should not compare our presnt status with one of the richest countries in the world. When and if BD can build anything on its own, only then any such project is supportable even if it is a white elephant. Why to take a big loan and eat GHEE?

4) Another point is the futuristic projection of economy. A country builds or acquires many new technologies to expand production and trade. By the time BD is able to expand trade in that way, it will also be able to build up its technology muscle to construct such a port by itself.

5) In the present context, if there is no prospect of India using this port, and unless BD and China talk with Burma to get a BD-China transit via that country, there will remain a very little substance in the project. I am surprised at the naivity of Kalu Miah, he is insisting to trust a DRAFT economic feasibility report whose validity has expired with new developments in the geo-politics of this region.

6) I propose a new FR be prepared without those bright and false data feeding by the GoB. The new FR should consider all the data that reflect the new geo-political developments in the region. Do not ask me again about my credibility, but note one thing, in Japan, I have seen companies, with order from the Ministry of Finance and-------- , to prepare new FR due to a changing circumstance or due to non-inclusion of a vital information in the previous FR, specially for the foreign projects. No FR is a Bible and there is no reason to say that it cannot be revised, upgraded or completely re-written.

 

[kalu_miah]

1) We are an independent country and we should not be that calleous so as to give away a part of our sovereignty to any country including China. 80% of Bangladesh population will oppose it. It is very strange to see how people here are ready to give away our sovereignty to a foreign country only to win a debate contest.

2) The reality is China has never approached BD to give away its sovereignty by allowing to build its Naval facilities, but here the posters are drumming up that. Issue in this thread is not to build a Chinese naval base. The issue is if China will ever use the proposed port for transporting itsgoods to and from Sonadia. I have never crossed a news that said Burma agreed to a BD-China transit.

3) Someone referred to Nagoya which has a deep seaport and is handling only a limited shipment. But, is Nagoya port a $7 billion port built by foreign countries? We should not compare our presnt status with one of the richest countries in the world. When and if BD can build anything on its own, only then any such project is supportable even if it is a white elephant. Why to take a big loan and eat GHEE?

4) Another point is the futuristic projection of economy. A country builds or acquires many new technologies to expand production and trade. By the time BD is able to expand trade in that way, it will also be able to build up its technology muscle to construct such a port by itself.

5) In the present context, if there is no prospect of India using this port, and unless BD and China talk with Burma to get a BD-China transit via that country, there will remain a very little substance in the project. I am surprised at the naivity of Kalu Miah, he is insisting to trust a DRAFT economic feasibility report whose validity has expired with new developments in the geo-politics of this region.

6) I propose a new FR be prepared without those bright and false data feeding by the GoB. The new FR should consider all the data that reflect the new geo-political developments in the region. Do not ask me again about my credibility, but note one thing, in Japan, I have seen companies, with order from the Ministry of Finance and-------- , to prepare new FR due to a changing circumstance or due to non-inclusion of a vital information in the previous FR, specially for the foreign projects. No FR is a Bible and there is no reason to say that it cannot be revised, upgraded or completely re-written.

Why would building a port and financing it by China mean giving away sovereignty to China? If UAE funds it and builds it, does that mean we are giving away our sovereignty to UAE?

I clearly pointed out China-BD traffic should not be included in any feasibility report, we can only depend on Bangladesh traffic alone, not even NE states traffic which has the option to go through Burmese ports like Kyukphyu.

I welcome a new updated feasibility report and lets publish these reports, old and new on the web, so everyone can see them.

 

[idune]

1) We are an independent country and we should not be that calleous so as to give away a part of our sovereignty to any country including China. 80% of Bangladesh population will oppose it. It is very strange to see how people here are ready to give away our sovereignty to a foreign country only to win a debate contest.

China had been one of the largest infrastructure development investor and main supplier of defense equipment and had been enhancing Bangladesh sovereignty, not the other way around.

That type of insinuation is utter rubbish talk because no one in their right mind call investment as taking over sovereignty. That kind of rubbish talks normally indian establishment and media propagate to compete with Chinese capital. In Bangladesh because of indian domesticated group we hear this kind of indian propaganda through Bangladeshi bought up crowd.

4) Another point is the futuristic projection of economy. A country builds or acquires many new technologies to expand production and trade. By the time BD is able to expand trade in that way, it will also be able to build up its technology muscle to construct such a port by itself.

A fast growing economy or country does not wait till own resource is available. In such case further development stalled and opportunity missed. Rather countries build to progress and adjust and distribute burden into future period of progress.

5) In the present context, if there is no prospect of India using this port, and unless BD and China talk with Burma to get a BD-China transit via that country, there will remain a very little substance in the project. I am surprised at the naivity of Kalu Miah, he is insisting to trust a DRAFT economic feasibility report whose validity has expired with new developments in the geo-politics of this region.

That is another way of saying Bangladesh deep sea port is india dependent, which is NOT. Besides, Bangladesh has it's own needs, business and strategic cases to pursue. serving foreign trade is not dominant factor here.

6) I propose a new FR be prepared without those bright and false data feeding by the GoB. The new FR should consider all the data that reflect the new geo-political developments in the region. Do not ask me again about my credibility, but note one thing, in Japan, I have seen companies, with order from the Ministry of Finance and-------- , to prepare new FR due to a changing circumstance or due to non-inclusion of a vital information in the previous FR, specially for the foreign projects. No FR is a Bible and there is no reason to say that it cannot be revised, upgraded or completely re-written.

That is your opinion but far from facts and reality indians and many other projects.

 

[eastwatch]

Why would building a port and financing it by China mean giving away sovereignty to China? If UAE funds it and builds it, does that mean we are giving away our sovereignty to UAE?

This is what you have propagated as one of the reasons for building the Sonadia port. Check your earlier post. It was I who asked you the same about the UAE participation, but, you are here repeating my question shamelessly. But, anyway, a new feasibility study report is a necessity before jumping to a conclusion that this port is immediately needed.

BD, Burma and China should sit together, discuss and resolve the problem of BD-China transit over Burmese land. Unless this issue is resolved there is no way BD should spend such a vast amount of money on that lame duck port, although India will very eagerly use it.

Instead of going after a big name port, BD should first re-build the Mongla port and then construct a small new port in/near Kuakata. Mongla will serve BD west as well as Nepal and Bhutan. Kuakata will serve the middle Bangladesh comprising greater Barisal, Faridpur, south of greater Dhaka district, west of greater Mymensing and Kushtia with a very large population living there.

Unless China uses Sonadia it will be only India who will use it and will dictate terms on us. India remains to be net gainer if a new port is built because the capacity will be much larger for BD alone to handle. India will then dictate its terms for using this new port. It is as simple as this.

 

[scholseys]

Why would building a port and financing it by China mean giving away sovereignty to China? If UAE funds it and builds it, does that mean we are giving away our sovereignty to UAE?

This is what you have propagated as one of the reasons for building the Sonadia port. Check your earlier post. It was I who asked you the same about the UAE participation, but, you are here repeating my question shamelessly. But, anyway, a new feasibility study report is a necessity before jumping to a conclusion that this port is immediately needed.

BD, Burma and China should sit together, discuss and resolve the problem of BD-China transit over Burmese land. Unless this issue is resolved there is no way BD should spend such a vast amount of money on that lame duck port, although India will very eagerly use it.

Instead of going after a big name port, BD should first re-build the Mongla port and then construct a small new port in/near Kuakata. Mongla will serve BD west as well as Nepal and Bhutan. Kuakata will serve the middle Bangladesh comprising greater Barisal, Faridpur, south of greater Dhaka district, west of greater Mymensing and Kushtia with a very large population living there.

Unless China uses Sonadia it will be only India who will use it and will dictate terms on us. India remains to be net gainer if a new port is built because the capacity will be much larger for BD alone to handle. India will then dictate its terms for using this new port. It is as simple as this.

we don't have the communication infrastructure to handle the Indian demand do we?

 

[eastwatch]

Look, when we are stuck with an expensive new port unable to earn and service the huge loan, India will impose its will. Even without an infrastructure it can make best use of the situation. It will ask BD to open the present Ctg. port for handling its cargoes from calcutta to Tripura.

However, I believe, if the GoB really constructs the port, it will certainly construct a better infrastructure before the port construction starts. This infra will be needed to handle the huge construction works in the port. So, when this road is damaged after a few years of construction use, the highway deptt. will re-construct it making it a good 4-lane or 6-lane highway.

Anyway, I believe a Chinese cargo handling/transport business through Burma is a needed component for the survival of this port. This is why there should be a tripartite agreement before the GoB starts asking for finance.

 

[kalu_miah]

Port in Kuakata?

Need for Indian and Chinese traffic for the feasibility of deep sea port?

You have no clue about Bangladesh shipping needs. Stop being an expert without credentials. Show some sources for your claims or state your credentials. Otherwise your mumblings are just that hot air from a layman who has no expertise, information or data and is simply spouting nonsense.

As I said before, I have no problem with a new updated feasibility report done by experts. That is the only thing we agree on and the only sensible thing you have said so far. I also support looking at the old feasibility report as a reference to see what mistake was done on that one.

 

[eastwatch]

Port in Kuakata?

Need for Indian and Chinese traffic for the feasibility of deep sea port?

You have no clue about Bangladesh shipping needs. Stop being an expert without credentials. Show some sources for your claims or state your credentials. Otherwise your mumblings are just that hot air from a layman who has no expertise, information or data and is simply spouting nonsense.

As I said before, I have no problem with a new updated feasibility report done by experts. That is the only thing we agree on and the only sensible thing you have said so far. I also support looking at the old feasibility report as a reference to see what mistake was done on that one.

What makes you think you yourself are an expert of every thing? Did I ever ask you to present your credentials? Why do you have that audacity to ask others? It is a discussion forum and is not a place to brag about things that is someone's very personal. My posts will show what I know and what I am, and I do not need a certification from the most indiscreet guy like you.

It seems you are in a dilemma because your Kalu Miah dream of uniting with ASEAN will remain only a pipe dream in the near future if Burma does not allow a transit. But, is Burma willing to give us transit even to China? Ask yourself and get your answer. Sonadia is not viable without a Burma route to China. Now, when I say this you want to see my credentials. Note also, Kuakata is more needed because it lies at the middle point of the country. Its construction will speed up the development of a large part of Bangladesh.

See the map and also the road map of BD if you have no opportunity to see them frequently. Why do you guys want the middle BD to suffer with a port far away? Note also, a Kukata port will be needed even to serve Sonadia, once it is built. Can't you see it, are you such a blind guy, yet pretending to be an expert of everything? Oh, Kuakata is not related to your ASEAN pipe dream, isn't it? So, you come with that India crap.

How about your very Nagoya port, why was it neede although there are other ports nearby? Do not bring India unnecessarily here. We need our port for our use, and if the GoB gives permission for Indian transit, it is not a matter to discuss in this thread. please know the limit of each thread.

Now, thank you for agreeing to my main proposal about rewriting the FS for Sonadia. Now, think about Kuakata, you will find rationale in it, too.

 

[kalu_miah]

What makes you think you yourself are an expert of every thing? Did I ever ask you to present your credentials? Why do you have that audacity to ask others? It is a discussion forum and is not a place to brag about things that is someone's very personal. My posts will show what I know and what I am, and I do not need a certification from the most indiscreet guy like you.

It seems you are in a dilemma because your Kalu Miah dream of uniting with ASEAN will remain only a pipe dream in the near future if Burma does not allow a transit. But, is Burma willing to give us transit even to China? Ask yourself and get your answer. Sonadia is not viable without a Burma route to China. Now, when I say this you want to see my credentials. Note also, Kuakata is more needed because it lies at the middle point of the country. Its construction will speed up the development of a large part of Bangladesh.

See the map and also the road map of BD if you have no opportunity to see them frequently. Why do you guys want the middle BD to suffer with a port far away? Note also, a Kukata port will be needed even to serve Sonadia, once it is built. Can't you see it, are you such a blind guy, yet pretending to be an expert of everything? Oh, Kuakata is not related to your ASEAN pipe dream, isn't it? So, you come with that India crap.

How about your very Nagoya port, why was it neede although there are other ports nearby? Do not bring India unnecessarily here. We need our port for our use, and if the GoB gives permission for Indian transit, it is not a matter to discuss in this thread. please know the limit of each thread.

Now, thank you for agreeing to my main proposal about rewriting the FS for Sonadia. Now, think about Kuakata, you will find rationale in it, too.

Looks like we are going in circles. I never claimed to be expert, but I have confidence in expert created feasibility reports, the old one or any new one.

You can propose Kuakata port all you want, but that does not make it justifiable, unless it is verified and recommended by professional experts.

So here is what I propose:

- publish old feasibility report
- create new feasibility report and publish it on web

 

[eastwatch]

@kalu_miah, thanks for your post. But, I would like you to note the mind of Burma when taliking about Sonadia. I have noticed some of the posters have tilted intentionally towards Burma as if Burma is a saviour from an octupus called India. People have reasons to figerpoint India for many of our problems. But, Burma itself is same. Rather, when India is trying to engage us in trade, border issues, and water sharing, transit and so many other things, can someone tell us what kind of engagements could our poor country make with Burma?

It is zero or almost zero. Think of the asian highway (AH) route, Burma did not even want a route that connects that country directly with BD. The route has been finalized at India-Sylhet-Indian NE-some other Indian NE states-Burma. It means Burma wants no direct connection with a blacky muslim Bangladesh. It is crystal clear. If that is the final route of AH, there is no way BD will ever be able to intermingle with other ASEAN countries and China through Burma.

Burma rejected outright an AH route that goes directly from Bangladesh. That country's attitude towards its own Muslim citizens, Rohingyas manifest how they look down upon them only because they look like us, our twin brothers in another land.

So, I request you to take notice of the situation that may arise when BD builds a large port without first getting a nod from that no-God country called Burma on the BD-China transit. We have to understand that Burma is no client state of China. China cannot force Burma to open its border for the transit to Sonadia.

So, a prior tripartiate treaty is needed before we can start asking for foreign loan for the Sonadia port. In fact, Sonadia port was initially considered in the light of a prospect of serving Yunnan through Burma. I think, it should still remain the foremost condition for building such a costly port.

About Kuakata. I have noticed that not only Kuakata, but, BD also needs many medium/small size river ports along the Padma, jamuna, Sitalakhya to serve many zones of the country. Countries with navigable rivers must build river ports so that cargoes can be loaded from Ctg (with or without Sonadia) and unloaded in those river ports.

For example, Narayanganj and Ashuganj are two such river ports. The river port system is good for a riverine country like Bangladesh. Many other river points, such as, Bhola, Shibchar/Madaripur, Faridpur, Aricha, etc. must be designated for the future development of ports that can handle containers. A wider port facility will bring about a larger economic activities that will raise the GDP.

 

[kalu_miah]

@kalu_miah, thanks for your post. But, I would like you to note the mind of Burma when taliking about Sonadia. I have noticed some of the posters have tilted intentionally towards Burma as if Burma is a saviour from an octupus called India. People have reasons to figerpoint India for many of our problems. But, Burma itself is same. Rather, when India is trying to engage us in trade, border issues, and water sharing, transit and so many other things, can someone tell us what kind of engagements could our poor country make with Burma?

It is zero or almost zero. Think of the asian highway (AH) route, Burma did not even want a route that connects that country directly with BD. The route has been finalized at India-Sylhet-Indian NE-some other Indian NE states-Burma. It means Burma wants no direct connection with a blacky muslim Bangladesh. It is crystal clear. If that is the final route of AH, there is no way BD will ever be able to intermingle with other ASEAN countries and China through Burma.

Burma rejected outright an AH route that goes directly from Bangladesh. That country's attitude towards its own Muslim citizens, Rohingyas manifest how they look down upon them only because they look like us, our twin brothers in another land.

So, I request you to take notice of the situation that may arise when BD builds a large port without first getting a nod from that no-God country called Burma on the BD-China transit. We have to understand that Burma is no client state of China. China cannot force Burma to open its border for the transit to Sonadia.

So, a prior tripartiate treaty is needed before we can start asking for foreign loan for the Sonadia port. In fact, Sonadia port was initially considered in the light of a prospect of serving Yunnan through Burma. I think, it should still remain the foremost condition for building such a costly port.

About Kuakata. I have noticed that not only Kuakata, but, BD also needs many medium/small size river ports along the Padma, jamuna, Sitalakhya to serve many zones of the country. Countries with navigable rivers must build river ports so that cargoes can be loaded from Ctg (with or without Sonadia) and unloaded in those river ports.

For example, Narayanganj and Ashuganj are two such river ports. The river port system is good for a riverine country like Bangladesh. Many other river points, such as, Bhola, Shibchar/Madaripur, Faridpur, Aricha, etc. must be designated for the future development of ports that can handle containers. A wider port facility will bring about a larger economic activities that will raise the GDP.

You are welcome.

You are assuming that traffic from Indian NE states and Chinese Yunnan via Burma is essential to make Sonadia deep sea port feasible. Does it say that in the old feasibility report?

No port should be built based on assumptions from other countries which may or may not materialize in the future. We can only depend on the increasing traffic need from Bangladesh which has already exceeded 1.5 million TEU in Chittagong in 2010-2011 time period and probably exceeded 2 million TEU by 2012 or will do so in a few years.

As for river ports, we can definitely do with more, but I think they are not topic of discussion here.

I was wondering, how did countries like China and UAE become interested in a mega venture like this involving billions without running their own independent feasibility report? Are they not concerned that an investment will become a failure and they have to bear some responsibility, as I would imagine the builder/financier would also be involved in running this port.

Our sea access is our only connection to the world economy and to all neighbor nations other than India. I think even to reduce our dependence on India, this deep sea port will play a vital strategic and economic role, that cannot be measured with money.

But as mentioned before, let us all wait for a new updated feasibility report, that should only count Bangladesh traffic.