Seeing from the news reporting of Bangladeshi media, Burmese media and other Asian media (which we should look at) - There are stark differences. The deliberate bias of both the Bangladeshi media and Burmese media are clearly present. But we are all human aren't we?
But, one thing I did notice in the is that our border security officials are not clear as to what constitutes the water lines. They are not sure whether or not those fishermen crossed the line. And that is a cause for concern.
While there is no information regarding the particular unfortunate fishing vessel in question, it is worth noting that most (if not all) of these small rural fishing boats do not carry sonar or radar equipment. Or in other words, they don't carry any equipment whatsoever. Since it was a 'fishing boat', it is likely to have been a very rudimentary vessel.
Given the tensions in that part of Burma, one should take all the necessary precautions. Did Bangladesh' law, its security forces take these measures to ensure safety of its citizens?
Going into international waters without equipment is never a bright idea. You will attract all manner of dangers.
Well, the Tatmadaw also use Chinese weaponry. I don't see how Bangladesh using Chinese weapons makes any point.
I believe we have talked enough about Burma. Let's look at how Burma can potentially see Bangladesh as an adversary.
Let's begin from strategy. What would be their basic strategy against an opponent like Bangladesh? The idea here would be to see the Way of an adversary. The Way meaning the moral fiber of the adversary in question, the coherence of social order, the popularity of the government, or the common morale. Under the correct conditions, a small group can prevail over a large group. And these conditions are justice, order, cohesion and morale. Regardless of equipment and numbers, those who run a moribund organization are bound to perish and those who run a viable one will be the victors.
See, during the Arab war against the Persians, the Persian forces were far better trained and equipped along with the numbers to back them up. This is relative to the force led by Khalid Ibn al-Walid. And yet, Al-Khalid emerged as the decisive victor in every battle against the more numerically and technologically advanced Persian army. Now that is a true mark of a brilliant general. Indeed, military history has shown this. There are so many examples.
Now ask yourselves, how do you fare in the above? I leave it to all of you to figure it out. Do not blame anyone (or any country for that matter) if it isn't anything good.
