Protest continues against India's pressure for transit
- Thread starter BanglaBhoot
- Start date
BanglaBhoot
RETIRED TTA
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2007
- Messages
- 8,839
- Reaction score
- 5
- Country
- Location
New Delhi claims that granting the transit facility from Bangladesh to Nepal via 20Km of Indian territory would impinge on its sovereignty!
The corridor being demanded by India if it was limited to being a mere transit facility would be of interest to Bangladesh provided it extended right up to China thereby granting Bangladesh access to that country through India's North-East. It would be of even greater benefit to Bangladesh if it went in the opposite direction also right through India to Pakistan so that Bangladesh can have access to that country using Indian territory as a transit facility.
The corridor being demanded by India if it was limited to being a mere transit facility would be of interest to Bangladesh provided it extended right up to China thereby granting Bangladesh access to that country through India's North-East. It would be of even greater benefit to Bangladesh if it went in the opposite direction also right through India to Pakistan so that Bangladesh can have access to that country using Indian territory as a transit facility.
Vinod2070
BANNED
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2007
- Messages
- 10,552
- Reaction score
- -2
- Country
- Location
You are right. All this small mindedness needs to go away and the countries should freely trade with each other and allow transit to each other.
India needs to take the lead. We live in a difficult neighborhood with no stable democracy for a thousand miles around.
India needs to take the lead. We live in a difficult neighborhood with no stable democracy for a thousand miles around.
BanglaBhoot
RETIRED TTA
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2007
- Messages
- 8,839
- Reaction score
- 5
- Country
- Location
India Trying to Force Strategic Concessions From Bangladesh - Commentary
By: iStockAnalyst Thursday, July 17, 2008 11:56 PM
The Indian government has presented a draft agreement to the Bangladesh government recently on land transit for free movement of cargo and passenger transports through Bangladesh to its north- eastern states of Meghalaya, Tripura and Mizoram.
The move came at an inappropriate time and quite unexpectedly to the public when the Caretaker Government (CG) has no mandate to take policy decisions. Analysts wonder whether the Indian government is trying to exploit the vulnerability of the CG in a volatile political situation.
One does not know why the Indian government has taken the sensitive issues only three weeks prior to the forthcoming SAARC [South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation] summit in Sri Lanka early next month.
Different political parties and professional groups have already condemned the move. The four-party alliance headed by BNP [Bangladesh Nationalist Party] has already called for protest on July 16 saying the Indian move is aimed at forcing strategic concessions from the weak Caretaker Government to make it a vassal state. "We will resist it to the end," BNP secretary general Delwar Hossain said last week announcing the protest.
The transit issue is not a new phenomenon and has many strategic and socio-economic factors involved in it. The finalisation of an agreement, even taking up the issue seriously for discussion leading to producing a draft is quite sensitive in one hand and requires long home work on the other.
Nonetheless, the Indian High Commission in Dhaka has presented the draft to the Caretaker Government. The High Commissioner Pinak Ranjan Chakravarty has further demanded that the forthcoming foreign secretary meetings of both the countries to be held in Delhi on July 17 and 18 must finalise the agreement.
Another report said India has also demanded the return of Anup Chetiya before the foreign secretary level meeting. Replying to a question last week, Pinak Chakravarty said Delhi will be thankful if Dhaka complies with the request. He, however, refused to comment on transit issue.
The Indian High Commissioner met the foreign secretary Dr Iftekhar Ahmed Chowdhury last Wednesday and spelled out Delhi's views to him on both issues. It seems that the Indian government is working unilaterally bringing pressure on Bangladesh government on the issues.
Last week, senior foreign ministry officials failed to respond to the queries of the press. Reports said the foreign ministry has referred the draft to the Communications Ministry for follow-up. Secretary of the Ministry of Communication reportedly said they are not in a position to act on the draft, as there is no policy decision on it from the country's present political leadership.
Foreign Ministry sources are also of the view that without the policy decision of the Council of Advisers on the subject there is no scope to go ahead with the discussion and deal with the matter. To their knowledge, he said, the council has not discussed the issue.
They said, these are sensitive issues and as far as they believe only an elected government will be able, and have the mandate, to take decision on the issues. It is not new, they said, such proposals also came in the past but no decision was made.
Observers wonder why the Indian government has chosen the present time knowing well that this government has no mandate to take such decision. Even if it works on the line, court cases may stop it before it makes any progress.
The latest Indian draft says its cargo vehicles carrying containers and goods and passenger carriers would cross Bangladesh territory to reach the north-eastern states through several points. They want to enter the Indian territory and return through Tamabil, Bibir Bazar and Khagrachari crossing over to Meghalaya, Tripura and Mizoram states.
The Indian government has proposed the right of the routes and multiple-entry facility to and from 'seven sisters', her north- eastern states.
For Indian cargo vehicles it has proposed seven-day stay permit inside Bangladesh and for passengers' transport, five days' stay.
The proposed agreement will be initially for five years, to be reviewed every year. On expiry of five years, it may be renewed.
Earlier, the Indian government also presented proposals for railway transit to the Caretaker Government. The proposals identified five points to carry goods to the north-eastern states. It suggested that goods train will enter Bangladesh and return through Gadey-Darshana, Shindabad-Meherpur, Petrapole-Benapole and Radhikapur-Shahjadpur points.
The proposal further demanded construction of Akhaura-Agartala section of the railway and using Ahugonj as port of call for Indian vassals arriving with goods from Kolkata and booked for Agartala. Accordingly, the Indian government is also laying railway track from Agartala to Bangladesh border at Akhaura.
Observers wonder why India is pressurising to take concessions from the Caretaker Government. However, similar moves were noticeable in recent past from High Commissioners and Ambassadors of some other countries who wanted to benefit multinationals of their own countries by winning contracts.
One High Commissioner presented a list of five big projects including some projects already involved in political controversy. The Caretaker Government so far resisted such pressure. "Will India win its prize this way?" wonders an expert saying the whole issue should be sorted out under a common regional agenda.
According to experts, this region must form an 'economic union' and things are working towards that direction. Here India must have patience and make more concessions before demanding such strategic gains.
The confidence-gap is the number one problem here, experts view.
Moreover, Bangladesh's surface roads and highways are not wide enough and well-built to take the load of the heavy Indian vehicles. The railway track on the Jamuna Bridge has already showed cracks; besides many other railway bridges are in deplorable condition indicating these are not fit to bear the heavy loads either.
One expert argues that India should make heavy investments in the country's communications system in the first place before demanding facilities. Moreover, he said, the spread of AIDS from the Indian truckers can be a real threat to Bangladesh.
These are the critical aspects that any government in Bangladesh will face in handling the issue.
If India believes Bangladesh's Foreign Secretary will be able to finalise the agreement and the Caretaker Government will be able to deliver the goods, it will be an oversimplification of the explosive issue, said a source.
India Trying to Force Strategic Concessions From Bangladesh - Commentary
By: iStockAnalyst Thursday, July 17, 2008 11:56 PM
The Indian government has presented a draft agreement to the Bangladesh government recently on land transit for free movement of cargo and passenger transports through Bangladesh to its north- eastern states of Meghalaya, Tripura and Mizoram.
The move came at an inappropriate time and quite unexpectedly to the public when the Caretaker Government (CG) has no mandate to take policy decisions. Analysts wonder whether the Indian government is trying to exploit the vulnerability of the CG in a volatile political situation.
One does not know why the Indian government has taken the sensitive issues only three weeks prior to the forthcoming SAARC [South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation] summit in Sri Lanka early next month.
Different political parties and professional groups have already condemned the move. The four-party alliance headed by BNP [Bangladesh Nationalist Party] has already called for protest on July 16 saying the Indian move is aimed at forcing strategic concessions from the weak Caretaker Government to make it a vassal state. "We will resist it to the end," BNP secretary general Delwar Hossain said last week announcing the protest.
The transit issue is not a new phenomenon and has many strategic and socio-economic factors involved in it. The finalisation of an agreement, even taking up the issue seriously for discussion leading to producing a draft is quite sensitive in one hand and requires long home work on the other.
Nonetheless, the Indian High Commission in Dhaka has presented the draft to the Caretaker Government. The High Commissioner Pinak Ranjan Chakravarty has further demanded that the forthcoming foreign secretary meetings of both the countries to be held in Delhi on July 17 and 18 must finalise the agreement.
Another report said India has also demanded the return of Anup Chetiya before the foreign secretary level meeting. Replying to a question last week, Pinak Chakravarty said Delhi will be thankful if Dhaka complies with the request. He, however, refused to comment on transit issue.
The Indian High Commissioner met the foreign secretary Dr Iftekhar Ahmed Chowdhury last Wednesday and spelled out Delhi's views to him on both issues. It seems that the Indian government is working unilaterally bringing pressure on Bangladesh government on the issues.
Last week, senior foreign ministry officials failed to respond to the queries of the press. Reports said the foreign ministry has referred the draft to the Communications Ministry for follow-up. Secretary of the Ministry of Communication reportedly said they are not in a position to act on the draft, as there is no policy decision on it from the country's present political leadership.
Foreign Ministry sources are also of the view that without the policy decision of the Council of Advisers on the subject there is no scope to go ahead with the discussion and deal with the matter. To their knowledge, he said, the council has not discussed the issue.
They said, these are sensitive issues and as far as they believe only an elected government will be able, and have the mandate, to take decision on the issues. It is not new, they said, such proposals also came in the past but no decision was made.
Observers wonder why the Indian government has chosen the present time knowing well that this government has no mandate to take such decision. Even if it works on the line, court cases may stop it before it makes any progress.
The latest Indian draft says its cargo vehicles carrying containers and goods and passenger carriers would cross Bangladesh territory to reach the north-eastern states through several points. They want to enter the Indian territory and return through Tamabil, Bibir Bazar and Khagrachari crossing over to Meghalaya, Tripura and Mizoram states.
The Indian government has proposed the right of the routes and multiple-entry facility to and from 'seven sisters', her north- eastern states.
For Indian cargo vehicles it has proposed seven-day stay permit inside Bangladesh and for passengers' transport, five days' stay.
The proposed agreement will be initially for five years, to be reviewed every year. On expiry of five years, it may be renewed.
Earlier, the Indian government also presented proposals for railway transit to the Caretaker Government. The proposals identified five points to carry goods to the north-eastern states. It suggested that goods train will enter Bangladesh and return through Gadey-Darshana, Shindabad-Meherpur, Petrapole-Benapole and Radhikapur-Shahjadpur points.
The proposal further demanded construction of Akhaura-Agartala section of the railway and using Ahugonj as port of call for Indian vassals arriving with goods from Kolkata and booked for Agartala. Accordingly, the Indian government is also laying railway track from Agartala to Bangladesh border at Akhaura.
Observers wonder why India is pressurising to take concessions from the Caretaker Government. However, similar moves were noticeable in recent past from High Commissioners and Ambassadors of some other countries who wanted to benefit multinationals of their own countries by winning contracts.
One High Commissioner presented a list of five big projects including some projects already involved in political controversy. The Caretaker Government so far resisted such pressure. "Will India win its prize this way?" wonders an expert saying the whole issue should be sorted out under a common regional agenda.
According to experts, this region must form an 'economic union' and things are working towards that direction. Here India must have patience and make more concessions before demanding such strategic gains.
The confidence-gap is the number one problem here, experts view.
Moreover, Bangladesh's surface roads and highways are not wide enough and well-built to take the load of the heavy Indian vehicles. The railway track on the Jamuna Bridge has already showed cracks; besides many other railway bridges are in deplorable condition indicating these are not fit to bear the heavy loads either.
One expert argues that India should make heavy investments in the country's communications system in the first place before demanding facilities. Moreover, he said, the spread of AIDS from the Indian truckers can be a real threat to Bangladesh.
These are the critical aspects that any government in Bangladesh will face in handling the issue.
If India believes Bangladesh's Foreign Secretary will be able to finalise the agreement and the Caretaker Government will be able to deliver the goods, it will be an oversimplification of the explosive issue, said a source.
India Trying to Force Strategic Concessions From Bangladesh - Commentary
Vinod2070
BANNED
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2007
- Messages
- 10,552
- Reaction score
- -2
- Country
- Location
The perpetual victim attitude is not going to serve you very well.
Act like a confident nation that knows what is good for it. Looking for conspiracies from the big brother is not going to take you very far. An example is the natural gas sale and the pathetic mindset of Bangladeshi politicians towards the issue and even towards the Gas pipeline issue.
Act like a confident nation that knows what is good for it. Looking for conspiracies from the big brother is not going to take you very far. An example is the natural gas sale and the pathetic mindset of Bangladeshi politicians towards the issue and even towards the Gas pipeline issue.
indiapakistanfriendship
BANNED
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2007
- Messages
- 587
- Reaction score
- 0
Vinod India will never agree to such a measure for two reasons.
1. NE is already in a boiler due to increased BD immigrants, Assamese vehmently oppose local BD polpulation and it is time they take over NE in terms of numbers.
2. BD especially MUJIB had traditionally staked claim to NE, even once quoting that NE will serve as the economic lifeline of BD.
Cheers
GHATAK
BANNED
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2008
- Messages
- 173
- Reaction score
- 0
Its plain and simple, if the Bangladsi's don't want to give transit facilities, then let them not. Its their right, the politicians are elected by the people.
We must look for other alternatives. We can only request, but should not create unfriendly political issues out of it. The same goes to their politicians also. Its plain simple Yes or No.
Bangladesh is the most peaceful country in the region and we admire it.
Bangladesh Most Peaceful in the Region - Vision of Humanity
I have seen lot of good quality bangladesh exported textiles in switzerland and good to see them developing and getting foreign exchange. If all the countries of the region develop, its good for the peace and stablity of the entire region.
Cheers bangladesh.
We must look for other alternatives. We can only request, but should not create unfriendly political issues out of it. The same goes to their politicians also. Its plain simple Yes or No.
Bangladesh is the most peaceful country in the region and we admire it.
Bangladesh Most Peaceful in the Region - Vision of Humanity
I have seen lot of good quality bangladesh exported textiles in switzerland and good to see them developing and getting foreign exchange. If all the countries of the region develop, its good for the peace and stablity of the entire region.
Cheers bangladesh.
BanglaBhoot
RETIRED TTA
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2007
- Messages
- 8,839
- Reaction score
- 5
- Country
- Location
251 DU teachers against transit
DU Correspondent
New Age - July 22, 2008
Two hundred and fifty-one teachers of Dhaka University loyal to BNP-Jamaat-backed White Panel on Monday said awarding transit facilities to any expansionist neighbouring country would be against Bangladeshs security, independence, sovereignty and national interests.
The teachers in a statement said that such a move to award transit would not be acceptable to people. Policies that go up against the national interests will spell disaster for the country, the statement added.
Regional hegemonic power had indulged in conspiracies against security, independence and sovereignty of Bangladesh. They are making all their efforts to turn the country into a client-state killing our border guards and innocent peasants after intruding into the Bangladesh territory, the statement said.
They also continued with their stand against the interests of Bangladesh ignoring the bilateral deals and paying no heed of solution to the bilateral problems. Now they are hell-bent on using Bangladesh as corridor in the name of transit during the regime of a caretaker government.
The teachers also urged all the patriotic forces to raise their voice against such initiatives that go up against the countrys interests and existence.
Signatories to the statement include Sadrul Amin, Aminur Rahman Majumder, Sirajul Islam, Tazmeri SA Islam, Quamrul Ahsan Chowdhury, Mahbubullah, Ferdous Hossain, UAB Razia Akhtar Banu, Shahida Rafiq, Abul Bashar, Zahidul Islam, Saiyad Salehin Quadri, Ziaush Shams, AFM Abu Bakr Siddique, Taslima Mansur, Nazrul Islam and Mujahidul Islam.
Front Page
DU Correspondent
New Age - July 22, 2008
Two hundred and fifty-one teachers of Dhaka University loyal to BNP-Jamaat-backed White Panel on Monday said awarding transit facilities to any expansionist neighbouring country would be against Bangladeshs security, independence, sovereignty and national interests.
The teachers in a statement said that such a move to award transit would not be acceptable to people. Policies that go up against the national interests will spell disaster for the country, the statement added.
Regional hegemonic power had indulged in conspiracies against security, independence and sovereignty of Bangladesh. They are making all their efforts to turn the country into a client-state killing our border guards and innocent peasants after intruding into the Bangladesh territory, the statement said.
They also continued with their stand against the interests of Bangladesh ignoring the bilateral deals and paying no heed of solution to the bilateral problems. Now they are hell-bent on using Bangladesh as corridor in the name of transit during the regime of a caretaker government.
The teachers also urged all the patriotic forces to raise their voice against such initiatives that go up against the countrys interests and existence.
Signatories to the statement include Sadrul Amin, Aminur Rahman Majumder, Sirajul Islam, Tazmeri SA Islam, Quamrul Ahsan Chowdhury, Mahbubullah, Ferdous Hossain, UAB Razia Akhtar Banu, Shahida Rafiq, Abul Bashar, Zahidul Islam, Saiyad Salehin Quadri, Ziaush Shams, AFM Abu Bakr Siddique, Taslima Mansur, Nazrul Islam and Mujahidul Islam.
Front Page
BanglaBhoot
RETIRED TTA
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2007
- Messages
- 8,839
- Reaction score
- 5
- Country
- Location
Transit to India
A.B.M.S. Zahur
The Daily Star - July 22, 2008
SECRETARY level talks on various Indo-Bangladesh issues have just concluded in New Delhi recently. Both sides put forward their agenda of interests. The Bangladesh foreign secretary was hopeful of positive results relating to economy and border. He said that Bangladesh would not give any concession regarding transit but would be willing to discuss strengthening security to tackle the terrorists on both sides of the border. He also took up issues of reducing trade gap (removal of non-tariff barriers, duty-free access, exporting more products from Bangladesh) border demarcation in remaining 6.5kms, unfettered access through Tin Bigha corridor, exchange of enclaves, and unsettled territories.
There are many other issues for Bangladesh to discuss with India such as Talpatti, land transit with Nepal, stoppage of push-in, indiscriminate killings of Bangladeshi by Indian BSF, etc. But by keeping the agenda small, Bangladesh has done well. Meetings with limited agenda are more effective. The issue of transit to India is highly sensitive as we may have to go even to referendum and parliamentary discussion to determine the acceptability by the people. Moreover, the CTG is not competent to take any final decision on such an issue.
It is true that Bangladesh could make adequate progress in transit issue after signing of the Indo-Bangladesh Trade Agreement on March 28, 1972 which provided for "mutually beneficial arrangements, for the use of their waterways, railways and roadways for commerce between the two countries and for passage of goods between two places in one country, through the territory of the other."
The then Indian trade minister's observation in this regard is significant. His observation was: "Excellency, we would be too happy to provide the necessary transit facilities to Nepal and our friends in Bangladesh." With the passage of time the question of transit facilities to Nepal appears to have been forgotten by India. Bangladesh does not appreciate this kind of attitude of India.
There has been enough discussion about the talks, and, broadly speaking, there were a few observations from the leading economists, eminent politicians, and prominent citizens. They were: (a) CTG is not competent to handle a highly sensitive issue like transit to India, (b) the issue is also political,(c) we cannot extend concession to India sacrificing our own interest, and (d) our experience of agreements with India in past is not happy.
Secretary level discussion is expert level meeting. As such there is no scope for dictation by any emotion or sentiment. It has to be confined strictly to economic cost and benefit. However, Bangladesh should be straight in expressing its attitude that solution of the issue of transit depends on solution of some other critical issues. However, serious discussion on the issue of transit is not appropriate at this stage.
Though agreement of October 4, 1980 had similar proviso for surface connectivity as included in 1972 agreement, successive governments of Bangladesh could provide the facility due to: (a) very sensitive nature of the matter, (b) taking a decision on an issue that might be seen as providing special dispensation to India, (c) depriving Bangladesh of the benefit of access to enclaves like Dahagram and Angorpota on permanent basis, (d) non-fulfillment of promised sale of half a million tons of rice to Bangladesh, and (e) permanent settlement of sharing Ganges water.
We do understand that transit facility to India is of great importance for India because it enables India to control and develop its states of Assam, Meghalaya, Tripura, Nagaland, Mizoram, Monipur, and Arunachal.
However, easy access to these states through Bangladesh means too much pressure on our weak infrastructure (particularly on roads and culverts), the possibility of entry of narcotics, possible complications vis-à-vis anti-insurgent activities across the border, etc. The railroads may have to be brought up to international standard, the rivers to be used by Indians should be dredged to increase their navigability. The government of India should bear the entire cost of improving river transport, roads, and railways.
India may assist in promoting trade between Bangladesh-Nepal and Bangladesh-Bhutan through allowing small corridors. In extending transit facility to India, we must be careful about the interest of our traders and industrialists.
Right from the independence of Bangladesh its people were eager to extend concessions to Indians. But for certain acts of India they have become suspicious. The worst act was the Farakka barrage. Bangabandhu's trust in India was not honored properly. We are suffering from less supply of Ganges water than committed. BSF are killing Bangladeshis without adequate reasons. Maritime boundaries need to be finalised, issues like Talpatti, demarcation of 6.5kms borders, stoppage of push-in, and Bangladesh-Nepal and Bangladesh-Bhutan corridors can be solved without much difficulty. But so long as the Bangladeshis are skeptical of Indian motives, no Bangladesh government will dare to solve the transit issue. Thus it is up to India whether it settles the issue the quickly or allows it to continue to drag on for an indefinite period.
In improving the image of India in Bangladesh it appears to be relevant to point out the role of media in India. It has been observed that the Indian media is not very friendly toward Bangladesh. Before concluding this analysis, it would be appropriate to say that the governments of Bangladesh did not pay due attention in drafting earlier international agreements. This caused loss to the nation. In future the government may seek the assistance of eminent lawyers of the country in this matter.
:The Daily Star: Internet Edition
A.B.M.S. Zahur
The Daily Star - July 22, 2008
SECRETARY level talks on various Indo-Bangladesh issues have just concluded in New Delhi recently. Both sides put forward their agenda of interests. The Bangladesh foreign secretary was hopeful of positive results relating to economy and border. He said that Bangladesh would not give any concession regarding transit but would be willing to discuss strengthening security to tackle the terrorists on both sides of the border. He also took up issues of reducing trade gap (removal of non-tariff barriers, duty-free access, exporting more products from Bangladesh) border demarcation in remaining 6.5kms, unfettered access through Tin Bigha corridor, exchange of enclaves, and unsettled territories.
There are many other issues for Bangladesh to discuss with India such as Talpatti, land transit with Nepal, stoppage of push-in, indiscriminate killings of Bangladeshi by Indian BSF, etc. But by keeping the agenda small, Bangladesh has done well. Meetings with limited agenda are more effective. The issue of transit to India is highly sensitive as we may have to go even to referendum and parliamentary discussion to determine the acceptability by the people. Moreover, the CTG is not competent to take any final decision on such an issue.
It is true that Bangladesh could make adequate progress in transit issue after signing of the Indo-Bangladesh Trade Agreement on March 28, 1972 which provided for "mutually beneficial arrangements, for the use of their waterways, railways and roadways for commerce between the two countries and for passage of goods between two places in one country, through the territory of the other."
The then Indian trade minister's observation in this regard is significant. His observation was: "Excellency, we would be too happy to provide the necessary transit facilities to Nepal and our friends in Bangladesh." With the passage of time the question of transit facilities to Nepal appears to have been forgotten by India. Bangladesh does not appreciate this kind of attitude of India.
There has been enough discussion about the talks, and, broadly speaking, there were a few observations from the leading economists, eminent politicians, and prominent citizens. They were: (a) CTG is not competent to handle a highly sensitive issue like transit to India, (b) the issue is also political,(c) we cannot extend concession to India sacrificing our own interest, and (d) our experience of agreements with India in past is not happy.
Secretary level discussion is expert level meeting. As such there is no scope for dictation by any emotion or sentiment. It has to be confined strictly to economic cost and benefit. However, Bangladesh should be straight in expressing its attitude that solution of the issue of transit depends on solution of some other critical issues. However, serious discussion on the issue of transit is not appropriate at this stage.
Though agreement of October 4, 1980 had similar proviso for surface connectivity as included in 1972 agreement, successive governments of Bangladesh could provide the facility due to: (a) very sensitive nature of the matter, (b) taking a decision on an issue that might be seen as providing special dispensation to India, (c) depriving Bangladesh of the benefit of access to enclaves like Dahagram and Angorpota on permanent basis, (d) non-fulfillment of promised sale of half a million tons of rice to Bangladesh, and (e) permanent settlement of sharing Ganges water.
We do understand that transit facility to India is of great importance for India because it enables India to control and develop its states of Assam, Meghalaya, Tripura, Nagaland, Mizoram, Monipur, and Arunachal.
However, easy access to these states through Bangladesh means too much pressure on our weak infrastructure (particularly on roads and culverts), the possibility of entry of narcotics, possible complications vis-à-vis anti-insurgent activities across the border, etc. The railroads may have to be brought up to international standard, the rivers to be used by Indians should be dredged to increase their navigability. The government of India should bear the entire cost of improving river transport, roads, and railways.
India may assist in promoting trade between Bangladesh-Nepal and Bangladesh-Bhutan through allowing small corridors. In extending transit facility to India, we must be careful about the interest of our traders and industrialists.
Right from the independence of Bangladesh its people were eager to extend concessions to Indians. But for certain acts of India they have become suspicious. The worst act was the Farakka barrage. Bangabandhu's trust in India was not honored properly. We are suffering from less supply of Ganges water than committed. BSF are killing Bangladeshis without adequate reasons. Maritime boundaries need to be finalised, issues like Talpatti, demarcation of 6.5kms borders, stoppage of push-in, and Bangladesh-Nepal and Bangladesh-Bhutan corridors can be solved without much difficulty. But so long as the Bangladeshis are skeptical of Indian motives, no Bangladesh government will dare to solve the transit issue. Thus it is up to India whether it settles the issue the quickly or allows it to continue to drag on for an indefinite period.
In improving the image of India in Bangladesh it appears to be relevant to point out the role of media in India. It has been observed that the Indian media is not very friendly toward Bangladesh. Before concluding this analysis, it would be appropriate to say that the governments of Bangladesh did not pay due attention in drafting earlier international agreements. This caused loss to the nation. In future the government may seek the assistance of eminent lawyers of the country in this matter.
:The Daily Star: Internet Edition
BanglaBhoot
RETIRED TTA
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2007
- Messages
- 8,839
- Reaction score
- 5
- Country
- Location
BORDER SHOOTOUT LINKED TO 'TRANSIT' ISSUE?
Time to bring 'boundary violation'before UN
M. Shahidul Islam
The Indian adventurism is climaxing to an unacceptable height and there seems hatred for innocent lives. The killing of two BDR personnel by the BSF on July 17 inside 1.5 km of Bangladesh territory is a grisly act of provocation and an intentional violation of Bangladesh's territorial integrity and national sovereignty.
Three other deaths and two more injuries sustained by innocent Bangladeshis ever since is indicative of the unfolding of a new type of pressure tactic that India wants to employ to squeeze the government in Dhaka to comply with some of Delhi's longstanding demands before the Caretaker Government quits power.
Never since April 16, 2001, when a heavily armed BSF battalion conducted a sneaky night operation to retake 6.5 km of Bangladesh territory in Padua, there had been an incursion of this nature inside Bangladesh territory. The BDR soldiers defended their motherland at that time with utmost valour and compelled the enemy to flee after having lost 16 of their soldiers and dozens of injuries.
According to a reliable source, the intrusion by BSF 1.5 km inside Bangladesh territory in Raghunathpur under Chapai-Nawabganj district coincided with a 'non-conclusive' bilateral meeting of the two foreign secretaries in which the transit and the trans-shipment issues were not given as receptive an attention by Bangladesh as India would have liked, and sought.
The source says the proposition made hours before the incident by Bangladesh foreign secretary, Towhid Hossain, to defer the matter of any discussion on transit and trans-shipment until the election of a new government in Bangladesh was viewed by India as a sign of non-compliance by a weak neighbour.
Even if that is true, should that have sparked such inhuman a reaction from India?
Some observers say the timing for the escalation in border tension was intentionally chosen by Delhi to deflate public attention from the ongoing crisis that has plagued the Indian government since a motley alliance of leftist parties decided to withdraw from the UPA coalition, prompting a confidence vote in the parliament. That seems unlikely.
What looks certain now is: As things unfolded since the July 17 incursion inside Bangladesh, the Indian ploy has proved to be as much a short-sighted brinkmanship as it was a wrong gambit diced at a wrong time. Months away from a general election, the voters in Bangladesh are likely to take such external aggressions as unprovoked threats to their national security and may vote into power a party that may chose not to be in accord with many of India's 'sensitive demands'.
The long-term consequence of these ongoing incidents, hence, will be too detrimental for Delhi as the people in Bangladesh have already begun to rally behind the government and the armed forces to forestall the recurrence of similar incidents.
Sources say, prior to the ongoing Deputy Director General (DDG)-level meeting between the two border forces in Kolkata, both sides have reinforced military capabilities at strategic bordering areas and the BDR is learnt to have requested for deployment of strong Fire Support Units (FSU) along vulnerable and easily accessible spots of the borders in anticipation of further Indian incursions.
Why such an escalation? One of the reasons could be that, the matter was made worse by the uncoordinated statements and spinning by the Indian government and the media. Since July 17, India has been cooking up stories to absolve itself from the crime of territorial violation of another sovereign nation and the commission of an act of manslaughter that resulted in deaths of two uniformed soldiers of another country 1.5 km deep inside the defenders' territory.
In a statement on July 18, the Indian High Commission in Dhaka narrated the story in the most incredulous and unconvincing manner. The statement blamed Bangladesh media of inaccurate reporting and said, "On the basis of a specific input on cattle smuggling along river Ganga (Padma), on the night of July 17-18, 2008, the 108th Battalion of the BSF noted movement of cattle and their smugglers in the area of border outpost Nimtita (Malda Sector of West Bengal). The BSF river-wing pursued the cattle smugglers who were travelling in boats in Indian territory. These smugglers fired at the BSF upon which BSF retaliated. During this exchange of fire, one BSF constable sustained serious bullet injuries."
The press release makes heroes out of cattle smugglers and overlooks an incident of hot pursuit and perplexingly it also remains totally oblivious to the unwarranted killing of BDR personnel and of BSF's intrusion into another sovereign country.
The statement from the Indian High Commission concludes by saying, "A flag meeting between local BSF and BDR commanders held on July 18 decided to refer the matter to higher authorities after detailed investigation, the results of which would be shared between the two sides."
An investigation does not necessarily get translated into justice, which alone can ensure the non-recurrence of such incidents in future. India must realise that acts of these kinds relegate its international stature into a bundle of paradox in so far as its aspiration to become a permanent member of the UN is concerned. Responsible UN members - let alone permanent members - do not encourage and enjoy shooting of innocent people across their borders.
Besides, while the Indian High Commission pinned the blame on Bangladesh media for inaccurate reporting, the Indian media had resorted to outright lies to offer a fig leaf of some sort to the crime of its border forces.
A Press Trust of India (PTI) report claimed on July 19, "The local official in Murshidabad district said the Bangladesh Rifles (BDR) men opened fire when guards of the Border Security Force (BSF) were chasing cattle smugglers at Nimtita area, forcing them to retaliate."
An Indian citizen now in custody inside Bangladesh, who was privy to the incident, claimed such a version as false and explained how and when the BSF started shooting first.
Yet, the PTI - which is the official Indian news agency - quoted the BSF's DIG as having said to the district magistrate of Murshidabad, Subir Kumar Bhadra, "The report I have received from the Deputy Inspector General (DIG), BSF, is that there was some trespass from the international border from the Bangladesh side. There were two to three causalities of BDR and some soldiers have been injured. I have asked the DIG, BSF, to give me detailed report for onward transmission to the government."
Outraged by these diversionary and deceitful official reactions from India and Delhi's insensitive efforts to cover up wanton murders inside another sovereign nation, the Foreign Office in Dhaka lodged a strong protest the same day with the Indian government, reiterating that, "Bangladesh underscores the fact that it views the action of the BSF as totally unacceptable". The protest note of the foreign office expressed hope that the "Indian authorities will take appropriate action against those responsible and ensure that such incident will not recur."
That the incident is recoiling badly on India can be gleaned from the statement made by Touhid Hossain, the foreign secretary, who had just returned from Delhi at the conclusion of the two-day-long annual talks held to improve bilateral ties between the two neighbours.
Hossain said upon his return to Dhaka on July 20, "It is unacceptable that 73 Bangladeshi civilians have been killed this year by Indian border guards. I told my counterpart (External Affairs Secretary Shiv Shankar Menon) that India is our friendly neighbour. Such huge number of the civilians' killing is unacceptable."????
Touhid Hossain is a suave diplomat of militarily weaker nation and his limitations are unlimited. That is why his discreet outcry did little to put an end to Indian BSF's barbarity, and two more Bangladeshi civilians were seriously injured along the Lalmonirhat and Mymensingh borders on the night of July 20 as the BDR's DDG boarded onto a flight for Kolkata to eke out a negotiation with his Indian counterpart.
Given that such negotiations do not make India stop killing, and the numbers of deaths in BSF's hands have crossed the mark of 500 in the last five years alone, some members of the citizenry want the government to raise the issues of frequent violation of Bangladesh's territorial integrity by Indian forces - and of unprovoked killings - with the UN.
HOLIDAY > FRONT PAGE
Time to bring 'boundary violation'before UN
M. Shahidul Islam
The Indian adventurism is climaxing to an unacceptable height and there seems hatred for innocent lives. The killing of two BDR personnel by the BSF on July 17 inside 1.5 km of Bangladesh territory is a grisly act of provocation and an intentional violation of Bangladesh's territorial integrity and national sovereignty.
Three other deaths and two more injuries sustained by innocent Bangladeshis ever since is indicative of the unfolding of a new type of pressure tactic that India wants to employ to squeeze the government in Dhaka to comply with some of Delhi's longstanding demands before the Caretaker Government quits power.
Never since April 16, 2001, when a heavily armed BSF battalion conducted a sneaky night operation to retake 6.5 km of Bangladesh territory in Padua, there had been an incursion of this nature inside Bangladesh territory. The BDR soldiers defended their motherland at that time with utmost valour and compelled the enemy to flee after having lost 16 of their soldiers and dozens of injuries.
According to a reliable source, the intrusion by BSF 1.5 km inside Bangladesh territory in Raghunathpur under Chapai-Nawabganj district coincided with a 'non-conclusive' bilateral meeting of the two foreign secretaries in which the transit and the trans-shipment issues were not given as receptive an attention by Bangladesh as India would have liked, and sought.
The source says the proposition made hours before the incident by Bangladesh foreign secretary, Towhid Hossain, to defer the matter of any discussion on transit and trans-shipment until the election of a new government in Bangladesh was viewed by India as a sign of non-compliance by a weak neighbour.
Even if that is true, should that have sparked such inhuman a reaction from India?
Some observers say the timing for the escalation in border tension was intentionally chosen by Delhi to deflate public attention from the ongoing crisis that has plagued the Indian government since a motley alliance of leftist parties decided to withdraw from the UPA coalition, prompting a confidence vote in the parliament. That seems unlikely.
What looks certain now is: As things unfolded since the July 17 incursion inside Bangladesh, the Indian ploy has proved to be as much a short-sighted brinkmanship as it was a wrong gambit diced at a wrong time. Months away from a general election, the voters in Bangladesh are likely to take such external aggressions as unprovoked threats to their national security and may vote into power a party that may chose not to be in accord with many of India's 'sensitive demands'.
The long-term consequence of these ongoing incidents, hence, will be too detrimental for Delhi as the people in Bangladesh have already begun to rally behind the government and the armed forces to forestall the recurrence of similar incidents.
Sources say, prior to the ongoing Deputy Director General (DDG)-level meeting between the two border forces in Kolkata, both sides have reinforced military capabilities at strategic bordering areas and the BDR is learnt to have requested for deployment of strong Fire Support Units (FSU) along vulnerable and easily accessible spots of the borders in anticipation of further Indian incursions.
Why such an escalation? One of the reasons could be that, the matter was made worse by the uncoordinated statements and spinning by the Indian government and the media. Since July 17, India has been cooking up stories to absolve itself from the crime of territorial violation of another sovereign nation and the commission of an act of manslaughter that resulted in deaths of two uniformed soldiers of another country 1.5 km deep inside the defenders' territory.
In a statement on July 18, the Indian High Commission in Dhaka narrated the story in the most incredulous and unconvincing manner. The statement blamed Bangladesh media of inaccurate reporting and said, "On the basis of a specific input on cattle smuggling along river Ganga (Padma), on the night of July 17-18, 2008, the 108th Battalion of the BSF noted movement of cattle and their smugglers in the area of border outpost Nimtita (Malda Sector of West Bengal). The BSF river-wing pursued the cattle smugglers who were travelling in boats in Indian territory. These smugglers fired at the BSF upon which BSF retaliated. During this exchange of fire, one BSF constable sustained serious bullet injuries."
The press release makes heroes out of cattle smugglers and overlooks an incident of hot pursuit and perplexingly it also remains totally oblivious to the unwarranted killing of BDR personnel and of BSF's intrusion into another sovereign country.
The statement from the Indian High Commission concludes by saying, "A flag meeting between local BSF and BDR commanders held on July 18 decided to refer the matter to higher authorities after detailed investigation, the results of which would be shared between the two sides."
An investigation does not necessarily get translated into justice, which alone can ensure the non-recurrence of such incidents in future. India must realise that acts of these kinds relegate its international stature into a bundle of paradox in so far as its aspiration to become a permanent member of the UN is concerned. Responsible UN members - let alone permanent members - do not encourage and enjoy shooting of innocent people across their borders.
Besides, while the Indian High Commission pinned the blame on Bangladesh media for inaccurate reporting, the Indian media had resorted to outright lies to offer a fig leaf of some sort to the crime of its border forces.
A Press Trust of India (PTI) report claimed on July 19, "The local official in Murshidabad district said the Bangladesh Rifles (BDR) men opened fire when guards of the Border Security Force (BSF) were chasing cattle smugglers at Nimtita area, forcing them to retaliate."
An Indian citizen now in custody inside Bangladesh, who was privy to the incident, claimed such a version as false and explained how and when the BSF started shooting first.
Yet, the PTI - which is the official Indian news agency - quoted the BSF's DIG as having said to the district magistrate of Murshidabad, Subir Kumar Bhadra, "The report I have received from the Deputy Inspector General (DIG), BSF, is that there was some trespass from the international border from the Bangladesh side. There were two to three causalities of BDR and some soldiers have been injured. I have asked the DIG, BSF, to give me detailed report for onward transmission to the government."
Outraged by these diversionary and deceitful official reactions from India and Delhi's insensitive efforts to cover up wanton murders inside another sovereign nation, the Foreign Office in Dhaka lodged a strong protest the same day with the Indian government, reiterating that, "Bangladesh underscores the fact that it views the action of the BSF as totally unacceptable". The protest note of the foreign office expressed hope that the "Indian authorities will take appropriate action against those responsible and ensure that such incident will not recur."
That the incident is recoiling badly on India can be gleaned from the statement made by Touhid Hossain, the foreign secretary, who had just returned from Delhi at the conclusion of the two-day-long annual talks held to improve bilateral ties between the two neighbours.
Hossain said upon his return to Dhaka on July 20, "It is unacceptable that 73 Bangladeshi civilians have been killed this year by Indian border guards. I told my counterpart (External Affairs Secretary Shiv Shankar Menon) that India is our friendly neighbour. Such huge number of the civilians' killing is unacceptable."????
Touhid Hossain is a suave diplomat of militarily weaker nation and his limitations are unlimited. That is why his discreet outcry did little to put an end to Indian BSF's barbarity, and two more Bangladeshi civilians were seriously injured along the Lalmonirhat and Mymensingh borders on the night of July 20 as the BDR's DDG boarded onto a flight for Kolkata to eke out a negotiation with his Indian counterpart.
Given that such negotiations do not make India stop killing, and the numbers of deaths in BSF's hands have crossed the mark of 500 in the last five years alone, some members of the citizenry want the government to raise the issues of frequent violation of Bangladesh's territorial integrity by Indian forces - and of unprovoked killings - with the UN.
HOLIDAY > FRONT PAGE
Vinod2070
BANNED
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2007
- Messages
- 10,552
- Reaction score
- -2
- Country
- Location
Munshi, hear the words of your own high commissioner to India. They are very near the beginning of the video.
jpZDyB446FI[/media] - 1971 Genocide in East Pakistan (Bangladesh) - 1
And now compare that with your attitude now!
See why many Indians feel that you are a thankless people.
jpZDyB446FI[/media] - 1971 Genocide in East Pakistan (Bangladesh) - 1
And now compare that with your attitude now!
See why many Indians feel that you are a thankless people.
Last edited by a moderator:
BanglaBhoot
RETIRED TTA
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2007
- Messages
- 8,839
- Reaction score
- 5
- Country
- Location
When an Indian is losing an argument to a Bangladeshi he brings up the 1971 war as if that has any relevance to contemporary issues. I was born after 1971 so I have no personal recollection. Find a new record to play ....
BanglaBhoot
RETIRED TTA
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2007
- Messages
- 8,839
- Reaction score
- 5
- Country
- Location
A lot of the older generation mentioned how India screwed us over in 1971 and are continuing to do so.
Similar threads
- Article
- Article
