'US-Bangla military diplomacy up'

[idune]

personal opinion bro i think bd's best balance act should be between USA and china.


ecnomic and trade deals with USA that will favour bd and keep buying higer and sophisticated weopons from china and also use USA to help BD achieve its goals in the international arena.
just my line of thought ,



what i am saying is that BD must not lose the chinese under any circumstance

That is what I was trying to convey - we need to have “balance” while protecting our interest. Trade and investment with US is not that good experience.

Let’s consider history for US trade and investment engagement for review:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1) Bangladesh still pay 14-15% tax on RMG for US market. TIFA and other condition US pushing Bangladesh to agree on will vastly diminish Bangladesh competitive advantage on export thus will be net loss in the long run. Besides, US already killed WTO initiatives led by Bangladesh to grant least developed countries favorable market access. US intention is to use this trade deal as leverage on political or policy change. At the end Bangladesh stand to lose more. So over dependence on US market is a very detrimental to our overall trade, economy and policy.
Side Note: That is not to say Bangladesh should not improve wage and living condition of garments and other workers. Rather we need to set target at different stages.

2) Historically US investment in infrastructure development in Bangladesh is dismal and that is where Bangladesh needs most investment.
3) US investment in energy sector is modern day plundering compare to percentage Bangladesh would get from explored resources if we had chosen Chinese or even Russian companies. Besides, with any mishap, US had and will use its superpower status to force Bangladesh not to pursue any contractual and legal remedy.
4) Besides, Bangladesh economy is not at the level where we can engage with US business in more beneficial ways.

Now compare that with engagement with China
-------------------------------------------------
1) Bangladesh has duty free access to Chinese market, waiting to be explored.
2) Unlike US NO interference, no string or over burden imposed by China for trade and investment.
3) Chinese companies are increasingly looking into Bangladesh for investment, provided we can facilitate land requirements.
4) Chinese trade and investment outlook and policy matches with Bangladesh outlook and goals.
5) China had already done immense infrastructure development in Bangladesh.
6) China had been ready to build deep sea port in Bangladesh for last 4 years.
7) China provides almost all defense equipment and armament for Bangladesh.


You can see where we have been and will have more benefit for the country. Yes, we have to strike "some sort of balance" but that balance has to have biased towards our benefit.

 

[Jobless Jack]

That is what I was trying to convey - we need to have “balance” while protecting our interest. Trade and investment with US is not that good experience.

Let’s consider history for US trade and investment engagement for review:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1) Bangladesh still pay 14-15% tax on RMG for US market. TIFA and other condition US pushing Bangladesh to agree on will vastly diminish Bangladesh competitive advantage on export thus will be net loss in the long run. Besides, US already killed WTO initiatives led by Bangladesh to grant least developed countries favorable market access. US intention is to use this trade deal as leverage on political or policy change. At the end Bangladesh stand to lose more. So over dependence on US market is a very detrimental to our overall trade, economy and policy.
Side Note: That is not to say Bangladesh should not improve wage and living condition of garments and other workers. Rather we need to set target at different stages.

2) Historically US investment in infrastructure development in Bangladesh is dismal and that is where Bangladesh needs most investment.
3) US investment in energy sector is modern day plundering compare to percentage Bangladesh would get from explored resources if we had chosen Chinese or even Russian companies. Besides, with any mishap, US had and will use its superpower status to force Bangladesh not to pursue any contractual and legal remedy.
4) Besides, Bangladesh economy is not at the level where we can engage with US business in more beneficial ways.

Now compare that with engagement with China
-------------------------------------------------
1) Bangladesh has duty free access to Chinese market, waiting to be explored.
2) Unlike US NO interference, no string or over burden imposed by China for trade and investment.
3) Chinese companies are increasingly looking into Bangladesh for investment, provided we can facilitate land requirements.
4) Chinese trade and investment outlook and policy matches with Bangladesh outlook and goals.
5) China had already done immense infrastructure development in Bangladesh.
6) China had been ready to build deep sea port in Bangladesh for last 4 years.
7) China provides almost all defense equipment and armament for Bangladesh.


You can see where we have been and will have more benefit for the country. Yes, we have to strike "some sort of balance" but that balance has to have biased towards our benefit.

to be honest i dont think bd will swing to the US side , not with a military and population (majority) that is traditionally anti india

and besides even if bd ditches china for usa. i say bd and china will stick togather or will get back togather again simply because both country has anti india interest. and in the forseable future willl continue to do so. its benificial for china and bd to be allies even if after us leaves ( assuming we distanced the chines while USA was around ) simply because of BD's geographic position. No matter how many allies china has it will always want bd it her wind.


and besides with the bd military and population with its traditional anti india feeling i dont think u.s will try to distance bd from china. worst case senario they make us stay nutral to any regional conflict between ind-chin

 

[kalu_miah]

I have posted this in US-Bangladesh relations under Bangladesh International Relations of Bangladesh2050 forum. I did not provide a link, out of respect for this sites policy. Here is the post, if you want discuss it, please come to that forum, I will post no further follow ups here:

To provide a background about my thoughts on this issue which started decades ago and long before the US came up with this pivot towards Asia, please go through these threads in dfp:

http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-affairs/164048-kalu_miahs-new-world-order-road-map-future.html
http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-affairs/180755-geopolitics-asean-region.html

US Pivot towards Asia is a direct result of the geopolitical shifts that are going on now because of the rise of China, but has been neglected or I should say have been facilitated by the US.

To defeat the Soviet Union, Nixon-Kissinger shook hands with China and provided market access to them and eventually China became a member of WTO. The foolish free trade policy of extremist unregulated free market promoter Milton Friedman, was thought to be an effective instrument for enhancing the wealth of the financial and business elite of the West. Utilizing this global free trade, some nations did well, such as Japan, S Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Singapore and in a limited manner some South East Asian countries. But none were large enough to become a multi-dimensional strategic threat for the US.

What the US over looked is that large nations like China and India, once they start utilizing this unregulated global free trade, the playing field will gravitate towards them and much smaller US will be helpless to stop the rise of these two nations with billion plus populations. This relates to my two theories/hypotheses:

1. Theory of Historical Continuity
2. Theory of Large systems

These are explained in detail in the first thread above.

Now that China is half way there and India is just making the right moves to start this journey, the US is now alarmed, but its a little too late for that. So for the next 2-3 decades the US will get busy with a futile attempt to balance and prevent the fast rise of both China and India, so it does not loose global preeminence to any of these two up and coming powers.

The Pivot to Asia is all about both China and India. Yes India is apparently friendly and want to jump into the bandwagon of anti China bloc led by the US in this region, but if history is going to teach us anything, Indian friendship with the US has no long history and if China could be a threat today, why India will not be tomorrow? Does India strive to help and accommodate the concerns of other nations in the neighborhood? Not really, in fact it is a regional bully and has been since 1947 with a track record of fomenting and sponsoring terrorism in the neighborhood. With increasing economic growth, its ambitions, arrogance and bluster are rising even out of proportion to its current economic conditions.

So USA showing up now still provides opportunity for smaller countries in South, South East and East Asia. As they say, better late than never. We should give the US benefit of doubt and hope that it has learned from its idiotic decade long futile "War on Terror/Islam/Muslims" and hope that it is now ready to get down to serious business.

For this region, a formation of ASEAN+ with Japan and S Korea in the lead, under US supervision is the way to go. ANZ does not fit in, no Asian will accept a Euro entity within their midst. I have talked to Asians from this region, they are all for ASEAN+ and no ANZ part in it. If we recall a bit of history, Japan with its war time Imperial occupation in Asia did try a failed effort to create such an entity:
Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It was the US that defeated Japan, forced Japan to withdraw from this region and eventually allowed China to rise, while keeping Japan bottled up with a pacifist constitution. It was also the US and Russia and partly China that divided Korea and created a situation for Korean war that is still causing problem in East Asia, giving an excuse for USA to have bases in S Korea and Okinawa, Japan. So the presence of the US has been the most destabilizing for this part of Asia. US will be remembered fondly if it can gradually leave the region after cleaning up the mess it had created in this region, by working with the regional countries to bring about a strong and united ASEAN+ bloc, which can stand on its own two feet and hold its own against the threat of a rising China and then a rising India as well, further down the road.

Now what about Bangladesh. I believe with no possibility of any cooperation from India in the foreseeable future, Bangladesh has no alternative but to join this US led ASEAN+ bloc.

What of our relationship with China?

Let me explain the current GDP figures on world stage, so things will become crystal clear:

US+EU+ANZ (West) GDP: $37 trillion
GCC (US surrogate): $1.4 trillion
China : $7.3 trillion

Currently most of our export market is in the West and most of our foreign remittance come from GCC and West. So Bangladesh essentially makes a living working for West and GCC.

Yes China may become a $70 trillion economy in 2050 and India may become a $30 trillion economy by then, but that is 4 decades away. Today, right now, we have no dependence on China, except for some military hardware that we buy from them, which could be easily sourced from S Korea, Japan, Indonesia, Turkey etc.

Make no mistake, if you go through my above threads, you will see that I believe in a China led highly integrated Asia in the long term, where US or West has minimal role, but that day will be gradually ushered in 2-3 decades from now, not today or this decade.

So we should not burn our bridges with China or even India, after all they are our neighbors and fellow Asians and they will become No. 1 and No. 2 economy of the world. But for now and next few decades, we have a job to do together with the US. It is to build ASEAN+ under US supervision.

I know it is hard to wrap our brain around "grandiose" concepts, but geopolitics is about global issues like the above where the globe is the unit and regions are individual small parts of it. Without a global perspective, it is hard to understand regional ones, and without understanding regional perspective, it is impossible to understand, what direction individual countries should move towards. So yes it is hard to do this kind of thinking, but when we are dealing with countries on global stage, regional and global matters are automatically pulled in. Those people who are not comfortable dealing with such issues, should study more or should avoid such discussions, instead of bringing down the level of debate.

 

[eastwatch]

Only US smelling BoB oil/gas is perfectly right. They want to keep China in bay is correct which is against our interest though. They don't want to keep india in bay, it's not feasible for them in current scenario. And protecting small nation is bogus...US doesn't have a bit of concern regarding this. Don't forget Noriega of Panama who was arrested by US forces and taken to USA. There are many such examples.

Every big power has its concerns about small countries with no power. Entire SE asia, japan, taiwan and South Korea are under US security umbrella. Entire Europe, Arab world and Israel are under US protection.So, you cannot say US does not care. Latin America used to be America's backyard. Noreiga wanted to free Panama Canal. So, he faced a US Court that sentenced him to jail. Had he not been for a free Panama Canal US would have seen the other way about his link with the drug cartels.

India is not friendly with the US. India worries about China, this is why it is seeking US friendship. USA understands that Indian themselves are not India friendly. India is stretching towards Myanmar and Vietnam, and will contest with China for putting influence on other SE countries. Indians are numerous in some of these countries.

USA may not want a tug of war between two asian big countries. So, this can be sited as one reason that US wants to emphasise a good relationship with BD, a small country but vital for keeping a watch on these big countries. Myanmar may next be influenced by USA under the same security game plan. It is more vital because it has direct border with China.

 

[BanglaBhoot]

Small countries are generally inconsequential from the US point of view.

A strong Indian economy is not a liability for the US. It's an asset.

This is how the situation stood 3 years ago. We are all taking the US perspective into account but India has its own strategic calculations that do not necessarily coincide with America's but they both pretend it does. Do not take things at face value ..... There is quite a lot that does not meet the eye.

 

[BanglaBhoot]

The Pivot to Asia is all about both China and India. Yes India is apparently friendly and want to jump into the bandwagon of anti China bloc led by the US in this region, but if history is going to teach us anything, Indian friendship with the US has no long history and if China could be a threat today, why India will not be tomorrow? Does India strive to help and accommodate the concerns of other nations in the neighborhood? Not really, in fact it is a regional bully and has been since 1947 with a track record of fomenting and sponsoring terrorism in the neighborhood. With increasing economic growth, its ambitions, arrogance and bluster are rising even out of proportion to its current economic conditions.

I agree with these remarks in particular and the rest of your post is probably the most insightful so far in this thread. You see things 10 years ahead of everyone else. Others are just seeing the immediate situation not realising it might be all fake. You have a better understanding of geo-strategy than many other so-called experts here ..... Who are you????

 

[kalu_miah]

I agree with these remarks in particular and the rest of your post is probably the most insightful so far in this thread. You see things 10 years ahead of everyone else. Others are just seeing the immediate situation not realising it might be all fake. You have a better understanding of geo-strategy than many other so-called experts here ..... Who are you????

No one special, just an average guy who stumbled upon a theory that can model human society and predict the future better than other existing theories.

I am too lazy to write a book, although I did approach some people, not sure if they will take me seriously though, don't know yet.

But no matter, if you believe in my theories and think they work, come and work with us at Bangladesh2050 group. We need all the help we can get. We will make change happen starting with Bangladesh. And yes this group will also get into making money, if members so desire.

 

[scholseys]

A base in BD allows usa to monitor china and india's rise. No one is no one's friend, especially countries with huge ambitions. US always try to plan 20 years ahead.

 

[BanglaBhoot]

No one special, just an average guy who stumbled upon a theory that can model human society and predict the future better than other existing theories.

I am too lazy to write a book, although I did approach some people, not sure if they will take me seriously though, don't know yet.

But no matter, if you believe in my theories and think they work, come and work with us at Bangladesh2050 group. We need all the help we can get. We will make change happen starting with Bangladesh. And yes this group will also get into making money, if members so desire.

Naaa you can't be an ordinary guy. Your thinking is too detailed and sophisticated for just an amateur.

What is the link for Bangladesh2050?

 

[scholseys]

Kalu miah, asean is a possibility if certain things fall in place

 

[kalu_miah]

Naaa you can't be an ordinary guy. Your thinking is too detailed and sophisticated for just an amateur.

What is the link for Bangladesh2050?

I cannot mention a link, against this forum policy. But if you google that word you will find the site. Thanks for your kind words.

 

[BanglaBhoot]

I cannot mention a link, against this forum policy. But if you google that word you will find the site. Thanks for your kind words.

Yea thanks I found it .....

 

[CaPtAiN_pLaNeT]

Locklear Encourages Closer U.S.-Bangladesh Military Ties


defence.professionals | defpro.com

06:27 GMT, October 12, 2012 WASHINGTON | Praising Bangladesh as a global model in both peacekeeping and disaster management, Navy Adm. Samuel J. Locklear III, commander of U.S. Pacific Command, told Bangladeshi leaders and reporters Oct. 10 he welcomes more opportunities for the United States and Bangladesh to work together to support their mutual security interests.

Locklear visited Dhaka, Bangladesh’s capital city, where he met with Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, Army Chief Gen. Iqbal Karim Bhuiyan and Navy Chief Vice Adm. Zahir Uddin Ahmed.

The United States, Bangladesh and other regional neighbors all stand to benefit from a strong U.S.-Bangladeshi military-to-military relationship, Locklear told reporters following the meetings.

“As I look across this part of the world, having a prosperous, secure and safe Bangladesh is a cornerstone to the future security of this part of the world,” he said.

Locklear recognized strides Bangladesh -- the world’s seventh-most-populated country -- has made as it learns to prosper in a challenging geographic environment.

With a long history of devastating natural disasters, Bangladesh has made tremendous strides in managing their effects, the admiral said. “I think it is a model for others to follow,” he said, expressing hope that the United States and Bangladesh can “learn from each other and strengthen our cooperation in some of these key areas.”

In addition, Bangladesh has become “the world standard for peacekeeping operations,” Locklear said. “And there is a lot that other nations can learn from what your forces do globally in support of U.N.-sanctioned peacekeeping operations,” he added.

Bangladesh also recently built and launched its first ship, “quite an accomplishment” toward building a maritime force, he said.

Locklear congratulated both Bangladesh and Burma for taking their dispute over territorial seas, exclusive economic zones and continental shelves in the Bay of Bengal to the international law of the sea tribunal. The tribunal handed down its judgment in March.

Calling this “an excellent model” for other nations around the world, Locklear said the tribunals offer a way to deal with contested maritime areas in the South China Sea, East China Sea and elsewhere around the world.

Asked by a reporter, Locklear said any support from the United States to help Bangladesh defend its waters as defined by the tribunal would be at the request of the Bangladeshi government.

“And we will help in ways that would improve their capacity to be able to monitor what is going on in their maritime areas and to respond when their maritime interests are at stake,” he said.

Assigning “a very good grade” to the military-to-military relationship between the United States and Bangladesh, Locklear said he would like to build on it to become stronger partners in ensuring a positive security environment.

He cited the biannual Cooperation Afloat Readiness and Training, or CARAT, exercise series, in which the two militaries train together to increase interoperability. This year’s exercise included the navies of the United States and Bangladesh, as well as Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and, for the first time, Timor Leste.

In another measure under discussion, but not yet concrete, the United States could transfer a retired U.S. Coast Guard cutter to the Bangladeshi navy.

Locklear and the Bangladeshi military leaders discussed these and other issues, agreeing to annual general-officer-level meetings to assess progress and chart the way forward for the military-to-military relationship.

While hoping to lock in key events such as exercises and senior-level visits as part of a five-year plan, Locklear said, he hopes to foster “a pretty free-flowing, living relationship like you would expect from any other partner.”

The United States has no problem with Bangladesh advancing relationships with other regional nations, particularly China, Locklear said in answer to a reporter’s question.

“In the end, we should have a security environment where everyone participates … in their own interest, but also in the collective interest of everyone else,” he said.

He emphasized that the U.S. rebalance toward the Asia-Pacific region is not designed to “contain” China, as some have argued. “It is a strategy of looking at how do we ensure peace and prosperity and enhance a security environment for the decades, for the years to come in this part of the world where the United States, like China, like Bangladesh, like India have shared interests,” he explained.

“There are too many problems facing the world today for everyone to line up and take sides,” Locklear said. “We have to be able to be productive together and to create an environment that is better for our children and for their grandchildren. We have to be positioned with our military and our capabilities across all our nations, to be able to deal with massive humanitarian disasters that we know will come again. We have to ensure that the maritime, the cyber, the global commons are secure and safe, so that everyone can have access to them and so economies can grow.

“So the expectation would be that if Bangladesh chooses to have multiple relationships, it would be healthy for the security environment,” Locklear said.


----
Donna Miles
American Forces Press Service

 

[eastwatch]

1) Americans seem to be serious about engaging Bangladesh directly.

2) It is willing to provide security umbrella to BD in the BoB.

3) It wants India and Myanmar to follow a hands off policy vis-a-vis BD. US is very blunt about it.

4) It welcomes a Chinese role in BD, but will not like to see itself taking a secondary role while China takes the main role.

5) USA does not want the strong presence of Chinese navy in the BoB.

6) It does not want China to intimidate Myanmar to provide a land route to China through its land. A US strong presence in the BoB will offset China from pressing Myanmar.

7) By not allowing a BoB access via Myanmar the Chinese will be forced to keep on using the long Malakka Straight sea route for its international trade.

8) USA similarly denied access to the former USSR (Russia) by supporting Talibans to oust USSR troops from Afghanistan. Russia had a Century old dream to get access to the warm water of Arabian Sea through Afgh. and Pakistan.

9) USA wants BD to be a part of SE Asian collective defense system under its sponsor whereby both China and india are not to be included. All these countries are small and are vulnerable in front of these two regional powers.

10) USA is willing to sell equipments to BD. The visiting dignitary said about providing/selling warships to BN.

Many things seem to depend upon the military of BD. While China has proved itself a friend of BD in times of its need, USA can be a seasonal friend. Once USA finds no oil/gas in the BoB, it may forget all about our small BD. However, for the foreseeable future USA will certainly not allow China to have a strong presence in or a land access to BoB.

 

[Zabaniyah]

The Pivot to Asia is all about both China and India. Yes India is apparently friendly and want to jump into the bandwagon of anti China bloc led by the US in this region, but if history is going to teach us anything, Indian friendship with the US has no long history and if China could be a threat today, why India will not be tomorrow? Does India strive to help and accommodate the concerns of other nations in the neighborhood? Not really, in fact it is a regional bully and has been since 1947 with a track record of fomenting and sponsoring terrorism in the neighborhood. With increasing economic growth, its ambitions, arrogance and bluster are rising even out of proportion to its current economic conditions.

There is no doubt about that.

I'd like to complement some more details here.

Bangladesh's exports to India are usually met with the so-called "hidden tarrifs" in the Indian market.

Another thing is that Indian consumers are highly ethnocentric. So much so, they'll buy a locally made product even though it is low quality than an imported one. Not a very attractive market if you ask me.

On another note, many in India, particularly in the media are saying that Bangladesh is on its way to become another Pakistan. They've been saying this ever since the 90's. They do claim that Bangladesh is a hotbed for terrorists.

True, or not, there are reasons why they do this. See, many American firms rely on India's IT industry to a significant extent. If the Indian IT firms stop providing service to the Americans, it'll create global losses worth billions.

Not saying that they are going to do it, but it does give them some leverage to tell the American public: "Hey, we are taking care of things in our neighborhood". It's a form of psychological warfare and media propaganda. Although, opinions of American public are of little relevance.

But however, if the US stops importing goods and services from India, China, or any country for that matter - their economies will collapse in 24 hours. So, Indians have little leverage even with their IT industry. We mustn't underestimate the power of American consumerism. It is huge and significant upon which many third-world/developing nations are very dependent.

So USA showing up now still provides opportunity for smaller countries in South, South East and East Asia. As they say, better late than never. We should give the US benefit of doubt and hope that it has learned from its idiotic decade long futile "War on Terror/Islam/Muslims" and hope that it is now ready to get down to serious business.

The commitments of many smaller countries do matter. The thing is that with India and China rising, it'll undoubtedly make the "little guys" uncomfortable.

The US does officially support more regional connectivity within South Asia and South East Asia. But how will this happen? Who will pay $7.5 billion for the transit infrastructure in Bangladesh? What people don't see is that trade within SAARC is very little compared to the likes of ASEAN or even GCC.
Reserve Bank of India
http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2006/september/tradoc_113489.pdf
http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2006/september/tradoc_113471.pdf

And yet, we are dreaming about having this 'transit' all the way to Thailand and Malaysia.

Small countries individually do not really matter. But what should matter are many small countries. Little things do matter. If we make a mistake in a mathematical calculation, the result will turn out wrong. If we make a mistake in a programming project, it won't compile. If we make a mistake in a business deal, the client would not be happy.

When many little things come together, it becomes something big. And that matters.

It's possible to somehow rally those "little guys". Be it India or China. But the process is going very slowly. The US would need to adjust its strategic equation. Suffice to say, those sagols ruling Bangladesh simply won't go anywhere.