What's new

US NAVAL BASE ,On BD !! True Or Lie ??

presence of usa navy in the region will affect the Indian supremacy
Not Just India But Also Chinese Supremecy , Now the question is : Mother India kya karegi :rofl:
Curious to know .
About America,," It's friend of none " .kyon ki jo PK itna kuch kia us k he khelaf hilari
Indian media pe baataya , " War on terrorism pe pak ny jo kia vo enough nahi tha " , now in american eye " India is good , Pakistan do not " . !!
India , America & Israel this trio nothing but a curse upon the world
 
.
Not 800 years but 300 years. Same can be said about west. The main reason for colonialism was that mongol and turk ruler did not contribute much towards education for centuries which had made the south asia and middle east lagged behind Europe. This happened not only to the muslim countries but also to south americans, africans, south east asians and even to China. But due to western decline in terms of science and technology it is reversing. Within next 20-50 years it will be a complete different world where west will lagged behind asia to a big margin. Alreagy downfall of some western countries like greece, spain, italy etc have begun.

If you count from the fall of Muslim Spanish period, it's 500 years. After that there was no shiny history like Muslim rule in indian subcontinent is not comparable to the height of Spanish one where they advanced in all sectors. But why is the debate about achieving dominance of Muslim or a single community? World has seen a lot, if one ethnic group or religious group is able to dominate that result in unjust war, oppression on others. Definitely there's a sadistic pleasure for the dominating group but this same pleasure might cause non ending grief to others.

Starting from 700 AD until the fall of Muslim civilization definitely there were many achievements specially in medical science and architecture. But that period was never peaceful, Muslim people were always in a conquering view of new empires that resulted in an unbelievable geographical boundary sprawling from Spain to this subcontinent. The Caliph culture starting from 700 AD started a sword culture actually both in home and abroad, either killing in own family to ascend throne or to annex other empires. As a result this Muslim people could not stop fighting in themselves even after the fall. It's unbelievable and also humiliating that few Jews defeated whole Arab in 1948 when these Arabian were actually passing time with women and alcohol at night and fighting at daytime, consequently Palestine was lost and now millions of innocent Palestinians are suffering for Muslim Arabians' recklessness.

I was born just before Iran-Iraq war started, whole my childhood I used to hear that these two Muslim nations were fighting. Later comes Iraq-Kuwait when I just got to secondary school and it's continuing. Just 7/8 years before I was born there was another massacre of Muslim by Muslim that resulted that nation divided in two parts (East and West).

Even Muslim people are fighting in their own races like Shite, Sunni, Kurdi.

The same things apply to Christian community after it achieved its domination which is still continuing. One USA is now capable of destroying all Muslim nations. It was started by European by their colonialism and now after WWII the responsibility is on USA. Look what's happening, there's no concrete evidence about the mastermind of 9/11, well....one country Afghanistan is vanished. Their CIA once claimed Iraq is developing WMD and they destroyed the most prosperous middle eastern nation, later the CIA report proved to be false. So, Christian dominance is another example of oppression to others.

I think rather any ethnic/religious dominance, a dominance led by good removing all bad should be future world's ultimate peace. I didn't blame any religion for this, I just said that the followers being a big group when starts to dominate, there might be others who are sufferers of that domination. In a cosmopolitan world one can easily observe religion personally.

where west will lagged behind asia to a big margin.

Asia is advancing doesn't mean only Asian Muslim are advancing, among the religious group of Asia one cannot assert that Muslim is the number one in this competition.
 
. . .
I remember one newspaper report that a US military expert team would visit Bangladesh from 14 April to 16 April to finalize talk about the latter's security matters. But, there was no further reporting on the outcome of those meetings. the US team has already left, but the newspapers did not even reported their departure.

I do not know if there will be ever be a US base in BD. But, even if it happens it will happen very slowly. Probably, the USA will wait for the next cyclone, a common phenomenon, to hit Bangladesh to initiate such a thing. Hillary also had a meeting with BKZ for quite a long time. I suspect it was to make her understand the US position on defence matters and to get her endorsement about it.

That was a close door meeting, no press was allowed and after the meeting main agenda was avoided to the press.
 
. .
OK, I see a lot of posts with a lot of confusions. Let me make some points:

1. Most Bangladeshi's would object vehemently to go back into a union under Hindu majority domination. But for the arguments sake if Bangladeshi's wanted such a union, lets say SAARC, then India would never agree to it. India will have free trade, economic integration, but it will never agree to a political union. They simply do not want to increase their Muslim population. As mentioned before, just look at the border situation between India-Nepal and India-Bangladesh, you will get the answer. Also, if you do not believe me, ask Indians in this forum or go to any Indian forum and discuss with them. It is out of question for them. Unlike some clueless people in this forum, I have actually talked and discussed this issue with a lot of Indians from different walks of life, on and off line and the answer I get is that trade yes, but political union, No. After 700 years of Muslim domination, they want to keep Muslim numbers in their democracy as low as possible. There is a universal consensus about this. Also, Bangladesh is considered a highly populated land with low per capita land and low resources, so it is a burden also, that is another factor. Pakistan is more acceptable in that regard, it has more land and resources per capita. But they are also allergic to Muslim Pakistan and Pakistan is also allergic to Hindu India, so the feeling is mutual. So SAARC union is only possible with
- Nepal (if India can beat China in that space), Bhutan (almost Sikkimized)
- Sri Lanka (if Sri Lanka fails to join ASEAN for some reason) and
- Maldives (if China or ASEAN find no use for this entity, as it will be sinking under water soon)
Pakistan and Bangladesh both do not want to join India and India does not want to join any of them either in any kind of union.

2. So if SAARC will never become a political union including Bangladesh, for us Bangladeshi's, hoping for such a union in the future is to waste our time on mirage. To me our only option to join any kind of union of nations (which I believe is vital for our survival) is ASEAN, as I believe it is open to our joining and we are also open to join ASEAN. True we are kind of new to each other, but both are open to possibilities. Those of you that did not read the threads and post links I have provided, here is current status of Bangladesh with ASEAN:
Enlargement of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Criteria for observers

The ASEAN senior officials had agreed in 1983 that observer status "should be granted only to potential members of ASEAN who satisfy the criteria set for ASEAN membership". One of the criteria states, "Only states in the Southeast Asia may join ASEAN."[5]

Future enlargement

Papua New Guinea

Papua New Guinea shares the island of New Guinea, world's second largest, with two Indonesian provinces Papua New Guinea, or PNG, a Commonwealth Realm, has been an observer of the regional bloc since 1976, earlier than any other non-original members of ASEAN. The fact that Papua New Guinea, a country outside Southeast Asia had been granted the observer status is because Papua New Guinea's admission was carried out before the enactment of 1983 decision of limiting only Southeast Asian countries becoming a part of the regional bloc.

During the 29th ASEAN Ministerial Meeting held in Jakarta, in 1996, Papua New Guinea's Foreign Minister, Kilroy Genia expressed Papua New Guinea's desire to further strengthen its interactions with ASEAN by proposing that Papua New Guinea be accorded a permanent associate membership with ASEAN.[19] Current Prime Minister of Papua New Guinea, Michael Somare pointed out during his visit to one of ASEAN's founding member, the Philippines in 2009 that his country is ready and able to fulfill the requirements of membership in the regional grouping.[20]

Geographical location somewhat hinders PNG's admission to ASEAN. Although located no farther away from Jakarta, headquarter of ASEAN, than northern Myanmar, PNG isn't geographically part of Southeast Asia, nor the continent of Asia. When the country was granted the observer status in 1976, it was acknowledged that PNG shares the same political and economic region with ASEAN's member, and connected geographically, because the country forms half of the huge island of New Guinea, with Indonesia’s provinces of Papua and West Papua comprising the other half. Since then, it has languished in a 35-year-long purgatory awaiting permission to become a full member.

East Timor

José Ramos-Horta hoped East Timor could join ASEAN before 2012
In March 2011 East Timor submitted a membership application to the ASEAN[21], a move which was supported by Indonesia.[22]

The country which gained its independence in 2002 made its debut in Southeast Asian Games, a multi-sport event which commonly associated with ASEAN, from 2003. The country firstly invited to ASEAN Regional Forum in 2005, making it the 25th country to join the forum. The biggest struggle for the country is to maintain embassies in all ASEAN members; from 10 current members of the regional association, one of the world's youngest country only maintains four embassies.[23] Timorese President José Ramos-Horta hoped to gain membership before 2012.[24]
The lack of consensus on the question of East Timor's membership has prevented ASEAN from arriving at decisions on ASEAN observer status for East Timor and its accession to the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation. The treaty makes clear distinctions between the rights of regional and non-regional signatories, but whether East Timor a part of the region is debatable.[5]

Singaporen Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong objected in late 2011 to East Timor's membership, due to his desire to achieve economic integration by 2015, which the relatively less developed East Timor would make difficult.[25] Although ASEAN has no membership criteria regarding political ideology, but some ASEAN countries have difficulties with East Timor's eventual membership, including East Timor's foreign-policy orientation[citation needed], alleged presence of Portuguese functionaries all over its government[citation needed], and Burma's objection to media articles by East Timorese personalities supportive of the National League for Democracy[citation needed]. Some member states are concerned that, having experienced the entry of four relatively underdeveloped members, ASEAN would be admitting an even poorer one.[5]

Bangladesh

Laos supports Bangladesh getting observer status in ASEAN.[26]

Lao to back Bangladesh for getting observer status of ASEAN
news_image_2011-06-14_9031.jpg

Newly appointed Ambassador of Lao PDR to Bangladesh Thongphanh Syac-khaphom presenting his credentials to President Zillur Rahman at Bangabhaban on Monday. Photo: PID

Lao to back Bangladesh for getting observer status of ASEAN

Lao will provide its support to Bangladesh for getting observer status in Association of South East Asian Nation (ASEAN), reports BSS. The assurance came when the newly appointed Ambassador of Lao PDR to Bangladesh Thongphanh Syac-khaphom presented his credentials to President Zillur Rahman at Bangabhaban. During the meeting, the President welcomed the new envoy and expressed his satisfaction over the existing friendly relations between the two countries. The President said Bangladesh attached importance to its relations with Lao as one of the important ASEAN member states. “Bangladesh can be a bridge between ASEAN and South Asia,” the President observed. President Zillur Rahman said there is ample scope to further strengthening the relations between the two countries particularly trade and agriculture sector.
The new envoy assured the President that he would take high endeavor to increase trade and commerce relations between the two countries. He lauded the role of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina in establishing peace and solidarity in national and international arenas. Secretaries and high officials concerned to the President Office and Foreign Ministry were present on the occasion.
Earlier on his arrival at Bangabhaban, a contingent of President’s Guard Regiment gave a guard of honor to the new ambassador.

3. Bangladesh also has a very strong look east policy of increasing trade, economic and diplomatic relations with all east asian states including ASEAN, China, Japan and South Korea. This is mainly to balance the overwhelming influence of India in our economy and if I might add, politics as well. Above countries to the east of us are positioned not only to supersede India in almost all respects, they can become our partners in ASEAN and negate India's harmful monopolized influence on Bangladesh. So rightly for national security and balance of power, we need to become as close to ASEAN and other east Asian nations as possible, and we need to start taking steps in that direction. If we consider how many people from Dhaka visit Bangkok and Singapore and how many people go to Delhi or Kolkata or Bombay, this can be clearly stated that we are already getting closer to ASEAN by air. Our entire import/export trade via feeder vessel goes through Singapore, not Mumbai. A land link road/rail with Myanmar will truly connect Bangladesh with ASEAN greater Mekong sub-region. As Myanmar develops, Bangladesh will get more access via this land link to ASEAN regions.

4. Now finally getting to the point about choosing US vs. China for Bangladesh, it is my opinion that Bangladesh's future is with ASEAN, not India or even China. Of course we will have close economic and trade relations with China and India both of whom are ASEAN neighbors and partners, but for security and political union, we are going to be going the ASEAN route, which eventually may include Japan and South Korea, while keeping ANZ as an ASEAN partner. This entire South East and East Asian group of nations will be closely allied with the US/West, which most of them already are. Because of this reason, Bangladesh automatically will be drawn into this security umbrella. How does that affect our future relations with India and China:

India: India does not want Bangladesh to get out from under its sole control and a monopoly market for its goods, so it is a net negative for India. Bangladesh as an integral part of ASEAN will mean that India will be dealing with an ASEAN member state and ASEAN as a whole when it deals with water issues, border issues, trade issues and myriad other issues. It will no longer be able to push Bangladesh around using its agents within our country to compromise our interest. It will eventually neutralize Indian domination, as we would have more and more relations with ASEAN states, as well as Japan and South Korea.

China: China will not be able to use Bangladesh as a pawn against India, but it will trade with Bangladesh just like it does with rest of ASEAN states, using ASEAN-China FTA. China may not like the US allied security structure, but it may have little options to prevent this from happening. In fact, my guess is that Myanmar will soon make a shift from Chinese camp to US camp, so will any other China leaning states in ASEAN. This is due to the Asian Pivot project, the US has just launched last year and almost all ASEAN states geopolitical interests are aligned with this project, mainly to limit Chinese influence and balance out the threat from an aggressive and overbearing China, in this space. This is a sound geopolitical initiative and I think it will be a win-win for the US/West and ASEAN+ states as well as ANZ in this region. It will also promote stability and limit adventurism by newly emerging bully powers like China and India.

Now, for those Bangladeshi's who are carrying the Chinese flag, instead of logically looking at our national interest and the future geopolitical direction of our country, please note we are not Pakistan, as its geography and resulting geopolitics is completely different. Because of their location Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iran should become part of the expanded Eurasian Union (former Soviet Union) under SCO security umbrella. It was a mistake for the US to stop Soviet expansion in Afghan theater, using imported extremist meme/ideology and unleashing it in that space, the result was "Islamic terror" and the blow back in 9/11. The cost to the US was 10 trillions and counting and both Iraq and Afghanistan lost millions of lives as a result. So geopolitical mistakes are costly, even though they are made by foreign policy wonks in State Dept. or think tanks, but no one can escape geography and geopolitics, regardless of costly mistakes. Unfortunately, as has been seen, many a times, some poor innocent farmer in Afghanistan or Pakistan loose their lives from suddenly falling bombs from drones in the sky, because of geopolitical errors made by state dept. officials, who has never set foot in these regions or never will.

So, in brief, the US should get out of Afghanistan and hand the stabilization effort of Afghanistan to SCO, while SCO should take this responsibility and make it happen under an expanded Eurasian union to include Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iran. Greater GCC, which includes all Arabic speaking lands in West Asia, was an Ottoman area previously. China and Russia or SCO should limit its roles there (Syria is a case in point) and reign in their rogue elements like Iran, so Turkey, the Ottoman successor can lead and integrate this region. While ASEAN+ will develop and remain a US/West allied area till it becomes a completely self sufficient entity on its own to withstand threats from China or India (and yes friends can turn into enemies if interests do not align):
http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-affairs/180755-geopolitics-asean-region.html
http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-affairs/180771-geopolitics-gcc-region.html
http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-affairs/180767-geopolitics-eurasia-region.html

But this is of course just one man's opinions, and before making fun of my ideas and dismissing them as some idea from pdf members, please go through this thread in detail and understand the philosophical underpinnings of these ideas and then debate about these ideas first:
http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-affairs/164048-kalu_miahs-new-world-order-road-map-future.html
This thread also talks about why Muslims lost and the West became the rulers of the world to this day, which is slowly making way for a more "multi-polar" world. The road map I propose makes this transition in the smoothest and shortest possible time-frame within practical means, which also will minimize the global population peak, an abiding interest of mine, to limit environmental degradation on this small planet of ours.

These geopolitical errors are made by state dept. officials sitting in nice offices, who think they know a lot, but in reality are creating a mess of their and other countries and lives of people in these countries. It is better that we take it in our own hand, put some effort into it and suggest some correct geopolitics using open source method. May be some state dept. officials will come to pdf and debate with us, that would definitely help increase their understanding and ours.

Just don't say, we need to go with China or USA or whatever. Geography as well as demography is central to the understanding of geopolitics. We can discuss, debate, share information and educate ourselves. Once we find the correct geopolitical direction, then it is our job to lead and educate the masses, starting with the right political parties who cares about their nation and people.
 
.
That was a close door meeting, no press was allowed and after the meeting main agenda was avoided to the press.

This is why I wonder what were discussed in those closed door meetings. I understand security matters are not for open publication. The agenda certainly contained issues like how BD can cope with the security of BoB. However, one big question remains to be answered, was also a kind of US navy's docking and resting facility included in the meeting's agenda?
 
.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom