If the wise men and women under the leadership of Princeton PhD Dr Fakhruddin Ahmed believe that what they are doing with some corrupt political somersaulters like Manann Bhuiya or Amir Hossain Amu, is the needed political reform for Bangladesh, we have really bad days ahead of us.
According to this reform our political future is at the hands of,
1. Abdul Mannan Bhuiyan, leftist to NAP Bhashani to Jagodol to BNP. When Salam Talukder, ex landlord of Sharishabari died, Khaleda not very happy with the Zamindari styles of Salam Talukder, wanted to recruit someone from a poor background. Mannan Bhuiyan, living out of party welfare, was the perfect one for Khaleda Zia to pick out of obscurity. Now 10 yrs later, leading the most corrupt ministry (LGRD) as per TIB for five years, owning Houses in Gulshan, making frequent medical trips to Singapore (each one costing at least a million Taka), looting LGRD owned dairy Milk Vita to its destruction, this Mannan Bhuiyan is the pick to salvage Bangladesh politics!!!
2. Amir Hossain Amu. I had personal knowledge of corruption of two ministers in Bangladesh. One is the rampant corruptions of Amir Hossain Amu while he was food minister and the other was the corruption of Dr Khondokar Mosharraf Hossain, the immediate past health minister. There are many politicians who have been given harsh punishments for indulging in a fraction of Amu’s corruption.
Now should I believe that Dr Fakhruddin will depend on these corrupt disloyal bunch to implement a healthy political atmosphere in Bangladesh? Am I out of my mind? Or is Dr Fakhruddin out of his mind?
I believe nobody is out of their mind. What is being shown like a reform strategy for now, is, in my opinion, is a shrewd exit starategy. This government of Fakhruddin, Moeen, Moinul, Matin, Masud et el know very well that their back skin is very much vulnerable if AL or BNP under current leadership returns to power. And they do not want to make the mistake of handing over power to any of these parties. Then who they would hand it over to? They themselves were not sure a third king’s party will fair against BNP or AL. Or least they probably don’t want to take the chance. Hence this new exit plan comes up.
It seems according to this new exit plan, the power will be handed over to the winners of a mock election contest between a BNP and AL redesigned by the CTG and led by Abdul Mannan Bhuiyan, and either of AmuMukul/Rajjak/Suranjit etc.
A good exit strategy is fine. But sadly this exit plan exposes a real lack of commitment towards a positive democratic reform and a fair election in Bangladesh. Otherwise why there will be double standard in dealing with Amanullah Amn and Jahiruddin Swapon or between Abdul Jalil and Amir Hossain Amu?
Dear people of Bangladesh, worse time is ahead of us. Be prepared.
In the Middle of Nowhere 
June 27, 2007 at 8:21 am
Rumi bhai,
This so called reform is turning into a scary circus. Even people who were supporting reform is going “what the heck is going on?”.
5 years on Manju for having alcohol??? I mean c’mon. If you’re gonna stage this, at least make it look believable!
June 27, 2007 at 12:27 pm
Unfortunately, it took too long for people to understand what is happening under disguise of so called anti corruption drive. This is only what can be seen in surface. Its rather tragic that people can not see what is beyond anti corruption face.
Indeed people of Bangladesh should be prepared for worse time ahead. Answer of “why” is behind the veil of anti corruption face.But for a preview read the suggestion made by indian foreign seretary (Shib Sanker Menon) to Awami leadership.
[ The visiting guest (Shib Sanker Menon) went to residence of Begum Khaleda Zia at noon and had meeting with her for five minutes then he saw AL Chief Sheikh Hasina and had talks with her for a long duration.
Sources said after the first meeting the Indian Minister had an exclusive meeting with the AL leader and reportedly advise her to strengthen agitation programme and prepare for elections by January-February next. ] — Reported by The New Nation
http://nation.ittefaq.com/artman/publish/article_37150.shtml
June 27, 2007 at 4:27 pm
Another bogus piece of reporting from Barrister Mainul Hossain’s New Nation.This is the same paper that said the letter from the 15 senators were fake.
This people just don’t give up do they??
June 27, 2007 at 5:33 pm
Here is another report from Nayadiganta, basically same statements made by indian foreign seretary Shib Sanker Menon. In a nutshell India is trying to instigate political agitation and violance using Awami league. Like all previous time india will extend its support (financial or intel and otherwise) to destablize Bangladesh. Another interesting info on those statements – Jan-Feb election timeframe. Looks like its south block who decides when Bangladesh elction can be held.
Lets see if people can figure out who is playing as indian A team and who is playing B team. Remember besides Awami league, interim entity is other team in the tournament.
http://www.dailynayadiganta.com/fullnews.asp?News_ID=29679&sec=1
June 27, 2007 at 11:36 pm
Why should one believe the content of the report of The New Nation and Daily Nayadiganta, when it is reported that the meeting was exclusively between them?
June 28, 2007 at 12:41 am
It doesn’t matter whether Bangladeshi people are prepared or not; worst days may come. We are used to it.
India is surrounding us and econimically we have to depend on India; its true. Now we have to handle the situation diplomatically and with negociation skills. By negative use of religion and India we have made the situation complicated. Our diplomates became idiots by the misuse of politicians. There were no efficient Foreign Secretary to negotiate with Mr. Menon; some how Govt. managed Mr Towfiq to negotiate the matters.
Is there anybody who can atleast give some positive views regarding Bangladesh’s future.
June 28, 2007 at 1:00 am
On shadakalo’s blog comments today, I read that “south block” hates AL and the Mujib family and that is why they are trying to sideline SH. Now, on this blog, I hear that “south block” is using AL for agitation.
India is powerful, but seriously isn’t it time we stopped seeing it’s hand behind every move? They cannot even manage their own house properly, let alone try and get involved into our complicated politics.
How about we simply concentrate on internal political actors who are far more powerful inside BD than India is? Rumi bhai’s point is a valid one. This is not reform. This is replacement of family corruption with friend-circle corruption. It saves the CTG’s backside once they relinquish power, but it hardly saves ours.
June 28, 2007 at 1:22 pm
#6 Rupen said: [India is surrounding us and economically we have to depend on India; its true.]
Notion that Bangladesh has to depends on india because we are surrounded by it, is an utterly submissive mentality. Such submissive thinking goes against sprit of independence and sovereignty. Since pre independence india had invested great deal to nurture such capitulation in Bangladeshi psyche. Unfortunately some people can not think beyond what had been uttered by few india leaning media and so called sushil. Bangladesh is not a land lock country and india is not only country Bangladesh has border with. Despite india being a large country it is in awkward position geographically and in terms of energy reach. It has been cut off by Pakistan (in west) from Iranian and central asian resources and in east Bangladesh has virtually cut it off from eastern india and Myanmar resources. India has to constantly negotiate to ensure energy for its development thrust. Compare to that, Bangladesh has its own energy resources to sustain (if right policy and political situation prevail) our development path. Hope these scenarios would provide food for beyond submissive thought. Besides, Bangladesh has done ok (Certainly below potential) without any indian help. Bangladesh has virtually no economic dependecy on india ($285 million export 2005-2006) BUT Bangladesh providing more than $4 billion export earnings for indian poor population.
#6 Rupen said: [By negative use of religion and India we have made the situation complicated.]
This is grossly opposite to the reality. It is indian media and indian politicians who love to gain mileage out of propaganda that Bangladesh has gone fundamentalists. Have you forgotten statement by BJP (indian main opposition party) chief calling to attack Bangladesh? Those who know and live in REAL Bangladesh would reject to live in propaganda myth created by india. Negative image of india is its own creation – hostile policy towards Bangladesh (don’t get me started on what), oppressing and savaging its own minority population (that goes against Muslims, Sikh, dalits and more…). Forget about Bangladesh, go ask people from Srilanka and Nepal – story you will hear (and I can forward you plenty) would enlighten you with reality.
#6 Rupen said : [Our diplomates became idiots by the misuse of politicians. There were no efficient Foreign Secretary to negotiate with Mr. Menon; some how Govt. managed Mr Towfiq to negotiate the matters.]
This part, I agree that our diplomats are vastly incompetent. We have to be diplomatic but not submissive. There is very clear line between them.
#7 Asif said: [India is powerful, but seriously isn’t it time we stopped seeing it’s hand behind every move? They cannot even manage their own house properly, let alone try and get involved into our complicated politics.]
Well india has its own problem that’s true. BUT that did not deter india from interfering in all countries of the neighborhood. Anyone who understands geo politics and strategy123 knows about indian hegemonic ambition. Its not matter of perception; rather it is about indian actions and subversive activities for destabilizing Bangladesh. Unfortunately, Bangladeshi institutions, section of media and sushils welcome indian hegemonic appetite. Last year even before garments unrest started indian chamber leaders has professed European buyers to avoid Bangladeshi garments industry citing upcoming unrest. There were lots of garments and other industry workers lost their living because of that unrest. I wish you could tell some of these workers to live by the thought that india has enough problem on its own and don’t interfere in Bangladesh.
June 30, 2007 at 3:17 am
An excellent and thoughtful analysis from historic prospective by Farhad Mazhar. His article also make suggestion of a exit strategy.
http://www.dailynayadiganta.com/fullnews.asp?News_ID=30010&sec=4
June 30, 2007 at 5:18 pm
“I wish you could tell some of these workers to live by the thought that india has enough problem on its own and don’t interfere in Bangladesh.”
And there we have it! Great conspiracy theory, but in terms of facts: nothing. Given the soaring inflation we had, it doesn’t take those “evil geniuses” in the Indian Chamber of Commerce to see that worker unrest was on it’s way.
Shonen, I am in no way denying Indian hegemonic tendencies and ambitions. I dislike it HIGHLY myself. But this sort of thinking where we see Indian subversives everywhere is not analytically accurate and highly counterproductive. What good will widespread unrest in Bangladesh do for them? Rather they want a friendly regime that will help them control their north-east provinces. If India has enough resources to effect “regime change” in Bangladesh, then I’ll say fine, your analysis makes sense. India does not. That was my point.
Where India really asserts its hegemony is in it’s control of trade within South Asia, treaties between South Asian countries, its huge military build-up with which it might one day bully its neighbours. But to imagine RAW in every corner, behind every dissident… well there’s a term for that I’d rather not use out of respect for Rumi bhai.
July 1, 2007 at 5:11 am
‘It seems according to this new exit plan, the power will be handed over to the winners of a mock election contest between a BNP and AL redesigned by the CTG and led by Abdul Mannan Bhuiyan, and either of AmuMukul/Rajjak/Suranjit etc.’
—
A variation of this is a ‘national unity’ government, with either Mannan Bhiuyan as PM and Amu/Tofail/Razzak as Deputy (I don’t think we are likely to see a Hindu PM anytime soon – sorry Suranjit) or vice versa. This government will be ‘supported’ by a ‘national security council’ comprising of our patriotic forces.
You know when I first heard this idea, and from whom? It was just after Ershad resigned in Dec 1990, and I heard it from Mr Matiur Rahman. He hadn’t started with large national dailies yet. In fact, I think he was still a member of the Communist Party then.
July 1, 2007 at 6:47 am
Yes yes… exactly a national government is probably on the table too. That could be after the election of understanding or even decided before the election.
But the million dollar question is whether will they be able to work their plan?
July 1, 2007 at 4:02 pm
#10 Asif said [But this sort of thinking where we see Indian subversives everywhere is not analytically accurate and highly counterproductive]
You have made one fact clear that no matter how evident indian subversion and bullying; you don’t want people and media expose it or discuss about it. Its no way counterproductive for people to know about indian systematic subversive activity.
What counterproductive is indian design of subversion and destructive activities. What counterproductive is constant indian media propaganda labeling Bangladesh in certain bracket. What counterproductive is power gel explosive produced in Bharat explosive send inside Bangladesh (go check newspaper picture and BDR registry), what counter productive is phnsidyl factories set up along west Bengal border to make money out of drug addicts. What counter productive is killing Bangladeshis every other day. Should I go with more examples….? Please don’t come up with your opinion, come up evidence that can alleviate pain Bangladeshis suffering for longtime.
#10 Asif said [its huge military build-up with which it might one day bully its neighbours.]
Have you read IHT article how India bully Bangladesh? Well here you go..
India the bully
By Philip Bowring International Herald Tribune
http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/02/08/edbow_ed3_.php
That was just an independent account of indian bullly. In 2001, india sent its commando battalion 2 km inside Bangladesh (through Boribari border), burned villages and tried to capture BDR BOP. That was flexing military muscle in full sight. Don’t tell us that were another conspiracy theory. Indian military bullying happening everyday, you can choose to live in the mythical box india created but Bangladeshis live along border will tell you otherwise.
Here are some samples Bangladeshis killed every other day.
BSF kills 2
http://www.thedailystar.net/2007/05/03/d70503013122.htm
BSF kills farmer
http://www.thedailystar.net/2007/04/09/d70409013520.htm
Bangladeshi girl shot by BSF
http://thedailystar.net/2007/06/29/d70629061986.htm
By the way can your HR activity can put some spot light on these chronic killings?
#10 Asif said [And there we have it! Great conspiracy theory, but in terms of facts: nothing. Given the soaring inflation we had, it doesn’t take those “evil geniuses” in the Indian Chamber of Commerce to see that worker unrest was on it’s way.]
Inflation and price of everything now are much much higher than year ago. If one has to go by your miserable inflation diversion theory then there would have been endless riots and destruction in Bangladesh by now. There goes another propaganda to cover indian act……
Indian chamber member effort to poison European buyers with advance knowledge of unrest has just exposed indian involvement and knowledge of subversion. Indeed these facts were well registered in Bangladeshi newspapers, with BGEMA and BKEMA (I had a conversation with BKEMA chief during the incident) and with intel agencies. There were well documented report and intel about hired outsiders burning garments and non garments related industries. Besides, no garments workers would accept self destructing prophecy – burning and destroying their means of living because of inflation pressure. Please explain – would you prefer no income over existing level of income? Kamal Muzumder arrest was directly related to that unrest. You inflation theory to cover indian ill motive exposed you in way I rather not put any more spot light.
#10 Asif said [What good will widespread unrest in Bangladesh do for them?]
I am sure you know why; you just need to drop the mask of pretending. From policy dictates and hegemonic design India sees advancement of any of its neighbor more than itself as threat to its economy and its integrity. Its no secret India is a land of dozens of independent movements. In indian psyche any significant advancement by neighbor over its own achievement would only strengthen its internal independence movements. Srilanka is prime example of such indian doctrine. Spectacular Srilankan growth (in eighties) had seen by indian policy makers as economic and political threat. Hence India armed, trained and funded Tamil tigers. Separatist’s movement has virtually destroyed Srilankan thrust to become next Singapore just off the coast of India. Wa-la classic divide and conquer doctrine paid dividend to ultimate Indian goal.
Because of Bangladesh homogeneous ethnicity there is little chance of ethnic unrest hence india embarked on different subversive tactics. Besides, weaker Bangladesh industry means more chance for indian industry to dominate Bangladeshi market.
I can understand you are frustrated as you dont have any evidence to cover Indian acts of subversion. But its no way good reflection on you to hide behind others.
July 1, 2007 at 4:18 pm
I think Jyoti has made very good point on exit strategy of interim entity. We can expect infight for leadership on such national govt platform. And in big part that fight will answer question Rumi bahi raised.
July 1, 2007 at 9:35 pm
I could rebutt your claims pretty easily M. Amin. But I’m not about to. Your baseless accusations about me trying to “cover” up Indian subversion is not something I’m willing to dignify with a response. I’m a patriotic Bangladeshi, sir, and I take people pointing to my lack of knowledge on any topic much better than I take accusations of “treachery”. Your stance in this entire debate shows where you are coming from, and it is not worth my time to deal with this.
July 2, 2007 at 1:25 am
#15(I could rebutt your claims pretty easily M. Amin. But I’m not about to. Your baseless accusations about me trying to “cover” up Indian subversion is not something I’m willing to dignify with a response. I’m a patriotic Bangladeshi, sir, and I take people pointing to my lack of knowledge on any topic much better than I take accusations of “treachery”. Your stance in this entire debate shows where you are coming from, and it is not worth my time to deal with this.)
It seemed like the so-called conspiracy theorist(Mr. Amin)took his globes off and threw some effective jabs, right/left hooks, which were enough to take the introducer(Mr. Asif) of Deflective Art or Conspiracy Theory down and make comments like the RAJA(King)of Rabindranath Tagore’s JOTA ABHISKAR/SHOE INVENTION(Amio Jantam Kamone Beta Pereche Sheta Jante). Now please listen up Mr. Asif, if you were to be a patriotic Bnagladeshi(As you claimed) then tried to diss-prove Mr. Amin with logic, rational and evidence. Otherwise readers would have plenty of reasons to assume that a CROW acted as WANNABE CUCKOO but in fact became something in between( Just two cents of an observer in the beginning).
July 2, 2007 at 1:38 am
BTW if anyone didn’t know the extent of RAW infiltration in Bangladeshi socio/cultural/governmental/Military scenario then please read ‘RAW and Bangladesh’ by Zainal Abedin. Furthermore, A. I. Munshi’s ‘India Dcotrine’ would be another dressing on salad IMHO(In my honest opinion).Finally a small correction on JOTA ABISHKAR’s story. The comment was actually MANTRY’s (Minister) not Raja’s.
July 2, 2007 at 1:56 am
Couple of good write ups by a proud Muslim (I am waiting for more of Conspiracy Theorist levels), the perimeter of which reached beyond Pakistani boundari. Reader’s constructive comments would be greatly appreciated
# 1 India’s insatiable appetite
—————————
Shireen M Mazari
When India’s Prime Minister Manmohan Singh spoke at the Institute of Defence Studies and Analysis (IDSA) on November 11, his reference to “failed states” emerging in the region triggered a terrible sense of deja vu. It was once again a reminder of India’s appetite for constant expansion of its national borders. After all, apart from Israel, India is the only other state to have expanded its territory through the use of force and military power since its creation. Besides the annexation of the princely states of Hyderabad and Junagarh and the occupation of Jammu and Kashmir, India took military action in Goa in 1961 followed by the incorporation of that state within the Indian Union in 1962. Then, in 1975, Sikkim was swallowed up by the Indian Union.
The case of Sikkim is particularly interesting because it shows the devious manner in which the Indian state manipulated events to end the sovereignty of that tiny territory which had remained an independent Buddhist kingdom under the Namgyal Chogyal dynasty from 1642 right up to 1975. Earlier, in 1835, the king of Sikkim had been forced to give Darjeeling to the British as a ‘gift’ and it was at this time that Sikkim became a British protectorate. When the present state of India was created in 1947, it took over the protectorate and as such the foreign policy and national defence of Sikkim were transferred to India. But that was never enough for Indian rulers. Using Nepalese settlers in Sikkim to intrigue and plan the overthrow of the Choygal, India continued to increase its influence in this kingdom. In 1975, Mrs Gandhi annexed Sikkim in a well-planned drama. On April 8, Indian tanks and soldiers surrounded the palace and placed the Choygal under Indian surveillance. On April 10, the Sikkim Assembly unanimously resolved that “the institution of the Choygal is hereby abolished and Sikkim shall henceforth be a constituent unit of India”. Then on April 14 a referendum was held, while Indian forces continued their presence, which supported the Assembly’s resolution. Ten days later, the Indian parliament accepted the Sikkimese request of merger and thus India was able to make this one-time independent kingdom the 22nd state of the Indian Union. This Indian practice of moving in its forces was similar to what the Indians had tried in their occupation of Jammu and Kashmir. In the case of Sikkim, the pretext given throughout was one of instability and insecurity of a weak regime — what would be referred to as a failed state in today’s political language.
So when Indian leaders talk of the “danger of a number of failed states emerging in our neighbourhood” and how this will have “far-reaching consequences for our region and our people”, the neighbourhood should certainly be alarmed. After all, India has sought control over all the smaller states within its neighbourhood, one way or another.
At present, it is experiencing problems not only with Nepal but also with Bangladesh. Despite the fact that Maoist rebels use sanctuaries across the border in India, New Delhi refuses to seal this border because it has never regarded it as a proper international boundary. Instead, its forces have gone across at will to arrest people on the Nepalese side. Indian political intervention in Nepal is well known and efforts to control Nepalese foreign policy are also documented. For instance, how can anyone forget the stoppage of Nepal’s transit rights as a landlocked state when it chose to purchase a few anti-aircraft guns (a purely defensive weapon system) from China? Given the political use India has made of this situation, Afghanistan should be grateful that it has uninterrupted transit rights across Pakistan. Because Nepal has persisted with displaying a sense of independence as behoves a sovereign state that was never colonised, India has become increasingly bellicose towards the Himalayan kingdom. The remarks made by Singh at the IDSA, therefore, contain a veiled threat that should not be ignored. Nor did the threat only target Nepal, given the reference to refugees and destabilisation of India’s border areas. This was a clear reference to Bangladesh and its ongoing conflict with India on the issue of refugees and outstanding border demarcations.
Even more critically, Singh’s statement is extremely dangerous for the neighbourhood because the language is similar to that of the US pre-emptive doctrine and regime-change notions. As we know, India had already laid claim to this doctrine so it would not be fanciful to assume that India, with US blessings, now seeks greater control over the smaller states in its neighbourhood. This does not mean that it will necessarily use overt military force to implement its agenda.
History should never be forgotten and we need to recall how India gained control over Bhutan’s external affairs. Bounded on three sides by India, Bhutan has always been a key part of India’s strategic planning. As early as 1949, India signed a Treaty of Friendship with Bhutan, which remains in force in perpetuity. This Treaty, comprising ten articles, assures Bhutan of India’s “non-interference” in its internal affairs in return for Bhutan agreeing “to be guided by the advice of the Government of India in regard to its external relations” (Article 2).
As India’s military might has increased and its strategic partnership with the US has proceeded by leaps and bounds, it is now seeing itself in a position to be more forceful and assertive with states like Nepal and Bangladesh. Eventually, it can also increase belligerency towards Pakistan. After all, despite the ongoing peace process, it continues to remain intransigent over conflictual issues. Here, it is not just Kashmir but also the water issue. We have now seen how India kept us uselessly involved in talks that led nowhere on the Kishanganga project and that is why we are now compelled to seek the international arbitration allowed for under the Indus Waters Treaty. Nor should we assume that the violence meted out to our diplomatic staff and their children is simply an odd incident — even though our own sudden silence on the beating up of our High Commission staffer’s child is strange and surely should not be the price we have to pay for sustaining positive atmospherics for the dialogue process.
Meanwhile, it would seem that India’s insatiable appetite to gain ever more control over its neighbourhood seems to be overwhelming us all. That is why Afghanistan is in Saarc and China is not. After all, becoming a member of Saarc would have allowed China freer access to trade in this region given the push for SAFTA, and that would pose a threat to Indian goods. With Afghanistan as a Saarc member, how will we now prevent Indian access across the land route to Afghanistan under SAFTA? India talks of no redrawing of borders but it has an endless hunger for expanding its own national frontiers, directly or indirectly. Manmohan Singh has shown us the new face of this voracious appetite. We will have only ourselves to blame if we ignore this warning.
#2 The Indian scheme of things
—————————
Shireen M Mazari
It has been apparent for some time now that since the dialogue process recommenced between Pakistan and India, the latter has adopted a devious and indirect approach — the line of least resistance on the part of Pakistan, as Liddell Hart would have put it — towards seeking resolution of Kashmir on its terms. There have been multiple tacks on this approach, some overt and some covert — but all aimed at getting de facto recognition of the status quo given that de jure recognition of the same is not a possibility even in the most conducive of atmospherics that could possibly be created.
In terms of overt efforts, while Pakistan has moved to demanding demilitarisation and self-governance as interim measures, which could create a better climate in which to seek a final resolution of the Kashmir conflict, the Indians are making the self-governance issue an end in itself — even as they continue to ignore the demilitarisation CBM sought by Pakistan. The latest salvo fired in this regard came from Kuldip Nayyar, in Islamabad, when he suggested that self-governance was the only possible way to resolve the Kashmir issue! What exactly is meant by self-governance? The Indians are very clear that it refers to autonomy for the Kashmiris, but under the Indian Constitution — a situation that prevailed in Indian Occupied Kashmir (IOK) till 1953. Pakistan has accepted the self-governance principle for AJK, as an interim measure which is why it has never sought to bring AJK within the permanent purview of the Pakistan Constitution.
Under this framework, all that self-governance would do is at best create a more conducive political environment for the Kashmiris, but within the prevailing control structure of the Indian Constitution for Kashmiris in IOK and AJK’s linkage with Pakistan. So self-governance does not in any way deal with the issue of the Indian occupation of Kashmir and the right of self-determination of the victimised Kashmiris –- all necessary to resolve the conflict. Therefore, at best, it can be an interim measure. But again we in Pakistan need to be careful when we talk of self-governance for Kashmiris. We can ensure this in AJK but we can only express a hope that India will do the same, as an interim measure, in IOK. If we make this a formal issue to be discussed between the two states, then we are giving de facto recognition to the Indian Occupation of Kashmir — which is exactly what India would want. Hence their efforts to submerge us in this self-governance issue, with our refrain of “interim measure” soon becoming a mere whimper, lost to all but the keenest of ears — and we know the international community lacks such acute sensitivity. So we need to continuously point to the limitations of this notion even as we commend it temporarily to provide greater political breathing space to the Kashmiris.
Incidentally, Mr Nayyar’s claim that the partition of Kashmir along religious lines goes against the secular policy of New Delhi is nonsensical because India used the religious argument to take control of Hyderabad and Junagadh, so where it suits India, it is quite happy to use religion despite its claims to secularism. Indians also seem to suffer from a convenient amnesia regarding the reality of the LoC — that is, it is merely a ceasefire line and not a border, so it can be neither a “soft” nor a “hard” border.
Linked to the self-governance issue is the issue of movement of people across the LoC. Pakistan has rightfully been pushing for greater access to Kashmiris across the LoC — especially in the wake of the earthquake tragedy but if Indians and Pakistanis are going to cross the LoC this raises a series of legal issues. Will they use passports? If so, then they will be giving de facto recognition to the sovereignty of Pakistan and India over AJK and IOK. If such movement is allowed, then investors and traders will also begin coming across the LoC so we would have Indian investors in AJK — the likelihood of Pakistanis investing in IOK will not be a possibility for some time given the Indian Occupation and emergency rules. At the end of the day, such developments will also create a de facto recognition of the status quo as a solution since there will be no impetus for seeking another solution with trade and political movement being conducted across the LoC as if it were a border! The Indians know the logic of the policy of opening up of the LoC to non-Kashmiris including political elites from Pakistan and India but are we also now prepared to go along with this ploy which will inevitably bolster the status quo?
Another ominous development is the statement coming recently from New Delhi from the IOK’s Chief Minister, Ghulam Nabi Azad that international flights would start from Srinagar in two years. This would clearly give legality to India’s occupation because any foreign airliner that landed in Srinagar would be accepting the writ of the government there — that is, the Indian occupying force. Once India has notified the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) of the airports available for international traffic, through its national civil aviation authority, it will be on the ICAO list of international destinations with ICAO determining air lanes and so on. Even unused airports are in the ICAO log book, once their name has been sent there. There is a need for Pakistan to do something to counter this indirect approach of India to get legal recognition for its occupation of Jammu and Kashmir. This must be opposed in ICAO. At the very least a letter should be sent to ICAO in the form of an indemnification document to protect our legal position on Kashmir.
Worse still, if Pakistanis, and one hears some are contemplating this damaging move, were to fly from within Pakistan directly to Srinagar, we would have played the game India wants us to play. That is why foreign policy must be guided clearly from one central source and not be decentralised or privatised.
Of course, there is also talk of Muzaffarabad becoming an international airport. We should not expect the Indians to protest because this would only bolster the Indian position of seeking the status quo as a solution to the Kashmir conflict. But again our position will certainly be compromised. Unless we are extremely careful on how we move on Kashmir — and there is no reason for us to show an unseemly haste — we can be in danger of allowing state practices to gradually dilute our legal position on Kashmir to an extent where the status quo and Indian occupation of Kashmir becomes a legal reality for all intents and purposes.
__________________
“The world is supported by four things only: the learning of the wise , the justice of the great , the prayers of the righteous and the valour of the brave”
(An inscription over the collegiate portals of the Unviersity of Granada in Muslim Spain)
July 2, 2007 at 5:57 am
But the million dollar question is whether will they be able to work their plan?
—-
Wouldn’t that depend on the grass roots? How do you think they’ll react?
I have no idea, and would very much like to know your thoughts.
July 2, 2007 at 10:54 am
I do not know about ‘pre-emptive policies’, but nullifing Farakka, cut off Asaam and have a land connection to Nepal are few plans Bangladeshis can look into.
July 2, 2007 at 12:34 pm
Ahh yes Ahmedur R, I’M the one who has to present “logic, rational and evidence”. M. Amin has presented absolutely logical and rational evidence that I am on the Indian side (without knowing me personally or, evidently, my writing), so now it’s my turn. Yes, that makes sense. (it’s called sarcasm)
Look, neither of you have asked for proof, or even tried to hear what I’ve been trying to say. Instead, you’ve resorted to verbal abuse (yes, implying that I am an “indian agent” is abuse to my ears). When this conversation becomes one with decent people, I’ll present my POV. Asking for some perspective and common sense in dealing with Indians effectively (so as to check their ambitions) should not invite accusations of being pro-Indian.
To every other sane person on this board: I am in no doubt as to this once fact: India is our biggest foreign policy problem. When it comes to dealing with this problem, accusations like those made by M. Amin and Ahmedur R. are particularly problematic because they undermine our credibility in the eyes of the world. That is what I meant when I originally said that such modes of thinking are counterproductive. Rather, I’d highlight the very REAL problems that India has caused for us, from Farakka to trade barriers to BSF killing our border people (which btw, M.Amin is not the kind of “bullying” I had in mind.)
Finally apologies to Rumi bhai, because this little name-calling session has probably been repugnant to his instincts as a gentleman (which we see displayed so well in DP every week), and also because this has gone completely off topic.
July 2, 2007 at 12:38 pm
Folks, I am a little surprised how this post turned into a India related battle field. There was nothing about India in the original post. I request you to please focus your discussion on the political transformation that is going on in Bangladesh in the name of reform.
July 3, 2007 at 11:48 am
Ahh yes Ahmedur R, I’M the one who has to present “logic, rational and evidence”. M. Amin has presented absolutely logical and rational evidence that I am on the Indian side (without knowing me personally or, evidently, my writing), so now it’s my turn. Yes, that makes sense. (it’s called sarcasm)
Look, neither of you have asked for proof, or even tried to hear what I’ve been trying to say. Instead, you’ve resorted to verbal abuse (yes, implying that I am an “indian agent” is abuse to my ears). When this conversation becomes one with decent people, I’ll present my POV. Asking for some perspective and common sense in dealing with Indians effectively (so as to check their ambitions) should not invite accusations of being pro-Indian.
To every other sane person on this board: I am in no doubt as to this once fact: India is our biggest foreign policy problem. When it comes to dealing with this problem, accusations like those made by M. Amin and Ahmedur R. are particularly problematic because they undermine our credibility in the eyes of the world. That is what I meant when I originally said that such modes of thinking are counterproductive. Rather, I’d highlight the very REAL problems that India has caused for us, from Farakka to trade barriers to BSF killing our border people (which btw, M.Amin is not the kind of “bullying” I had in mind.)
Finally apologies to Rumi bhai, because this little name-calling session has probably been repugnant to his instincts as a gentleman (which we see displayed so well in DP every week), and also because this has gone completely off topic.
Comment- It is facile to distinguise whose heart lies where, all one has to do is to see spade as spade. It doesn’t require million dollar’s prism that is made of diamond but just the clean ness of heart, intention and honesty.
Siding with the enemies of mankind, pursuing their mission with eloquence but shamelessly and denying universal facts vehemently don’t make one the friend of mankind but may helps buying a IVY leaguer’s degree and fame in Investment Banking Industry (Mother of all current destruction IMHO). Although you have frothed constantly, you haven’t demonstrated any rational, countered M. Amin’s arguments with logic. Now if you still call yourself a rational, logician then may Almighty give you sense and may GOPAL BHAR stop joking from hell. Thanks
July 3, 2007 at 1:01 pm
Folks, I am a little surprised how this post turned into a India related battle field. There was nothing about India in the original post. I request you to please focus your discussion on the political transformation that is going on in Bangladesh in the name of reform.
Comment- Dear Rumi Bhai,
Agreeing with the core of your statement and showing due respect to the premise of the topic, I would like to point out that the current game plan of so-called reformists (NADIR OF SATANIC VENTURE IMHO) has bneen designed by the Chanakya Indians that has hardly anything to do for the well-being of 145 Million Bangladeshis.The following articles would be icying on the cake in this regard,
http://www.weeklyholiday.net/front.html
http://www.dailynayadiganta.com/fullnews.asp?News_ID=30709&sec=4
It seems natural for one to divulge chauvinist’s scheme of things of India. Furthermore Indian rise as a super power directly correlates with its neighbor expence. So, please note that CREATION OF INDIA RELATED QUAGMIRE at here have some rationals, thanks.
In that context
July 4, 2007 at 12:19 am
Ahmedur R.
With great reluctance and ONLY out of consideration to someone I respect highly, I’m replying to your last comment.
You said, “Siding with the enemies of mankind, pursuing their mission with eloquence but shamelessly and denying universal facts vehemently don’t make one the friend of mankind but may helps buying a IVY leaguer’s degree and fame in Investment Banking Industry (Mother of all current destruction IMHO)”
This makes me think that you are mistaking me for Asif Saleh of Drishtipat. I’m not Asif Saleh, but another Asif. I usually post under AsifY at DP and other wordpress-based blogs to distinguish myself from him. Will do so from now on at Rumi bhai’s blog as well. I repeat in order to get this through to someone as thick as yourself: I’m not Asif Saleh. Neither am I an investment banker (and I disagree with your blanket condemnation of the profession.) Nor did I go to an Ivy League school or Dhaka University, both of which I’d love to do.
You’re not the first person to mix us up: http://www.drishtipat.org/blog/2007/05/02/webcast/#comment-134737
July 7, 2007 at 4:50 pm
[…] says: What is being shown like a reform strategy for now, is, in my opinion, is a shrewd exit starategy. […]
July 11, 2007 at 9:15 am
[…] Rumiは次のようにいっている： 差し当たって改革方策のように見せて提示されているのは、抜け目のない出口戦略だと私は思う。もし現在の指導体制のもとALかBNPが政権に復帰することになれば自分たちが危険になることを政府はよく知っている。そして、彼らはどちらの党にも政権を受渡すような間違いをおかしたくはない。 […]
July 21, 2007 at 9:36 pm
Rumi Bahi , I do respect and understand your observation. But I would like to mention the fact that my responses were based on what Asif[Y] written on your blog. I was explaining how action from our neighbor has caused and causing trouble for Bangladesh. If I may say all were in the in context. But facts and proof I presented did not bode well with some folks. I have heard from many good analysts and chance to learn from insiders that 1/11 and its aftermath has deep rooted indian involvement. Therefore future of interim entity and its exit strategy will see maneuvering from across the border. Evidence of many such maneuvers has already been published in the newspapers.
I have seen many blogging space discussing 1/11 and aftermath in the context of Bangladesh domestic politics and corruption. Unless and until leadership (and broader population) can see and understand our past, present and future in the context of global and regional geo political and strategic game, we are bound for failure in the long run. I am sure you and many know these facts. I am surprised why there is not much effort to promote these understandings?Perhaps for many these facts are not as popular as story of who stole how much.
Here is a good analysis:
http://dailynayadiganta.com/2007/07/21/fullnews.asp?News_ID=33560&sec=4