|
COUNCIL BUOYS NATIONALIST FORCES
BNP should retain links with grassroots
M I Ali
The enthusiasm with which the Fifth Council of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party was held heralds a return of confidence of the Bangladeshi nationalist forces in the politics of the country. It celebrated not only the end of inertia of BNP politics but also the party's unfortunate decision to continue its pre-One Eleven political routine, albeit with a few minor changes in order to comply with the requirements of the Election Commission's current Representation of the People Order.
While both the major political parties, the Awami League and the BNP have now completed their mandatory councils, the intra-party democracy remains a far cry. It seems that these were done only to reconfirm that their highest leadership do not have confidence in the general party members' wisdom or ability to elect the party officials. The councils were held only to surrender their rights to the heads of their respective parties.
It may be said without doubt that BNP was singled out for repression and intimidation by the military backed Caretaker Government. Analysts will of course argue that BNP itself paved the way for the takeover by the extra Constitutional government through the shenanigans of its institutions like the Hawa Bhaban. It is also said that activities of such party quasi official party organs had resulted in an erosion of the confidence of the party stalwarts in the party's ability to effectively represent the will of the majority. The result of this lack of confidence was the outcome of the last general elections in which BNP suffered a major defeat. Thanks to the Fifth Council, it now appears that he party has successfully picked up the pieces left behind by the One Eleven government.
With the conclusion of the BNP Council sessions it is clear that neither of the two major political parties have learnt any lessons from their past experiences. The fact that initially people did support the military backed takeover of One Eleven because of the lack of democracy within their parties as well as in the country, has still not been taken into account by these parties. Both parties have now totally rejected attempts to democratise themselves. That the people did reject 'minus two' formula of the Caretaker Government, does not mean that they still want to see dictatorships in these two parties.
The way the Awami League and the BNP are currently structured, the issues that led to One Eleven continue to exist. There is no democracy within these parties, no dissent is tolerated and all ideas must flow from the top to the bottom. There is a general belief that the present system - encircled by the sycophants - will again allow the isolation of the party president or chairperson from the general members and that the prevailing situation would not allow the holding of impartial elections in future.
Least we forget, a thorough overhaul of the administration by the Latifur Rahman led Caretaker Government in 2001 totally upset the Awami League apple cart and ushered BNP into power that year. In 2006 BNP went one step further, they tried to make sure that under any circumstance, they will have their own man as the head of the Caretaker Government. This unfortunately paved the way for the military backed Caretaker Government and BNP can only blame themselves for this. This situation would have definitely been avoided had there been democracy within BNP.
As things stood in 2006, had the elections been held normally, BNP would have returned to power with a comfortable majority. BNP unnecessarily wanted to see their man as head of the Caretaker Government. Sensing this, Awami League, then in opposition, launched a street movement in response to BNP's election arrangement machinations and this in the end turned out to be successful for that party. This was a time when BNP had just announced its list of candidates for the 2006 general elections which, in the eyes of most, represented the aspirations of a coterie within the party. Most of these candidates owed their loyalty to the coterie which was very close to the Chairperson, basking on her immense popularity among the electorate. However, when Awami League started their street movement, a majority of the BNP supporters stood on the sidelines as they had been ignored by the highest leadership. Thus the advent of One Eleven.
The Fifth Council of BNP was the successful culmination of a democratic process which generates great enthusiasm among the grass root membership. It is doubtful if the Council would have been this successful had the democratic process been ignored. Now that the BNP Chairperson has been vested with the responsibility of appointing the BNP office bearers, one can only hope and pray that she will choose wisely and correctly, not succumbing to the wishes of the self seekers who surround her. It will be a great loss to the nation if BNP once again becomes isolated from its grass root activists, supporters and well wishers.
 ^ TOP OF THIS PAGE ^ MAIN PAGE
WHY HASINA DEFERRED INDIA TRIP?
Misgivings, obduracy blight
Dhaka-Delhi relations
M. Shahidul Islam
Something weird is souring Dhaka- Delhi relations prior to the PM's scheduled visit to India. There seems more to the last minute deferral of the visit than what meets the eye. For, if one must believe the reason given by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) about the deferral of the visit, the blame must go to India, which, according to the Foreign Minister, "requested" for rescheduling the visit.
Teesta agreement
That, however, does not tally with the facts unearthed so far. Sources say Dhaka felt insulted, snubbed and betrayed in a number of pre-summit interactions, prompting the PM to pause and reflect further before making a desperate dash to sign agreements which could prove suicidal for the nation.
Dhaka is learnt to have taken offence when Delhi flatly rejected on December 5 a proposition to hold a meeting of the Joint River Commission (JRC) to finalize an agreement on the sharing of Teesta river waters during PM's upcoming visit. A different brand of chemistry thus intruded into the bilateral equations once that negative Indian decision was conveyed to Bangladesh officials at the conclusion of the second day's meeting of the JRC experts, which commenced in the state guest house Meghna on December 4.
A meeting source said, "India proposed to hold Secretary-level meeting first, prior to JRC," which they argued not being possible before PM's (now-postponed) visit from December 18-21.
Another source in the MOFA, however, regretted that the Indian proposal was unacceptable due to the Teesta water sharing agreement being pending since 2005 when Bangladesh first delivered to India the first draft of the agreement, with proposition that Bangladesh and India each would get 40 per cent water of the river and 20 per cent would go to Bay of Bengal for maintaining adequate flow in the channel. "That was why Dhaka decided to hand over the draft of the agreement to India prior to PM's visit so that the agreement could be finalized and signed during the scheduled summit of the two PMs," the source maintained.
Besides, Dhaka found it surprising that India failed to comply with its commitment to finalize the Teesta agreement 'sooner,' made during Foreign Minister Dipu Moni's Delhi visit in September.
Sources also say Dhaka had other reasons to feel insulted and snubbed. While Delhi failed to accept the Teesta water agreement, Dhaka had meanwhile complied in a hurry with the finalization of three other agreements that Delhi wanted desperately to get concluded during PM's visit. The concluded agreements include (1) Treaties on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters, (2) Transfer of Prisoners, and, (3) Bilateral Agreement on Combating International Terrorism.
Signed during Home Secretary level meeting in Delhi on December 1, the three agreements are slated to obtain treaty status after the two PMs sign them during the upcoming Delhi summit. But, in return, Dhaka got nothing.
Threats from ULFA
There are also reports that the visit was postponed due to credible threats from the ULFA activists. That prospect borders on 'may be,' notwithstanding that, since coming to power, the AL-led regime has been doing for Delhi much more than what could be lawfully expected of any sovereign nation.
For instance, long before these legal instruments could become efficacious, Indian special force had already conducted a covert operation inside Bangladesh on November 1 and abducted two ULFA leaders - Chitrabon Hazarika and Sasha Choudhury - from a residence in Dhaka. The two leaders were later produced in a court in Assam the next day.
Ever since, other ULFA leaders have been making threats against Bangladesh and its PM in particular, the latest threat coming on December 5 following abduction of ULFA's founding chairman, Arabinda Rajkhowa, from Dhaka and his appearance before a judicial magistrate in Gawahati the next morning. The threat against the PM followed Rajkhowa's angry comment in the court premise that "Bangladesh had betrayed us."
ULFA threats often prove credible, and, other reports do indicate the ULFA leaders are tired of the theatrics and the mendacity of the regime in Dhaka.
Despite Indian Border Security Force (BSF) having admitted that they took possession of the ULFA leaders (Rajkhowa, his wife and their two children, his personal bodyguard Raja Bora, as well as the deputy commander-in-chief of ULFA's military wing, Raju Barua, among others) from Bangladesh authorities, the insistence by Home Minister Shahara Khatun that 'our security forces were not involved in the arrests of ULFA leaders' further indicated the recent raids in Dhaka having been conducted by Indian Special forces. And, these unlawful actions have startled legal communities and other observers due to Bangladesh and India not having any extradition treaty, although Indian intelligence agencies have hinted a number of times since the AL-led regime's coming to power that Dhaka has 'tacitly' agreed to track down Indian insurgents hiding in Bangladesh.
Meanwhile, these 'abduction' incidents have so elevated the mood of Indian officials that, following the latest abduction in Dhaka and possession of so many top ranking ULFA leaders by India, foreign secretary, Nirupama Rao, said on December 5 that cooperation between New Delhi and Dhaka had delivered "very positive results." Yet, that Delhi remains characteristically lax toward reciprocating on long-outstanding matter like the Teesta water sharing agreement is a matter of deeper concern.
Such concerns have prompted many observers to say in anger, "If the nation's sovereignty is trumped at will in the absence of legal instruments allowing intrusion into a third country of the special force of another, what consequence the new treaties will have on the territorial integrity of Bangladesh?" They further ask: "Will Indian forces enter Bangladesh in witch hunt of northeast insurgents (or alleged Islamic militants) if our own forces fail to comply with Indian requests?"
Fear of retribution
Make no mistake that they certainly will. That is why the evolving scenarios lead one to fear that Bangladesh faces one of the gravest dangers of being attacked by a number of Indian insurgent groups if the AL-led regime moves too aggressively to aid India in quelling their liberation struggles. At least 17 insurgent outfits of varied denominations are active and perilously armed all across Bangladesh borders.
Some experts fear, the fall out in Bangladesh from any immature Indo-Bangladesh collaborations against northeast insurgents could be unspecified and massive. When the AL-led government made a similar move in 1996, ULFA leader Poresh Borua had made it clear by saying: "Bangladesh will be targeted and get attacked if it assists India that goes against our Liberation movement."
Added to the ongoing China-India rivalry, as well as the alleged Chinese backing for a hybrid of insurgent groups operating in Indian northeast, Bangladesh must juggle assiduously through a maze of strategic dilemmas and our policy makers must ponder thoroughly whether the PM must sign those agreements at all.
Double standard
Dhaka must not also forget the painful memory of Indian double standard in matters relating to our vital national interests. In 1972, India cited security threat as its main reason not to allow Bangladesh the use of Calcutta port (the Chittagong port being almost inoperative due to obstruction created by war-damaged sunken ships). That Dhaka now can not invoke its own reasoning to say 'no' to many of the 'anti-national-interest' propositions of India is indicative of how beholden the AL-led regime is to this regional bully.
As well, Dhaka's failure over the last 38 years to obtain from Delhi any agreement to use the 16 miles transit through Indian territory (the Siliguri Corridor) for bilateral trade between two SAARC countries - Bhutan and Nepal - shall serve as aide memoirs before a decision to concede anything substantive to Delhi in the upcoming summit.
Transit & transshipment
Then, there are other major variables to be factored in. As speculations thicken that the PM will ink the transit deal too during her upcoming visit to Delhi, the very prospect of it instils fears in the heart of our people. Transit refers to the passage across our territory of Indian goods, using Indian transports, without discrimination whether those goods are military or civil.
Transshipment, on the other hand, refers to the same movement of goods using the transport of transiting countries, which Dhaka may agree, if compelled to. India did avail transshipment facilities from Pakistan since 1947 to commute goods to the northeast, until relations soured in the 960s, leading to the 1965 war.
Belgium syndrome
One of the prime movers of Bangladesh-China relationship is China's vehement objection to Bangladesh granting transit facilities to India, due mainly to Beijing's concern that, in case of any Indo-China hostility, India will bring her troops to North Eastern provinces through Bangladesh to prevent severance of the Siliguri corridor from mainland India.
This strategic conundrum reminds one of the Belgium syndromes. Belgium lost its sovereignty during the Second World War after the Nazi forces invaded that country on May 10, 1940, precipitating the invasion of Netherlands and the Luxemburg in the broader military sweeps that followed. If the allied forces did not win the war, Belgium to date would have remained a German satellite.
Likewise, if India and China go to war once again, as they did in 1962, India will conquer Bangladesh first by using the transit at Ashugonj and Chittagong ports, and the corridor being offered in the name of Asian highway, as Hitler did against Belgium.
Moreover, nearly half of India's total armed forces being already deployed in the trouble-ridden northeast, the strategic priority of the region has increased manifold in recent years, especially after Pakistan became militarily weaker amidst a foreign-imposed civil war and the invasion of Afghanistan, allowing India to focus singularly on China by slowly gobbling Bangladesh into its underbelly for use as strategic depth, a buffer, and a subjugated economic hinterland.
^ TOP OF THIS PAGE ^ MAIN PAGE
REVAMP PARTY TO FACE CHALLENGES
5th council amends BNP's constitution
Special Correspondent
The long overdue council of Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) concluded in the city last week adopting a number of changes in its party constitution including creation of a new position - senior Vice-Chairman - to accommodate Tariq Rahman next to her mother Begum Khaleda Zia who has been chosen the Chairperson for another term.
The senior vice chairman, according to newly adopted constitution, will enjoy the status of a standing committee member. The number of office-bearers of the central executive committee has been increased to 251 extending the tenure of the central executive committee to three years.
Lapse of 16 years
The BNP held its 5th national council session in the city on Tuesday after a lapse of 16 years. The council decided to increase the number of members of the standing committee -- the party's highest policy making body - to 19 from 15.
On conclusion of the national council, party joint secretary general Nazrul Islam Khan told reporters that many proposals were accommodated in changing the party's constitution.
"So, BNP will emerge with a new appearance."
The new central executive committee will be announced within a day or two, he said. The councillors entrusted party chairperson Khaleda Zia with the responsibility to elect the new committee, including the secretary general, and the standing committee members. Khandaker Delwar Hossain will continue as secretary general until a new secretary general is elected or he is re-elected.
Sacrifice to be rewarded
The council session also adopted a 10-point resolutions including a call upon the government for trying former Army Chief Moeen U Ahmed and his associates who 'carried out inhuman torture and repression' on politicians after the political changeover on January 11, 2007.
Meanwhile, Khaleda Zia congratulated the party faithfuls who had sacrificed for the party and worked hard during its bad days. "The new committee will be formed with those dedicated and tested leaders, activists and workers," she said.
Begum Zia told the councillors that party leaders and workers are the judges of the matter and this will be considered during election of the committee.
National unity, oppression
Earlier, inaugurating the council at Bangabandhu Conference Centre on Wednesday, Begum Khaleda Zia called for forging greater national unity of citizens, political parties and all other organisations to make democratic institutions active, strong and functional.
Khaleda appealed to the people, the party leaders and activists to prepare for a tough struggle as "misrule has again become a burden on the nation not to be easily dispensed with."
In her inaugural speech, Khaleda asked the government to uphold the rule of law, curb corruption and stop oppression and harassment of the opposition leaders and workers.
She also asked the ruling party to show respect to the opposition in the parliament and make the parliament effective instead of making any decisions in secret. 'We will help to make the house effective.'
BDR, maritime, corridor, AH
The former Prime Minister said the government is making policies unilaterally on issues such as the massacre of military officers at Peelkhana, maritime boundary, offshore gas block lease, India's move to construct a dam at Tipaimukh, corridor to India, the Asian Highway (AH) benefiting India, and troop pullout from the Chittagong Hill Tracts had questioned the government's sincerity to protecting national interest on the issues.
Begum Zia warned the government of building a strong resistance involving the people if it continues with activities against the interest of the country and the people.
The opening council session, held in a festive mood on the outer premises of the conference centre, was joined in by 2,523 councillors, 12,000 delegates, 3,000 local and foreign guests, and several thousand leaders of the party from 75 organisational district units.
Tarique Zia's speech lauded
The venue turned into a carnival of a huge number of people carrying banners, flags and festoons. The huge back-screen featured the portraits of the party's founder Ziaur Rahman, Khaleda Zia and their eldest son Tarique Rahman. As an added attraction, Tariq Rahman, now staying in London, appeared on a large video screen to deliver a pre-recorded speech. The younger generation of the party workers applauded his speech.
Representatives of local and foreign political parties including the ruling Awami League also spoke at the inaugural session. Respect Party lawmaker in the British House of Commons, George Galloway, Daniel Briton of the New Democratic Party of Canada, Mian Ijajul Hasan of the Pakistan People's Party, Sri Lankan tourism minister Fayaz Mostafa, also leader of the Lankan Freedom Party, and the Chinese ambassador in Dhaka Zhang Xianyi on behalf of the Communist Party of China also spoke at the inaugural session of BNP Council.
17 years of BNP rule
The late president Ziaur Rahman founded the BNP, a right-of-the-centre political party, on September 1, 1978. The party has ruled the 38-year-old country for about 17 years if the martial law regime of Ziaur Rahman is included.
Although the council session is supposed to be held every year, the last council session of the BNP was held on September 3, 1993 at Manik Miah Avenue when Khaleda Zia was re-elected chairperson and she had chosen Abdul Mannan Bhuiyan as the party's secretary general.
The first national council session of the party was held on September 1, 1978 at the Ramna Green, the second in 1983 and the third in 1988.
Awami League highly critical
The fifth national council session of the main opposition BNP has failed to assure the nation the party is returning to fair politics, said Mahbub-ul-Alam Hanif, joint general secretary of the ruling Awami League.
''We as well as the nation hoped that the BNP would signal its return to better politics keeping in mind the harsh experiences after the January 11, 2007 political changeover, but the party has frustrated the nation,'' Hanif told reporters at the party's Dhanmondi office on Wednesday.
He was highly critical of the BNP for electing Khaleda Zia's son Tarique Rahman the senior vice-chairman of the party. ''The nation knows Tarique as a killer, plunderer, corrupt and patron of militancy,'' he said.
''By electing such a controversial person to an important party post, the BNP has encouraged corruption,'' he said.
^ TOP OF THIS PAGE ^ MAIN PAGE
Dhaka demands 75 per cent climate fund for LDCs
Holiday Report
Three-quarters of any climate adaptation fund should go to the most vulnerable countries, Dhaka's delegation to Copenhagen said on Tuesday, as a new report revealed that Bangladesh was among the countries worst affected by climate change. Bangladesh made the plea on behalf of least developing countries and those most vulnerable to climate change, at a press conference at the Bella Conference Centre in the Danish capital. It also demanded a legally binding framework for the adaptation fund.
Dr. Ainun Nishat, member of the Bangladesh delegation, said the major portion, 75 per cent, of any agreed climate fund should go to vulnerable small islands, LDCs and African countries. He stressed: "The climate fund should not be mixed up with official development assistance, which is a separate thing. This is very important. We also want some kind of legal enforcement. There was a commitment in 1990 that 0.7 percent of GDP of rich nations would go to overseas aid for developing countries. This has not happened. If the adaptation fund also remains voluntary, the same inaction will be seen, whatever is finally agreed," he said. He said 1.5 per cent of GDP from developed nations was being mentioned for the adaptation fund.
Earlier in the day, a new report, unveiled on the second day of the climate talks in the Danish capital, said Bangladesh, Myanmar and Honduras were the countries most affected by climate change over the two decades from 1990. Berlin-based Germanwatch, in its 'Global Climate Risk Index 2010' report, said the top ten most affected countries were all developing nations in the low-income or lower-middle income country group. The report said 600,000 people died as a direct consequence of more than 11,000 extreme weather events around the world, with losses incurrd of $1.7 trillion, over the period surveyed from 1990-2008. It said such natural disasters and their consequences could weaken the process to reach Millennium Development Goals and the most affected countries needed greater financial assistance to achieve the goals.
Bangladesh was among the countries facing "continuous" climate change impact, the report said, although more than 80per cent of deaths in the period surveyed occurred in 1991. More 140,000 people were killed in a devastating cyclone that year. The fact that no such catastrophic death toll occurred since, despite continuing extreme weather events, is partial proof that it is possible to prepare for climate risks and prevent larger-scale calamities, said the report. Bangladesh incurs annual losses of 1.81 percent of GDP due to extreme weather events, the report added. Total losses were $2.19 billion a year from 1990 to 2008, said the report.
Man-made climate change is expected to lead to further increases in precipitation extremes, both increases in heavy precipitation and increases in drought, said the report. It said the Copenhagen climate summit must result in a real difference for particularly vulnerable developing countries, through an ambitious adaptation action framework. A key role therefore needs to be played by scaled-up financial support provided by developed countries, it said.
If sea levels rise by one meter, at least 20 million Bangladeshis, of a total population about 150 million, would be displaced. If the glaciers on the Himalayas melt due to global warming, the situation is even worse. "The population of our one coastal district is bigger than the entire population of all island countries and in that consideration at least 15 percent of any climate fund should come to us," State Minister of Environment and Forest Hasan Mahmud told a news conference, according to Reuters.
Hasan Mahmud emphasized that Bangladesh is the most vulnerable country in the world to climate change, Reuters reports. "We are not begging any mercy from anyone. Rather we want justice as the worst victim of climate change," said Qazi Kholiquzzaman Ahmad, a leading economist, who is also part of the Bangladesh climate negotiation team.
^ TOP OF THIS PAGE ^ MAIN PAGE
AF-PAK DEVELOPMENTS, MANMOHAN SINGH
US will withdraw shamefully, says
Taliban spokesman
Sadeq Khan
US President Barack Obama ordered 30,000 extra troops to Afghanistan. Responding to US call for support, NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen declared that 25 NATO countries would send 7,000 soldiers. Other NATO countries, including France and Germany which await a London conference on Afghanistan scheduled for January 28, 2010, are also expected to commit more troops. General Stanley McChrystal, top U.S. and NATO commander of International Security Assistant Force in Afghanistan has been gratified. He asked for 40,000 additional troops to be able to "turn the tide of the war by mid-2010."
Rejecting comparison with the Vietnam War as a "false reading of history," President Obama also managed to give the impression that he had a sound exit plan to get out of the unpopular war. As the US death toll for 2009 hit a record 300, Obama vowed in his nationwide speech from the West Point Military Academy on December 1 that a military withdrawal would start by July, 2011. "Afghanistan is not lost, but for several years, it has moved backwards," Obama said, "As commander in chief, I have determined that it is in our vital national interests to send an additional 30,000 troops to Afghanistan." Putting a $30 billion price tag on the surge, he assured, "after 18 months, our troops will begin to come home." Obama warned that attacks against the United States were "being plotted as I speak," and promised he would go after Osama bin Laden militants operating in Somalia, Yemen or further afield if necessary.
President Obama particularly mentioned in his speech that success in Afghanistan was "inextricably linked" to Pakistan, whose mountainous tribal borderlands serve as a labyrinth of "safe haven" for militant fugitives from across the porous borders.
However, speaking to reporters in Europe hours before Obama's speech, Pakistan's foreign minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi expressed caution over fresh deployment of US forces: "Our issue is not whether the United States is increasing its troops in Afghanistan or not, but how they deploy them." Pakistan's prime minister the previous week said that an influx of new US troops in southern Afghanistan could push more militants across the border into Pakistan, further destabilising its already-troubled border regions. Main opposition leader Nawaz Sharif welcomed timetable for withdrawal of US troops from the region, where common people liken the foreign presence to an occupation.
'US will withdraw shamefully'
The Taliban vowed to step up resistance to the extra US presence. "Obama
will witness lots of coffins heading to America from Afghanistan," Taliban spokesman Qari Yousuf Ahamdi said by telephone. "They will withdraw shamefully. They cannot achieve their hopes and goals."
General Stanley McChrystal, commander of US and NATO forces in Afghanistan, said the clarity, commitment and resolve outlined in the president's address are critical steps toward bringing security to Afghanistan and "eliminating terrorist safe havens that threaten regional and global security."
In an advance notice of his new Af-Pak policy to the President of Pakistan, the US President offered Pakistan the bait of an expanded partnership, increased military and financial assistance and high-tech strategic weaponry. But territorially, Pakistan's borderlands have been clearly marked as targets of that policy.
Placating Indian pique
In this context, Dr. Maliha Lodi, former Pakistani ambassador to USA, examined the implications of the Indian Prime Minister's grand welcome and loaded visit as state guest in Washington. She noted: "Indian prime minister Manmohan Singh's visit to Washington reinforced the growing strategic relationship between the two countries. It was the first state visit of the Obama presidency, in which symbolism seemed as important as substance. Some saw pomp and diplomatic pageantry take precedence over content during the four-day trip. Contrasting Prime Minister Singh's 2005 trip, which saw the signing of the civilian nuclear deal that became the emblem of a new strategic relationship, (leading to Indo-American) the 123 agreement, the visit was preceded by the expression of great Indian anxiety over Washington's growing ties with Beijing as well as the ostensible importance accorded to Pakistan by America's regional strategy.
"What is being characterised as an era of the 'G-2' partnership (an alliance of US and Chinese interests) triggered panic attacks in Delhi. Indian officials used the recent rise in Sino-Indian tensions, provoked mainly by Indian border movements and escalation in Indian rhetoric, to raise the spectre of a threat from China.
"What also rattled Delhi was the formulation in the Sino-US joint statement of Nov 17, which committed the two nations to 'work together to promote peace, stability and development' in South Asia.
"Prime Minister Singh also made repeated mention in pre-visit interviews of his expectation that the US should pressure Islamabad to change course, while questioning the wisdom of America's ties with Islamabad and accusing Pakistan of 'using terror as an instrument of policy.'
"(Indeed) the Indian effort ahead of the visit was to warn Washington not to subordinate US-Indian ties to the US-Pakistan relationship. 'The focus on Pakistan to the exclusion of India emerged as a common complaint in officially inspired media comment. An editorial in The Indian Express illustrated this: The Obama administration has tended to use Pakistan as the fulcrum of South Asia, and see India as one knotty strand in the Afghanistan tangle.
"(In the event Indian effort met with some success.) Significant from Pakistan's perspective was the recognition accorded to India's role in Afghanistan. The joint statement 'appreciated India's role in reconstruction and rebuilding efforts' (in Afghanistan) and hoped for its enhancement. This struck a very different note from that by General Stanley McChrystal in his Afghanistan review, where he referred to Indian activism in Afghanistan exacerbating regional tensions. Islamabad would view this part of the joint statement with sharp concern. This will likely strengthen suspicions in Pakistan's security establishment of a Delhi-Kabul-Washington nexus, which in turn could heighten fears of Pakistan's strategic encirclement.
Pakistan's Consolation
"(Some consolation is that) during the press conference with Prime Minister Singh, President Obama studiously avoided being drawn into openly criticising Pakistan. Instead, he found a tactful way of voicing Washington's desire to see a de-escalation of Pakistan-India tensions....
"The signing during the Singh visit of a number of memorandums (six MOUs and two MOIs), a glitzy White House state dinner and a wide-ranging joint statement, all served to indicate a deepening relationship. But any Indian expectation that the visit would operationalise the civilian nuclear deal and open the way to rapid technology access failed to materialise. ...... (On that account) the Singh visit may not have yielded all that the Indians wanted from it ..... But several aspects of solidifying US-India ties have ramifications for Pakistan that will need to be carefully evaluated."
Reflecting U.S. point of view vis-a-vis Pakistani concerns, news analysis by The Washington Post staff Writer Karen De Young on November 30 observed briefly as follows: "Prior to announcing his new Afghan strategy, President Obama offered Pakistan an expanded strategic partnership, including additional military and economic cooperation, while warning with unusual bluntness that its use of insurgent groups to pursue policy goals "cannot continue."
Expansion of the U.S.-Pakistan relationship will require overcoming significant public and political mistrust in both countries. Officials said that they recognize the difficulty in delivering on either U.S. promises or threats, and that "our leverage over Pakistan is very limited."
At the same time, although the administration's goal is to demonstrate a new level and steadfastness of support, short-term U.S. demands may threaten Pakistan's already fragile political stability. "It's going to be a game of cat-and-mouse with them for a while, what we're trying to do is to force them to recalculate" where their advantage lies.
Sway of Am-Pak vector
"For the things that we care about," a U.S. official said, "the real decision-maker is the Pakistani military." It has long been hedging its bets in Afghanistan; the military has positioned itself to prevent inroads by India in the event of a U.S. withdrawal, and against a 30-year history of being used and then rejected by shifting U.S. policy aims. "Our game is to convince them that our commitment to Afghanistan and the region is long-term. "We're not going to pack up our bags and leave them as soon as we're done. We have to create a situation in which they see a much more positive interest in closer relations with us than they do in trying to play us. But it requires time."
Karen De Young further noted that despite the public and political attention focused on the number of new troops, Pakistan has been the hot core of the months-long strategy review. The long-term consequences of failure there, the review concluded, far outweigh those in Afghanistan: "We can't succeed without Pakistan. You have to differentiate between public statements and reality. There is nobody who is under any illusions about this."
Review officials all of whom spoke about the closely held details of the new strategy on condition of anonymity, emphasized that without "changing the nature of U.S.-Pakistan relations in a new direction, you're not going to win in Afghanistan. And if you don't win in Afghanistan, then Pakistan will automatically be imperilled, and that will make Afghanistan look like child's play."
Proffered U.S. carrots, outlined during Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton's October visit to Islamabad, centred on a far more comprehensive and long-term bilateral relationship. It would feature enhanced development and trade assistance; improved intelligence collaboration and a more secure and upgraded military equipment pipeline; more public praise and less public criticism of Pakistan; and an initiative to build greater regional cooperation among Pakistan, India and Afghanistan.
Indeed, public US criticism of Pakistan's "terrorist links," so to say, to pursue policy goals in Kashmir and in Afghanistan, may actually hide American intentions to make use of the same. This is noted in the analysis of Ambassador MK Bhadrakumar, retired Indian diplomat writing in Asia Times Online on November 25. He observes: "Manmohan's visit has been a creditable success. India and the US launched a wide-ranging counterterrorism cooperation initiative and agreed on the 'absolute imperative' to bring to justice the perpetrators of the Mumbai terrorist strikes last year.
Obama's balancing act
"The Obama-Manmohan joint statement echoes the Indian charge about Pakistani doublespeak on terrorism. It expressed 'grave concern' about a continuing terrorist threat 'emanating from India's neighbourhood' and agreed that 'resolute and credible steps must be taken to eliminate safe havens and sanctuaries that provide shelter to terrorists and their activities ... [which] undermine security and stability in the region and around the world.'
An innocuous-looking reference in the joint statement may hold a vital clue, where the two leaders committed to 'continue to pursue mutually beneficial defence cooperation', including 'trade and technology transfer and collaboration'. In a broader context, the US agreed to strengthen high technology trade 'in the spirit of their strategic dialogue and partnership'. Evidently, the US seriously intends to participate in India's massive arms procurement program. Secretary of Defence Robert Gates called on Manmohan."
Nevertheless, Bhadrakumar notes, when the Indian Prime Minister was enjoying the limelight in Washington, a different chameleon colour was being displayed by President Barack Obama's 'AfPak' aide, Richard Holbrooke: "While Obama kept harping on the special importance of according to Manmohan the honour of being the first foreign dignitary to Washington on a 'state visit' during his presidency, Holbrooke took the opposite direction to plead with the Pakistanis not to take it to heart. Holbrooke held a two-hour press briefing to massage the Pakistani ego. He had this to say: 'And no one in Pakistan, and no one in any other country, should read this [Manmohan's state visit] as a diminution of the importance we attach to them. It's entirely appropriate that someone has to have the first trip. And - it usually used to be in the past, a European ally, but they come over in informal trips ... It [the visit] in no way should be read as a diminution.'
"(Furthermore,) Holbrooke virtually confirmed media reports that Saudi intelligence is engaging the hardcore Taliban leader, Mullah Omar. He admitted, 'We would be supportive of anything that the kingdom chose to do in this regard.' The US has fought not fewer than 100 wars. But this is the first time Saudi Arabia has worked on an exit strategy for the US. To be sure, Manmohan's main problem also, as he arrived in Washington on Monday, was that compared to his previous visit in 2005, he was dealing with a US vastly denuded of its global influence.
Nuclear Handicap
On balance, Washington lacks the strength to assert it will have an ENR with India and will still enforce its writ on the non-proliferation regime.
Overarching this, Delhi harbours disquiet about Obama's 'reset' of regional policies. The US's Afghan strategy remains predicated on Pakistan's cooperation. Washington needs a collegiate Beijing to cope with the crisis in the US economy, which precludes the scope for 'containment strategy' towards China. In sum, Delhi feels disheartened that from a tall pedestal as an Asian 'balancer' on which Bush installed India, Obama brings it down as a sub-regional power."
Ambassador Bhadrakumar gives credit to Dr. Manmohan Singh that despite the nuclear handicap, the Indian Prime Minister could turn up trumps by successfully dangling the bait of American business and job opportunities in the fast-expanding "open" Indian market, to balance the Chinese leverage of upper hand in financial dealings with the weakening superpower. He noted that Manmohan's visit to White House may have begun the "process of laying to rest the ghost of the Bush era, which kept butting into the Indian elitist consciousness."
Indian Counterweight
Obama's response was effusive: Beyond Asia, as the world's largest multiethnic democracy, as one of the world's fastest-growing economies, and as a member of the G20, India will play a pivotal role in meeting many challenges we face today. And this includes my top economic priority, creating good jobs with good wages for the American people.
Such anglings and prevarications are but early signs that the cat-and-mouse game the diminishing superpower is playing in the dangerous Af-Pak theatre may extend in a milder form to Nepal, North East India and the Bay of Bengal as well. Bangladesh ought to be wary, and watchful about possible false steps either in Dhaka or in Delhi.
^ TOP OF THIS PAGE ^ MAIN PAGE
India to supply arms to Nepal, train army
Shamsuddin Ahmed
India will soon resume supply of arms to Nepal and training its army in accordance with an accord reached at the joint secretary level talks between the two countries in Kathmandu beginning on December 4. No immediate reaction to the accord was available from the opposition Maoist party of Nepal, which has time and again warned against such an accord that goes against the peace deal among the political parties.
But the New Delhi-based Asian Centre for Human Rights (ACHR) has expressed deep concern at the decision of arms supply resumption. "It will not only encourage the Nepalese Army to play a more pro-active political role, but also harm further Nepal's dangerously-stalled peace process," said ACHR director
Suhas Chakma. In Nepal,
opposition Maoist party chief Pushpa Kamal Dahal (Prachanda) is set to unilaterally announce autonomy of 14 regions of the country on December 11. If he finally carries out the decision, it will be in clear defiance of the government. The Maoist decision has unnerved the government of Prime Minister Madhav Kumar Nepal, who discussed the matter with the President and the Army Chief. The President has asked Madhav Kumar and leaders of the alliance government to dissuade Prachanda from implementing his decision.
Political observers in Kathmandu believe that the Maoists are in a position to capture power anytime. But it is impossible for Nepal to survive without blessings from New Delhi, because, the landlocked country largely depends on India for its external trade while the Maoists are deemed heavily tilted towards China.
With 40 per cent seats in the parliament and powerful youth and labour wings, the Maoists are undoubtedly dominating the events of the country. After ruling for 8 months following the 2008 general election, the Maoist government stepped down in early May in a row with President Ram Baran Yadav over sacking of the then Army chief. After that 21 smaller parties allied to form the government headed by Madhav Kumar Nepal, who had lost to Maoist candidates in both the constituencies he contested in the general election.
Admittedly, Madhav Kumar Nepal lacks political legitimacy and has no moral authority to lead the coalition government. The alliance has been forged, allegedly at the behest of New Delhi's South Block, only to prevent Maoists from coming back to power.
However, without support of the Maoists, no peace process can be achieved. Since the party left the government, the parliament has been remaining totally hung and the government ineffective. The UN, which has mandated Nepal to reach a consensus and implement the peace process by early next year, has expressed deep concern at the political turmoil in Nepal. It viewed that sufferings of helpless Nepali people could deepen as "rivalry between China and India may spark a wider conflict in the area... Nepal's peace process is in danger of failure."
"Nepal is pushed to political quagmire. Given the instability prolonged, the democratic system has no future," observed Prof Lok Raj Boral in Kathmandu.
The geo-political reality is more powerful. Nepal is surrounded by two powerful countries, which have border disputes between them. Unless the giant neighbours allow, the political leaders can do little. On both sides of the country, there are irreconcilable problems. It is very difficult to resist their pressure - "a situation in which even God might fail," Ganesh Raj Sharma, an eminent lawyer of Kathmandu, was quoted by Nepalnews as saying recently.
"The nagging question is," writes veteran journalist Dhruba Adhikary, "does India want stability in Nepal?" Seasoned analysts in New Delhi tend to reply in the negative.
"Controlled instability (or chaos) is something that Indian rulers always want to find in Nepal," wrote Adhikary.
Latest reports from Kathmandu suggest that there is no immediate prospect of any bloody clash between the Maoists and the government. But the danger is looming large. Once it flares up, it may spread across the country like a bonfire in the event of the Delhi-patronised Army's intervention and action against the Maoists.
^ TOP OF THIS PAGE ^ MAIN PAGE
INDIAN INSURGENTS' REPRISAL LIKELY
Govt. inviting serious threats to
nation's security
Faisal Rahim
As the government is trying to win India's highest level of confidence by capturing rebel ULFA leaders and handing over them to the Indian authorities, observers here believe that Bangladesh may soon emerge as a third-party battle zone as a vengeful action of such moves.
Being aware of the danger, home minister advocate Sahara Khaton last week said the government is ready to face any ULFA threat on its soil. Moreover, some security analysts here say the Prime Minister's visit to Delhi later this month has been deferred mainly on information from the Indian security agents that she might be target of the insurgent group during her visit to India.
The issue came up in discussion in the last cabinet meeting and news report quoted cabinet ministers as asking the foreign minister to secure guarantee of all leak-proof security measures from the Indian authorities before fixing the next date.
The greater prospect of ULFA sabotage in domestic front and even attempts on Prime Minister life came in the wake of the recent arrest of ULFA chairman Arabinda Rajkhowa, his publicity secretary Apurba Barua and several family members of the rebel leaders in Bangladesh and their handing over to Indian Border Security Forces.
The ULFA leaders decried it as a betrayal and hinted of actions if the government in Dhaka is not changing its policy of arrest of rebel leaders and cadres who had fled home for security reasons.
They said they are engaged in their 'liberation war' like the one Bangladesh fought in 1971 when they lent all support and shelter to millions of fleeing Bangladeshis from home for safety. Bangladesh can not deny the same now to them and any help to Delhi in this issue would sound like 'collaboration' of Bangladeshi anti-liberation forces with Islamabad at that time.
As things now develop, desperate ULFA groups may now target the country's infrastructure, bridges and power plants. People wonder why the government is inviting such threats and insecurity for no reason other than proving to India of its loyalty in breaking down what ULFA says their liberation war but Indian policy makers blame it as act of insurgency.
Mystery, cover-up
The arrest of Rajkhowa and other remained shrouded in mystery. Officially the Bangladesh government has denied ofits involvement in the arrests and their subsequent
handing over to the Indian security forces. Indian Home Minister P Chitambaram claimed they had surrendered to the Indian Border Security Force on their own. But the Indian press said they were arrested in downtown Dhaka to provoke the question how the Indian security forces made their presence here to nab the rebel leaders and decamped without the knowledge of the Bangladesh security forces. In fact both sides are working under a big cover-up. On earlier occasions last month when two more ULFA leaders Sasha Chowdhury and Chitraban Hajarika were arrested from Uttara in the outskirt of Dhaka city, the Indian authorities made similar claims of securing their surrender at Agartala border. Bangladesh home minister and other security agencies had also declined that time of any knowledge of the arrest although they did it and transported the victims to Agartala border at midnight to hand over them to the Indian authorities.
Focusing on Rajkhowa's arrest this time, local news report said his group was put on a trap at Cox's Bazar when they were on the move to leave Bangladesh through Myanmar with their next destination to Bangkok.
Surrender case
The group was waiting to get on board a regular bus to Teknaf when an Indian mole, who had made successful access to Rajkhowa inner circle, suggested the use of a private transport to be safer for the journey. A report said, Rajkhowa immediately sensed something fishy and had rather opted to use the regular bus service. At that point some people emerged on the spot and put them forcibly to transport wagons. They drove it to Megalaya border instead of Teknaf or Agartala and handed them to Indian border guards presenting the incident as a surrender case.
As the Indian leadership is now confident, in the first place to be able to bring split and break the backbone of the outfit group finally to drag them to negotiating table to end the insurgency, which ULFA leaders claim as their war of liberation from Delhi and non-negotiable. The outfit leaders still at large have ruled out such possibility, as news report said. The self-styled commander-in-chief of ULFA military wing Poresh Barua and other top leadership from their hideout said negotiations with Delhi is always on their cards. But the issue should be the sovereignty and independence of the state of Assam.
News report said the outfit group is now regrouping their leadership chain and operational structure while looking for new secured hideouts for regrouping.
Meghalaya, Myanmar border
Indian news report said some outfit cadres are now establishing shelter in the Garo villages of Meghalaya while most top leadership is reportedly moving to Chinese shelter around Myanmar border. Strategic analysts say, insurgency in the Indian northeast is having its roots in socio-political deprivation, economic exploitation and denial of the centre, due respect, share of wealth and income which they deserve. Bangladesh fought the war of liberation on the same ground to which India lent us total support.
They say India should resolve the problems politically without putting Bangladesh to a new war front shifting the battle ground on Bangladesh infrastructure. Moreover, Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina's government should think twice before exposing the country to a new war theatre. Any act of sabotage or destruction that Bangladesh may face will not be rebuilt by India free of cost. Moreover, why should the incumbent government make the country vulnerable to possible fear of reprisal from insurgents now that a a peaceful environment prevails with a vibrant economy moving on with high growth targets to become a middle-income nation soon.
Bangladesh's security is the first job the government must ensure, hence analysts say greater caution is needed in dealing with the explosive issues in a fast deteriorating volatile situation.
^ TOP OF THIS PAGE ^ MAIN PAGE
AIM IS TO CREATE DHAKA'S OWN BRAND
Dhaka hopes to be world's
#1 knitwear exporter
Abdur Rahman Khan
Bangladesh is aspiring to become the number one Knitwear exporter in the world by producing diversified items and locally designed Bangladeshi brand. Bangladesh ranks third among the world's knitwear exporters.
It is possible to secure number one position by upgrading the skill and productivity of the workers and developing a fully compliant garment sector, according to Bangladesh Knitwear
Manufacturers and Exporters Association (BKMEA).
Huge potential
Highlighting his vision, BKMEA president Md. Fazlul Hoque told the Holiday that the knitwear sector would continue to be biggest wave in Bangladesh economy by using huge potential in this sector.
BKMEA recognises that the development of knitwear sector to the strong backward linkage support where local suppliers provide 90 per cent of the total fabric requirement and 75 per cent of total yarn requirement of knitwear sector.
Long entrepreneurial experiences, reinvestment of profit by the entrepreneurs, readily available labour force, easily trainable workers and the price competitiveness in the world market also contributed to the significant growth of knitwear sector.
BKMEA is also thankful to the government for policy preferences like duty draw back scheme, bonded warehouse facilities, reduced corporate income tax rates, banking and customs facilities which made the sector prosper.
Bangladesh Knitwear sector succeeded to maintain a growth rate of 19 per cent on an average over the decade contributing about 7 per cent in the nation's GDP.
$6.4 billion export
The knitwear sector also fetched an export earning to the tune of USD 6.4 billion in 2008-09 against $5.3 billion in 2007-08 and $4.5 billion in 2006-07. The net retention rate was more than 70 per cent.
The European Union constitutes 78 per cent of our knitwear export while the USA constitutes another 15 per cent.
Apart from export earnings, the sector creates employment opportunity for 1.2 million workers, 70 per cent of whom are women. There are presently more than 1600 members enlisted with the BKMEA.
However, the sector is facing some infrastructural problem that affects the productivity of the factories. Electricity and gas supply problems are major constraints that lead to increase in cost of production.
''We do not get 40 per cent gas of the total demand for the industry,'' Fazlu Haque told the Holiday. The demand for power is less in the winter. Gas production depends on power. ''The gas crisis can be resolved if the government supplies gas from Siddhirganj power station to the factories of Narayanganj,'' the BKMEA president suggested.
''If the government does not come forward to solving the crisis then all the initiatives including its stimulus package to weather the impact of global downturn and the knitwear fair will end in failure,'' he said. "All our moves will be futile if we cannot make clothes due to paucity of gas,'' he said ahead of a three-day international fair titled Knit-Tex.
BGMEA jointly with Conference and Exhibition Management Services Ltd is organised the exposition for displaying knitting technology and machinery. The three-day 2nd Knit+Tex Bangladesh 2009 exposition began from December 10 (Thursday) at the Bangabandhu International Conference Centre in the city.
The country's knitwear sector would be benefited through this exposition, as the industries would be able to updated their units with new technologies, which would ultimately raise standards of their products, Fazlul Hoque said adding that the knitwear products would gain much higher quality to compete at the global market.
This exposition would also create a unique opportunity for the exhibiting firms to display much advanced technology, he said adding: ''Machinery manufacturers would be able to interact with prospective buyers through the show.''
Seventy-five firms will take part in the show, he said. Besides the host country, Canada, China, England, Germany, India, Iran, Italy, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Pakistan, Singapore Taiwan and the USA joined the exhibition.
The BKMEA chief also stressed for sufficient and appropriate skill development training for the workers so that their products can well compete in the global market.
He asked the BKMEA members to go for diversified products and use quality raw materials to attract the buyers having varied tastes and choices.
Apart from improving the skill of the workers and use of modern machines, the sector need preferential treatment from the government side to get an edge over the competitors like India, Vietnam and Cambodia, said Fazlul Haque.
^ TOP OF THIS PAGE ^ MAIN PAGE
AN APPEAL TO INDIAN PREMIER
Shazia and Zubair need Delhi's protection
Anisur Rahman in Stockholm
It is something more than any Hollywood love story. India's Zubair Khan, 27, and Bangladesh's Shazia Zarin, 23, met on Facebook. They fell in love. She fled from home for Delhi in February this year. They got married. They are now expecting a child as she is seven month pregnant by this time.
This is not the end of the story. Shazia's millionaire businessman father Abdus Sabur Khan has sought her deportation through a petition to Delhi High Court. On the other hand, the desperate couple are pleading with Indian President Pratibha Patil and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to intervene in the issue and help them survive with their expected baby.
We can remember almost similar a story that took place aftermath of the tragic division of Indo-Pak subcontinent in 1947. A group of culprits was trying to kidnap a Muslim girl called Zanhbi in India. Buta Singh bought the girl for Tk. 1500 and got married her and the couple was blessed with a girl child after 11 months of their marriage. Buta Singh named the girl as 'Tanvir' as per the initial of the first word in their religious book 'Grantha Sahib'. Buta Singh's brothers saw as their property would be distributed. They complained with the authority as if Buta did kidnap and thus cordoned Zanhbi at his home. By that time, an agreement was signed over sending back kidnapped girls between India and Pakistan. Zanib was snatched away from Buta's home. The authority started to search Zanhbi's relatives. Buta rushed to Delhi and got his hair cut. He converted to Islam from Shikhism and took Jamil Ahmed as his new name. He went to Pakistan High Commission in Delhi and demanded his wife getting back. Buta went to Pakistan. He faced many assaults from Zanhbi's relatives. He went to Pakistan court. After all his effort, he failed to get back his wife. Frustrated, shattered, battered Buta started for India along with his daughter Tanvir. On the way, he committed suicide jumping in front of a moving train.
We don't know what the Delhi High Court on December will say in its verdict over the petition filed by Shazia's father for her deportation. However, we believe this is a humanitarian matter. Alike, Zubair and Shazia we are also afraid as the life of the expecting baby in her womb is not safe at all if she is deported!
By this time harassment by Delhi police has taken place over the couple since registering a case of kidnapping against Zubair, a Delhi University graduate. The couple filed a writ petition in the Delhi High Court alleging they were being harassed by the police and sought protection.
On July 21, the Delhi High Court ruled that no coercive steps should be taken against the couple. The court on Sep 10 reiterated that the couple should not be harassed. However, the police categorically have denied charges of harassment.
Meanwhile, the desperate couple have also written to the Indian National Human Rights Commission and the National Commission for Women seeking permission for Shazia to stay in India as she is in an advanced stage of pregnancy. It is a serious question of human rights.
E-mail: anisbangla@yahoo.com
^ TOP OF THIS PAGE ^ MAIN PAGE
|
