[🇧🇩] Indo-Bangla Relation: India's Regional Ambition, Geopolitical Reality, and Strategic Options For Bangladesh

G Bangladesh Defense
[🇧🇩] Indo-Bangla Relation: India's Regional Ambition, Geopolitical Reality, and Strategic Options For Bangladesh
513
14K
More threads by Saif


India needs to pursue equal partnership with Bangladesh

1727916498567.png


Gautam Adani, founder and chairman of India’s Adani Group, meets former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina at Gono Bhaban on July 15, 2023. PHOTO: X/Gautam Adani

India is often portrayed as Bangladesh's closest ally. The two nations share a strategic partnership grounded in shared history, economic interdependence and strong cultural ties. However, this relationship has frequently been characterised by a power imbalance, with India being in a position to exert dominance over Bangladesh. If Bangladesh and India are to forge a more equitable friendship, three existing bilateral issues need to be addressed.

A vexing issue that has been in deadlock for decades is the disadvantages imposed on Bangladesh for being a lower riparian state. Even though the recent floods cannot solely be attributed to India opening the Dumbur dam, the situation serves as an eye-opener on our water-sharing agreements (or lack thereof), flood management capacity, and the need for bilateral negotiations where both countries can mitigate the damages from heavy rainfall without harming the other. Teesta River's water-sharing agreement is one example. If current trends continue, the Teesta water shortage could lower Bangladesh's rice production by roughly 8 percent by 2030 and 14 percent by 2050. This scarcity raises production costs and risks for farmers and also triggers social issues such as migration, displacement, and poverty.

Even though Sheikh Hasina's government allowed India several benefits, including the upcoming railway line that will allow the transport of goods and travel of passengers (including military personnel) from India to its seven northeastern states via Bangladesh, Dhaka continues to be sidelined. Under Hasina's government, Dhaka had not been able to leverage its concessions to India to make progress with Teesta or other shared rivers. The interim government now has an opportunity to address this issue and build strong political consensus for a more equitable and sustainable water-sharing and flood mitigation arrangement between the two neighbours.

The second issue is the border killings between India and Bangladesh. Despite the close friendship between the two countries, the border is riddled with mindless deaths of Bangladeshis at the hands of the Indian Border Security Forces (BSF). Ain o Salish Kendra, a human rights organisation in Bangladesh, conservatively reported that between 2013 and 2023, 332 people were killed by the BSF, averaging 30 deaths per year. Aside from the killings, the BSF has also subjected Bangladeshis at the border to gruesome torture and abductions. It makes little sense for two countries that share exemplary ties to allow such lethality on their border. Although the leadership in India pledged zero deaths, this reality is yet to materialise as state promises are unaligned with BSF actions at the border. If the previous home advisor's words are an indication, the Bangladesh Border Guard (BGB) will no longer remain passive and retreat in border conflicts in the face of aggression from the Indian side. But more importantly, it is pertinent for the interim government to address the crisis and catalyse strong political will from its Indian counterparts to end the killings and bring to book the BSF soldiers who engaged in prior misconduct that led to the loss of lives and lifelong injuries of Bangladeshis.

A third contentious point that requires a comprehensive reassessment is Adani's Godda power plant in Jharkhand which charges Bangladesh an exorbitant, above-market rate. The deal was initiated back in 2015 by Modi—who Adani's chairman is close to—and signed in 2017 with Hasina's blessing, despite the deal not being favourable for Bangladesh, as reported by The Washington Post.

Even though a report by the non-profit AdaniWatch suggested Bangladesh might have at least two ways to exit the contract, it turns out that Adani made sure to insert clauses that prevent Bangladesh from leaving even if Adani breaches the contract. First, private coal-fired power plants in India can export electricity if only India has a power surplus, which it currently does not. Second, the contract states that the Bangladesh Power Development Board (BPDB) must pay a levy of taxes and duties that Adani itself is exempt from, especially since it was declared a Special Economic Zone (SEZ). BPDB was supposed to be officially informed of these changes for a price adjustment within 30 days, but Adani failed to do so. BPDB still went ahead with the contract, even fast-tracking it under the political compulsion of the Hasina government. Unfortunately, as The Daily Star pointed out, Bangladesh can only leave if Adani's breach of contract negatively impacts the latter's ability to produce electricity. As it stands, making unethical profits off the backs of Bangladeshi tax-payers will not be harming Adani's bottom line anytime soon.

Despite the ironclad agreement, there may be a way out. Unresolved disputes may be "settled in accordance with the Rules of Arbitration of the Singapore International Arbitration Centre, 2016, 6th Edition," according to a lawyer interviewed by The Daily Star. If such a pathway can be pursued, the interim government may probe into the matter to identify any scopes for dispute resolution. Getting out of this contract or renegotiating the prices would drastically minimise costs in a country that is already plagued with debts and dwindling foreign reserves.

Whether it's our riparian rights, contentious border killings, or power deals designed to empty Bangladesh's coffers, it is true that Bangladesh often gets the short end of the stick. But Bangladesh can leverage its advantage as a zone of influence for great power politics and make use of its concessions to its upper riparian neighbour to ensure the sustainable prosperity of its land and people. It is also in the best interest of both India and Bangladesh to ensure the survival and thriving of their long-lasting exemplary friendship—with transparency and broad political consensus benefitting both countries equally.

Afia Ibnat is a political analyst and executive member of a local non-profit.​
 

Dhaka, Delhi stress promoting bilateral relations
BSS
Published: 02 Oct 2024, 22: 48

1727919776254.png

Indian high commissioner Pranay Verma makes a courtesy call on the foreign affairs adviser Md Touhid Hossain at the foreign ministry in the capital on Wednesday BSS

Bangladesh and India have emphasized that the two neighbouring countries need to work together in promoting bilateral relations for the welfare of their people.

This was observed today, Wednesday while Indian high commissioner Pranay Verma paid a courtesy call on the foreign affairs adviser Md Touhid Hossain at the foreign ministry in the capital, a foreign ministry’s press release said.

During the meeting, the two sides discussed a range of bilateral issues, with particular emphasis on the resumption of regular visa processing by the Indian high commission.

Both the foreign adviser and the Indian envoy underscored the importance of activating the regular bilateral mechanisms between the two countries.

Touhid referred to his the meeting with Indian external affairs minister S Jaishankar on the sidelines of the 79th United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) in New York in this regards.

They also explored opportunities for enhanced cooperation in trade, ongoing development projects, and fostering stronger people-to-people connections between Bangladesh and India.​
 

'India needs a clear security assurance from Bangladesh'

1728270349571.png


The India-Bangladesh relationship experienced some strains in the aftermath of the Awami League's fall and Sheikh Hasina being sheltered in India. Prof Sreeradha Datta, a South Asian expert who teaches international affairs at the Hariyana-based OP Jindal Global University, shared her views on the future of Bangladesh-India relations with The Daily Star's Diplomatic Correspondent Porimol Palma.


How is India looking at Bangladesh after Bangladesh's recent political change?

Historically, we have supported the Awami League (AL). We perceive that there is a possibility of an Islamist party takeover in Bangladesh if the AL is not in power. However, that is not the current reality in Bangladesh. It is true that India has worked extensively with the AL, which has increased bilateral trade volume and has also benefited Bangladesh. However, India does not have any policy that would prevent it from collaborating with any other government in Bangladesh.
The relationship with a sovereign state must be based on equity. This principle has been repeatedly emphasised by the current leadership in Bangladesh. Nevertheless, claims that India was responsible for the recent floods in Bangladesh's southeastern region are unfounded. Additionally, some senior Indian leaders have made remarks that were unnecessary and did not benefit either side.

What should be the immediate steps to improve the relations?

I believe Dhaka and New Delhi are already in contact. I propose that both countries hold formal dialogue at the earliest opportunity to resolve any outstanding issues. India needs a clear assurance that there will be no anti-Indian activities originating from within Bangladesh. The core problem is that India believes only the AL can address its security concerns, which I consider a misguided perception. If Dhaka assures Delhi that it will address India's security concerns, this could serve as the foundation for a strong relationship. At the same time, the interim government can also communicate to India which issues it should urgently address regarding Bangladesh.

The interim government has not said anything that can create such a perceived threat for India. So, why is India worried about it?

There have been attacks on Hindus in Bangladesh recently, and we understand the reasons behind these incidents. However, many other events are occurring that are not receiving adequate attention. What we are observing is that the BNP seems to be becoming quite vocal. Although the BNP is separate from the interim government, it appears that the party is gaining strength. The interim government should have the authority to manage any aggressive rhetoric, as it conveys the wrong message. Some experts argue that religious fundamentalism is not a big factor in Bangladesh, and I share this belief.

Dhaka said the Indian media has exaggerated the events of attacks on minorities. What is Delhi's understanding?

I agree that there is a lot of disinformation. However, a perception has developed in India that Hindus in Bangladesh are coming under attack because Hasina is not in power. While we know that such incidents are not as prevalent as portrayed in the media, the general public has developed a negative perception. On August 15, Prime Minister Narendra Modi spoke about the persecution of Hindu minorities in Bangladesh, but he failed to mention that others were also killed. He could have addressed that point. It's important to understand that this matter is related to our domestic politics. What I'm saying is that a negative perception is being cultivated. Therefore, the leaderships should meet and issue a joint statement affirming that the relationship will be as it should be between two sovereign states.

Border killings and water issues have been thorns in the relationship. How do you see it?

Border killings can be stopped if the two countries work together. Even if the number of killings is low, they should not occur between two friendly nations. In 2010, we stated that we would establish an agreement for the basin-wide management of our transboundary rivers and address the problems of other rivers, if not the Teesta. Why has this not been implemented? India must resolve the water issue. Just as security is important for India, water is equally important for Bangladesh. Even if there had been an interim arrangement for water sharing, the typical anti-India sentiment would not be as strong as it is now. Given that the water-sharing issue has always been an emotional one for Bangladesh, India must do the right thing.

There is a perception that India benefited more from the agreements or MoUs signed during the AL regime. There is a discussion those may be reviewed.

It may not look good to India, but Bangladesh can certainly review those agreements. I know that many MoUs may not have been discussed in parliament. I believe that the connectivity projects implemented thus far benefit both countries. However, if Bangladesh wants to review any deal, such as the one concerning transit, it is entitled to do so. India has not acted in a non-transparent manner. In fact, I think it would be beneficial for the MoUs to be revisited. Doing so will clarify whether the MoUs are useful or not.

Work of some projects under the Line of Credit remains suspended as Indian contractors are yet to restart working. Why?

I believe it is due to a lingering sense of fear. While we are not certain yet, the information we are receiving is somewhat unnerving. If the Bangladeshi authorities assure India that they have no security concerns, then things will proceed.

The interim government said it may take steps to bring back Sheikh Hasina for legal reasons. Will it create any friction in the relationship?

I believe there are various aspects to consider—both from legal and technical perspectives. Bangladesh needs to take these into account. Sheikh Hasina will not be extradited simply because Bangladesh wishes it. We cannot disregard India's relationship with the AL or Sheikh Hasina. Nevertheless, we would like to work with Bangladesh.

Our foreign adviser said India's relationship needs to be with the people of Bangladesh, not only with AL. What are your thoughts?

I agree 100 percent. India should work with whichever government is in office in Bangladesh. The problem arose with the government that was in power from 2001 to 2006, which soured relations. Later, we found that the AL was friendly towards India. In a multiparty system, any government can be elected to office. Why should India not work with it?

Sadly, it was the BNP that fostered anti-India sentiment in Bangladesh from 2001 to 2006. During the BNP-Jamaat regime, a large quantity of arms and ammunition, reportedly meant for the Indian separatist organisation ULFA (United Liberation Front of Assam), was seized in Chattogram in 2004.

The interim government wants to revitalise SAARC. What's your view?

SAARC is important for cooperation in South Asia, but Pakistan needs to change its behaviour. We have always said we are willing to work with Pakistan if it does so, but it hasn't.​
 

An astute strategic prism
M Rashiduzzaman 07 October, 2024, 00:00

1728349867180.png

A student carrying the national flag takes part in a protest march as protesters on August 3 demanded justice for victims arrested and killed in the student-mass uprising. | Agence France-Presse/Munir uz Zaman

THE sweeping protests in July-August that ousted Bangladesh’s prime minister Sheikh Hasina’s authoritarian rule, won the country an innovative brand — the ‘new’ Bangladesh minus the earlier steamroller governance. In the wake of that upheaval, which still rings throughout the country, two hot-button disputes re-emerged from its not-so-hidden past: While Hasina’s sudden tumble ripples like a political earthquake in India, will New Delhi be a threat to Bangladesh’s future stability and sovereignty? Should Bangladesh reset its ideological and identity sensitivities as a bulwark against a future despotic menace? Both are existential questions. But Dr Muhammad Yunus is now busy navigating between the populist cry for a retribution against the perpetrators of the banished tyranny, responsible for wanton killings and repression, and the simmering demands for an early restoration of an elected democracy.

The post-Hasina leaders need an astute strategy to deal with the emerging Bangladesh-India encounters and the ideological contents for the country’s national integrity and sovereignty. Neither the strategic imperatives nor the ideological probes will take care of themselves — not in ‘new’ Bangladesh where Hasina’s earlier autocratic rule is more than a painful remembrance. Her swift collapse has severely jolted India, the persistent benefactor of the hegemonic leadership that rigged three consecutive elections boycotted by opposition parties. And the maximum number of Bangladeshis are more confident now, which is likely to pop up in their domestic and diplomatic aspirations.

Geopolitics, however, does not give Bangladesh easy choices in dealing with its big and powerful neighbour that surrounds the country from three sides. But India’s enormous size and its military as well as economic prowess have not yet offered an unrestrained diplomatic advantage over Bangladesh, still blistering against its ousted autocrat, now sheltered in India. New Delhi’s old political ties to the Awami League and its remnants scattered across the band evoke deep suspicion in Bangladesh. Not long ago, the Guardian, the British newspaper, disparaged India’s strategy of putting all its diplomatic eggs in the basket of one leader (Hasina) and one party (Awami League) as a ‘myopic’ venture. India hopes for Bangladesh’s ‘eternal obligation’ to yield to New Delhi’s wishes because of its overt and covert help towards the 1971 struggle for independence. Narendra Modi’s brazen anti-Muslim policy is humiliating to the Bangladeshi Muslims although the Hasina government did not raise an eyebrow against India’s Hindutva zealots. It will be a thorn in the future Indo-Bangladesh relations. New Delhi tries to handcuff Dhaka’s domestic and foreign policies on grounds of the (Bengali) Hindu minority’s alleged insecurity in Bangladesh while the Indian media continue to smear Bangladesh’s current interim regime for its apparent capitulation to the Islamic militants and their leaders. Badruddin Umar, a senior socio-political commentator in Dhaka, recently pointed out that the Indian intellectual community has been mostly silent about the unprecedented protests that recently dislodged a dictatorship after an enormous loss of lives and destruction of infrastructures.

Hasina’s rapid plunge on August 5 dramatised India’s loss in Bangladesh, but India’s popularity faltered with the bulk of Bangladeshis, not long after the 1971 independence. As New Delhi became the enabler of the Hasina-led single party (the Awami League) juggernaut, India’s unpopularity spiralled in Bangladesh throughout the last decade. India will be a threat to Bangladesh’s internal politics and stability if New Delhi tries for a ‘regime change’ by rehabilitating and regrouping Hasina and her Awami League. She has settled in a virtual exile in India, but scores of AL leaders have also fled to India and the whispering reminiscences of the 1971 Indian military intervention stoke up anxiety in Bangladesh. The Bangladeshis itch for Hasina’s extradition to face a domestic or international trial for the hundreds of students and ordinary citizens deliberately killed or wounded by the politicised police, security forces and the AL-hired goons during the tumultuous civil unrest in July-August. China, New Delhi’s archrival, may now extract more geopolitical advantages from the post-Hasina regime; it will not be welcome to India and the western rivals vying for influence in the region.

The storm of protests that evicted the Hasina government changed the country’s political calculus. The secular Bengali nationalism that gained an unprecedented ascendancy against the earlier Pakistani Muslim nationalism exhausted its political traction since 1971. Secularism and Bengali nationalism provided an ideological cover for Hasina’s long tyrannical rule. She also postured her regime as a thundering protection against Islamic orthodoxy in Bangladesh. Those appeals, exclusionary in their substances, merit a reset although it is not yet certain if Yunus’s cabinet is ready to step into emotionally charged identity debates.

The western-style secularism has failed to take roots in most Muslim countries, including Bangladesh, mainly because the social, political and religious interactions in the Muslim-majority countries are not identical with those of the European and North American nation-states. The stringent secular rhetoric that indeed equated conventional Islamic expressions with hardline fundamentalism hastened the country’s political polarisation. The Muslim political inheritances of the colonial Bengal, the 1947 partition and former East Pakistan connect with what is independent Bangladesh today. Not surprisingly, the Bangladesh government exiled in India in 1971 did not have enough time to deliberate on the details of the expected country’s ideological and identity configuration. Even though their political and historical contexts did not match, Bengali nationalism sauteed in Rabindranath Tagore’s patriotic song as the national anthem became a convenient choice blessed by India at those critical hours. Later in Bangladesh, the ‘pro-liberation forces’ and their ‘cult of patriotic fervour’, a vocabulary borrowed from (the late) Ashok Mitra, a West Bengali leftist intellectual, denied the Muslim inspiration’s space in the country’s chronicle. But those ideological postures effectively helped the Awami League to consolidate its authority multiple times — by Hasina in recent years, but also by Sheikh Mujibur Rahman at the dawn of Bangladesh.

Muslim distinctiveness, not a religious extremism, is a security asset for Bangladesh’s sovereignty, independence and integrity. Once AK Fazlul Haque, in the 1940s, called upon the people not to apologise for being Muslims. The liberal perception of the Islamic groups as the ‘enemy’ of Bangladesh sovereignty is a dangerous appellation that undermines national harmony. The Islamic parties stand for the curse of the liberal intellectuals and politicians — the stance goes beyond the right-wing parties’ controversial resistance to the 1971 breakup of Pakistan.

In my Asian Survey, November 1994, article, ‘The Liberals and the Religious Right in Bangladesh’, I observed that the right-left controversy eventually destabilised peace and democracy in Bangladesh while, globally, that time-worn dichotomy gradually yielded to a more pragmatic and multilateral view of life. The feisty Muslim consciousness, however, survived through their populist roots. Partly, the liberal-secular clash emanates from the liberal establishment’s ‘blind spot’ about religion. Anyone who appeals to Islamic values endures the relegation as a maulabadi (fundamentalist/fanatic), enemy of Bangladesh independence scratching for zealotry. The Awami League and its liberal allies abused this epithet as a political capital against the so-called religious right. But the country’s strategic future and its democratic development call for participation of all groups including the Islamists in the political process.

Majority of the liberal leaders, their outfits and the cohorts did not raise a hell against the New Delhi-supported authoritarian regime for the last 15 years. Hasina’s ultimate downfall came from the swelling anti-job quota roil that transformed into a fearsome coalition against her long dictatorship. The widening political upheaval involved diverse elements — the opposition-blessed protesters, right-wing Islamic campaigners and the ordinary citizens who came out of their hiding plus a handful of human rights non-governmental organisations. The courageous student coordinators from both sides of the ideological scale blasted through death and destruction conducted by the police and the armed partisans. But it was an effective example of a strategic partnership between the right and the left to exorcise a merciless autocracy that consistently denied democracy, fair election and a peaceful political transition in Bangladesh.

M Rashiduzzaman is a retired academic based in the United States. He occasionally, writes on Bangladesh politics, history and Muslim identity.​
 
In past, ISI was operating from the soil of BD. R&AW carried out operations to neutralize it. BD must assure that such activities do not happen from BD soil. If it happens, India shall be forced to carry out operations in BD and violate its Sovereignty which will spoil India-BD Relations.
We never allowed RAW to carry out operations inside BD soil. Care to explain why has India been arming and training Shanti Bahini (UPDF/JSS) to carryout subversive activities within Bangladesh? Shanti Bahini has bases in Tripura and Mizoram.
 
We never allowed RAW to carry out operations inside BD soil. Care to explain why has India been arming and training Shanti Bahini (UPDF/JSS) to carryout subversive activities within Bangladesh? Shanti Bahini has bases in Tripura and Mizoram.

Shani wahini was a Bengali freedom fighter organization of Oppressed Bengali people. We helped and armed them to fight against the brutal killing and rapes of Pakistani army and help them to liberate BD from bloody claws if Pakistani army. It is documented story and nobody denies that.

Second point,

No country allows (except some rogue states) foreign intelligence agency to operate from their soil willingly. It is done covertly.
 
Shani wahini was a Bengali freedom fighter organization of Oppressed Bengali people. We helped and armed them to fight against the brutal killing and rapes of Pakistani army and help them to liberate BD from bloody claws if Pakistani army. It is documented story and nobody denies that.

Second point,

No country allows (except some rogue states) foreign intelligence agency to operate from their soil willingly. It is done covertly.
My friend, you seriously need some quality education on the history of Bangladesh. Shanti Bahini was a terrorist organization formed by Manobendra Larma of Chakma tribe. This terrorist outfit was formed to fight against the government of Bangladesh to create Jumma Land---an independent state for the tribal people in Chittagong Hill Tracts. Shanti Bahini was formed in the 70s.
 
My friend, you seriously need some quality education on the history of Bangladesh. Shanti Bahini was a terrorist organization formed by Manobendra Larma of Chakma tribe. This terrorist outfit was formed to fight against the government of Bangladesh to create Jumma Land---an independent state for the tribal people in Chittagong Hill Tracts. Shanti Bahini was formed in the 70s.

Ok. My Mistake, I misunderstood it with Mukti Bahini.
 

বাংলাদেশীরা ভারতে না যাওয়ায় বিলিয়ন ডলার ক্ষতি হয়েছে (ভারতীয় পর্যটন মন্ত্রণালয়)​


 

'If you’re in power for 15 years, you feel all is well'
Says ex-Indian high commissioner Pinak Ranjan Chakravarty on Hasina's downfall

1728863867520.png

Photo: Facebook/Unofficial: Diplomats of India

Former Indian High Commissioner to Bangladesh Pinak Ranjan Chakravarty discussed a range of issues from India-Bangladesh ties under Sheikh Hasina's regime, her downfall, and her presence in India with Shubhajit Roy, diplomatic affairs editor of The Indian Express.

On what the Hasina govt meant for Bangladesh

Chakravarty said Bangladesh became one of the fastest-growing economies in Asia, and had a stable relationship with India.

Indian investments were made in Bangladesh, and the countries developed energy connectivity, railway, and transport links, and trade grew to almost $18 billion.

Bangladeshis also were the largest set of tourists to India.

On the negative side, there were allegations of elections not being free and fair, he said.

The BNP boycotted the polls and the Jamaat-e-Islami was banned as a political organisation and a party.

Hasina also banned the Jamaat's student wing, the Islamic Chhatra Shibir.

Additionally, she instituted the International War Crimes Tribunal, for Jamaat leaders who were pro-Pakistan in 1971. Those leaders were convicted and hanged; that created bad blood.

Later, BNP Chairperson Khaleda Zia was convicted of corruption. Such domestic developments gave the feeling that Sheikh Hasina was becoming increasingly authoritarian, Chakravarty said.

India had no role to play in those things; they were entirely domestic, he added.

On India's relationship with Bangladesh govt under Hasina

India's problems with the previous BNP-Jamaat government were over security issues and their ties with Pakistan's Inter-services Intelligence (ISI).

The BNP has always been a little right-wing and pro-Pakistan. Jamaat, of course, has always been very pro-Pakistan, although they now claim that they are different. The BNP, too, claims they have changed, said the former envoy.

Festive offer

When Hasina came to power in 2009, she said they would not allow Bangladesh soil to be used against Indian security interests, which was something she lived up to, Chakravarty said.

The United Liberation Front of Asom (ULFA) Assam insurgency leaders were handed over to India. She ensured the insurgents' camps were uprooted and handed over, said the report.

"I remember how Hasina first told me that she needed electricity from India. That is how the project began for connecting the grids," he said.

"Today, we provide almost 1,200 megawatts. We also planned the Numaligarh refinery pipeline to northern Bangladesh, to provide diesel and petroleum products."

On the dissatisfaction with the economy, especially among the youth

"I think people welcomed the economic growth until the Ukraine war broke out and the energy and food prices went sky high," said Chakravarty.

Further, Bangladesh's growth was probably not equitable. The jobs created were insufficient and a younger generation was entering the economy. That's why the anti-quota agitation came in since quotas blocked employment in the government.

Later, with the elections, the new voters felt that they were not getting a choice, said the Indian Express report.

On how the anti-quota agitation grew

Chakravarty said he believed the agitation would have stopped after the Supreme Court judgement, which reduced the quota to only 7 percent.

More than 300 people died during those agitations. The protesters returned with a nine-point demand. They wanted the resignation of ministers, the police commissioner, and so on.

"Now, why they did that is a mystery. And my view is that there were other influences at work there -- mostly foreign and some internal. Since Hasina obviously did not agree to sack her ministers they went on a rampage again. And this time, I think, it was a very well-oiled machine backing them," the former high commissioner said.

"Why did it turn so political, with the march to Dhaka and demands for the PM's resignation? That is also a question. I would say that ultimately it was the army that unseated her by saying that, no, we can't protect you. We will not fire on these protesters," he added.

On whether India saw this coming

"Did we know about the things happening in Bangladesh? Of course, we knew. But the question is whether Sheikh Hasina anticipated her downfall. My sense is that she didn't, maybe if you stay for 15 years in power, then you feel that everything is okay," said Chakravarty.

On the interim govt led by Yunus

"It comprises different kinds of people. There is a leader of the far-right group Hefazat-e-Islam Bangladesh. Then there are BNP sympathisers. And then, of course, Professor Yunus is there. He's a big, internationally-known figure. I would say he's very anti-Hasina and she has slammed several legal cases against him, for things such as embezzlement," Chakravarty said.

"My worry is, will they (different sections) be able to work together? All of them could pull the government in different directions," he said.

There are two student leaders in the advisory council and apparently, there are two student appointees in every ministry to oversee what it does. Of course, some indicators are there, said the report.

"For example, Prof Yunus has said we must revive the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (Saarc). He has also reportedly said that he would want Bangladesh to join The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean)," he said.

"But ultimately, reality will bite. Things are still all over the place. Hindus were also attacked, unfortunately, they are seen as Awami League supporters."

In 2001, when the BNP-Jamaat government came to power, the same thing happened, said the former envoy.

On Sheikh Hasina's presence in India

"Hasina has been here before, from 1975 to '81, when her whole family was murdered as part of a political plot. She's back again. Does she have a future as a political leader of the Awami League (AL)? I would say we cannot dismiss the possibility that the AL reorganises, they are not a party that will disappear," said Chakravarty.

"They will participate in the next elections. Would Hasina then go back? She'll have to face cases and inquiries, and they might put her in jail. It's what was done to Khaleda Zia, and revenge politics is very much possible. But will the AL produce a new leader? These are all possibilities.

"Whether Hasina will continue to stay here is her choice. I don't think the government of India is going to push her out," Chakravarty concluded.​
 
ভারতের কূটনীতি নিয়ে প্রশ্ন; ‘ঢাকা-দিল্লি সম্পর্ক পুনর্মূল্যায়ন প্রয়োজন’



I saw this and the experienced Bangladeshi diplomat mentioned something critical about all Bangladeshi political parties speaking in one voice.

So that Indians cannot play one party in Bangladesh against the other.
 

Dhaka, Delhi discuss enhancing bilateral relations
Bangladesh Sangbad Sangstha . Dhaka 20 October, 2024, 20:16

1729468657350.png

Indian high commissioner to Bangladesh Pranay Verma and Bangladesh’s foreign secretary Md Jashim Uddin discuss ways to enhance bilateral relations on Sunday. | BSS photo

Indian high commissioner to Bangladesh Pranay Verma on Sunday met with foreign secretary Md Jashim Uddin to discuss ways to enhance bilateral relations in various sectors.

The meeting, held at the foreign ministry in Dhaka, focused on advancing mutual cooperation in line with the shared aspirations of both Bangladesh and India for peace, security, and development.

‘The meeting was more about how we can take forward our relations in the coming days,’ said the Indian envoy to media after the meeting.

Both sides emphasised the importance of reinvigorating regular bilateral mechanisms to address key issues, he added.

Responding to a question, Pranay Verma said that they did not specifically talk about the issue related to ousted prime minister Sheikh Hasina.

Regarding the next round of Foreign Office Consultations between India and Bangladesh, the high commissioner noted that the issue was a subject of their discussions.

The previous FOC was held in New Delhi on November 23, 2022. On October 2, the Indian high commissioner met with foreign affairs adviser Md Touhid Hossain where they also addressed a range of bilateral matters.​
 
I believe one of the most important bi-lateral issues to be discussed is cross-border trade and how to reduce Indian customs NTBs (Non Tariff Barriers) which are fictitious and enforced without due cause, in contravention of WTO rules. We need to close the yawning 90 to 10 trade deficit affecting this trade right now, which has existed for at least the last five decades, currently amounting to almost twenty Billion dollars a year officially and probably twice as much when smuggling is considered.

To say that a large portion of India's export economy runs on Bangladesh trade will not be untrue.

In my opinion, we should enforce WTO rules more rigorously and enforce our own tit-for-tat NTBs, if Indian administration continues in this path of blowing off WTO rules.

We literally have NOTHING to lose.

The rest of our trading partners i.e. Pakistan, Malaysia, Indonesia, Turkey and China have a lot more to gain.
 

Bangladesh's success under interim Chief Yunus could strengthen ties with India: The Wire
FE ONLINE DESK
Published :
Oct 29, 2024 14:07
Updated :
Oct 29, 2024 14:07

1730252876433.png


Indian news outlet - The Wire - in its recent article highlights how a successful Bangladesh, under Chief Adviser Professor Muhmmad Yunus, is more likely to be a strong ally of India than a failing one, reports BSS.

Vinod Khosla, a businessman and venture capitalist, wrote the opinion released in The Wire on October 27.

Following is the full text of the full article.

As a proud American and son of India, I look with hope at the exciting possibilities surrounding Professor Muhammad Yunus's leadership of Bangladesh. Three days after Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina fled the country on August 5, Yunus was sworn in as Bangladesh's interim government head.

Yunus, whom I consider a friend and have known for decades, accepted that post at the insistence of the student leaders who were at the forefront of the student-led struggle.

I am an entrepreneurship zealot, a believer in the power of ideas, and passionate about sustainability and impact. I am in awe of what Yunus has accomplished in his life. I work to bring life-enhancing technology to the world through my investments. Yunus, through endless experimentation and tinkering, has developed a series of institutional success models for reducing poverty, improving health care and education outcomes, and combating climate change.

For example, in 1996, Yunus succeeded in putting cell phones in the hands of hundreds of thousands of poor women in rural villages in Bangladesh, allowing them to generate income as village cell phone ladies. I am passionate about protecting our environment. Yunus founded a company that, beginning in 1995, has installed 1.8 million solar home systems and 1 million clean cook stoves, again almost exclusively in rural Bangladesh.

That doesn't even include the creation of Grameen Bank that has cumulatively made US$39 billion in small, mostly income-generating loans to more than 10 million poor women that became a model for similar efforts in India and many other countries.

But now, Yunus has turned his attention to a new challenge, leading the eighth largest country in the world by population, a nation of more than 170 million people. This is a country with about half the population of the United States all in a land mass equal to the U.S. state of Illinois.

There are people throughout Bangladesh and around the world who are batting for Yunus's success. I am one of them. But there are others who want him and the interim government he leads to fail and are spreading false narratives about what is going on under his leadership. So I would like to share my perspectives about his values, his approach, and his early results.

In his first two months in office, he got the police to return to work, which improved the law and order situation, took tangible steps to protect minorities such as Hindus, worked to improve relations with India, suggested that the regional powers reinvigorate SAARC, and made progress on bringing stability to the banking and financial sectors in Bangladesh (which were in disarray when he took office).

He also represented Bangladesh effectively at the UN General Assembly, and had more than 50 productive meetings with global leaders while
he was in New York.

In his work in this role, I have seen him applying the same values and approach that I have seen him use throughout his career: building a national consensus on key issues, experimenting to determine what works best, inspiring fellow citizens (especially youth) to get involved in practical and constructive ways, treating all people with respect regardless of their religion, gender, or ethnicity, and being pragmatic as well as energetic (despite being 84 years old).

But there are many challenges. Leading a government can be many times more difficult than running a suite of social businesses and nonprofits. People aligned with the prior government that lost power wants his efforts to fail. The party that has been out of power for years wants a quick return. But I believe Yunus is up to the job.

In September, I joined 198 global leaders including 92 Nobel laureates in a letter to the people of Bangladesh and people of goodwill around the world.

"We are excited to see Professor Yunus finally free to work for the uplift of the entire country, especially the most marginalisd, a calling he has pursued with great vigor and success across six decades (sic)."

His early successes in this role augur well for the future of Bangladesh, and a successful Bangladesh is more likely to be a strong ally of India than a failing one. We should all be rooting for Yunus to continuing making progress in this important interim role, because Bangladesh reaching its potential is in India's best interest.​
 

Bangladesh's success under interim Chief Yunus could strengthen ties with India: The Wire
FE ONLINE DESK
Published :
Oct 29, 2024 14:07
Updated :
Oct 29, 2024 14:07

View attachment 10155

Indian news outlet - The Wire - in its recent article highlights how a successful Bangladesh, under Chief Adviser Professor Muhmmad Yunus, is more likely to be a strong ally of India than a failing one, reports BSS.

Vinod Khosla, a businessman and venture capitalist, wrote the opinion released in The Wire on October 27.

Following is the full text of the full article.

As a proud American and son of India, I look with hope at the exciting possibilities surrounding Professor Muhammad Yunus's leadership of Bangladesh. Three days after Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina fled the country on August 5, Yunus was sworn in as Bangladesh's interim government head.

Yunus, whom I consider a friend and have known for decades, accepted that post at the insistence of the student leaders who were at the forefront of the student-led struggle.

I am an entrepreneurship zealot, a believer in the power of ideas, and passionate about sustainability and impact. I am in awe of what Yunus has accomplished in his life. I work to bring life-enhancing technology to the world through my investments. Yunus, through endless experimentation and tinkering, has developed a series of institutional success models for reducing poverty, improving health care and education outcomes, and combating climate change.

For example, in 1996, Yunus succeeded in putting cell phones in the hands of hundreds of thousands of poor women in rural villages in Bangladesh, allowing them to generate income as village cell phone ladies. I am passionate about protecting our environment. Yunus founded a company that, beginning in 1995, has installed 1.8 million solar home systems and 1 million clean cook stoves, again almost exclusively in rural Bangladesh.

That doesn't even include the creation of Grameen Bank that has cumulatively made US$39 billion in small, mostly income-generating loans to more than 10 million poor women that became a model for similar efforts in India and many other countries.

But now, Yunus has turned his attention to a new challenge, leading the eighth largest country in the world by population, a nation of more than 170 million people. This is a country with about half the population of the United States all in a land mass equal to the U.S. state of Illinois.

There are people throughout Bangladesh and around the world who are batting for Yunus's success. I am one of them. But there are others who want him and the interim government he leads to fail and are spreading false narratives about what is going on under his leadership. So I would like to share my perspectives about his values, his approach, and his early results.

In his first two months in office, he got the police to return to work, which improved the law and order situation, took tangible steps to protect minorities such as Hindus, worked to improve relations with India, suggested that the regional powers reinvigorate SAARC, and made progress on bringing stability to the banking and financial sectors in Bangladesh (which were in disarray when he took office).

He also represented Bangladesh effectively at the UN General Assembly, and had more than 50 productive meetings with global leaders while
he was in New York.

In his work in this role, I have seen him applying the same values and approach that I have seen him use throughout his career: building a national consensus on key issues, experimenting to determine what works best, inspiring fellow citizens (especially youth) to get involved in practical and constructive ways, treating all people with respect regardless of their religion, gender, or ethnicity, and being pragmatic as well as energetic (despite being 84 years old).

But there are many challenges. Leading a government can be many times more difficult than running a suite of social businesses and nonprofits. People aligned with the prior government that lost power wants his efforts to fail. The party that has been out of power for years wants a quick return. But I believe Yunus is up to the job.

In September, I joined 198 global leaders including 92 Nobel laureates in a letter to the people of Bangladesh and people of goodwill around the world.

"We are excited to see Professor Yunus finally free to work for the uplift of the entire country, especially the most marginalisd, a calling he has pursued with great vigor and success across six decades (sic)."

His early successes in this role augur well for the future of Bangladesh, and a successful Bangladesh is more likely to be a strong ally of India than a failing one. We should all be rooting for Yunus to continuing making progress in this important interim role, because Bangladesh reaching its potential is in India's best interest.​

Well at least an Indian at the level of Mr. Khosla (an important venture capitalist and a mover/shaker in Silicon valley, being a co-founder of Sun Microsystems) understand who Dr. Yunus is and what his entrepreneurship holds as a promise to Bangladesh.

Dr. Yunus' influence and reach goes far past the ambit of traditional Indian or subcontinental politics.
 
We never allowed RAW to carry out operations inside BD soil. Care to explain why has India been arming and training Shanti Bahini (UPDF/JSS) to carryout subversive activities within Bangladesh? Shanti Bahini has bases in Tripura and Mizoram.

Before Hasina's own RAW training and active encouragements of RAW operatives operating in Bangladesh to ensure her safety and security, RAW did not have any foothold in Bangladesh. Indian Media is just too romantic.
 

Bangladesh's shared GIs with India: The conflict and the outlook


1730792810965.png

The Jamdani saree, another significant traditional craft, is registered in both Dhaka, Bangladesh, and West Bengal, with further Indian registrations for Uppada and Fulia Jamdani sarees. PHOTO: SHAHREAR KABIR HEEMEL

In the recent past, the topic of shared Geographical Indications (GI) between India and Bangladesh has frequently appeared in public discourse. A comparative review of the GI journals published by the Department of Patents, Designs and Trademarks under Bangladesh's Ministry of Industries and Intellectual Property India under the Ministry of Commerce and Industry reveals that at least eight products are recognised as GIs in both countries, reflecting historical and cultural overlaps.

For instance, Bangladesh's Nakshi Kantha from Jamalpur corresponds to India's Nakshi Kantha from West Bengal, while Chapainawabganj's Khirsapat Mango parallels Malda Khirsapati (Himsagar) Mango in India. Similarly, Rajshahi-Chapainawabganj's Fazli Mango is registered as Malda Fazli Mango in India, and the renowned Dhakai Muslin in Bangladesh is registered as Bengal Muslin in West Bengal. The Jamdani saree, another significant traditional craft, is registered in both Dhaka, Bangladesh, and West Bengal, with further Indian registrations for Uppada and Fulia Jamdani sarees. Gopalganj's Rasogolla also has its counterpart in India's Banglar Rasogolla, and Tangail saree of Bangladesh has been registered as Tangail saree of Bengal in West Bengal. This shared registration pattern underscores the need for comprehensive legal protections to avoid conflicts, particularly as both countries seek to capitalise on the economic and cultural values of these products.

Products registered as GIs under both Indian and Bangladeshi jurisdictions due to overlapping geographical areas or historical connections fall under the category of trans-border GIs. A trans-border GI originates from a geographical area that extends over the territories of two adjacent contracting parties. While trans-border GI conflicts are not particularly common, they do occur globally. These conflicts arise when producers from different countries seek GI protection for similar products.

Given the reputation and consumer faith that a GI status brings, it is in the economic interest of every country to register as many GIs as possible for their traditional products, regardless of the ambiguity of the exact geographical linkage. The motive behind seeking such protection is entirely rational from a national interest perspective. Consumers associate GIs with specific qualities and origins, differentiating them from similar products. They help develop collective brands for products with shared geographical characteristics, building a stronger market presence. It can also prevent unauthorised use of the indication by others ensuring only qualified producers benefit from its reputation. Additionally, GIs can lead to competitive advantages, premium prices for higher product value, increased export opportunities, stronger brand image, and higher export prices. The significance of these products extends beyond market economics and increased profits; they often embody the heritage, tradition, and culture of their place of origin.

However, when multiple countries register GI for a product separately under the national jurisdiction or the "Sui Generis System" of World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO)—which protects at national level only, it may make the GI product semi-generic, where the name merely becomes a description or class of product that can be produced in several countries. This may undermine the ability to command premium export prices as neither country can establish exclusivity over the product (as seen with Basmati rice) and may even result in a loss of protection against imitation. Furthermore, there remains apprehension about legal disputes in case either country attempts to deter the other from entering international markets.

To illustrate the gravity of the issue regarding the shared resources and their GI registrations between India and Bangladesh, below we briefly analyse two case studies:

Tangail saree is now an Indian GI

The Tangail saree is a longstanding cottage industry in Bangladesh, tracing back to the British era. These are completely made by handwork. Tangail's zamindars patronised Dhaka Jamdani weavers during the British colonial period. Over time, these weavers innovated various motifs, shaping the Tangail saree as we know it today.

On January 4, 2024, the Tangail saree was officially registered as a GI of India under the title "Tangail saree of Bengal." Coming to know about the Indian action, the agony and anguish of the people of Bangladesh were expressed through public outrage, including those of the weavers and the local people of Tangail.

Bangladeshi Tangail saree has a global market, spanning Europe, North America, the Middle East, Japan, and several Indian states. Bangladesh exports about 50,000 sarees to India every week. By registering a GI for Tangail saree, India has demonstrated an inclination to "free ride" which may lead to unfair competition for Bangladeshi producers of Tangail saree. Although Bangladesh completed the GI registration for Tangail saree on April 25, 2024, this is not going to stop India from using the GI of Tangail saree and capitalising on it. India now has the opportunity to capitalise on the heritage brand of Bangladeshi Tangail saree, which was built over 250 years.

India claimed the GI based on the argument that "Basak," the key weaver family of Tangail saree migrated to West Bengal post-partition in 1947 and again after the Liberation War of Bangladesh in 1971. They claim this category of saree to be a hybrid of Shantipur design and Dhaka-Tangail. However, the documentary evidence submitted in the GI Journal of India nowhere had the mention of "Tangail saree of West Bengal," rather one of their submitted documents referred to Tangail of Bangladesh as the place of origin of Tangail saree. Based on these fuzzy arguments, the Indian GI registration for Tangail saree is neither fully factual nor compelling.

As specified by WIPO, GIs must be linked to products produced in a specific territory. Bangladesh had a strong case to contest this GI as the Indian GI refers to "Tangail saree," which is a specific geographic location in Bangladesh.

Building on this foundation, in May 2024, Bangladesh decided to legally challenge the "Tangail saree of Bengal" GI by India. A first draft has been prepared to contest and the legal team has continued its effort to gather further evidence to strengthen their case.


1730792901015.png

A man collects honey from the Sundarbans, the world’s largest mangrove forest spread out between Bangladesh and India, with around 60 percent of the forest lying within the former’s borders. File Photo: Collected

Sundarban honey GI conundrum

As the backlash from the controversy over the GI awarded to India for Tangail saree began to simmer down, a new concern emerged. Sundarban honey was displayed as a GI product of India at the Diplomatic Conference on Genetic Resources and Associated Traditional Knowledge organised by WIPO in Geneva (May 13-17, 2024).

This sole representation of the said product by India sparked questions in our minds as the majority of Sundarban's territory lies within Bangladesh. Indeed, Bangladesh is the primary extractor of Sundarban honey. While official government records could not be found, media reports indicate that about 200-300 tonnes of Sundarban honey are extracted annually, while India produces about 111 tonnes per year as mentioned in its GI application.

Curiously, the district administration of Bagerhat filed an application for the GI tag of Sundarban Honey on August 7, 2017. Yet for seven years there had been no development. This is a rather astonishing example of administrative dereliction of duty. The initiatives to secure GI status for Sundarbans' honey only gained traction after we drew attention to the matter through a media briefing organised at the Centre for Policy Dialogue (CPD). The GI registration for Sundarban honey was finally completed in Bangladesh in July 2024.

Contrary to Bangladesh, West Bengal Forest Development Corporation Limited of India applied for GI rights for Sundarban Honey on July 12, 2021. The GI tag was vigilantly issued on January 2, 2024. Consequently, India once again surpassed Bangladesh in the GI registration of shared resources. As a result, India alone received global recognition for the genetic uniqueness and traditional collection methods of Sundarban honey, while Bangladesh's contribution remains overlooked.

Way forward

Given the ongoing disputes surrounding GIs between Bangladesh and India, questions loom over the equitable recognition of trans-border GIs of Bangladesh. One can safely say that these are not the last incidents between Bangladesh and India. Without any established legal framework, tensions may continue to rise regarding trans-border GI protection. Given the contingency of geographical proximity and shared natural resources, Bangladesh should find a mechanism to systematically protect its GIs and look for a predictable legal solution to address the issue of GI conflicts of shared geographical resources. In view of that, we would like to make the following recommendations:

- It is important to have an assessment of the list of Bangladeshi GIs. There is a need to be clear on which Bangladeshi GIs have export potential, especially in Lisbon contracting states. Converting these into global products is essential to fully reap the benefits.

- GIs must be secured for all products with geographic reputation and export potential. The prerequisite for any country to protect its origin-based traditional products is to register them first in the country of origin.

- To seek protection internationally, GIs must be registered separately in each jurisdiction where protection is desired, often through bilateral agreements. The Lisbon Agreement for the Protection of Appellations of Origin and their International Registration (1958) can also be utilised. The Geneva Act of the Lisbon Agreement on Appellations of Origin and Geographical Indications, adopted on May 20, 2015, revised the pre-existing Lisbon Agreement. Although the number of signatories to this act is still limited to 44 countries, it could be an important first step for extending supranational protection of GIs alongside Appellations of Origin (AOs).

- Registering collective marks for the country's GIs should also be given thought. The primary purpose of collective marks is to indicate the origin of products within an association. Even if the association is geographically based or has specific standards for membership, other associations from the same region with different standards or features can coexist without confusing consumers about the origin of the trademark. A regionally based collective mark, such as a GI, not only indicates the origin of the product but also serves as a brand. Protecting GI products as "collective marks" within the trademark system opens up the possibility of using the international Madrid System, administered by WIPO, to file international trademark registrations after registration in the home country. The Madrid System offers a convenient and cost-effective solution for registering and managing trademarks worldwide. By filing a single international trademark application and paying one set of fees, protection can be sought in up to 131 countries. However, it is important to note that marks are vulnerable to revocation if they have not been used in a real and effective manner within a certain period after registration, often five years.

- To safeguard products with geographic reputations, constant monitoring of the GI Journal of other countries, particularly of those having shared borders with Bangladesh, is necessary to prevent wrongful registration of GIs for Bangladeshi products.

- In case of any GI conflict with another nation, bilateral consultations and legal recourse should be pursued.

- In alignment with Articles 22-24, Part II, Section 3, of Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), each WTO member has an international obligation to ensure that a GI product genuinely originates from their territory. If there is confusion about the geographical origin, the concerned members should seek a mutually agreed upon solution.

- If a GI is believed to be wrongfully appropriated by another nation and bilateral negotiations cannot resolve the issue, an appeal can be made to the High Court for its cancellation. Upon receipt of an application in the prescribed format from any aggrieved party, the Registrar or the High Court has the authority to issue an order to cancel or vary the registration of a GI based on "any contravention or failure" to observe a condition entered on the register in relation to the GI.

- Indeed if bilateral consultations and legal recourse through the country court system do not work, the case could be taken to the WTO dispute settlement mechanism (which remains dysfunctional at the moment due to the absence of an adequate number of judges) under a possible TRIPS Agreement violation.

- To protect trans-border GIs effectively across borders, Bangladesh and India need to adopt a collaborative approach instead of a competing one based on shared understanding and mutual consultations. A joint binational approach for exploiting trans-border GIs would be the best commercial strategy to enhance the recognition and value of the shared resources of both countries in international markets.

- While there is a long way to go in establishing a system for shared protection of trans-border GIs, it is recommended that Bangladesh sign a regional agreement with the EU if it hasn't yet and accede to the Geneva Act of the Lisbon Agreement (2015). Subsequently, through mutual understanding between the two neighbouring countries, potential avenues for joint protection should be explored.

- Once both Bangladesh and India sign up for the Geneva Act of the Lisbon Agreement 2015, discussions can be initiated on submitting joint applications under the act for all trans-border GIs since the accession of the EU to the Geneva Act of the Lisbon Agreement means that as soon as any third country joins the agreement, their GIs will gain protection throughout the EU as well through the Lisbon system.

- To secure and reap the benefits from GI recognition, the government's role is necessary, but the role of producers is inevitable. Although 28 GI products have been registered in Bangladesh, none have been exported with the GI tag, indicating a failure on the exporters' part. Eligible businesses must contact the GI owner organisations to benefit from premium export prices.

- Furthermore, it has not been decided who will approve the GI tags to be used by exporters. The relevant government authority needs to address this issue.

- Producers must be vigilant to ensure that no one unlawfully registers a GI for their products within the country or in neighbouring jurisdictions.

- Commercialisation is required, but the downstream distribution of benefits is also a concern. It must be ensured that GI protection has the potential to improve the conditions of farmers and rural producers, who often do not see the benefits of intellectual property protection in a globalised world.

There is much work to be done before Bangladesh can reap the benefits of any GI registration and effectively safeguard its GIs. By implementing these recommendations, Bangladesh can better protect its GIs, resolve conflicts, and maximise the economic and cultural benefits of its unique products.

Debapriya Bhattacharya is distinguished fellow at the Centre for Policy Dialogue (CPD).

Naima Jahan Trisha is currently working as a programme associate at CPD.​
 

India continues to spread anti-Bangladesh propaganda: Fakhrul
Correspondent
Thakurgaon
Published: 13 Nov 2024, 16: 23

1731549805462.png

BNP secretary general Mirza Fakhrul Islam talks with journalists at his hometown Thakurgaon on 13 November Prothom Alo

BNP secretary general Mirza Fakhrul Islam warned people against continuous Indian propaganda against Bangladesh.

“India has been continuously spreading propaganda against Bangladesh. We have to be cautious about this, otherwise we will face grave danger as a nation,” Mirza Fakhrul Islam told journalists at his Thakurgaon residence.

He also said some people are specifically trying to destroy the achievements of the country in social media.

“We cannot afford any more calamities at this moment. We have danger looming as the lynchpin of fascism is staying in India,” Mirza Fakhrul Islam said.

The BNP secretary general said Awami League has successfully divided the nation.

“We want to reject this divide and want a united nation. There would be different opinions in a democratic society. But there should be unity in fundamental issues such as independence, sovereignty, democracy and the rights of people. We must not be intolerant as a nation. We should practice tolerance. Removing the mess of 17 years is not possible within 17 days or even 17 months. That’s why this government should be given time.

But the current government does not need to start all reforms. It can be done by the next elected parliament.”

Mirza Fakhrul also said BNP does not support Proportional Representation (PR) system as implementing this electoral system is not possible in the country.

Thakurgaon district BNP’s general secretary Mirza Faisal Amin, Thakurgaon-3 constituency’s former lawmaker Jahidur Rahman, pourashava BNP’s president Shariful Islam, district BNP’s joint secretary Poigam Ali, among others, were present during Mirza Fakhrul’s media briefing at his home town.​
 
@Bilal9

When you hauled up an Indian (and a Pakistani) for speaking to each other in Hindi/Urdu across the forum, I agreed with you and in fact said that vernaculars have no place on an international forum.

I recall @PakistanProud even thanking that post of mine.

So my question is ... why then are you allowing videos to be posted in Bangla? Which nobody except Bangladeshis (like you two) and Bengalis (none I see here) would understand?

Let me point out that this is not the first or an isolated video either.

Is this designed to be a Bangladeshi echo chamber?

@RayKalm

Cheers, Doc

We may have our differences but you are right here. I don't agree with @Bilal9 cherry picking. Hopefully he will have a reasonable explanation to this or at least be neutral from now on.
 

Playing the minority card
Mohammad Abdur Razzak 14 November, 2024, 23:13

THERE is no hide and seek that India has huge discomfort and embarrassment about the political changeover in Bangladesh that took place on August 5. India ventilates its discomfort and embarrassment in different political, diplomatic and media presentations, talking about the concern for the security of minorities, specially the Hindus in Bangladesh. Concern was first expressed in a message by the Indian prime minister on his X handle while he greeted the chief adviser of the interim government of Bangladesh on August 8. He also hoped ‘for early return to normalcy, ensuring the safety and protection of Hindus and all other minorities’ in Bangladesh.

Majority and minority are collective expression of population, often based on religion. Religion is one of the statistical parameters used in population census. Belongingness to a religion is not a national identity. Irrespective of religious attachment, citizens’ fundamental identity is that they are Bangladeshis.

Bangladesh has been one of the best places in the world, setting the highest example of inter-racial and inter-religious harmony. Going by religion-based statistics, majority of the people in Bangladesh practise Islam. The second largest group of people practises Hinduism. The third largest group practises Buddhism. The fourth largest group of population by religion is Christian. There are smaller groups of population who practise their own religions. People of all faiths have been practising their religious rites freely even after Islam was adopted as the state religion in 1988.

Bangladesh on June 9, 1988 adopted Islam as the state religion. On the same day, retired major general Chitta Ranjan Dutta Bir Uttam led the formation of the Bangladesh Hindu, Buddhist and Christian Unity Council in protest at the adoption of Islam as the state religion. The official declaration was made after some days.

The organisation was formed with the objective to protect rights of religious and national minorities in Bangladesh. Over the years, it has pursued many agendas and slogans analogous to political mantras. Eventually, it has taken the shape of a politico-religious organisation under a religious banner.

After the political changeover on August 5, the organisation undertook programmes that could be likened to political activism. The organisation brought out processions in Dhaka and in outlying areas demanding safety, citing attacks on the Hindus. There was hardly any act of vengeance by the Muslims against the Hindus. There were a couple of incidents against bt the Muslims and the Hindus as well, deeply indulged in unethical political activities. The organisation attempted to portray the incidents of political vengeance as attacks on the Hindus.

Political movements in the form of street procession and sit-in by the Hindu-dominated organisation were negatively implicating the Buddhists and the Christians and they did not have a third-party political agenda to advance. Perhaps because of disagreement of the Buddhists and the Christians on motivated political activism, the organisation withdrew from partisan activities such as demonstrations on the road, rallies, etc. ISKCON, or the International Society for Krishna Consciousness, came at play to play the minority card.

ISKCON Bangladesh brought out processions and held rallies in a couple of cities citing the insecurity of the Hindus. ISKCON held its largest demonstration in Chattogram and Indian mainstream media, bloggers and Youtubers flooded the channels with streams of disinformation.

ISKCON was founded in New York on July 13, 1966. The purpose of founding ISKCON in the United States under the religious banner was to present it as a non-political organisation. The underlying objective was to make it a pro-Indian lobbying group like the American Israel Public Affairs Committee to advocate policies to the legislative and executive branches of the United States to promote Indian interests. From the beginning, the organisation was mired in controversies and has not fared well in the United States.

ISKCON has its headquarters now in Mayapur in Nadia, West Bengal. It started operating in Bangladesh, perhaps, in the mid-1990s with its Bangladesh head office located in Dhaka. It is not certain if it was registered with any government agencies.

ISKCON built ISKCON centres in different parts of the country. Besides building centres and temples, ISKCON also took over the charge of temples from local Hindu communities. Till 2004, ISKCON Bangladesh had only 1,900 members. Now it has more than 35,000 members. In 2009 it administered 35 temples in the country. Now, there are 71 temple/temple complex/ISKCON centres in the country. According to the South Asia Journal online as of October 29, 2019, the expansion of ISKCON has made it aggressive.

Former Indian high commissioner Harsh Vardhan Shringla in his address at a programme at Sri Sri Radha Madhav Jiu Temple of ISKCON at Jugaltilla in Sylhet on February 22, 2018 said that the Indian government had funded two projects at the ISKCON centres in Sylhet and Savar. The amount was Tk 74 million and Tk 55.4 million respectively, as the media reported that time. It was also revealed that the Indian government is ’supportive’ of ISKCON’s activities in Bangladesh and funds projects.

There is a third organisation called the Bangladesh National Hindu Grand Alliance. According to Wikipedia, the Bangladesh National Hindu Grand Alliance is also apparently a non-political and Hindu religious organisation. It was formed as an alliance of 23 Hindu religious organisations on September 17, 2006 with an aim to bond the Hindu community, protect and serve Hinduism and to realise the religious, social, cultural and political rights of the Hindus in Bangladesh.

The Bangladesh National Hindu Grand Alliance is also not free of controversies. There are allegations against the organisation of various communal incitements, with banners in the Hindi language despite being a Bangladeshi organisation and the use of “Bharat mata ki jai” (Long live, Mother India) slogan at the end of speeches and creating controversy about a number of Hindus martyred in Bangladesh’s liberation war. However, after the July uprising, while the Bangladesh Hindu, Buddhist and Christian Unity Council and ISKCON attempted to create social vortex towards a motivated political end, as popularly said, the Bangladesh National Hindu Grand Alliance took a different position, spreading a counter-narrative to disinformation by the Bangladesh Hindu, Buddhist and Christian Unity Council and ISKCON.

The Bangladesh National Hindu Grand Alliance chair in a couple of media interviews countered disinformation propagated by the Bangladesh Hindu, Buddhist and Christian Unity Council, ISKCON and Indian media. He noted that the Hindus suffered most persecution during the rule of the Awami League by its party people, but the Bangladesh Hindu, Buddhist and Christian Unity Council and ISKCON were silent. Even influential Hindu leaders in the Awami League government did not come forward to give the victims even a atient hearing. In some areas, Hindu leaders tortured their own community people. A former Hindu member of parliament for the Barguna constituency 1 is one example. There were a couple of media reports against a former inspector general of police who snatched land from a large number of Hindu people to build his Savana Resort beside the Jajira point on Bhanga Expressway. Leaders of the Bangladesh Hindu, Buddhist and Christian Unity Council, ISKCON and Hindu political leaders in the Awami League government supposedly had the knowledge of this forceful acquisition of land from the Hindus. But none raised voice to protect them. This was the common stand of the Bangladesh Hindu, Buddhist and Christian Unity Council, ISKCON and Hindu political leaders before August 5.

But, after the political changeover, the Bangladesh Hindu, Buddhist and Christian Unity Council, followed by ISKCON, swung into political activism to divide society along the religious line. This has certainly damaged the dignity and ideological values of ordinary people belonging to the religious groups. By playing the minority card, they are not doing any good to the people of Bangladesh, irrespective of their faith.

Mohammad Abdur Razzak (safera690@yahoo.com), a retired commodore of the Bangladesh navy, is a security analyst.​
 

Indian media spreading misinformation every day, says home advisor
bdnews24.com
Published :
Nov 14, 2024 22:00
Updated :
Nov 14, 2024 22:01

1731633917791.png


Home Advisor Jahangir Alam Chowdhury has said the Indian media is spreading misinformation about Bangladesh every day and the interim government will protest it.

“The home ministry will ask the foreign ministry to issue an official protest, as that ministry handles formal communication with other nations. A strongly worded protest letter will be sent to India on this issue,” he said in response to questions from journalists at a press briefing following the Barishal divisional law and order meeting.

When asked specifically about remarks from an Indian TV anchor regarding Chattogram, the advisor replied, “Stay vigilant on this matter. They are regularly publishing false reports, and I ask for your cooperation in stopping this.

“Report truthfully—if we make an error, tell us, and we’ll correct it. If there’s any corruption on my part, tell me, I’m not hesitant to address it. However, avoid false reporting, as such misinformation will eventually be exposed.

“It’s widely known that Indian reports are often inaccurate. Now, if they publish a true report, people may still doubt its authenticity. We encourage you to use the media as a platform to counter this, as you are our strongest ally in this matter,” he added.

Speaking about the Barishal division’s law and order, he said: “The law and order here is notably better than in other regions. However, road blockades occur occasionally, and it’s everyone’s responsibility to prevent them.”

Jahangir also spoke about the unresolved murder case of journalist couple Sagar Sarwar and Meherun Nahar Runi. “There will be progress this time. A six-month timeframe has been established, and a new investigative team was formed on the IGP’s instructions.”

Jahangir acknowledged issues of public trust in the police force: “Restoring confidence in police will take time, but there has been improvement.

“More progress will come gradually, so patience is essential. Journalists can be instrumental in raising awareness to combat mob justice.”

During this briefing, IGP Moinul Islam, RAB Director General AKM Shahidur Rahman, Barishal Divisional Commissioner Rayhan Kaosar, Brigadier General Amirul Azim from the 7th Infantry Division, Barishal Police Commissioner Md Shofiqul Islam, and Deputy Commissioner Mohammad Delwar Hussain were also in attendance.
 
Country specific languages can be posted but only in there respective country defense sections. IE: Bengali in Bangladesh Defense. Hindi/Gujarati/Punjabi/etc., in Indian defense and so on.

So essentially country specific defence sections should become echo chamber silos where only members of that country who can understand the tongue can participate?

So Hindi videos for the Indian section. Along with the 26 other major languages spoken in India.

And similarly, members can converse in thise languages too?

Tower of Babel comes to mind. But hey, its your forum.

I'm still waiting for @PakistanProud to remove my Moderator tag as requested.
 
So essentially country specific defence sections should become echo chamber silos where only members of that country who can understand the tongue can participate?

So Hindi videos for the Indian section. Along with the 26 other major languages spoken in India.

And similarly, members can converse in thise languages too?

Tower of Babel comes to mind. But hey, its your forum.

I'm still waiting for @PakistanProud to remove my Moderator tag as requested.
Thank you for sharing your perspective. I understand your concern about creating "echo chambers" in country-specific sections.

The intention behind allowing posts in local languages is to enable more meaningful discussions among those who are most familiar with the topics at hand. However, I completely agree that inclusivity is important.

To strike a balance, we might consider encouraging users to provide a brief summary or translation in English when posting in local languages.
This way, members who may not speak the language can still engage with the content and contribute to the discussion.

We are an international 'defense' forum and this opens the floor for others to share their views, fostering a collaborative environment.
 
Thank you for sharing your perspective. I understand your concern about creating "echo chambers" in country-specific sections.

The intention behind allowing posts in local languages is to enable more meaningful discussions among those who are most familiar with the topics at hand. However, I completely agree that inclusivity is important.

To strike a balance, we might consider encouraging users to provide a brief summary or translation in English when posting in local languages.
This way, members who may not speak the language can still engage with the content and contribute to the discussion.

We are an international 'defense' forum and this opens the floor for others to share their views, fostering a collaborative environment.

That is exactly the point of ANY forum.

Not just defence/defense.

Otherwise, it becomes a one sided archive or blog, like most of the Bangladeshi section anyways is.
 
That is exactly the point of ANY forum.

Not just defence/defense.

Otherwise, it becomes a one sided archive or blog, like most of the Bangladeshi section anyways is.
I appreciate your input and understand your concerns about maintaining a balanced dialogue on forums. You’re right that forums should promote diverse discussions, and that’s something we all value.

The aim of allowing country-specific languages in those sections is to encourage participation from members who might otherwise feel excluded. While some sections may currently seem one-sided, my hope is that by providing a space for local languages, we can foster more engagement among those who are familiar with the nuances of their country’s defense matters.

We are always open to hear any suggestions you might have on how we can improve engagement while ensuring that all voices are heard.
 
I appreciate your input and understand your concerns about maintaining a balanced dialogue on forums. You’re right that forums should promote diverse discussions, and that’s something we all value.

The aim of allowing country-specific languages in those sections is to encourage participation from members who might otherwise feel excluded. While some sections may currently seem one-sided, my hope is that by providing a space for local languages, we can foster more engagement among those who are familiar with the nuances of their country’s defense matters.

We are always open to hear any suggestions you might have on how we can improve engagement while ensuring that all voices are heard.

Having an English only rule is the obvious suggestion.

Its not like everyone participating here does not know English.

Or cannot find relevant/similar content in English to post.

There are exactly 2 members here who understand Bangla.

And everyday the rest of the membership is bombarded with 20-30 Bangla threads.

Trump ... Bangla thread.

Ukraine war ... Bangla thread.

Gaza Israel .... Bangla thread.

India China ... Bangla thread.

There is one Bangla member who is abusing the forum as his own private national soapbox archive.

And being given covering fire by another Bangla moderator.
 
Having an English only rule is the obvious suggestion.

Its not like everyone participating here does not know English.

Or cannot find relevant/similar content in English to post.

There are exactly 2 members here who understand Bangla.

And everyday the rest of the membership is bombarded with 20-30 Bangla threads.

Trump ... Bangla thread.

Ukraine war ... Bangla thread.

Gaza Israel .... Bangla thread.

India China ... Bangla thread.
I understand your frustration with the current volume of Bangla threads and appreciate that you’re looking for a more balanced discussion.

I believe that as our community grows, we will see more diverse participation from members around the world. For now, allowing discussions in specific languages can help foster a sense of belonging and encourage engagement among those who may be more comfortable expressing their ideas in their native tongue.

As the forum evolves, we can revisit these language policies based on the community's needs. I’m optimistic that with time, we’ll find the right balance that accommodates everyone while still promoting lively discussions.

Let’s keep the dialogue open, and I appreciate your contributions to shaping this community.
 

Indo-Bangla ties can’t be limited to a single issue
Indian envoy tells session of Bay of Bengal Conversation

1731888243389.png

Photo: Collected

The mutual cooperation between Bangladesh and India is multidimensional and cannot be restricted to a single issue, said Indian High Commissioner to Bangladesh Pranay Kumar Verma.

He made the remark yesterday addressing the second session of the Bay of Bengal Conversation symposium, organised by the Centre for Governance Studies at the Pan Pacific Sonargaon in Dhaka.

"Our relations can't be restricted to a single agenda or a single issue. The reality of our interdependence and mutual benefit will keep asserting itself over and over again regardless of the change in political will.

"Regardless of how it [the relations] may be characterised, we [India] believe it's a people-centric relationship … India will continue to seek a stable relationship for the sake of the people," he said.

"We issue more visas than any other diplomatic missions here," Verma said, additionallynoting that visa operations arecurrently limited.

He added that Bangladesh's zero tolerance for terrorism and refusal to harbour Indian anti-insurgency elements areimportant to India.

"Bangladesh sits at the intersection of most of India's foreign policy decisions. Our peace, progress, and security are interlinked."

Meanwhile, Dr Sreeradha Datta, professor at the Jindal School of International Affairs at OP Jindal Global University, said, "Integration in South Asia can only happen surrounding the India-Bangladesh caucus. That's how important it is."

The relationship between the two countries has been under pressure after former prime minister Sheikh Hasina sought refuge in India following her ouster on August 5.

Indian Foreign Affairs Minister S Jaishankar told the Rajya Sabha on August 6 that Hasina had sought approval to come to India on a "short notice".

The Indian media had reported that upon crossing the India-Bangladesh border, Hasina's exit flight was escorted by two fighter jets. She is reportedly staying at a safehouse in New Delhi.

The International Crimes Tribunal has asked Interpol to issue a red notice for Hasina's arrest in connection with the deaths of hundreds of protesters during the mass uprising against her in July.

Meanwhile, speakers at the conference also spoke about Indo-Pacific security and prioritising sovereignty.

Responding to a question about how the Chinese-built submarine base in Cox's Bazar's Pekua impacts Indo-Pacific security, the Acting High Commissioner for Australia Nardia Simpson said, "The question isn't about who was involved but about whether [Bangladesh's] sovereignty was prioritised."

She went on to say that Bangladesh must act for itself and not be acted upon.

Simpson added that security for the Indo-Pacific means a position "where a larger country cannot dominate and where all countries' sovereignty is respected."

David Brewster, senior research fellow at the National Security College in Australia, said Bangladesh holds the unique position to stabilise the increasingly fractured relations concerning the Indo-Pacific. "It can check major powers to make sure no one dominates."

He added, "It has long puzzled me why Bangladesh has not been a larger player in the region. Bangladesh has vital interests, but in recent years it has not sought to shape the strategic interests concerning the region in line with its own policy."​
 

Delhi wants stable ties with Dhaka: Indian envoy
Staff Correspondent 17 November, 2024, 21:50

1731891563080.png

Pranay Verma | Collected photo

The Indian high commissioner to Bangladesh, Pranay Verma, on Sunday said that his country would continue to seek a stable, positive and constructive relationship with Bangladesh with the people of both countries being the main stakeholders.

He described the relations between the two countries as ‘people-centric’ based on mutual trust and respect.

‘India will continue to seek a stable, positive and constructive relationship with Bangladesh in which people of both countries are the main stakeholders,’ said the envoy while speaking on India-Bangladesh relations during the Bay of Bengal Conversation at a hotel in Dhaka.

Highlighting the importance of the relations between the two neighbouring countries, Pranay expressed India’s commitment to working together with the government and people of Bangladesh to fulfill shared aspirations for peace, security and development, and to ensure that the partnership continued to bring benefit to the common people on both sides.

He stressed that India took a long-term view of its relations with Bangladesh and believed that the peace, security, progress and prosperity of the two countries were interlinked.

The high commissioner underlined the continued progress in trade, transport and energy connectivity and people-to-people engagements as a reflection of multifaceted ties, in which the reality of interdependence and mutual benefit would keep reasserting itself, ‘regardless of political changes’.

He mentioned the launch of 40 MW power transmission from Nepal to Bangladesh through the Indian grid, and the augmentation of infrastructure at the Petrapole-Benapole Integrated Check Post, both within this month itself, as examples of continued progress in bilateral exchanges.

He also described India-Bangladesh cooperation as an anchor for regional integration envisaged under architectures such as BIMSTEC.

Pranay underlined the need for constructive and pragmatic engagement, admitting the fact that there were irritants among the two nations.

The three-day geopolitical conference organised by the Centre for Governance Studies, an independent think tank based in Dhaka, will conclude today.​
 

Reflections on India-Bangladesh relations
Pranay Verma
Published :
Nov 18, 2024 21:47
Updated :
Nov 18, 2024 21:47

1731978483765.png

Bangladesh Foreign Affairs Adviser Md Touhid Hossain and India's External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar met on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly in New York on September 24 this year Photo : Agency

Our relationship with Bangladesh is long-standing and unique. We are linked by a shared history, a shared geography, in addition to a common language and culture. We both seek, and value, a relationship based on mutual trust and understanding, and mutual respect. There is broad shared empathy between our people, much of which can be traced back to Bangladesh's Liberation War of 1971. Regardless of how it may be characterised, it is a people-centric relationship. People and public-opinion shape our relations more than we realise.

As a neighbour to whom we take a long-term view of our relations, our ties with Bangladesh derive strength from our belief that our peace, security, progress and prosperity are interlinked. And therefore, we strive to create common stakes in our mutual prosperity through a robust framework of multifaceted cooperation. Both of us are important stakeholders in the peace, security and development of Bay of Bengal. We also share a common biosphere and ecological environment, which makes our collaboration vital to address shared challenges such as environmental sustainability and climate change.

Because of its geographical location, emerging capacities, and growing regional and global ambitions, Bangladesh is not just a pillar of our "Neighbourhood First" Policy, but sits at the intersection of most of India's key foreign policy visions - such as the "Act East Policy", the doctrine of SAGAR (Security and Growth for All in Region), as well as our Indo-Pacific Vision.

We believe ours is a relationship of great consequence, not just for the two of us, but also for our region, given our growing capacities and aspirations to get more integrated by leveraging each other's strengths and complementarities. Bangladesh is uniquely poised to advance the integration agenda under the Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation (BIMSTEC), being located at the geographical, political and economic centre of gravity of the region and also as the host of BIMSTEC's headquarters.

Many transformative changes that have taken place in our relations and which unlocked the growth potential of the region, are results of mutual sensitivity we have shown to each other's concerns and aspirations. Bangladesh's "zero-tolerance" to terrorism and its determination of not sheltering insurgencies targeting India, proved vital for our cooperation and prosperity. It will remain an important factor in the future development of our two countries, our region and our relationship.

One of our biggest achievements - the resolution of our maritime and land boundaries, has opened up whole host of avenues for our land and maritime connectivity as well as cooperation in blue economy. Our maritime boundary settlement, by referring the matter to the Permanent Court of Arbitration and then following its ruling in letter and spirit, is a fine example of how the principle of democratic and rules based international order that we strongly believe in, has found reflection in our bilateral conduct.

A key manifestation of the transformation of our multifaceted partnership, that has directly benefitted the people of both our countries, is our growing trade and economic engagement, and our connectivity links.

Today, Bangladesh is our largest trade partner in South Asia and the fifth largest in the world. India under SAFTA has unilaterally given duty-free, quota-free access to Bangladesh for more than a decade now, for all goods, which has enabled greater exports from Bangladesh to India.

We often hear concerns about trade deficit for Bangladesh, but it is important to appreciate that much of India's exports to Bangladesh either constitute critical inputs for a large part of Bangladesh's exports, or are supplies of essential commodities that help Bangladesh deal with inflationary pressures.

Actually, a less appreciated fact is that India is now among the largest export markets for Bangladesh in the entire Asia, with Bangladeshi exports to India consistently hovering around 2-billion-dollar mark over the last few years. And we do want this number to grow.

We strongly believe that connectivity is a major enabler that help our societies, our businesses and our people to closely connect and benefit from each other. And we have made quite some progress.

With a contiguous geography and a long shared-history, in many ways, we are actually trying to reconnect our two countries. We have restored six of the seven pre-1965 railway links for both passengers and goods. A major part of our bilateral trade and people-to-people movement are channelled through thirty-six functioning Land Customs Stations, five of which have been upgraded to the level of Integrated Check Posts. Just earlier this month, we added new infrastructure at Petrapole Integrated Check Post that will significantly enhance cargo movement and passenger convenience.

Today, Bangladesh RMG exporters are using three large Indian airports - Kolkata, Delhi and Bengaluru - as highly cost-effective transshipment hubs for their exports to third countries, making Bangladeshi products much more competitive in western markets. Our deep-sea ports are ready to offer similar advantages to Bangladeshi exporters.

Our connectivity links are not limited to trade and transport. We are also building robust energy connectivity. Some of the examples are - a new cross-border diesel pipeline launched last year bringing high-speed diesel from an Indian refinery to Bangladesh; the cross-border power transmission lines uninterruptedly supplying nearly 1200 MW of power from Indian power grid to Bangladesh; and the first transmission of 40 MW of power from Nepal to Bangladesh through the Indian grid just two days ago. All these are examples of how our energy connectivity and collaboration is augmenting our energy security and contributing to creation of a true regional economy.

In short, our approach to connectivity is a simple one - it is about transforming our geographical proximity into new economic opportunities that benefit people of both our countries and also the entire region.

Our belief that people are the foundation of our relations was evident when COVID-19 struck us when we opened our arms to help each other. It is also evident in our large visa operations in Bangladesh, where despite current limited operations, we issue more visas to Bangladeshi citizens each day than any other diplomatic mission in Dhaka.

As custodians of our future relationship, youth are an important stakeholder in our partnership. This is evident in nearly a thousand scholarships every year that India offers to Bangladeshi youths and young professionals, including from civil society and media, belonging to all regions and affiliations. Just two months ago, more than five hundred highly talented Bangladeshi students left for higher education in some of India's premier educational institutions on our ICCR scholarship. Our Bangladesh Youth Delegation, or the BYD programme as it is popularly known, is another robust platform for our youth outreach that today has a proud, nationwide alumni network.

To sum it all up, India will continue to seek a stable, positive and constructive relationship with Bangladesh in which our people are the main stakeholders. We have and will continue to support a democratic, stable, peaceful and progressive Bangladesh. We remain committed to working together with the government and people of Bangladesh to fulfil the shared aspirations of our peoples for peace, security and development. And we strongly believe that our partnership must benefit the common people on both sides.

Both India and Bangladesh are today far more developed and capable than they were ever before. And we also depend on each other far more today than we ever used to, as our economies and development paths continue to intertwine. We must keep reinforcing our interdependencies.

As two aspirational societies with growing economic capabilities, there is so much we can offer to each other, and create new opportunities if we continue to engage closely, pragmatically and constructively with each other. A strong and prosperous Bangladesh, we believe, is vital for India just as a strong and prosperous India is for Bangladesh.

And, a final reflection. The fact that our trade and economic ties, our transport and energy connectivity, and our people-to-people engagements have sustained a positive momentum, despite the turbulent changes in Bangladesh, shows that our relations are truly multifaceted, and cannot be reduced to a single agenda or issue. There are irritants but they have not restricted the overall forward movement in our relations. As two nations whose progress and prosperity are as inter-linked as our geographies and historical roots, the reality of our interdependence and mutual benefit will keep reasserting itself again and again, regardless of changes in the political wind.

We must shape the course and narrative of this very important relationship, with objectivity and with empathy.

The writer is High Commissioner of India in Dhaka, Bangladesh.​
 

Indo-Bangla high-level meet in Dec
2 foreign secys to lead first talks after Hasina’s fall

1732061660936.png

Photo: Collected

Bangladesh and India's first high-level official meeting since the fall of the Awami League government is scheduled for December in Dhaka.

According to a foreign ministry official, Bangladesh Foreign Secretary Jashim Uddin and Indian Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri will lead the Foreign Office Consultation.

The foreign ministry is preparing the necessary agenda for the meeting and will hold an inter-ministerial preparatory meeting regarding this at the foreign ministry today, he told this correspondent.

The meeting will discuss the existing agreements and memoranda of understanding and the developments of the decisions taken in the earlier meetings.

Indo-Bangla relations have been strained following the ouster of the Awami League government and the sheltering of the former prime minister Sheikh Hasina in India.

Bangladesh Chief Adviser Prof Muhammad Yunus in his address to the nation on November 17, said Dhaka will request New Delhi for Hasina's extradition.

Since the fall of the Awami League government, the Indian High Commission has limited the visas being issued to Bangladeshi tourists.

Besides, many of the projects under the Indian Line of Credit have also remained halted as the Indian contractors have not yet returned to Bangladesh for security concerns.

Prof Sreeradha Datta, a South Asian expert who teaches international affairs at the Hariyana-based OP Jindal Global University

Meanwhile, Foreign Adviser Touhid Hossain earlier told the media that Dhaka will review the agreements and MoUs signed with New Delhi over the last few years.

Indian scholar Prof Sreeradha Datta, who specialises in South Asian affairs, earlier told The Daily Star that a high-level meeting between the two countries should be held at the earliest to ease relations.

Bangladesh Foreign Adviser Touhid Hossain and Indian External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar met on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly in New York in late September.

However, Chief Adviser Prof Muhammad Yunus and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi's meeting there could not be held as their stay in New York then did not overlap.​
 

India’s hubris

1732061832023.png

Visual: Aliza Rahman

"We make our friends; we make our enemies; but God makes our next-door neighbours" - Gilbert K Chesterton

Isn't it time for India to come to terms with the reality about its neighbours, particularly about its most strategically located neighbour, Bangladesh? One wonders whether India realises that until the successful Monsoon Revolution in Bangladesh, the only government in the region that was close to it was that of Sheikh Hasina, whose regime, elected through questionable processes, India had consistently helped to sustain for 15 long years. And with every passing year, as the Hasina regime became more and more autocratic, India was seen as increasingly complicit in the travails and woes caused by the destruction of democracy and abridgement of the basic rights of Bangladeshis. Most saw the prolonged agony that Bangladesh went through as being the result of India's unflinching support for the Awami League (AL) to further its own geostrategic interests.

The degree of commitment of the Indian administration to AL is evident from the fact that some of the top leaders of the ousted regime have been given sanctuary in that country. Skeletons hidden in their closet for so long have only just started to emerge.

Before Bangladesh, it was for the Maldives to show that it had had enough of India. The gumption shown by the then newly elected president, Mohamed Muizzu, to say openly that his country would not be bullied by its big neighbour might have irked India, but that view is fairly representative of the views of citizens in India's many other South Asian neighbours. A new president in Sri Lanka from a party formed on nationalistic platforms must have added to India's worries.

India doesn't like being shown the door, and it showed after Muizzu ordered Indians to leave. And as is the tradition with the Indian establishment and media, it was the Maldives that was painted as the villain. No one bothered to analyse why Muizzu took the stand that he did.

The South Block and the Indian media must delve deep into why public opinion in Bangladesh had turned so vehemently against India over the years. It was guilt by association. Hasina served Indian economic and strategic interests—much at the expense of Bangladesh, we must add—and so India did everything to see that AL continued their hold on power. Anyone reading or watching only the Indian print and electronic media, particularly in the days following the July-August mass revolution, would be led to believe that a most benevolent servant of the people of Bangladesh, elected by overwhelming popular mandate, was illegally pushed out of power and made to flee to India!

The Indian media's lamentation about the death of democracy and collapse of Bangladesh's economy post-Hasina is in stark contrast to its deafening silence on Awami League's 15 years of misrule and wanton looting of national wealth by Hasina, her family, and party members, aided and abetted by a partisan bureaucracy. Largesse was also distributed among state institutions to make them pliant to her plunder and pillage. Nothing of the kind was published in the Indian media. Needless to say, the Indian media's lamentation in unison represents the opinion and position of the South Block.

India continues to play the Hindu card, exaggerating the stray incidents in Bangladesh, quite happily forgetting the unabated persecution of the minorities—particularly of the Muslims—in the last 10 years under the Modi regime.

The contrasting role of the media in the two countries has been very stark and noticeable. The media in Bangladesh has been virtually mum about the plight of the Muslims in India, fearing the oppressive laws that lay down stringent punishment for anyone expressing an opinion that might "harm bilateral relations" with our neighbours. Our mainstream media was scared even to publish the facts. Notice the contrasting role of the Indian media. Not only have exaggerations been resorted to but stories have also been fabricated to run a propaganda campaign about the so-called persecution of Hindus in Bangladesh.

India's diplomatic and intelligence failure in Bangladesh was hard to swallow for its leadership. Hence the venomous invective spewing from their mouth, which, thankfully, has been dismissed as guttural utterances by most world leaders. Such utterances do little to engender good neighbourly feelings, and good feelings are a precondition to a good mutual relationship.

Inevitably, India has predominated the foreign policy posture of Bangladesh since 1971. If one's foreign policy revolves around mainly three concentric circles—immediate neighbours, the region, and the international ambit—Bangladesh's first two circles have been dominated by India only, reminding one of the rueful remarks of a Mexican president, "So far from God, so near to the United States."

Indian leaders had not flinched from betraying their intention to be an "elder brother", if not a "big brother", and one of the foreign ministers is on record saying as much and in as many words. But while the main text has been followed to the letter and spirit, the subtext that it will care for its "younger brother" has been purged from the Indian leaders' mind.

A caring neighbour does not resort to shooting of harmless people on the border, nor does it renege on its commitment to observe the international norms and conventions related to the sharing of common resources. Nor would it take for a caring neighbour 41 long years to ratify an agreement. An administration that believes in dealings on the basis of sovereign equality with neighbours would try to remove the disparaging and irresponsible comments that have been coming out of the mouths of very senior Indian leaders, including ministers.

Indian scholars keep on harping on one single issue: anti-Indian activities conducted from inside Bangladesh. The same narrative has again been regurgitated by an Indian scholar in a recent interview with a leading Bangladeshi newspaper. What our interviewers failed to ask the Indian scholar was to say when such activities were last recorded.

It is not for India to ask for Bangladesh's assurance. All of India's security concerns have been met fully, and more. Rather, it is for Bangladesh to ask whether India would fulfil its commitments as a responsible neighbour.

We would like to remind our neighbour by repeating what we had said in the past: that there is a thin line between being a big country and being a great one. And that line is often inflated into a chasm by the petty-minded upholders of so-called enlightened self-interest.

It is also a good thought to conclude that Bangladesh would like to see India as neither a big nor an elder brother, but a gracious neighbour.

Brig Gen Shahedul Anam Khan, ndc, psc (retd) is a former associate editor of The Daily Star.​
 

What purpose does the Indian media propaganda about Bangladesh serve?
Hindus in Bangladesh themselves called on the Indian media to display facts.

1732062220816.png

In his Independence Day speech, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi emphasised that 1.4 billion Indians are worried about the safety of Hindu minorities in post-Hasina Bangladesh, in New Delhi, on August 15, 2024. FILE PHOTO: AFP

Since the student-led mass uprising toppled Sheikh Hasina's regime in Bangladesh on August 5, a new reality dawned on the horizon for the nation grappling with uncertainty. But in neighbouring India's media, an alternate reality of what was not seen on the streets of Bangladesh emerged. An incessant flow of misinformation and largely disinformation flooded social media. The attacks on Hindu minorities, which did indeed take place, was put on steroids to detract and distract from the real sentiments of the movement.

There was a clear and apparent campaign by the "Godi media"—a term coined by veteran Ramon Magsaysay award-winning Indian journalist Ravish Kumar to refer to media outlets that share unobjective alliances with the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)—to paint Bangladesh's democratic uprising against its former dictator as purely "anti-Indian" (in a roundabout way) and claim it was engineered by everything ranging from religious extremist forces to the US "Deep State." The latter claim came from none other than Republic TV's Arnab Goswami, who was initially reportedly funded by a prominent BJP politician, but he claims the shares have been bought back. Appearing on his channel, Goswami said, "When Rahul Gandhi goes to London and says America must save Indian democracy, this is the intervention he is probably talking about," as he pointed towards videos of Gono Bhaban being ransacked, buses being burnt in Dhaka and so on playing in the background. BJP MP Anurag Thakur called out Congress party's supposed hypocrisy in Lok Sabha by saying, "You spoke about Gaza but not about minorities in Bangladesh." The same sentiments were echoed by Aaj Tak's Sudhir Chaudhary when he compared the attacks against minorities in Bangladesh to the genocide in Gaza. "No country, no community in the world stepped forward to stop this genocide. Like how they did for Rafah," he said.

Hindus in Bangladesh themselves called on the Indian media to display facts. Bipra Prasun Das, a 21-year-old Hindu student from North South University in Dhaka, whose ancestral home was burnt down during the week of Hasina's fall, told Indian media watchdog Newslaundry, "If the Indian media had done its job properly, we would've had an easier time talking about what we are facing." This account itself shows that the endless distortion of the violence against minorities in Bangladesh in the pro-establishment media in India has taken attention away from the real attacks that happened and, in fact, caused more harm. So then, who does this propaganda about Bangladesh serve?

Before Hasina's ousting, writer Aakar Patel in The Wire had written an article, interviewing people in these pro-establishment channels, who said the overt majoritarianism under Narendra Modi has produced a condition where "existent bigotry is given a platform to be amplified." Along with this, this section of the Indian media used the situation in Bangladesh to attack the Congress party and the Indian National Developmental Inclusive Alliance (I.N.D.I.A.) and breed further division in India itself.

The necessity of an aggressive stance against the opposition has been clear after the elections where BJP failed to reach a majority on its own, in spite of its slogan, "Abki baar 400 paar," which means, "This time surpassing 400" of the 543 seats in Lok Sabha. BJP did not even reach the magic 272 seats needed to form a government, and had to rely on the National Democratic Alliance (NDA). Opposition leader Rahul Gandhi called the results "a moral and political defeat for Mr Modi." Although Modi did in fact bring home a third term, his grip on the nation seems to be dwindling and the difference between the parties widening, which can be further seen by analysing the contrast in their approaches towards Prof Muhammad Yunus-led interim government in Bangladesh.

For instance, External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar said it was "natural that we will deal with the government of the day," and that the relationship between the two countries has had its "ups and downs." Jaishankar's comments were stiff, steering clear of any jubilation or adversity, which was in sharp contrast to how Congress leader and former diplomat Shashi Tharoor addressed it. Speaking to NDTV, Tharoor said Prof Yunus taking over was "a very good sign, he is a highly respected figure, he has a reputation that goes beyond politics," elaborating that he is also "a figure that would certainly contribute to stability in Bangladesh" and that "stability is in our [India's] interest." When asked about reports on attacks on minorities, Tharoor said there was indeed anarchy for a couple days, but he also stated, "I have also seen reports of Bengali Muslims protecting Hindu temples and protecting Hindu homes," adding that "we should be telling both sides of the story."

In this context, it's also important to note the BJP's realpolitik foreign policy. Debidatta Mahapatra of the Times of India explained India's current foreign policy as it stood on the sidelines of the Russia-Ukraine war, until Prime Minister Modi's recent historic visit to Ukraine. "As realist prudence demands, India cannot simply undertake a moralist standpoint and ignore the dictates of realpolitik," described Mahapatra. This very use of realpolitik in India's neighbourhood policy—which is understandable as nations do act in their own interests—has bred the anti-India sentiments that we saw in the Maldives earlier this year.

Undoubtedly, the portrayal of India's international strength by the BJP, the hosting of the G20 Summit and its renewed importance on the world stage are all causes for national pride for India. BJP capitalises on it for its own party's incentives, reframing what would have historically been Indian pride into Hindu nationalistic pride. This is a page out of a cultural populist's playbook, the use of "us vs them," as we have seen time and time again by Prime Minister Modi. The "Hindu pride"—which is more to do with politics and little, if none, with religion—is sold to the public because real metrics don't indicate the best picture.

Raghuram Rajan, former governor of India's central bank who resigned two years into BJP taking power, stated that Modi's goals of becoming a developed economy by 2047 is unachievable, citing high dropout rates and lack of high school education in the country of 1.4 billion where more than half are below the age of 30. Youth unemployment stands at 45.4 percent, one of the highest in the world. The Global Hunger Index rated their child wasting rate as the highest in the world—at 18.7 percent—exceeding countries with active conflicts such as Yemen. This makes it imperative for the BJP to hold onto realpolitik policies to sell its position in the world to its people at the cost of fostering antagonistic attitude with its neighbours—which are all a part of what the Hindustan Times calls the "Modi-Doval-Jaishankar" playbook. The playbook can be summarised as "shaping democratic verdicts" when deemed necessary.

Many commentaries have been written to understand the purpose of the Indian media's propaganda, aligned with the ousted Awami League, such as Sajeeb Wazed Joy's recent post on Facebook about controversial journalist Chandan Nandy's report suggesting, without evidence, that "Bangladeshi student movement 'coordinators' met ISI, US handlers in Pakistan, Dubai and Doha between April and September (in) 2023." By painting the democratic uprising as Islamist or anti-Indian and leveraging it to attack the Congress party, the BJP's media allies demonstrated the lengths to which they would go to mask the domestic challenges India is currently facing under the BJP rule. This includes the prevailing communalism and violence in Manipur which the pro-establishment media and BJP politicians have ignored, while Modi recently wrote on X (formerly Twitter) that he discussed the issue of "Hindu minorities" in Bangladesh, with US President Joe Biden.

Irregardless, at the end of the day, Bangladesh and India need to maintain a good relationship. For the pro-establishment media in India to continue pursuing the divisive commentaries and the current brand of unethical journalism will needlessly harvest an anti-India sentiment in Bangladesh and cultivate harmful sentiments between ordinary citizens of the neighbouring countries. And that is the last thing that South Asia needs right now.

Ramisa Rob is in-charge of Geopolitical Insights at The Daily Star.

Mahadev Ghosh is an independent researcher and a columnist for Geopolitical Insights at The Daily Star.​
 

What purpose does the Indian media propaganda about Bangladesh serve?
Hindus in Bangladesh themselves called on the Indian media to display facts.

View attachment 10764
In his Independence Day speech, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi emphasised that 1.4 billion Indians are worried about the safety of Hindu minorities in post-Hasina Bangladesh, in New Delhi, on August 15, 2024. FILE PHOTO: AFP

Since the student-led mass uprising toppled Sheikh Hasina's regime in Bangladesh on August 5, a new reality dawned on the horizon for the nation grappling with uncertainty. But in neighbouring India's media, an alternate reality of what was not seen on the streets of Bangladesh emerged. An incessant flow of misinformation and largely disinformation flooded social media. The attacks on Hindu minorities, which did indeed take place, was put on steroids to detract and distract from the real sentiments of the movement.

There was a clear and apparent campaign by the "Godi media"—a term coined by veteran Ramon Magsaysay award-winning Indian journalist Ravish Kumar to refer to media outlets that share unobjective alliances with the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)—to paint Bangladesh's democratic uprising against its former dictator as purely "anti-Indian" (in a roundabout way) and claim it was engineered by everything ranging from religious extremist forces to the US "Deep State." The latter claim came from none other than Republic TV's Arnab Goswami, who was initially reportedly funded by a prominent BJP politician, but he claims the shares have been bought back. Appearing on his channel, Goswami said, "When Rahul Gandhi goes to London and says America must save Indian democracy, this is the intervention he is probably talking about," as he pointed towards videos of Gono Bhaban being ransacked, buses being burnt in Dhaka and so on playing in the background. BJP MP Anurag Thakur called out Congress party's supposed hypocrisy in Lok Sabha by saying, "You spoke about Gaza but not about minorities in Bangladesh." The same sentiments were echoed by Aaj Tak's Sudhir Chaudhary when he compared the attacks against minorities in Bangladesh to the genocide in Gaza. "No country, no community in the world stepped forward to stop this genocide. Like how they did for Rafah," he said.

Hindus in Bangladesh themselves called on the Indian media to display facts. Bipra Prasun Das, a 21-year-old Hindu student from North South University in Dhaka, whose ancestral home was burnt down during the week of Hasina's fall, told Indian media watchdog Newslaundry, "If the Indian media had done its job properly, we would've had an easier time talking about what we are facing." This account itself shows that the endless distortion of the violence against minorities in Bangladesh in the pro-establishment media in India has taken attention away from the real attacks that happened and, in fact, caused more harm. So then, who does this propaganda about Bangladesh serve?

Before Hasina's ousting, writer Aakar Patel in The Wire had written an article, interviewing people in these pro-establishment channels, who said the overt majoritarianism under Narendra Modi has produced a condition where "existent bigotry is given a platform to be amplified." Along with this, this section of the Indian media used the situation in Bangladesh to attack the Congress party and the Indian National Developmental Inclusive Alliance (I.N.D.I.A.) and breed further division in India itself.

The necessity of an aggressive stance against the opposition has been clear after the elections where BJP failed to reach a majority on its own, in spite of its slogan, "Abki baar 400 paar," which means, "This time surpassing 400" of the 543 seats in Lok Sabha. BJP did not even reach the magic 272 seats needed to form a government, and had to rely on the National Democratic Alliance (NDA). Opposition leader Rahul Gandhi called the results "a moral and political defeat for Mr Modi." Although Modi did in fact bring home a third term, his grip on the nation seems to be dwindling and the difference between the parties widening, which can be further seen by analysing the contrast in their approaches towards Prof Muhammad Yunus-led interim government in Bangladesh.

For instance, External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar said it was "natural that we will deal with the government of the day," and that the relationship between the two countries has had its "ups and downs." Jaishankar's comments were stiff, steering clear of any jubilation or adversity, which was in sharp contrast to how Congress leader and former diplomat Shashi Tharoor addressed it. Speaking to NDTV, Tharoor said Prof Yunus taking over was "a very good sign, he is a highly respected figure, he has a reputation that goes beyond politics," elaborating that he is also "a figure that would certainly contribute to stability in Bangladesh" and that "stability is in our [India's] interest." When asked about reports on attacks on minorities, Tharoor said there was indeed anarchy for a couple days, but he also stated, "I have also seen reports of Bengali Muslims protecting Hindu temples and protecting Hindu homes," adding that "we should be telling both sides of the story."

In this context, it's also important to note the BJP's realpolitik foreign policy. Debidatta Mahapatra of the Times of India explained India's current foreign policy as it stood on the sidelines of the Russia-Ukraine war, until Prime Minister Modi's recent historic visit to Ukraine. "As realist prudence demands, India cannot simply undertake a moralist standpoint and ignore the dictates of realpolitik," described Mahapatra. This very use of realpolitik in India's neighbourhood policy—which is understandable as nations do act in their own interests—has bred the anti-India sentiments that we saw in the Maldives earlier this year.

Undoubtedly, the portrayal of India's international strength by the BJP, the hosting of the G20 Summit and its renewed importance on the world stage are all causes for national pride for India. BJP capitalises on it for its own party's incentives, reframing what would have historically been Indian pride into Hindu nationalistic pride. This is a page out of a cultural populist's playbook, the use of "us vs them," as we have seen time and time again by Prime Minister Modi. The "Hindu pride"—which is more to do with politics and little, if none, with religion—is sold to the public because real metrics don't indicate the best picture.

Raghuram Rajan, former governor of India's central bank who resigned two years into BJP taking power, stated that Modi's goals of becoming a developed economy by 2047 is unachievable, citing high dropout rates and lack of high school education in the country of 1.4 billion where more than half are below the age of 30. Youth unemployment stands at 45.4 percent, one of the highest in the world. The Global Hunger Index rated their child wasting rate as the highest in the world—at 18.7 percent—exceeding countries with active conflicts such as Yemen. This makes it imperative for the BJP to hold onto realpolitik policies to sell its position in the world to its people at the cost of fostering antagonistic attitude with its neighbours—which are all a part of what the Hindustan Times calls the "Modi-Doval-Jaishankar" playbook. The playbook can be summarised as "shaping democratic verdicts" when deemed necessary.

Many commentaries have been written to understand the purpose of the Indian media's propaganda, aligned with the ousted Awami League, such as Sajeeb Wazed Joy's recent post on Facebook about controversial journalist Chandan Nandy's report suggesting, without evidence, that "Bangladeshi student movement 'coordinators' met ISI, US handlers in Pakistan, Dubai and Doha between April and September (in) 2023." By painting the democratic uprising as Islamist or anti-Indian and leveraging it to attack the Congress party, the BJP's media allies demonstrated the lengths to which they would go to mask the domestic challenges India is currently facing under the BJP rule. This includes the prevailing communalism and violence in Manipur which the pro-establishment media and BJP politicians have ignored, while Modi recently wrote on X (formerly Twitter) that he discussed the issue of "Hindu minorities" in Bangladesh, with US President Joe Biden.

Irregardless, at the end of the day, Bangladesh and India need to maintain a good relationship. For the pro-establishment media in India to continue pursuing the divisive commentaries and the current brand of unethical journalism will needlessly harvest an anti-India sentiment in Bangladesh and cultivate harmful sentiments between ordinary citizens of the neighbouring countries. And that is the last thing that South Asia needs right now.

Ramisa Rob is in-charge of Geopolitical Insights at The Daily Star.

Mahadev Ghosh is an independent researcher and a columnist for Geopolitical Insights at The Daily Star.​

BD can hide isolated attacks on Hindus but can not lie about the temples being attacked whose videos are there in Public forum. ISKCON temple vandalization and demand to declare ISKCON a terrorist organization. Tulsi Gabard has taken the charge of Intelligence head of Trump Government. She is a Staunch Devotee of ISKCON. No gimmick shall work.
 
BD can hide isolated attacks on Hindus but can not lie about the temples being attacked whose videos are there in Public forum. ISKCON temple vandalization and demand to declare ISKCON a terrorist organization. Tulsi Gabard has taken the charge of Intelligence head of Trump Government. She is a Staunch Devotee of ISKCON. No gimmick shall work.
Don't put too much faith in Tulsi. She is not a power over Bangladesh. We are a sovereign nation and preserve the right to kick any organization out from Bangladesh if it deems to have deleterious effect on our political and social stability.
 
Don't put too much faith in Tulsi. She is not a power over Bangladesh. We are a sovereign nation and preserve the right to kick any organization out from Bangladesh if it deems to have deleterious effect on our political and social stability.

Good in spirit not in reality. Pakistanis used to say same thing but ended up in more dependance on other nation who have pledged everything to get few USD for survival. You need to be self-reliant on so many things which requires a relentless effort in right direction for many decades along with so many other things.
 

Latest Posts

Latest Posts

Back
PKDefense - Recommended Toggle