What's new

Bangladesh’s Sonadia Port Dilemma: Is the US Navy the Answer?

Cold Blood

FULL MEMBER

New Recruit

Joined
Jan 26, 2012
Messages
93
Reaction score
-1
Bangladesh faces a tough challenge in going ahead with plans to set up a deep seaport at Sonadia due to various implications for both national security and regional stability. The naval strategies of China, India, and the United States are on a collision course, as all three naval powers are vying for a strategic presence in the Bay of Bengal. A presence in the Bay is aimed at furthering the strategic objectives of these external powers in the Indian Ocean and the Pacific, including the positioning and counter-positioning of naval fleets, establishing naval bases and surveillance stations, and ensuring accessibility to key ports via joint naval exercises.

The government of Bangladesh recently put off deciding on signing a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Chinese for the construction of the Sonadia port. This delay in signing off on the contract reflects heightened perceptions of strategic and security risks of late, mainly stemming from the potential strategic use of the Sonadia port by an external power, which could cause serious ripples in Bangladesh’s national security outlook. The awarding of a deep seaport would have serious consequences in terms of Bangladesh’s role in the region, and maybe even globally. Any rash and uncalculated decision on the Sonadia port by the government could undermine national security and regional stability. Ongoing bilateral economic and security cooperation between Bangladesh and China, India, and the United States also risks being adversely affected unless the port is awarded to a neutral third party.

China has evidently gained the confidence of the leadership in Dhaka with prospects of closer economic and defense cooperation, culminating in the announcement of a strategic partnership. However, the momentum of this growing relationship between Dhaka and Beijing suddenly ‘stalled’ due to this recent decision to defer the signing of the MOU on the port, which was supposed to be signed during the recent visit of the prime minister to Beijing but was dropped from the agenda at the very last moment, putting the two countries’ bilateral relations in serious jeopardy.

Chinese delegates have offered a total of $5B for the construction of the Sonadia port. They have expressed an interest in financing, designing, and building the facility, along with being involved in the ongoing operations and maintenance of the port once construction is complete. The main point of disagreement that arose during negotiations with the Bangladesh government revolved around Chinese insistence on retaining the right to ‘design the facility.’ Design of the facility by the Chinese would allow them to control the scope, which could mean future upgrades for strategic use of the Sonadia port via the installation of surveillance equipment and berths for navy warships. A Chinese naval presence at Sonadia would counterpoise the Indian Naval Headquarters of the Eastern Command at Vishakapatnam and pose a threat to regional stability. The China threat is thought to be one of the top priorities of the Modi Government. On his first foreign excursion to Bhutan, Prime Minister Modi entered into an agreement with the Himalayan Kingdom that neither of the neighbors will allow their territories to be used for any purposes inimical to the other – a means of preventing any inroads from the Chinese into the South Asia region. Therefore it is extremely unlikely that India would react favorably to any request from Bangladesh to allow the Chinese entry into the Bay of Bengal.

A Chinese naval presence in the Bay would also go against the national interests of Bangladesh. External trade through the port of Chittagong and the exploration and production of oil and gas from the deep sea blocks in the Bay of Bengal will be halted in the event of an outbreak of hostilities between rival powers. Allowing the PLA Navy access to the Bay of Bengal would also go against the principle of ‘friendship to all, malice to none’ by allowing the use of Bangladeshi territory in a way that is ‘inimical to India.’

The decision not to sign the MOU has disappointed the Chinese side, and it risks producing resentment that could result in the withdrawal of China’s pledges of economic and security assistance. This would effectively deprive Bangladesh of the option of playing the ‘China card,’ which would force it back under the Indian umbrella. Since Bangladesh has desperately tried to keep out of complete surrender to the whims of its neighboring power, perhaps a partnership with the United States may be the only viable alternative. At present, the Pacific Command of the US Navy and the Bangladesh navy are holding joint naval exercises in the Bay of Bengal. Under President Obama’s Asia ‘pivot’ policy, the US Navy plans to relocate about 60 percent of its naval assets to the region. This would allow the United States to use the Bay of Bengal as a second theater in containing Chinese expansion beyond Myanmar. To this end, access to the Chittagong port and the Bay of Bengal would provide an excellent strategic fit for the US Navy.

A convergence of interests between a global superpower and a smaller emergent economy in South Asia could make for a mutually beneficial security partnership. US naval ships operating in the Pacific and the Indian Ocean would find it convenient to use the port facilities in Chittagong for repair and refurbishment, in addition to the possible policing of the Bay of Bengal. Assurances from the United States with respect to Bangladesh’s security dilemma could come after the Hasina regime demonstrates its willingness to reconcile with the opposition and bolster the country’s democratic credentials.

The US Navy would be perfect for the role of a balancer in the Bay of Bengal, fending off the dangers of Chinese expansionism and Indian dominance. Bangladesh can accept any one of a range of other offers for financing a deep seaport on the Bay of Bengal, whether from the Norwegians, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Japan, and/or a consortium from Europe. And any option for the strategic use of a commercial hub at Sonadia should be off the table on the grounds of national security.

Bangladesh’s Sonadia Port Dilemma: Is the US Navy the Answer? » Geopolitical Analysis & Forecasting
 
.
This discord arose regarding the submarine landing station near Sonadia deep sea port. Detailed was not made public.
 
.
US Navy is not the answer. It can only bring disaster in its wake. That has been the experience everywhere. With USas an ally, no one needs an enemy.The correct course would be to hand over this entirely to China to add another pearl to her String of Pearls. That would be most advantageous to BD in national security bringing her even more closer to China and her allies like Pakistan.

This discord arose regarding the submarine landing station near Sonadia deep sea port. Detailed was not made public.
Submarine, modern MBT and fighter aircraft are offensive weapons.BAL's subservient policy towards India will not allow any progress in acquiring teeth for BD armed forces. These must remain happy with UN Mission capabilities only.
 
.
US Navy is not the answer. It can only bring disaster in its wake. That has been the experience everywhere. With USas an ally, no one needs an enemy.The correct course would be to hand over this entirely to China to add another pearl to her String of Pearls. That would be most advantageous to BD in national security bringing her even more closer to China and her allies like Pakistan.


Submarine, modern MBT and fighter aircraft are offensive weapons.BAL's subservient policy towards India will not allow any progress in acquiring teeth for BD armed forces. These must remain happy with UN Mission capabilities only.
I support Bangladesh get closer to US,you can get close to China and US both,and you can get most benefit from this balance policy,and our interests in south asia are balance the Indian power,you get closer to US will not harm interests,I fully support that
Also I think China will never want military bases in other countries,we have non-interference in internal affairs policy,have military base in another country will only anger the citizens of that country
 
.
US Navy is not the answer. It can only bring disaster in its wake. That has been the experience everywhere. With USas an ally, no one needs an enemy.The correct course would be to hand over this entirely to China to add another pearl to her String of Pearls. That would be most advantageous to BD in national security bringing her even more closer to China and her allies like Pakistan.


Submarine, modern MBT and fighter aircraft are offensive weapons.BAL's subservient policy towards India will not allow any progress in acquiring teeth for BD armed forces. These must remain happy with UN Mission capabilities only.

Whether USA or China, I guess it's high time we should try to elevate ourselves into an effective ally and truly join one of the leagues. The external threats are on rise, nobody has any clue about Myanmar's nuclear program, some even saying they will have full access to nukes by 2019. And then the pain called India is always there.

There will be massive public resentment, especially from the communist parties, if a foreign military base is allowed. However there's no alternative if we really want to join one of the alliances. It would require a daring leadership to decide on such thing.
 
. .
BD should study the results of bringing foreign powers to use their soil for their "Dirty Work".many of our neighbours tried,with results not so impeccable.plus,a foreign military base,be it USA,China or any other,it'd make BD a terrorist target.plus,nullifying neighbour's influence using a foreign power never bear the intended fruit as Foreign powers will come and go,the neighbour will stay.

the best bid is to make compromise with neighbour.forget about India.Giving the base to USA will make China unhappy as now,USA will get a foothold near China and US' new friend,Myanmar.that base will surely going to be used against China.Giving the base to China will make USA unhappy,which will see it as a move of undoing what they're trying to do to contain PLAN activity within First Island Chain.plus,bringing USN to nullify India's effect probably not going to happen as both IN and USN are co operating this region to counter PLAN.
 
.
I think you are giving too much importance to them.

Not really. They might be weak numerically, but have the talent. Most of the intellectuals are hardcore communists, some of the brightest students across the public universities are communist supporters. They can easily influence the masses. Shahbag movement?
 
.
Not really. They might be weak numerically, but have the talent. Most of the intellectuals are hardcore communists, some of the brightest students across the public universities are communist supporters. They can easily influence the masses. Shahbag movement?

Shahbag movement is not something to boast of.
 
. .
BD should study the results of bringing foreign powers to use their soil for their "Dirty Work".many of our neighbours tried,with results not so impeccable.plus,a foreign military base,be it USA,China or any other,it'd make BD a terrorist target.plus,nullifying neighbour's influence using a foreign power never bear the intended fruit as Foreign powers will come and go,the neighbour will stay.

the best bid is to make compromise with neighbour.forget about India.Giving the base to USA will make China unhappy as now,USA will get a foothold near China and US' new friend,Myanmar.that base will surely going to be used against China.Giving the base to China will make USA unhappy,which will see it as a move of undoing what they're trying to do to contain PLAN activity within First Island Chain.plus,bringing USN to nullify India's effect probably not going to happen as both IN and USN are co operating this region to counter PLAN.

You are saying it from the Indian perspective. Compromise with India? I think that's what we have been doing for the last 43 years and in return got nothing but India's interference on our internal matter. Besides, having the strategic location, we need to fully utilize our capability as a middle power. What if Myanmar allows a Chinese or American base? And terrorist targets! We don't see South Korea, Japan being terrorist targets.

If you are suggesting US base won't be effective then the only option remains China. USA won't remain the sole super power in near future and with the rise of China we are gong to witness a multipolar world, which means China and US will have more or less equal weight.
 
.
Bangladesh faces a tough challenge in going ahead with plans to set up a deep seaport at Sonadia due to various implications for both national security and regional stability. The naval strategies of China, India, and the United States are on a collision course, as all three naval powers are vying for a strategic presence in the Bay of Bengal. A presence in the Bay is aimed at furthering the strategic objectives of these external powers in the Indian Ocean and the Pacific, including the positioning and counter-positioning of naval fleets, establishing naval bases and surveillance stations, and ensuring accessibility to key ports via joint naval exercises.

The government of Bangladesh recently put off deciding on signing a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Chinese for the construction of the Sonadia port. This delay in signing off on the contract reflects heightened perceptions of strategic and security risks of late, mainly stemming from the potential strategic use of the Sonadia port by an external power, which could cause serious ripples in Bangladesh’s national security outlook. The awarding of a deep seaport would have serious consequences in terms of Bangladesh’s role in the region, and maybe even globally. Any rash and uncalculated decision on the Sonadia port by the government could undermine national security and regional stability. Ongoing bilateral economic and security cooperation between Bangladesh and China, India, and the United States also risks being adversely affected unless the port is awarded to a neutral third party.

China has evidently gained the confidence of the leadership in Dhaka with prospects of closer economic and defense cooperation, culminating in the announcement of a strategic partnership. However, the momentum of this growing relationship between Dhaka and Beijing suddenly ‘stalled’ due to this recent decision to defer the signing of the MOU on the port, which was supposed to be signed during the recent visit of the prime minister to Beijing but was dropped from the agenda at the very last moment, putting the two countries’ bilateral relations in serious jeopardy.

Chinese delegates have offered a total of $5B for the construction of the Sonadia port. They have expressed an interest in financing, designing, and building the facility, along with being involved in the ongoing operations and maintenance of the port once construction is complete. The main point of disagreement that arose during negotiations with the Bangladesh government revolved around Chinese insistence on retaining the right to ‘design the facility.’ Design of the facility by the Chinese would allow them to control the scope, which could mean future upgrades for strategic use of the Sonadia port via the installation of surveillance equipment and berths for navy warships. A Chinese naval presence at Sonadia would counterpoise the Indian Naval Headquarters of the Eastern Command at Vishakapatnam and pose a threat to regional stability. The China threat is thought to be one of the top priorities of the Modi Government. On his first foreign excursion to Bhutan, Prime Minister Modi entered into an agreement with the Himalayan Kingdom that neither of the neighbors will allow their territories to be used for any purposes inimical to the other – a means of preventing any inroads from the Chinese into the South Asia region. Therefore it is extremely unlikely that India would react favorably to any request from Bangladesh to allow the Chinese entry into the Bay of Bengal.

A Chinese naval presence in the Bay would also go against the national interests of Bangladesh. External trade through the port of Chittagong and the exploration and production of oil and gas from the deep sea blocks in the Bay of Bengal will be halted in the event of an outbreak of hostilities between rival powers. Allowing the PLA Navy access to the Bay of Bengal would also go against the principle of ‘friendship to all, malice to none’ by allowing the use of Bangladeshi territory in a way that is ‘inimical to India.’

The decision not to sign the MOU has disappointed the Chinese side, and it risks producing resentment that could result in the withdrawal of China’s pledges of economic and security assistance. This would effectively deprive Bangladesh of the option of playing the ‘China card,’ which would force it back under the Indian umbrella. Since Bangladesh has desperately tried to keep out of complete surrender to the whims of its neighboring power, perhaps a partnership with the United States may be the only viable alternative. At present, the Pacific Command of the US Navy and the Bangladesh navy are holding joint naval exercises in the Bay of Bengal. Under President Obama’s Asia ‘pivot’ policy, the US Navy plans to relocate about 60 percent of its naval assets to the region. This would allow the United States to use the Bay of Bengal as a second theater in containing Chinese expansion beyond Myanmar. To this end, access to the Chittagong port and the Bay of Bengal would provide an excellent strategic fit for the US Navy.

A convergence of interests between a global superpower and a smaller emergent economy in South Asia could make for a mutually beneficial security partnership. US naval ships operating in the Pacific and the Indian Ocean would find it convenient to use the port facilities in Chittagong for repair and refurbishment, in addition to the possible policing of the Bay of Bengal. Assurances from the United States with respect to Bangladesh’s security dilemma could come after the Hasina regime demonstrates its willingness to reconcile with the opposition and bolster the country’s democratic credentials.

The US Navy would be perfect for the role of a balancer in the Bay of Bengal, fending off the dangers of Chinese expansionism and Indian dominance. Bangladesh can accept any one of a range of other offers for financing a deep seaport on the Bay of Bengal, whether from the Norwegians, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Japan, and/or a consortium from Europe. And any option for the strategic use of a commercial hub at Sonadia should be off the table on the grounds of national security.

Bangladesh’s Sonadia Port Dilemma: Is the US Navy the Answer? » Geopolitical Analysis & Forecasting

US won't have a military Base in BD maybe in Myanmar but not BD,
 
.
BD should study the results of bringing foreign powers to use their soil for their "Dirty Work".many of our neighbours tried,with results not so impeccable.plus,a foreign military base,be it USA,China or any other,it'd make BD a terrorist target.plus,nullifying neighbour's influence using a foreign power never bear the intended fruit as Foreign powers will come and go,the neighbour will stay.

the best bid is to make compromise with neighbour.forget about India.Giving the base to USA will make China unhappy as now,USA will get a foothold near China and US' new friend,Myanmar.that base will surely going to be used against China.Giving the base to China will make USA unhappy,which will see it as a move of undoing what they're trying to do to contain PLAN activity within First Island Chain.plus,bringing USN to nullify India's effect probably not going to happen as both IN and USN are co operating this region to counter PLAN.

1.India hosts CIA,FBI and other agencies on her soil. Communication/eavesdropping facilities have remained from pre-1947 and strengthened/modernized. The deals India has with USA and Israel are more "Dirty" than a physical/visible base.

2. We need Chinese physical presence to stop India's pressures on us. Some smart diplomatic work will be needed to explain our predicament to USA.Pakistan's relations with China had grown in spite of her presence in CENTO and SEATO.
 
.
You are saying it from the Indian perspective. Compromise with India? I think that's what we have been doing for the last 43 years and in return got nothing but India's interference on our internal matter. Besides, having the strategic location, we need to fully utilize our capability as a middle power. What if Myanmar allows a Chinese or American base? And terrorist targets! We don't see South Korea, Japan being terrorist targets.

If you are suggesting US base won't be effective then the only option remains China. USA won't remain the sole super power in near future and with the rise of China we are gong to witness a multipolar world, which means China and US will have more or less equal weight.

I do not think we should allow a Chinese military base but should try to firmly ally with China and allow regular port visits of Chinese warships.

Once China becomes a superpower, Indians can just watch and cry like women.
 
.
I always favoured chinese involvement in BD but they seem to have less interest in BD compared to SL & PAK. Any country that would help counter the nose-poking of paganistic henious mentality India is welcome. But is US the answer though? I would rather opt for some Norwegians/japanese company make the port. But witch Hasina won't be able to do anything abt the port without India's consent as we saw in her recent trip to beijing. And if it wasn't for direct US/west siding with India, this witch wouldn't have come to power post 1/11. Even now west is only giving lip-service to the cause of democracy in BD even after the jan-5 circus show.

A post-hasina BD may be able move forward on the deep sea port issue. The prime concern for BD would be making the port & getting out of Indian interference and nose-poking.

US Navy is not the answer. It can only bring disaster in its wake. That has been the experience everywhere. With USas an ally, no one needs an enemy.The correct course would be to hand over this entirely to China to add another pearl to her String of Pearls. That would be most advantageous to BD in national security bringing her even more closer to China and her allies like Pakistan.


Submarine, modern MBT and fighter aircraft are offensive weapons.BAL's subservient policy towards India will not allow any progress in acquiring teeth for BD armed forces. These must remain happy with UN Mission capabilities only.

IS china interested in BD?

I support Bangladesh get closer to US,you can get close to China and US both,and you can get most benefit from this balance policy,and our interests in south asia are balance the Indian power,you get closer to US will not harm interests,I fully support that
Also I think China will never want military bases in other countries,we have non-interference in internal affairs policy,have military base in another country will only anger the citizens of that country

Yeah US may not allow Indian ocean become India's ocean but if any dickhead like bush comes in washington and makes a u-turn then it would be disastrous for BD.

BD should study the results of bringing foreign powers to use their soil for their "Dirty Work".many of our neighbours tried,with results not so impeccable.plus,a foreign military base,be it USA,China or any other,it'd make BD a terrorist target.plus,nullifying neighbour's influence using a foreign power never bear the intended fruit as Foreign powers will come and go,the neighbour will stay.

the best bid is to make compromise with neighbour.forget about India.Giving the base to USA will make China unhappy as now,USA will get a foothold near China and US' new friend,Myanmar.that base will surely going to be used against China.Giving the base to China will make USA unhappy,which will see it as a move of undoing what they're trying to do to contain PLAN activity within First Island Chain.plus,bringing USN to nullify India's effect probably not going to happen as both IN and USN are co operating this region to counter PLAN.

Compromise with a neighbor that goes to any length to have its puppet in power in BD, wants to control BD as a pathetic vassal, dries up our river, shoots our citizen at the border everyday and after all that spew BS propaganda of illegal migrants. How do u compromise with such a 2 faced snake? Or does compromise means dalals like Hasina be allowed to run the affairs in BD?
 
.

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom