Zakir & Abir with all other associates as well read below a glimpse of what some portion of today's generation of Bangladesh feels about their country and India as a whole. Yesterday i was visiting BDmilitrary forum and come across this masterpiesce in which fellow bangladeshis are allure to join the union of India or India leaded Saacr Union and leave aside Bangladesh as an entity, which in turn make other saarc members to join in later on.
I think this is very much related to this thread so i brought his whole article here the guy username is Saarc1.
Qoute
Hello everyone. I have been active at this forum with a different name. For reasons I may explain later if needed, I have dropped that name and I am using a new name saarc1, with help and approval from BDM1A1 Bhai.
I would like to draw your attention to an idea I have promoted a few years ago. The idea is about a SAARC union, similar to European Union, with the goal of eventual political union and form a United States of South Asia, which is also the ultimate goal of EU, to form a United States of Europe.
The current SAARC charter does not have any provision for eventual political union, but there is ongoing work for a free-trade area. But essentially it has been more or less a useless talk shop for bureaucrats and head of states to meet and waste everyone's time with fancy idea's but no real results, for the benefit of the population of this region. One of the main problems is the hostility between two main members, India and Pakistan, on the issue of Kashmir.
Although Bangladesh (SAARC was a brain-child of late Zia) was the founding member, like other smaller members, we hoped to see some benefit, but because of India-Pakistan issues SAARC never took off. Another issue is that India saw SAARC as a vehicle for smaller neighbor countries to gang up against it, while PRC was giving support from behind the scenes. So India preferred bilateral deals with neighbor countries and did not see SAARC as a way to further its interest.
I have been active for the last year or so in Bharat Rakshak forum, discussing with Indian forum posters about EU style integration. Initially there was not much of a response, as various other people, specially from Pakistan, such as MQM leader Altaf and assorted other intellectuals are also promoting similar ideas (in web, print/broadcast media and real life). Over time, I have come to understand the Indian point of view about not just this issue but also about many other areas.
The issue of Partition inevitably comes up, as it left a deep scar in people's psyche, an event that happened just 63 years ago. This reinforces the historical grievances of a Hindu-Buddhist country that fell under an Islamic onslaught and was more or less under Muslim rule for some centuries. The current Pakistan-India relations or the lack of it, also looms large as a continuation of the legacy of the by-gone days.
My historical analysis had been that Muslims of the subcontinent made a monumental blunder by supporting partition and creating Pakistan.For one, there would be 500 million Muslims in India against close to a billion Hindu, so India would have in effect two majority population, one major majority and another minor majority (since 500 million population cannot be called a simple minority by any standard). But once Muslims went for Pakistan, for whatever reasons, due to leadership mistakes or prevailing anxiety among the population at the time, they have in effect divided the 500 million Muslim population block of today in the subcontinent into three more or less equal parts in three different nation states - India, Pakistan and Bangladesh.
Fast forward to today, we have a rising India, a relatively prosperous Bangladesh and an unstable and failing Pakistan. Many Indians feel now that it was a good thing that Partition happened and the unwanted Muslims were cut off from India, so that they have an absolute majority for Hindu's. Thus it was better that the perpetual trouble makers opted to take themselves out of Mother India out of their own free will (create Pakistan).
But as time passes, people in the subcontinent, are coming to realize the practical problems (strategic, economic etc.) we are facing due to drawing up borders and making separate new countries where there was none for many centuries past.
The West and East Pakistan broke up, just as Lord Mountbatten predicted, exactly around 25 years after 1947. There was rise of political Islam in both Pakistan and Bangladesh (JeI and Moududi's legacy). Pakistan, due to its geographic location, was used by the US and Saudi Wahabists, to counter Soviet expansionism in Afghanistan, giving rise to CIA and Saudi funded Jihadi wahabi/salafi/deobondi Taleban and other allied Jihadist forces in the ****** region. Al Queda/ OBL etc. all came out of this mix. There was also rise of RSS, Hindu nationalism, BJP etc. in India. 9/11 happened and US got involved in Afghanistan and then Iraq.
Today we have several dynamics going on. PRC (China) has always been a friend of Pakistan since 1947, as its leadership understood that as long as there is division among the subcontinental population, they can exploit the division to their advantage. One policy of all global powers is that they want to keep other potential threatening large group of populations disunited and broken down, so that they can influence and use the different parts for their own benefit and interest without much difficulty. "Divide et impera" or "divide and rule", is an old imperial dominating strategy, still successfully followed by all global powers. It is for this reason that Ottoman was broken up, with help of Turkish and Arab nationalism. The Hindu Muslim rivalry and distrust in the subcontinent also worked to weaken and divide the subcontinental population, which is advantageous for all reigning global powers and any new up and coming powers, such as PRC.
So far all of the above is old story, so what really is new.
Lately India, after opening up its economy to the outside world, at the end of Nehru's socialist and isolationist policies, found new success and economic growth. PRC, with its splendid authoritarian leadership, at least had a decade head-start compared to India and is rapidly growing as well. PRC, with its new found prosperity and success, is showing some assertiveness with its neighbors, such as Japan, Vietnam and India, about unresolved border and territorial issues and maritime economic zones involving small islands or rock outposts. Many believe that PRC also helped Pakistan to achieve the nuclear deterrence against India and is using Pakistan to stem India's rise. Using Pakistan as a pawn, in effect PRC is trying to prevent India from becoming an effective and almost equal great power rival and competitor.
As for Bangladesh and its population, I have been searching for a direction and destiny. Whither Bangladesh, which way should we go, [/B]what is at the end of the road for us. The more I thought about this, the more convinced I became that we can never become part of PRC, as it is dominated by one ethnic group, the Han Chinese. There will never be a PRC led Union, like EU, that we can be part of with the ultimate goal of political union. It is not just true for Bangladesh, it is also true for any neighboring PRC country, in ASEAN (such as Myanmar) or in East Asia, such as Japan or Korean peninsula. But we already were part of greater subcontinent for most of past history. So I started looking at possibilities for integration of the subcontinent or in effect, to undo the partition. So instead of staying in a confused state, like we are today, not knowing which way to lean, towards India or towards PRC, I wanted a logical and definite direction and I found the answer to be India. Staying neutral is not an option, as we are too small to not get influenced by bigger neighbors (in fact the two biggest countries in the world in terms of population).
So then we need to look at what are the challenges if we are to lean towards India. This re-orientation cannot be based on a blind India friendly obsequious attitude like Hasina led AL, but it must be a popular mandate of the people of Bangladesh, who will see this as beneficial for their future progeny. Our Muslim identity and our position in a Hindu majority India is a major concern and Hindu's have not shown themselves to be sensitive to Muslim concerns in the past.
As Indian strategists are opening their eyes to the wider global scenario as well as the Asian land mass, they can see that in the great Eurasian land mass, the Western part is of course dominated by Europeans, now being consolidated under European Union. US strategists like Zbigniew Brzezinski even wants to bring in Russia, eventually under this European Union project, of course led by the US as the patron for consolidation of European population of the Eurasian landmass. PRC is slowly spreading its wings to become the new Asian hegemon with ambitions to become a global hegemon. Islam, although is making a lot of disturbances and turbulence globally and in the subcontinent, they are no more than insignificant nuisance (except of course the Pakistan Nuclear threat, but this also is supported by PRC efforts to pin down and box-in India), compared to the greater and powerful entities, rapidly consolidating West under US leadership, Han Chinese dominated PRC and last but not the least an economically resurgent India. Today no Islamic Ottoman or Mughal exists to become a threat for any of the existing or aspiring great powers, all are broken down, although some small or medium success stories exist like Turkey or Malaysia.
Despite the occasional threat of extremists, mainly from "non-state" actors of Pakistan, my job was to convey to Indian strategists, that Muslims need allies, and no one is in a better position to provide that support and alliance (not US led West or PRC) than India, as India itself has 170 million Muslims and the greater subcontinent also happen to have another 330 million Muslims. Why should Indians go for an alliance with the Muslim world, because if they don't, Muslims will continue to be exploited by US led West and PRC, as pawns to be used for resources and other geo-strategic benefits. PRC in particular will score in the open field (khali mathe goal) and will continue in its effort to befriend and use Muslim countries (such as Pakistan, Iran and Afghanistan) and Muslim populations (such as Kashmir valley) against an anti-Muslim India. Of course Pakistan is locked in a struggle with India for Kashmir, so Bangladesh remains a viable option for India, to be integrated along with other SAARC nations, in stages.
For India, the benefits will be manifold, as it will become a country with more than 300 million Muslims (although this may happen far in the future, may be at least 50 years or more from today) and thus call itself the country with biggest Muslim population, hopefully get OIC membership etc. With increasing affluence, Indian and Bengal Muslims will be able to take Muslim leadership from Punjabi's hand and when oil is gone, from the Arab hand as well.
For Bangladesh, we will no longer have to depend on Indian mercy for water flowing down from Padma, Surma and other common rivers, we will be able to take the fight to Indian parliament and supreme-court eventually or at least to a SAARC level joint task-force, for the time being. We will also be able to hope and plan for a future in a large and peaceful polity, instead of this current unstable situation based on idiotic leadership that the two Begum's and their families gave us so far. We will also be ready to fight for our fair share of water from Brahmaputra, when PRC gets ready to divert much needed dry-season water from upstream Yarlung Tsangpo river in Tibet.
At some stage, if we do well in the SAARC integration process and benefit from it, population of Pakistan may also see the light and instead of being used as a pawn for PRC, may eventually decide to join the club.
Of course this may seem like a pipe dream, SAARC is a reality today, we will simply take the existing structure, put Pakistan and Afghanistan in shelve for now and proceed full speed with the rest 6 countries for a fast track integration. Yes, we will be serving India's and subcontinental interest, but it will be our joint project, of Bangladeshi and Indian Muslims, Sri Lankan Buddhists/Muslims/Tamils and others, not just exclusively a project for the interest of Hindu India alone.
As the overwhelming majority of Muslims who want to live and let live peacefully with the rest of the world, this will be a major victory for the Muslim population of the world to move India away from its current hostile position to a position of neutrality and eventually an ally. As affluent citizens of a powerful block/Union and an eventual unified political entity, subcontinental Muslims will be able to exert positive influence on Muslim countries in the rest of the globe, possibly move them away from extremism, end their pariah status and engineer a better future for them, so that global powers may not be able to use the disunited parts as pawns for resources and arms market for perpetual internecine conflicts among these parts, such as the ones that is brewing up in ME between the Iran led Shia block and Saudi led Sunni block.
I know this is difficult to imagine, but politics and geo-politics is the art of the impossible and future is always stranger than science fiction. Personally I see this as our only viable way out from the many myriad problems that we see in the future of this overpopulated small land, fenced in from all sides and trying to get by with the bad luck and impossible fate that our fore fathers had designed for us with their support for partition.
Unquote.
I love to see your precious thoughts on this article as we cannot ignore what a section of our subcontinental society are thinking of
