Exploit strategic location: Hillary to Bangladesh

[eastwatch]

China has border with bangladesh.................??

If it is business and trade the Chinese border is about 6,000km away from BD. The route is through BoB, Indian Ocean, Malakka Strait and South Pacific to Shanghai. So, China is a far away neighbour when it is a question of trade. BD is certainly not located in a strategically located point in consideration of a trade scenerio with China.

 

[Roybot]

The two factors you have mentioned are not enough to take India to the front seat of progress. Think of Japan, its GDP is $5 trillion with a population of 140 million, while, India's is only $1.2 trillion with a population of 1200 million. Think of England. It has much higher GDP than India while the population figure is much smaller than India. So, only bigger population and land mass do not necessarily guarantee a larger economy.

I don't know where you are getting your figure from but India's GDP is 1.73 Trillion not 1.2. And its per capita GDP and HDI is higher than both Pakistan and Bangladesh, so don't know what you mean by you have better standard of living.

Your arguments are fine, but don't manipulate the figures.

 

[kalu_miah]

If it is business and trade the Chinese border is about 6,000km away from BD. The route is through BoB, Indian Ocean, Malakka Strait and South Pacific to Shanghai. So, China is a far away neighbour when it is a question of trade. BD is certainly not located in a strategically located point in consideration of a trade scenerio with China.

Although sea transport is cheapest, road/rail are also important for regional economy. In that respect China is not a far-away neighbor to Bangladesh:

Kunming - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Its economic importance derives from its geographical position. Positioned near the border with Southeastern Asian countries, serving as a transportation hub in Southwest China, linking by rail to Vietnam and by road to Burma and Laos. This positioning also makes it an important trade center in this region of the nation.

ASEAN ministers eye working groups to remove market barriers | Asian Shipping-Freight-Cargo-Logistics Newspaper - Transport and Maritime Guide
Infrastructure for Growth
Kunming

http://www.asean.org/documents/MPAC.pdf

 

[eastwatch]

I was talking about the present sea route. The situation changes when Burma allows connectivity east of Cox's Bazaar. No real progress has yet been noticed on that. Even for Asian Highways Burma prefers a BD-India's NE-Burma route. Many things have to be settled before China becomes a very near neighbour.

 

[sur]

=
=
=
The left-eyed great deceiver a.k.a Dajjal, is coming your way Bangladesh ... Goodluck.

 

[bindaas]

I don't know where you are getting your figure from but India's GDP is 1.73 Trillion not 1.2. And its per capita GDP and HDI is higher than both Pakistan and Bangladesh, so don't know what you mean by you have better standard of living.

Your arguments are fine, but don't manipulate the figures.

$1.73 trillion is 2010 world bank data.

 

[Omar1984]

Bangladesh is better off choosing China over U.S.

U.S. will want Bangladesh to serve India's interests.

 

[eastwatch]

Bangladesh is better off choosing China over U.S.

U.S. will want Bangladesh to serve India's interests.

Bangladesh will certainly choose China. But, it will not be at the expense of USA. We need US involvement in the exploration of oil and gas in the BoB. Some reports suggest BoB may have 18 billion Barrels of extractable oil and 200 trillion cft of natural gas. Only a few months ago oil/gas company Santos suggested the need to invest $10 billion in the BoB in order to get the full information on the availability of natural resources.

When US companies are exploring for gas, US will not like the presence of Chinese navy vessels in the BoB. Hence, no naval base on the BD shore. The Hillary visit only emphasized this point to the politicians and people of Bangladesh. However, USA does not have any negativity when it is BD-China trade.

I do not buy your point that USA has put itself in the pocket of India. Contrary to what you say USA will also oppose Indian navy presence in our part of BoB. Because it creates problems and does not really serve US interest.

 

[agamdilawari]

Remember Indians, today or tomorrow, Bangladesh economic might will surpass that of India. Our living standard and also Pakistan's are much higher, at present, than the Indian one, though.

Grow up son

 

[CaPtAiN_pLaNeT]

Bangladesh will certainly choose China. But, it will not be at the expense of USA. We need US involvement in the exploration of oil and gas in the BoB. Some reports suggest BoB may have 18 billion Barrels of extractable oil and 200 trillion cft of natural gas. Only a few months ago oil/gas company Santos suggested the need to invest $10 billion in the BoB in order to get the full information on the availability of natural resources.

When US companies are exploring for gas, US will not like the presence of Chinese navy vessels in the BoB. Hence, no naval base on the BD shore. The Hillary visit only emphasized this point to the politicians and people of Bangladesh. However, USA does not have any negativity when it is BD-China trade.

I do not buy your point that USA has put itself in the pocket of India. Contrary to what you say USA will also oppose Indian navy presence in our part of BoB. Because it creates problems and does not really serve US interest.

What is your source regarding the reserve of oil and gas at the bay of bengal? 18 billion barrels of oil and 200 trillion cft gas combinedly represent more then 50 billion barrels of oil which has a market price more then 5 trillion usd which is pretty significant.

 

[Bang Galore]

I have been sending post after post for the past few years in the PDF that BD's unique geographical location has made it very important, only to be rebuffed by the bigmouth Indians.

Do you even understand the meaning of your country's "strategic position"? Why & what causes it to be so? It is not unique by itself, it's position next to India & close to China through Myanmar make it so. For BD to exploit it's strategic location it must necessarily be on good terms with those countries that make it strategic. If as you say, you are going to be dismissive of India, I'm afraid you are in for a rude shock. Your position immediately becomes that of any other country; nothing strategic or unique! In your rush to vilify India, you forget that India is part of the reason your are strategic. Without India, you are not.

 

[notsuperstitious]

Congratulations, after Pakistan, Bangladesh is the second country to receive strategic location award from America. Hopefully you guys will choose to play in your own weight category.

 

[ebr77]

First of all I ask my country members not to think transit is bad.How could we know it's bad for real if we don't give it a try for real. So lets give it a try. All these transit and transshipment deal that are being signed with India has a expiry date. We can re-negotiate the terms if we want to continue. If it's too bad for our country that don't worry, these can be stopped anytime in technicality. Don't worry brother.
One of the person said we shouldn't give transit to Myanmar to India in the fear of competition- OMG, why so??? Many of our product is world class. Competition is healthy for business. We should look for opportunities to export big time to India as well mate.

Lastly stop being ridiculous guys. Strategic location !!! That's will take a little while to sink in with me. Honestly after seeing Pakistan, I don't wanna consider US to consider BD their next strategic location.
Regards

 

[kalu_miah]

First of all I ask my country members not to think transit is bad.How could we know it's bad for real if we don't give it a try for real. So lets give it a try. All these transit and transshipment deal that are being signed with India has a expiry date. We can re-negotiate the terms if we want to continue. If it's too bad for our country that don't worry, these can be stopped anytime in technicality. Don't worry brother.
One of the person said we shouldn't give transit to Myanmar to India in the fear of competition- OMG, why so??? Many of our product is world class. Competition is healthy for business. We should look for opportunities to export big time to India as well mate.

Lastly stop being ridiculous guys. Strategic location !!! That's will take a little while to sink in with me. Honestly after seeing Pakistan, I don't wanna consider US to consider BD their next strategic location.
Regards

Transit is bad for Bangladesh and good for India. It will give a cheaper route for them to NE Bangladesh while polluting Bangladesh air with diesel fuel. Secondly they will use the same route to connect with ASEAN, while we have no route to Myanmar at present time, which means if we want to connect to ASEAN we will need to go through Indian land.

Providing transit also means a strategic threat, as idune Bhai and others pointed out, they can use the road to cut off Chittagong and take over and we don't have the army to resist that.

So till we get a balance of power achieved in our country, by bringing in China, ASEAN, Japan and Korea in the mix, to offset the imbalance created by influence from India, we cannot afford to be careless while we loose economically as well as strategically. Till we reach a BOP situation, we are in no position to provide transit:
Balance of power in international relations - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Balance of power in international relations

In international relations, a balance of power exists when there is parity or stability between competing forces. The concept describes a state of affairs in the international system and explains the behavior of states in that system.[1] As a term in international law for a 'just equilibrium' between the members of the family of nations, it expresses the doctrine intended to prevent any one nation from becoming sufficiently strong so as to enable it to enforce its will upon the rest.
"BoP" is a central concept in Realist theory. Within a balance of power system, a state may choose to engage in either balancing or bandwagoning behavior. In a time of war, the decision to balance or to bandwagon may well determine the survival of the state.
Kenneth Waltz, a major contributor to neorealism, expressed in his book, "Theory of International Politics" that "if there is any distinctively political theory of international politics, balance-of-power theory is it.".[2] However, this assertion has come under criticism from other schools of thought within the international relations field, such as the constructivists and the political economists[3][4]

A doctrine of equilibrium

The basic principle involved in a balancing of political power, as Charles Davenant pointed out in his Essay on the Balance of Power, is as old as history, and was familiar to the ancients both as political theorists and as practical statesmen. In its essence it is no more than a precept of common sense, born of experience and the instinct of self-preservation.[citation needed]
More precisely, the theory of Balance of Power has certain key aspects that have been agreed upon throughout the literature on the subject. First of all, the main objective of states, according to the Balance of Power theory is to secure their own safety, consistent with political realism or the realist world-view. Secondly, states reach an equilibrium because of this objective of self-preservation. States, by trying to avoid the dominance of one particular state, will ally themselves with other states until an equilibrium is reached.[5]

As Professor L. Oppenheim (Internal. Law, i. 73) points out, an equilibrium between the various powers which form the family of nations is, in fact, essential to the very existence of any international law. In the absence of any central authority, the only sanction behind the code of rules established by custom or defined in treaties, known as 'international law', is the capacity of the powers to hold each other in check. If this system fails, nothing prevents any state sufficiently powerful from ignoring the law and acting solely according to its convenience and its interests.

 

[Zabaniyah]

The transit would certainly require more *ahem* "clarifications".

But then in reality, it'll never really happen - $7.5 billion is no peanuts.