Prevent moves that can fracture historic ties with Bangladesh: Foreign Minister Momen to India

[Black_cats]

Prevent moves that can fracture historic ties with Bangladesh: Foreign Minister

External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar with his Bangladesh counterpart A.K. Abdul Momen. File | Photo Credit: PTI

Kallol BhattacherjeeNEW DELHI 27 JULY 2020 02:41 IST
UPDATED: 27 JULY 2020 00:27 IST

Won’t allow Ram temple to affect relationship, he says and defends Hasina-Imran talks over phone

The Indian government and society have an obligation to prevent any development that can fracture the historic ties with Bangladesh, Dhaka’s Foreign Minister A.K. Abdul Momen said on Sunday.

The statement was in response to the August 5 inauguration of construction of the Ram temple in Ayodhya which, according to commentators of Bangladesh, will give a new political opportunity to the hardline opponents of Sheikh Hasina. The Minister also defended last week’s phone conversation between Prime Minister Hasina and her Pakistan counterpart Imran Khan saying there was nothing unusual in that discussion.

“India and Bangladesh share a historic and arterial relationship. We will not allow this [temple construction] to hurt ties but I would still urge that India should not allow any development that can fracture our beautiful and deep relationship. This is valid for both our countries and I would say both sides should work in such a way so that such disruptions can be averted,” said Mr. Momen regarding the position of Bangladesh about the beginning of the temple construction.

The Minister told The Hindu over telephone from Dhaka that every section of India and Bangladesh should play a role in fostering good relationship. “Your society also has an obligation to ensure good relationship with us. Governments alone cannot deliver on such matters. People and media are also part of this endeavour to ensure ties remain on track and the focus remains on development activities,” said Mr. Momen.

Two-nation theory
The comments have added to the concern from the veteran experts of international affairs and the civil society of Bangladesh who have cautioned that the construction though an internal matter of India will have an emotional impact on the people of Bangladesh.

“This will of course give an opportunity to the politics of singularity in Bangladesh which moved away from the two-nation theory in 1971. We are not comfortable with this theory but evidences suggest that India is moving towards the two-nation theory,” said Prof. Imtiaz Ahmed of the University of Dhaka who urged India to prevent any spillover effect of the Ram temple episode from hitting ties with Bangladesh. Barrister Tureen Afroze of the Alliance against Extremism and Terrorism said the fundamentalist forces in Bangladesh will get a new lease of life in the coming weeks because of the planned event in Ayodhya. “Common people of India and Bangladesh suffer whenever fundamentalist forces prosper and this event will dramatically increase the strength of the singularity lobby in Bangladesh.”

Mr. Momen blamed “vested interests” for trying to highlight a series of developments in Dhaka which indicated increasing differences between the neighbours. It was reported in these columns earlier that outgoing High Commissioner Riva Ganguly Das could not meet Sheikh Hasina despite repeated efforts. Diplomatic sources from Dhaka said the meeting did not materialise because of the threat of COVID-19. “Most of the PM’s engagements have shifted to digital platforms as we are prioritising the leader’s safety and health in this time of pandemic,” said a source arguing that the meetings will resume once the pandemic scenario improves.

Pakistan and Bangladesh live in the same world

Dr. Momen said Bangladesh supports regional peace and expects dialogue with all and said last week’s phone call between Sheikh Hasina and Mr. Khan was a matter of courtesy.

“What’s wrong if Pakistan dials us? Why should there be any problem if they make a telephone call? After all we both live in the same world,” said Mr. Momen blaming the media for “spicing up” reports on the call during which both the leaders discussed the COVID-19 scenario. Pakistan said Mr. Khan had raised the Kashmir issue.

Bangladesh however has maintained silence about Kashmir and said the conversation was COVID-19-related. India subsequently appreciated the position as Dhaka considers it an internal matter of India.

www.thehindu.com/news/international/prevent-moves-that-can-fracture-historic-ties-with-bangladesh-foreign-minister/article32199196.ece/amp/

 

[DalalErMaNodi]

Can someone ask this incompetently foolish bumbler to keep his gob tight shut, I mean give it a rest man.


Either speak directly to the point Momen Saheb or quit the "Diplomatic" act, even PDF users are better at verbal gymnastics than you.


How hard is it, to ask India to back off a bit ?

 

[El Sidd]

Bangladesh is dictating India with her progressive politics.

India should do more for Indo Bangla ties

 

[bluesky]

The statement was in response to the August 5 inauguration of construction of the Ram temple in Ayodhya which, according to commentators of Bangladesh, will give a new political opportunity to the hardline opponents of Sheikh Hasina. The Minister also defended last week’s phone conversation between Prime Minister Hasina and her Pakistan counterpart Imran Khan saying there was nothing unusual in that discussion.

Without malice I would like to say a few words:

- Am I not correct to say that Ram was a mythological figure and not a historical one? How then he was born as a baby in this mortal world and there was a Ram Mandir built at his very birth place?
- For the sake of argument, let me say he was a mortal and a human being. But, he was a Prince born to Raja Jashoratha and Queen Kaushalya. As far as I understand a Queen gives birth to her baby in the comfort of the Palace Harem surrounded by Kabiraj/Doctors and many palace maids.
- Now, tell me why Hindus should claim Ram was born in a jungle that they claim as his birthplace when he was supposed to be born in the Palace Harem?

Can someone show us in the vicinity of Babari mosque a piece of Palace structure, for example, a single brick or a stone? This is absent because Ram was not a historical figure, not a living being. Yet, superstitious Hindus claim he was born in the very place where the Babari mosque was built by Emperor Babar.

Babar came to Bengal with an expedition to fight Sultan Nusrat Shah when the defeated Pathan remnants of north India, after losing in the Battle of Panipath in 1626 AD, fled and took shelter in Bengal. Babar ordered this Mosque to be built on his way to Bengal. Babar has no history of destroying Hindu structures unless it was a wartime necessity.

He did not face enemy in Ayudh and had no reason to destroy a Mandir to make place for a Mosque. Land was not in short supply in the then Hindustan because the population was very low. No reason he did it when there were virtually trillions of acres of free land without Mandirs on it.

Moreover, destroying a strong structure takes money and time. So, was it necessary to take this additional trouble of destruction?

 

[Michael Corleone]

Headline should be edited
Wife seeks divorce from husband following exposing of affair
@waz @The Eagle kindly edit the headline

 

[masterchief_mirza]

Am I not correct to say that Ram was a mythological figure and not a historical one?

Wait wait...it gets better...

This ancient mythological figure was somehow declared the plaintiff in the modern day legal proceedings.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.in...andir-deoki-nandan-agarwal-1617449-2019-11-09

"Suit 5 lists both Ram and the place it considers to be hisjanmabhoomi as plaintiffs (as "juridical persons"*), and asks that the entire premises be declared their property."

And lo! The law-givers in the mighty secular republic did spaketh decisively, and the denizens of the secular republic did rejoice for church and state did remain separate.

 

[Chhatrapati]

This ancient mythological figure was somehow declared the plaintiff in the modern day legal proceedings.

And lo! The law-givers in the mighty secular republic did spaketh decisively, and the denizens of the secular republic did rejoice for church and state did remain separate.

Ignorance can be a funny thing some times.

A temple and a diety, in particular, cannot be owned by anyone, be it a group of people or government especially large temples. If it's owned by a group of people anyone can make a claim for the Temple and have their own rules inside temple, that's why Diety is made the legal owner of the temple and has a legal guardian as whoever governs the temple. So, the property cannot be moved, sold, or rented by some group. And temples have a lot of valuables.

In other words, it's simply plugging a loophole when it comes to legal issues of Temple ownership. Instead of making archaic English and pretend to be smart, next time check some background.

He did not face an enmity in Ayudh and he had no reason to destroy a Mandir to make place for a Mosque. Land was not in short supply in the then India.

Temples were destroyed because it's the duty of Islamists to break idols, isn't it? Not because they face some enemies there. As for the rest of your quotes, there are a lot of such "mythologies" in every religion which cannot be corroborated with archeological evidence. Faith is a tricky thing, but there was a temple beneath the mosque, there's enough archeological evidence for that.

How hard is it, to ask India to back off a bit ?

The best thing is keep your nose out of our internal issues that are inconsequential for you. Our neighbors are too much invested in what happens inside India and then complain we are meddling in your affairs.

 

[Species]

How about constructing a Feluda Janmabhumi Temple at Kolkata?

 

[Jobless Jack]

Sounds more like " please , please dont do anything that may get us massacared here by BD people "

 

[Black_cats]

Ignorance can be a funny thing some times.

A temple and a diety, in particular, cannot be owned by anyone, be it a group of people or government especially large temples. If it's owned by a group of people anyone can make a claim for the Temple and have their own rules inside temple, that's why Diety is made the legal owner of the temple and has a legal guardian as whoever governs the temple. So, the property cannot be moved, sold, or rented by some group. And temples have a lot of valuables.

In other words, it's simply plugging a loophole when it comes to legal issues of Temple ownership. Instead of making archaic English and pretend to be smart, next time check some background.


Temples were destroyed because it's the duty of Islamists to break idols, isn't it? Not because they face some enemies there. As for the rest of your quotes, there are a lot of such "mythologies" in every religion which cannot be corroborated with archeological evidence. Faith is a tricky thing, but there was a temple beneath the mosque, there's enough archeological evidence for that.


The best thing is keep your nose out of our internal issues that are inconsequential for you. Our neighbors are too much invested in what happens inside India and then complain we are meddling in your affairs.

Stop your crap. No temple structure is found there. It’s one of the mythologies spread in 19th century same like the Padmavati mythology that Alaiddin Khilji attacked Chittor for her!

 

[Chhatrapati]

Stop your crap. No temple structure is found there. It’s one of the mythologies spread in 19th century same like the Padmavati mythology that Alaiddin Khilji attacked Chittor for her!

No stupid bongs were doing excavation on the site. And it's not a movie.
This is what one of the Archeologist named KK Mohammed found, "He discovered a Purna Kalasha structure shaped in form of a Ghada (water pitcher) part of the Ashtamangala Chinha in Hinduism which is found on the base of 12th and 13th century temples.

He adds that at an excavation in the western side of the Babri Masjid, the team uncovered various terracotta sculptures." There is a long discussion on Ayodhya verdict in PDF. Go through it, I'm not interested in this discussion any further.

 

[bluesky]

Temples were destroyed because it's the duty of Islamists to break idols, isn't it? Not because they face some enemies there. As for the rest of your quotes, there are a lot of such "mythologies" in every religion which cannot be corroborated with archeological evidence. Faith is a tricky thing, but there was a temple beneath the mosque, there's enough archeological evidence for that.

You are generalizing historical facts. Not Muslims, but today's Hindus are destroying Muslim Mosques and Babari Mosque is just one such example.

 

[Chhatrapati]

You are generalizing historical facts. Not Muslims, but today's Hindus are destroying Muslim Mosques and Babari Mosque is just one such example.

Now you're stalling. As I said, you can dismiss Archeological evidence, you're a Bangladeshi like the minister the matter is inconsequential to you.

 

[hussain0216]

Now you're stalling. As I said, you can dismiss Archeological evidence, you're a Bangladeshi like the minister the matter is inconsequential to you.

There is no archeological evidence

No independent archeological study was conducted, the one that was conducted was a travesty of justice made to simply back up claims of a the birth of a mythological blue creature


The pagan faith aspect I can understand, people have belief


But your SC and legal system has become worthless in its effort to justify this travesty

 

[bluesky]

Now you're stalling. As I said, you can dismiss Archeological evidence, you're a Bangladeshi like the minister the matter is inconsequential to you.

When fellow Muslims suffer at the hands of majority Hindus in India and Muslim mosques are destroyed, then of course, it is not inconsequential to all other Muslims in all the countries. This Hindu act propels many such things to happen in India's neighboring countries where Hindus are in minority.

The GoB has to take care of communal harmony and Hindu acts in India is making it difficult. Note that not only physics, but also human society reacts on the principle of "Every action has an equal and opposite reaction".