Will the BNP strike a deal with New Delhi

[idune]

US foriegn policy at present is not to give duty free access to Bangladesh. What has Bangladesh given the US that the latter should give this facility? When Bangladesh makes some offer to the US then Crowley will be the one to push the US government to make concessions. The US does not give anyone any free gifts.

There appears to be some divergence now. That is why India will want to back the BNP as US is not in favour of the party as long as Tareque has an option of coming to power. If the AL falls India has the only option of backing BNP or supporting military rule. The Indians will prefer the former so they will negotiate with BNP and support Tareque if necessary.


Indian dalals should be removed from BD politics. The problem is that we have difficulty in identifying the dalals.

I am not talking about present focus on duty free access but talking about historic record of last 20 years. I am afraid you are reading too much into congressman Crowley influence. Just look at record and see what Crowley was able to push through congress for Bangladesh. Crowley may read out US policy stand but he had not been vital source of influence for policy.

US and Bangladesh are not in same league in any sphere and US expectation is not great deal from Bangladesh; certainly not an expectation of quid pro quo. In that line duty free access has not been tied or referenced to be tied with anything. Labor lobby which had bigger influence and influenced by different quarters prevented such access. In fact US had given similar access to 20 some nations decades ago without anything in return. Enough said about off topic subject.

About US reservation with Tareq, if you look more closely US position you described (largely true) is conflicting. Tareq vs US strategic and economic interest is not much of a choice. And if you bring india into the mix and possible openinging for China; as I said I expect there will be some horse trading in near future. We may or may not like the outcome but that is what I suspect going to happen.

I will keep watching and I am sure so will you.....

 

[idune]

MOD, could you please see why page 8 (last page) is not visible? I had made a post yesterday and not been able to see or access the last page. Thx

 

[BanglaBhoot]

I am not talking about present focus on duty free access but talking about historic record of last 20 years. I am afraid you are reading too much into congressman Crowley influence. Just look at record and see what Crowley was able to push through congress for Bangladesh. Crowley may read out US policy stand but he had not been vital source of influence for policy.

US and Bangladesh are not in same league in any sphere and US expectation is not great deal from Bangladesh; certainly not an expectation of quid pro quo. In that line duty free access has not been tied or referenced to be tied with anything. Labor lobby which had bigger influence and influenced by different quarters prevented such access. In fact US had given similar access to 20 some nations decades ago without anything in return. Enough said about off topic subject.

About US reservation with Tareq, if you look more closely US position you described (largely true) is conflicting. Tareq vs US strategic and economic interest is not much of a choice. And if you bring india into the mix and possible openinging for China; as I said I expect there will be some horse trading in near future. We may or may not like the outcome but that is what I suspect going to happen.

I will keep watching and I am sure so will you.....

Diplomacy is never entirely open or the channels always obvious. We cannot have such a simplistic view of how the world works. No country does another country any favours without expecting something in return. It just is not publicly stated what is wanted. In our case duty free status is dependent on a military agreement. No one will admit it but that is what the US wants. quid pro qou.

I think the horse trading has already begun and the question which is party is prepared to sell out the most to India and whether the AL can survive. A lot depends on strength of bargaining power. Presently the BNP is weaker and so has to give up more.

 

[Kaniska]

Diplomacy is never entirely open or the channels always obvious. We cannot have such a simplistic view of how the world works. No country does another country any favours without expecting something in return. It just is not publicly stated what is wanted. In our case duty free status is dependent on a military agreement. No one will admit it but that is what the US wants. quid pro qou.

I think the horse trading has already begun and the question which is party is prepared to sell out the most to India and whether the AL can survive. A lot depends on strength of bargaining power. Presently the BNP is weaker and so has to give up more.

In diplomacy...emotions do not work...If emotion is the key factor in designing diplomacy then the biggest surprise would be Saudi Arab and GCC countries are ally of US who is fighting WOT....So keeping your emotions aside...Here is my feeling.

1- Civil society of India is slowly awakening..There are inhuman policies that happen in India too that is being taken up and addressed...So as a nation with so much of diversity, we are still evolving..
2- Diplomatically, Politically India and BD will never be any confrontational mode...The reason is not because India is a bully rather...India does not have anything to fight with Bangladesh....In otherwords we can put it like India and Bangladesh somehow ignore each other..

3- India dealing with Awami league is always not a good policy...Indian foreign policy should evolve so that India should be connected with people of a nation rather than Political party...This is a big risk that usually it happens..So going forward...India will move away from party centric foreign policy...But again this has to be fascilitated by other side too...Otherwise India does not have any choice rather than going for One party.

4- I donot think Indian relation is so bad when BNP is in power...Indian was dealing bussiness as usual when BNP was power..But of course it was not so in news in media...But when AL and Indian Gov deal there is lot of news...That creates a hype...Now please do not clum unpopular policy of AL with Indian foreign policy...It is not the responsibility of India to know what kind deal is required to provide transit to India...Rather it is BD gov responsibilty to communicate to India based on publlic response...

5- I can see that BD will courted by USA as more closer ally as a replacement of Pakistan ...That will provide couple of crucial advantage to USA ...Like controlling unpredictability of India, China factor and also Myanmar and SE Asia..BD is more liberal and culturally western rather than any South Asian Muslim countries...So this really fits into the bill for USA....

6- This will be a new surprise for India...I am not sure how India will deal with USA in its neighborhood...Time will tell us what will happen..

 

[idune]

Diplomacy is never entirely open or the channels always obvious. We cannot have such a simplistic view of how the world works. No country does another country any favours without expecting something in return. It just is not publicly stated what is wanted. In our case duty free status is dependent on a military agreement. No one will admit it but that is what the US wants. quid pro qou.

Well private and public diplomatic dance are always part of the game. Only known US desire was to have SOFA agreement. US in dealing with other country specially when comes to military and defense level treaty or engagement US typically announce those expecation and engagement even under veil of something else. But in case of Bangladesh which did not appear to have very crucial strategic value, US choose to keep it military expectation secret? What lavel of US expectation that you are aware of that my "simplistic" observation did not capture?

 

[jbond197]

Sure, India is open for the deal!!

 

[BanglaBhoot]

Well private and public diplomatic dance are always part of the game. Only known US desire was to have SOFA agreement. US in dealing with other country specially when comes to military and defense level treaty or engagement US typically announce those expecation and engagement even under veil of something else. But in case of Bangladesh which did not appear to have very crucial strategic value, US choose to keep it military expectation secret? What lavel of US expectation that you are aware of that my "simplistic" observation did not capture?

Bangladesh does have a crucial strategic value and the US has not kept its military expectation secret but that this is linked to other benefits to Bangladesh is of course hidden.

All this is of course irrelevant to the main point of my article. There is a chance that the BNP and India will come to an understanding. Notice how all the anti-Indian elements have been kept in prison while the pro-Indian politicians (except M.K. Anwar) have been let out? KZ is now surrounded by Indian sympathizers and dalals. The question is will she strike a deal with New Delhi to keep her son in politics. The US have not made any secret for their dislike of Tareque. There remains the possibility if the AL falls India will opt for a BNP return with Tareque in front just to keep the US out of BD. This in a very simple form is the argument of my article.

 

[idune]

view content

 

[Syed Naved]

Influence of others is also likely to increase.

Not Just Increase , Much Increase.
Democracy Means ppls demand & our demand " anti junior indian view " , saying bharat " Junior India " as because the India broke up,so junior indians , remember onething , " In bd india may be liked by BAL & HINDUS NOT BY Bangladeshis " , So U cant Influence us

 

[idune]

Bangladesh does have a crucial strategic value and the US has not kept its military expectation secret but that this is linked to other benefits to Bangladesh is of course hidden.

All this is of course irrelevant to the main point of my article. There is a chance that the BNP and India will come to an understanding. Notice how all the anti-Indian elements have been kept in prison while the pro-Indian politicians (except M.K. Anwar) have been let out? KZ is now surrounded by Indian sympathizers and dalals. The question is will she strike a deal with New Delhi to keep her son in politics. The US have not made any secret for their dislike of Tareque. There remains the possibility if the AL falls India will opt for a BNP return with Tareque in front just to keep the US out of BD. This in a very simple form is the argument of my article.

Bangladesh strategic importance increased only after Obama’s Asian (South and South East) pivot strategy from 2010-11. Before that (since 9/11) Bangladesh was treated as a dotted line from Delhi under US 3D policy doctrine.

Here are some foods for thought:

• Is TZ involvement in next (if that happens) BNP govt is absolutely necessary? My personal view is NO. In fact he should keep out from govt.
  
• Would and could BNP go into election without TZ being at the helm? My view is absolute yes, they can.
  
• Would KZ compromise with india which had been attacking her family, destroying her party and country? I like to think NO but there are lots of unknown.

According to your write up, US would not accept BNP with TZ. You also stated that if US does not, BNP may go with india to ensure TZ place in next govt.

If that happen US interest will be hindered by Indian influence within BNP.

Can US be that rigid to let its strategic interest undermined for shake of keeping TZ at bay? Specially when they know alternative is losing US interest and TZ will be in govt which US wanted to prevent at the first place. That seems to be proposition of double jeopardy for US.

Situation, specially in the back channel, still fluid; there are quite a bit of unknown. In that level of game playing with that much at stake, involved parties often change/modify their stand. No one going to win with rigid stand. Also, either TZ or no TZ are not only two available paths, there are and could be some middle roads. If we cannot influence any of these decisions then only thing we can do wait, watch and learn. And I am learning...

 

[BanglaBhoot]

If that happen US interest will be hindered by Indian influence within BNP.

Can US be that rigid to let its strategic interest undermined for shake of keeping TZ at bay? Specially when they know alternative is losing US interest and TZ will be in govt which US wanted to prevent at the first place. That seems to be proposition of double jeopardy for US.

The US still has several options other than the AL and BNP or other parties i.e. minus two formula, military takeover or national government. We cannot presume at this point we are heading for elections and that this will result in a BNP victory. The more likely scenario is civil war and chaos.

 

[BanglaBhoot]

The article in Times of India confirms much of what I wrote in my article -

Excl: America eyes Bangladesh

The Times of India - 31 May 2012

America’s threat to send its seventh fleet to stop liberation of Bangladesh in 1971 is a known fact. Now, 41 years later - it is America again - which wants to park its seventh fleet in the country - for its strategic interests. Worried by increasing presence of Chinese naval bases in the South China Sea - America now eyes a counter strategy - as it wants an overall presence in Asia - right from Japan to its Diego Garicia base in the Indian Ocean.

This by parking its seventh fleet in a base in Chittagong giving it both an eye on taking on China and a strategic post in Asia as it pulls out of Afghanisthan. The US State Department denying on the record that Hillary Clinton’s visits had anything to do with military co-operation.

Victoria Nuland: Please, in the back.

Question: Two questions.

Victoria Nuland: Yeah.

Question: The first one is about Bangladesh when Secretary Clinton was there. Can you confirm that she discussed the future of the seventh fleet with Bangladeshi officials? And does the State Department have a position on the future of the - home of the seventh fleet?

Victoria Nuland: That sounds like a question for the Pentagon. I will take it in terms of whether it came up in her consultations, but I don’t believe it did.

Off the record, confirmation of key strategic meetings between Bangladesh and America and the recent visit of US Secretary of State Clinton. America’s concerns clearly documented in the Pentagon report as they increasingly worried over the string of pearls of Chinese bases across the South China Sea and their naval might spreading all across Asia - putting the America behind. The Bangladeshi Government remaining extremely tightlipped over the recent developments - as they have internally decided to deny it on record - fearing backlash from their own hardliners.

Reporter: Recently Hillary Clinton visited your country. She has demanded for stronger relations between Bangladesh and US. Are you exploring the options?

Ambassador: I don’t know what she has discussed and in any case this is not the fora to discuss political issues.

Reporter: US had asked to allow Chittagong port to be used as their naval base? Will you allow them?

Ambassador: I am not aware of any such requests to the best of my knowledge.

This move by America could put India on the back foot if the American fleet moves to Bangladesh, all of India’s security installations will come under the American scanner. Bangladesh is not willing to comment on record even offering explanation to deny the developments. This Clinton visit a more strategic one than just a friendly one- the Indian establishment caught unawares--as this base could cast a shadow on India’s own strategic interests.

Excl: America eyes Bangladesh- TIMESNOW.tv - Latest Breaking News, Big News Stories, News Videos

 

[Zabaniyah]

The US still has several options other than the AL and BNP or other parties i.e. minus two formula, military takeover or national government. We cannot presume at this point we are heading for elections and that this will result in a BNP victory. The more likely scenario is civil war and chaos.

I don't think it's in anyone's interest to have civil war and unrest in Bangladesh.

 

[BanglaBhoot]

I don't think it's in anyone's interest to have civil war and unrest in Bangladesh.

No one seems interested to stop it either .......

 

[PlanetSoldier]

I don't think it's in anyone's interest to have civil war and unrest in Bangladesh.

Civil war and unrest don't rise as planned event, it's demand of time and sometime it becomes inevitable which ultimately might result in peaceful organized society. Just look at USA before and after their civil war, they'd been more & more organized after that 5 year long bloody war. Perhaps it's in our interest now.