Sunday, 22 June 2014

Arrogance of Burma and the Failed Diplomacy of Bangladesh (Part 2)


(See Part 1)


Zahir Ahmed


The screening process, started with Pilkhana killing, had been functioning throughout the AL tenure to serve double purposes. One is to root out nationalistic professionalism from the armed forces and to replace it with fawning servility towards AL to renaming in power which was manifested already during the 5th January farcical election. The other is, as a part of bigger plan, generated by India's Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) which recently had stepped in Bangladesh politics to keep Sheikh Hasina in power, to transform Bangladesh armed forces into India's auxiliary forces to achieve its goal in the regional power game. The process started after Sheikh Hasina first became prime minister in 1996. During her first tenure Bangladesh signed 'Mine Ban Treaty' on 1998 and subsequently ratified on 2000- relinquishing the right to use anti personal mines during war that defies any logic as none of the neighboring countries had done so! In 2009 when Burma prepared for a large scale war with Bangladesh, army discovered that the denial plan to thwart any Burmese advance towards Bangladesh is totally ineffective because the plan was missing one vital organ of the defensive plan anti-personal mine. That is one of the main reasons Bangladesh army is determined to avoid any conflict with Burma being unable to defend at least up to Chittagong.


The recent arms deal worth 2 billion USD with Russia by AL government is another stark example in favor of such transformation, where the armaments do not suit the tactical requirement of Bangladesh armed forces to defend any aggression by India. In line with that, last year Bangladesh Army had changed its defensive war plan at the behest of Indian Army Chief, in which Bangladesh had complied with not to consider India as its enemy and prepared a new fictitious defensive war plan against a fictitious enemy; basing on which Bangladesh army conducted its annual exercise last year. For smooth implementation of such double purposes unopposed, AL govt. has handpicked AL loyalists and corrupt officials to put in all the vital position of the armed forces. These officials had been busy with crushing the opposition political parties except when, occasionally Burma prepared for war with Bangladesh, the govt. along with its armed forces cringed in fear.


Such provocative actions by Burma against Bangladesh, perceivably aiming to push the Rohingyas into Bangladesh – were evinced several times after the Awami League came to power in 2009, but the incident that took place last month is extra ordinary in dimension and thus require some analysis. On 28 May Burmese border force BGP (formerly NA-SA-KA), backed by the army, suddenly opened fire on a regular petrol of Border Guards Bangladesh (BGB) in Nayikkhongchari of Chittagong Hill Tracts without any instigation in which a BGB man was injured and later abducted by the Burmese BGP. In the suddenness of the act BGB men ran away in a disorderly way but came back again to find that one of their fallen men was dragged inside Burma. BGB immediately called for a flag meeting but Burmese BGP scornfully rejected that. Later BGP responded and provided BGB a reference point in the international border to go and receive the deceased BGB man. When BGB authority, led by a Brigadier General reached accordingly, BGP again fired upon the delegation which sparked an exchange of heavy fire by both sides. On 6 the June a high level border force meeting was held in Burma, where the request from the BGB to withdraw Burmese military from the border according to the 1980 Bangladesh-Burma agreement that states no country should deploy army within 5 kilometers of the border, was rejected outright by Burma and instead Bangladesh was invited to deploy its army by the Burmese counterpart. Such arrogance was too humiliating to tolerate but Bangladesh govt. digested that quietly. Other than summoning the Burmese envoy twice to hand over a written statement, foreign minister of Bangladesh did neither warned against the Burmese excesses nor demand an apology from Burma for killing and violation of Geneva convention. Rather the foreign minister claimed that the BGB man was killed because of misunderstanding and 'hoped' that Burma would withdraw its army from the border. But when Burma binned such 'hope', the minister remained tight lipped.


After assuming power, Hasina govt. has changed its international relation and Bangladesh is gradually shifting it's strategically alliance towards Russia-China-India axis though large trades of Bangladesh are with western countries. Such re-alignment was done not for the interest of the country but for purely personal reason. After the Pilkhana killings in which many pointed finger at AL for its implicit involvement in connivance with India, AL had to succumb to India's demands to avoid consequences and remain in power. Trapped by the vicious situation, AL had to lay the national interest at the foot of India. Crippling the military, providing passage from India to India for enabling India to encircle Bangladesh with more military strength, giving importance of India's territorial integrity over national security and integrity of Bangladesh, destroying the apparel industry to enable India grab that – which India have achieved by crossing Bangladesh in garment export, making Bangladesh a market of Indian substandard products , awarding large sea blocks to India's inexperienced oil companies and so many such self-destructing steps are few of many which suggest impending ominous future for Bangladesh. Ministers including the Prime Minister, even Awami League leaders were found scathingly ignoring western countries call for an inclusive election-even demanding expulsion of US envoy from Bangladesh, after India's firm intention to see AL stay in power. Thus recently the US envoy in Bangladesh substantiated that by saying ' The US relations with Bangladesh are not usual', which indicates that US investment in Bangladesh and apparel export to US-both highest for Bangladesh will face difficulties. It is very intriguing to observe that Sheikh Hasina is very courageous to roar against a super power – US when her personal interest is at stake, but is too afraid to mew against Burma when the countries' security is at stake!


(End of Part 2)                                                                                                                                   


Disclaimer: Opinions expressed in this article are solely of the author and do not reflect the editorial policy of blitz.


Source: http://www.news.myanmaronlinecentre.com/2014/06/22/arrogance-of-burma-and-the-failed-diplomacy-of-bangladesh-part-2/

No comments:

Post a Comment