Showing posts with label Indian Hegemony. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Indian Hegemony. Show all posts

Saturday, 17 August 2024

Bangladesh: Breaking free from Indian octopus

We are pleased to share with our readers a letter by Mahmudur Rahman published in South Asia Journal. He has talked in the least number of words about Indian hegemony in the region,

In the later years of my life, I completed a PhD thesis titled “The Rise of Indian Hegemony in South Asia and the Security of Small States.” This work was finalized in mid-2022, a period marked by the authoritarian rule of Sheikh Hasina in Bangladesh, who maintained a firm grip over a population of 180 million. In brief, the conclusions of my research were as follows:

• As soon as British colonial rule in the subcontinent ended in 1947, India embarked on a relentless quest to establish complete hegemonic control over the region.

• Despite being relatively weaker both militarily and economically, Pakistan emerged as the primary regional barrier to India’s ambitions. Beyond the region, China also posed a formidable challenge to India’s hegemonic aspirations.

• Indian hegemony has been thwarted in Sri Lanka, Nepal, Afghanistan, and the Maldives.

• India has only managed to establish hegemony over Bhutan and Bangladesh in the region. In the case of Bhutan, this dominance has been maintained through a treaty signed in 1949, allowing Delhi to exercise absolute authority to this day. Consequently, Bhutan has been prevented from establishing official diplomatic relations with any of the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council—the United States, China, Russia, the United Kingdom, and France. In contrast, India’s dominance over Bangladesh was achieved without any formal hegemonic treaty. Instead, India installed a brutally oppressive puppet government in 2009.

In the great revolution of August, the courageous students and citizens of Bangladesh, through unforgettable sacrifices and acts of heroism, have successfully overthrown the puppet regime installed by India. The murderous fascist Sheikh Hasina has fled to her master, India, to escape the public’s wrath. In a cruel twist of history, the very daughters of the fallen dictator Sheikh Mujib, who had come from Delhi in 1981 to execute India’s mission in Bangladesh, have now been humiliatingly forced to return to Delhi after forty-three years. The people of Bangladesh have, at long last, awakened. However, in the meantime, Hasina, a lackey of Delhi, left behind a trail of destruction, dismantling every institution of the state.

The judiciary has been so severely compromised that it no longer retains any semblance of legitimacy in the eyes of the public. Back in 2010, I authored an editorial titled

“A Farce in the Name of Independent Justice,” which resulted in my prolonged detention and torture by the Detective Branch and Rapid Action Battalion. The young heroes of today’s revolution may not even be aware of these incidents.

Due to Sheikh Hasina’s ruthless use of the police as her personal death squad, this essential state institution has become the object of extreme public hatred. Sixteen years of disgraceful sycophancy from the media have left the so-called fourth estate of the state devoid of any credibility.

The civil administration has been debilitated by pervasive partisanship and corruption, while the nation has been plunged into insurmountable debt under the guise of fake development.

My sympathy lies with Dr. Yunus’s government, which has inherited this lamentable legacy. None of the statistics produced by the fallen government of Bangladesh can be considered credible.

Since 2018, I have repeatedly communicated with the World Bank, ADB, and IMF, bringing to their attention Sheikh Hasina’s corruption and the manipulation of statistics. However, my warnings have been consistently disregarded. Whether the officials in these institutions in Bangladesh were themselves complicit in Hasina’s corruption remains unknown, but how else could they have blindly accepted such false statistics year after year? Surely, they are not all fools.

The critical question now emerges, will India quietly endure this catastrophe?

The fall and flight of Sheikh Hasina in a bloodless revolution is not merely a diplomatic setback for Delhi; it represents the most devastating strategic defeat for India’s hegemonic ambitions in South Asia.

Even the humiliating defeat of the Indian military in Sri Lanka in 1989 is surpassed by the revolution in Bangladesh. The most remarkable achievement of the young revolutionaries lies in the fact that they accomplished this without any external support.

For fifty-three years, we have been paying for the assistance taken from India during the liberation war of 1971. While every political faction in the country, whether left or right, alongside the media and so-called intellectuals, has persistently invoked the memory of 1971, they have simultaneously exploited us economically and dominated our internal politics.

This time, no external power can claim any credit. The United States, despite its rhetoric on democracy and human rights, ultimately deferred to India’s stance on Bangladesh.

The people of Bangladesh have liberated themselves from the shackles of fascism through extraordinary courage and sacrifice, as exemplified by Abu Saeed’s martyrdom. We owe no debt of gratitude to anyone.

Internationally, Dr. Yunus is widely recognized for his close ties with the United States. However, neither he nor any other civil society figure played a pivotal role in this revolution.

Notably, I cannot recall any instance where Dr. Yunus has taken a decisive stance against Indian hegemony in Bangladesh, nor has he publicly condemned Hasina’s enforced disappearances, extrajudicial killings, and human rights abuses. What he may have done behind the scenes is unknown to the public.

Indian Nobel laureate Amartya Sen has always been vocal against Modi’s Hindutva and misrule. Nevertheless, we want to hope that Dr. Yunus will now take a stand against Indian hegemony. As the primary beneficiary of the people’s revolution, he bears a responsibility to repay the debt he owes to the people of Bangladesh.

Although more than a week has passed since the formation of the new government, we have yet to hear any statements from those in power regarding the lopsided agreements with India.

This piece concludes with a call for the formulation of a strategy, in unison with the people, to free Bangladesh from the clutches of the Indian octopus. Long live the revolution.

Bangladesh Zindabad.

 

Tuesday, 31 July 2012


US Hegemony in South Asia and MENA



According to media reports US ambassador-designate to Pakistan Richard Olson expressed that Islamabad has moved away from the old concept of finding strategic depth in Afghanistan and stressed encouragement for the positive development in the South Asian country’s strategic thinking.

Appearing in his confirmation hearing, Olson, who until recently served as a senior diplomat in Kabul, cited to Capitol Hill Pakistani actions as well as the avowed policy statements by its leaders to move away from the old thinking.

His apprehension may be right but he must also listen to others rather than basing his strategy on CIA-based information. Over the years CIA had been proved wrong repeatedly, may be because its designs conflicted with the policies of the democratically elected representatives of the largest democracy of the world. The CIA seems to be working on global agenda to make countries subservient to the US policies, including providing funds and arsenal to rebel groups around the world in the name of ‘regime change’.

For the information of designate ambassador there is a growing feeling that Pakistan has remained subservient to the US administration and never allowed to improve relationship with USSR, China and even India. At the best it may be said that Pakistan enjoys good relationship with China, only because it has been helping Pakistan in overcoming its economic problems. Pakistan was put against USSR in Afghanistan and India has been pampered and used against Pakistan and China.

Over the years Pakistanis have realized that their role has been reduced to ‘mercenaries’ killing Afghan and the US has been actively trying to create Indian hegemony in the region. This impression was further consolidated when the United States offered India ‘nuclear technology for civilian use’ but denied the same to Pakistan. Despite fully cognizant of the fact that Pakistan’s economic growth is constraint by energy shortage, the country is neither allowed buying oil, gas and electricity from Iran nor given money to construct hydel projects.

On the question of doctrine that Pakistanis over the years have talked about strategic depth and, one of the ideas that Afghanistan represents strategic depth against a potential conflict with India Olson said “My sense is that the Pakistani military and Pakistani government has moved away from that.”

The reason is obvious because President Obama visited India and termed it ‘strategic economic partner’ but keeps on saying ‘Pakistan should do more’ and at times voices were raised to stop assistance for Pakistan and declare it a ‘terrorist country’. The United States has created Taliban, a new breed of mercenaries to fight against USSR and if it can’t put the genie back in bottle Pakistan should not be blames.

There is also a growing realization in Pakistan that if USSR assault on Afghanistan was an attempt to get access to ‘warm waters’, the US occupation of Afghanistan is for getting control on production and supply of drug. Those Taliban who don’t support cultivation of poppy are termed ‘bad’ and those who have agreed to become partner in trade ‘good’. One of the reasons for stopping Nato supplies was aimed at stopping supply of chemicals under the disguise of goods of strategic importance for the combat soldiers.

The operation by Pakistan army is northern areas is aimed at weeding out infiltrators mostly coming from Afghanistan. Balochistan has also become centre of covert operation of foreign intelligence agencies against Iran. The much talked about Baloch uprising is to facilitate an independent Balochistan, comprising of three slices on each from Pakistan, Iran and Afghanistan and creating a hostile country against Iran, which has survived more than 32 years of economic sanction and refused to bow down before the US hegemony in the region.


Tuesday, 10 July 2012


  DPC opposing opening up Nato routes

Sheikh Rashid Ahmad speaks during All Parties Conference held under Difa-i-Pakistan Council at Lahore Hafiz Muhammad Saeed,  Maulana Samiul Haq, Syed Munawar Hasan and General (R) Hameed Gul also present
The Difa-i-Pakistan Council (DPC) rally that started from Lahore, stayed at Gujrat overnight and finally held a meeting outside parliament building in Pakistan’s federal capital.The meeting was addressed by some of the stalwarts belonging to banned religious outfits, among these the most prominent was Jamaat-ud-Dawa chief Hafiz Muhammad Saeed, Lashkar-e-Teba fame.

The entire proceedings went very well because at no point either the provincial government headed by PML-N or the federal government led by PPP made any attempt to stop the rally. However, attack at an army camp in Gujrat spoiled the entire game. It was certainly not a reward to the government for providing a safe passage to the leaders and the participants of rally.

Lahore is the stronghold of PML-N and Gujrat the home town of Pervez Elahi, Deputy Prime Minister and Ahmed Mukhtar, ex-defence minister and presently heading ministry of water and power. PML-N chose not to participate in APC held earlier but fully compensated. PML-N has often attracted criticism for having deep-rooted relations with some of the banned religious outfits.

The number of people attending Islamabad meeting were quoted from as low as 15,000 to as high as 30,000. Creation of an elaborate stage, assembly of such a large number of demonstrators and appearance of leaders of banned outfits in ‘red zone’ raise a question, what was the federal home ministry and capital police doing?

One of possible explanation could be that the ruling junta to which PML-N is also a part has realized the gravity of situation, extreme anti United States sentiments among Pakistanis and just wanted to avoid any confrontation. The demand for pulling out Pakistan out of US proxy war in Afghanistan is on the rise

It is becoming difficult for the ruling junta as it can’t satisfy the domestic constituency on supporting the US, which is no longer considered a friend. Most of Pakistanis strongly believe that the United States has been playing the most active part in creating Indian Hegemony in the South Asia. An impression is being created that Pakistanis are mercenaries fighting Proxy US War in Afghanistan and India a major trading partner of the United States.