India Calls 'Ceasefire' On Border Crossings

Efforts to transform the India-Bangladesh border from a 4,000 kilometer long zone of terrorism, smuggling and human trafficking into a peaceful barrier punctured by numerous trade corridors took a big step forward last week with a pledge that India's Border Security Force (BSF) would no longer shoot people crossing from one country to the other.

Indian Home Minister Palaniappan Chidambaram made the promise in Dhaka after signing a comprehensive border management deal on July 30.

"Let me make it very clear ... we have issued strict instructions to our Border Security Force that under no circumstances should they fire upon anyone trying to cross from either Bangladesh to India or India to Bangladesh. The message has gone down to the last jawan [private soldier]," he told a press conference.

The BSF has killed 20 Bangladeshis and wounded 50 so far this year, according to Bangladesh-based human-rights organization Odhikar. Chidambaram said seven people had been killed at the border this year, and 33 last year. As many as 930 Bangladeshis were killed from 2000 to last September, according to Human Rights Watch, citing Odhikar data.

"The only situation in which we have said firing may be justified is when a gang actually attacks a BSF jawan or an office," said Chidambaram. "Then he has to protect himself and fire in self-defense."

The director general of Border Guard Bangladesh (BGB), Major General Anwar Hussain, and the director general of the Indian BSF, Raman Srivastava, earlier signed a "Bangladesh and India Coordinated Border Management Plan" to stop cross-border crimes such as terrorism, drug smuggling and human trafficking. The sides agreed to cooperate on security and expressed their resolve to jointly combat insurgency, militancy and terrorism.

Chidambaran's visit precedes a trip to Dhaka early next month by Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh when a series of border-related agreements are expected to be finalized, an indication of the increasingly warm ties between the two countries.

At the end of last month, a border weekly market, or haat, was allowed to operate in Meghalaya district for the first time since 1971, and also in July the Indian Supreme Court gave the go-ahead to a ground-breaking cross-border cement project agreed to more than 10 years earlier.

Bangladesh has meanwhile taken a "political decision" to give transit to India as the "current government wants to establish all modes of connectivity in the region", Foreign Minister Dipu Moni said last month. One goal is to ease transit across Bangladesh's northern and eastern borders to improve sea access for India's far northeastern states.

India also wants improved road and railway routes that would allow it better access from Kolkata, the commercial capital of eastern India, across the Ganges Delta to the important port of Chittagong.

Chidambaram said outstanding issues concerning 6.5 kilometers of border demarcation, the transfer of enclaves and disputed land possession may be resolved during Manmohan's visit. As many as 51,000 people, 17,000 of them Bangladeshis, live in the 162 enclaves and exclaves that dot both sides of the border areas.

Asked whether the residents would be provided the opportunity to choose citizenship, he said the fate of the inhabitants would be decided by the countries' prime ministers when they met in Dhaka.

At a meeting of officials, Bangladesh's State Minister for Home Affairs, Shamsul Hoque Tuku, expressed "deep concern over the killing of innocent Bangladeshis by BSF, trafficking of women and children and smuggling of phensedyl from India to Bangladesh".

Phensedyl is an intoxicating cough syrup banned in Bangladesh and manufactured at factories along the Indian side of the border. Bangladeshi Home Minister Sahara Khatun told the meeting the factories had now been closed.

According to a recent United Nations Children's Fund report, about 400 women and children in Bangladesh are trafficked each month from Bangladesh. More than 300,000 Bangladeshi women and children had been trafficked to India in the past decade and another 200,000 were sold in Pakistan, the report said.

One issue that may continue to test relations is Dhaka's determination to secure the capture of Captain Abdul Majed and Risaldar Mosleuddin Khan, two fugitives found guilty of being involved in the 1975 killing of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, the country's first president. The Bangladesh government believes the two, who have been sentenced to death, are in India.

Bangladeshi Home Minister Sahara Khatun told the press conference that Bangladesh had sought India's cooperation in the search for the two men. Chidambaram said they may be in India and his government would "leave no stone unturned to apprehend the convicts" although they will need more information and intelligence from Bangladesh on the issue.

On the general border issue, Bangladesh would "hand over a list of vulnerable border points being used for criminal activities", the Daily Star reported, citing a Home Ministry official. At least 700 kilometers of the border, on rivers and other points, are unfenced.

As relations have improved, and amid Bangladesh's repeated requests to India to stop killings and torture at the border, the BSF has resorted to more unusual methods, as widely reported in the Bangladesh media this month.

Bangladeshi cattle trader Rafiqul Islam was killed on July 2 while crossing the Saniyazan River with cattle, after being hit by stones thrown by BSF jawans. BGB officials later confirmed the killing.

Two days earlier, a 25-year-old Bangladeshi farmer, Selim Hossain, while working at a paddy field on the Bangladesh side of the border, was allegedly dragged into Indian territory by BSF jawans who had crossed the border in Chuadanga district, locals said. An hour later, people found Selim's body hanging from an electrified barbwire fence on the Indian side of the border.

Residents in dangerous areas will be hoping that the BSF will abide by Chidambaram's order from now on.

The government of Bangladesh responds

The Economist received the following letter from the government of Bangladesh in response to a recent article:

"Our attention has been drawn to an article on India and Bangladesh, “Embraceable you”, published in The Economist in its issue dated July 30th. We are disappointed, as the report is less than well researched and contains elements of misinformation and a misrepresentation of facts.  What is more unfortunate is that the writer uses some words and sometimes draws analogies which lack decency and professional ethics. We are furnishing relevant information to put the issues in the right perspective.

The writer is of the view that the ruling Awami League (and its allies) came to power through “bags of Indian cash and advice”. This is a blatant lie and aptly speaks about the writer’s utter disrespect for responsible journalism. The international community, including independent observers, hailed the historic elections in December 2008 as the freest ever in the history of the country, which was reflective of the aspirations of the people. His comment is also a slur on the democracy-loving people of Bangladesh – one of the largest democracies in the world. His observation that the transit facilities between the two countries are to meet Indian security needs at the expense of the interests of Bangladesh is also misplaced as both countries are expected to benefit immensely from it.

Bangladesh attaches the highest importance to its relations with India.  These relations are time tested and based on shared history, culture, language, religion, traditions and values.  The traditional relations were infused with a new dynamism following the landmark visit of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina to India in January 2010 as the leadership of the two countries agreed to embark on a new era of co-operation for mutual benefit with the objective of fighting the common enemy of poverty and under-development.  This signifies closer engagement in areas as diverse as joint water resources management, land boundary demarcation, trade, power, connectivity, infrastructure, culture, education, etc.

The writer may be interested to know that as a part of the initiative of the government of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina to return to the values and spirit that inspired the nation during the war of liberation, it has undertaken an exercise to honour those foreign friends who stood by the people of Bangladesh and contributed to the attainment of statehood in 1971.  In this context it is widely felt that the seminal role played by the then Prime Minister of India, Mrs Indira Gandhi, deserves a special recognition. Thus she was conferred with the Bangladesh Freedom Honour (posthumously), the highest state honour for foreigners which was handed over to Mrs Sonia Gandhi when she visited Bangladesh to attend a special conference on autism.  The writer has undermined both Bangladesh’s struggle to attain statehood through its glorious war of liberation as well as the hand of friendship and support extended by India to Bangladesh when he refers to the Freedom Honour as ‘a gong’ in a negative manner.

It may be noted that the government of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina has undertaken a proactive policy for building up relations with not only India but with all of her neighbours in South Asia.  Towards this end, there have been exchanges of high level visits from Bhutan, Sri Lanka and the Maldives.  One of the most significant developments in this regard has been the decision of the government to grant both Nepal and Bhutan use of Chittagong and Mongla ports for transit trade to third countries. In addition to this, Bangladesh is working to provide smooth and seamless connectivity between Bhutan, Nepal and India and to extend it through Myanmar to the countries of South-East Asia and beyond.  Perhaps unknown to the writer is that this connectivity is not only through rail and road; Bangladesh has offered use of two airports situated in the north of the country to Bhutan for its own use.  Bangladesh is also working on intensifying shipping linkages with Sri Lanka which will benefit not only bilateral trade but will also help to enhance trade relations with the Maldives, which has so far been stymied by a lack of air and shipping linkages between the two countries. Taking connectivity and regional co-operation one step further, Bangladesh is also working towards a joint water resources management in a sub-regional context involving Bhutan, Nepal, India and Bangladesh.  This envisages water resources management for flood control and mitigation as well as augmentation of dry season flows of common rivers.  An added benefit will be hydro-power generation to meet the incremental energy requirements of one of the most economically dynamic areas of the world today.

While mentioning about opposition’s boycott of Parliament, the writer says that the Honourable Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina is “becoming increasingly autocratic”. This speaks about his poor knowledge about the numerous initiatives taken by the government to institutionalise democracy in the country. The writer is perhaps aware that the Dauphine University, a prominent Parisian university, awarded a gold medal to Honourable Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina on 25th May 2011 in recognition to her outstanding contribution to institutionalising and strengthening democracy, and also for her achievement in empowering the women of Bangladesh.  In line with the spirit of accommodation, the present government, for the first time in history, has allocated the chairmanship of the two important standing committees of the Parliament to the opposition parties who hold only 40 seats out of 345.  Even the post of deputy speaker was offered to the opposition. Despite the welcome gesture from the government, the opposition parties, quite ironically, have been boycotting parliamentary sessions for narrow political gains which undermines the country’s democratic process.

The initiative of the present government to try the people involved in genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and other crimes under international law, stems from the fundamental norms of a civilized society.  It is reflective of the primacy of the rule of law and the rejection of impunity. The initiative draws from the overwhelming popular support for putting the perpetrators of war crimes on trial and is not prompted by any feeling of vendetta against any individual or any political party.

Without giving any research-based statistics, the writer mentions that “corruption flourishes at levels astonishing even by South Asian standards”.  Fighting corruption and establishing good governance has been one of the priorities of the Government and neither any member of the present Prime Minister’s family nor any Cabinet member bears the stigma of being corrupt though corruption remains a major challenge for the country.  Keeping with the election mandate, the present government introduced an electronic public procurement system to ensure transparency which was possible due to the government’s determination to digitalise the country. The allegation of building a personality cult around Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, Father of the Nation of the Prime Minister, is just another example of poor judgment about the role of the great leader in the epic struggle of the country. The government, as per its election mandate, is trying to uphold the true history of the independence of the country which was subjected to distortion by successive military and pseudo-military governments. As regards to the  “vindictive” treatment shown to Muhammad Yunus, the Nobel laureate, the writer should have known that it was Honourable Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina herself who had a distinct role in patronizing and thus in making micro-credit, Grameen Bank and Professor Yunus familiar globally. The government’s recent actions about Grameen Bank were taken to uphold the rule of law and not to harass anyone.  The verdict of the courts, which are fiercely independent, was just reflective of the facts on the ground.

A closer look at the article indicates that the writer is carrying out the agenda of a quarter who are out to wage a smear campaign about Bangladesh and its present government led by the Honourable Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina who has, through her extraordinary courage, personal sacrifice and inspiring visionary leadership, brought the country back on track of democratic governance, made the country a model for women’s empowerment, food security, disaster management, poverty alleviation, and pursuing a people-centric peace building policy nationally as well as regionally and internationally. People in the region have already started enjoying the benefits of her government’s strong stand against terrorism and extremism."

Md. Shameem Ahsan
Director General (External Publicity)
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Dhaka

Pakistan's Double Cross

A Virginia man accused of running a Pakistani-financed program to influence American policy toward the disputed Kashmir region can be released on bond once his wife surrenders her passport and other conditions are met, a federal judge ruled late Tuesday afternoon.

Syed Gulam Nabi Fai will be subject to electronic monitoring while awaiting his trial.

The allegation that Pakistan routed more than $4 million to Fai to give to politicians and organize programs related to Kashmir is the latest in a series of revelations that have taken U.S.-Pakistani relations to the brink.

The May 2 Navy SEAL strike killing Osama bin Laden in a walled-compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan accelerated the deterioration of already strained relations. Incredulous American officials openly doubted Pakistani claims that bin Laden's presence was unknown to, and unsupported by, people in the government.

In just the past month, American officials have issued the Fai complaint, accused Pakistan of complicity in the brutal murder of a journalist, and frozen $800 million in military aid.

Those actions come on the heels of testimony in a Chicago prosecution which indicated members of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) spy agency played significant roles in the 2009 terrorist attacks in Mumbai which killed more than 160 people.

India suspects another ISI-connected terrorist group, the Indian Mujahideen (IM) was behind last week's coordinated bombings in Mumbai which killed more than 20 people and injured more than 100 others. The suspension of military aid came after Pakistan's expulsion of American military trainers. The $800 million at issue is about a third of annual U.S. aid to Pakistan. The Pakistanis "have taken some steps that have given us reason to pause on some of the aid we're giving to the military," said White House Chief William Daley.

Days earlier, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Mike Mullen implicated Pakistani authorities in the brutal murder of a prominent journalist who had investigated ties between Islamist militants and the country's military. During a Pentagon news briefing, Mullen had alleged that the torture and subsequent killing of journalist Syed Saleem Shahzad had been "sanctioned" by the Pakistani government.

Shahzad, who worked as a correspondent for Adnkronos International and was the Pakistan bureau chief for the Hong Kong-based Asia Times Online, was abducted in Islamabad on May 29, two days after publishing an article alleging al-Qaida infiltration in the ranks of the Pakistani military. The ISI denied any role in Shahzad's killing.

Recent reports, however, continue to detail the ISI's strong support for terror in the region. Classified military documents released in July 2010 by the whistleblower website WikiLeaks exposed the ISI's links to Afghan insurgent forces fighting U.S. and NATO troops in the region. The more than 90,000 secret military and diplomatic reports detail meetings between senior Pakistani intelligence officials and Taliban and al-Qaida leaders to plan attacks against U.S.-led coalition forces. The documents specifically mention discussions between former ISI chief Hamid Gul and Afghan mujahideen leaders Gulbuddin Hekmatyar and Jalaluddin Haqqani, who have been known to plot some of the most lethal attacks against U.S. troops.

A study released last year by the London School of Economics described ties between the ISI and Afghan insurgents. The report, based on interviews with captured insurgents and counterterrorism officials, claims the ISI provides "substantial financial, military, and logistical support" to the Afghan insurgency.

A United Nations report corroborates the Pakistani military and ISI's support for jihadist groups in the region.

The ISI has also historically supported Kashmiri jihadist groups, several of which are on the State Department's list of foreign terrorist organizations, as part of the Pakistani government's efforts to wage a low-intensity proxy war against rival India.

Recently released disclosures regarding Pakistani detainees at Guantanamo Bay tie India-focused terrorist groups such as the Lashkar-e-Tayyiba (LeT), Jaish-e-Muhammad (JeM), Harkat ul-Jihad-Islami (HuJI), and Harkat-ul-Mujahideen (HuM) to the ISI.

The LeT was responsible for the November 2008 terrorist strike on Mumbai when 10 gunmen from the terrorist group launched a frontal assault on several high-profile targets in the city killing 166 people, including six Americans, in a siege that lasted three days.

During testimony at a recent trial in Chicago, a confessed plotter of the 2008 Mumbai attacks recounted his recruitment, training and handling by former Pakistani military officers and ISI members. David Headley, an American Lashkar operative from Pakistan who pleaded guilty in March 2010, was the prosecution's star witness in the trial of Chicago businessman Tahawwur Rana whose immigration company provided cover to Headley to undertake surveillance missions on a variety of targets in Mumbai and other Indian cities.

Rana was found guilty of plotting an attack on a Danish newspaper and providing support to Lashkar but cleared of the more serious charge tying him to the Mumbai attacks.

India's Investigation

Headley's testimony was consistent with statements he made earlier to Indian investigators from the National Intelligence Agency (NIA). A 119-page report on Headley's interrogation was first reported on by the Guardian and posted later on the Internet.

"Every big action of LeT is done in close coordination with ISI," Headley told his Indian interrogators. Headley also alleged that ISI officials "have a profound influence and great control over the top brass of the LeT."

The Mumbai attacks were planned in part to halt the growing integration between Kashmiri jihadi groups and "Taliban-based outfits," he said. Several of the Kashmiri jihadist groups were shifting their focus from Kashmir and India to Taliban-sponsored jihadist activities in Pakistan and Afghanistan.

The ISI orchestrated the Mumbai carnage to redirect the focus of these groups to India and thus move "the theater of violence from the domestic soil of Pakistan to India."

The ISI is also a key sponsor of the Karachi Project, Headley claimed. That program trains Indian militants to wage terrorist attacks on major urban centers in India. The Project based in the southern Pakistani port city of Karachi also includes Pakistan-based terrorist groups, such as the LeT and HuJI, and has ties to the criminal underworld. The Indian Mujahideen that was implicated in the Mumbai serial bombings this month is part of the Karachi Project.

IM operatives have been affiliated with the LeT, HuJI, and the Student Islamic Movement of India (SIMI). SIMI, banned by the Indian government in 2001, has its roots in the Jamaat-e-Islami (JI), a radical Islamist movement in South Asia. SIMI has declared that "Islam is our Nation, not India," and hailed slain al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden as the "true Mujahid."

Headley mentioned two Karachi-based groups directing terrorist activity in India. One is led by Abdur Rehman Hashim Syed (also known as "Pasha"), a retired Pakistani army major and co-defendant in the Rana trial, and the other, by Lashkar member, Sajid Mir.

"The Karachi set up of Pasha has the complete backing of the ISI," Headley said. He also added that Pasha's ISI handler, Colonel Shah, "was actively involved in the Karachi Project."

"Pasha," a retired Pakistani army major and co-defendant in the Rana trial, introduced Headley to al-Qaida leader Ilyas Kashmiri to seek his assistance in plotting an attack on the offices of the Danish newspaper Jyllands Posten after Lashkar backed out of the operation.

Kashmiri was reported killed in a U.S. drone strike in the tribal areas in Pakistan early last month.

Fugitive Indian gangsters Dawood Ibrahim and Tiger Memon accused of masterminding the 1993 Mumbai bombings have also been linked to the Karachi Project.

The attack in February last year on a Germany bakery frequented by foreigners in the Indian city of Pune was also set off by the Indian Mujahideen as part of the larger Karachi Project. Headley reportedly visited Pune and conducted surveillance of potential sites for attacks and even stayed in the neighborhood where the bombing occurred. He also visited the Osho International Meditation Resort, close to the bakery.

The Road Ahead

U.S.-Pakistan relations are at a crossroads. While Pakistan has assisted U.S. counterterrorism efforts in the region and helped hunt down high-profile al-Qaida operatives, elements within its powerful military and intelligence services continue to fund and support terrorist networks that help bolster Pakistan's strategic advantage over rival India in Kabul, Kashmir and the broader South Asian region.

The ISI's historic alliance with Kashmiri jihadi groups such as Lashkar, HuJI and other groups, as part of its efforts to engage in proxy war with India, is a key impediment to peace in the subcontinent. Additionally, the Pakistani military's support for the al-Qaida-linked "Haqqani network" that has been responsible for the deaths of several U.S.-led coalition forces in the region continues to frustrate antiterrorist operations in the region.

American security assistance can be used as an effective leverage in deterring the Pakistani government's selective pick-and-choose approach to counterterrorism. Washington must ensure its defense aid is contingent upon Pakistan taking tangible steps to eliminate al-Qaida, Taliban, and other militant groups that operate unfettered on its soil.

Leading South Asia expert Lisa Curtis argues that cutting off all aid to Pakistan is not prudent policy since it could elicit a negative reaction from Pakistan that could obstruct U.S. counterterrorism interests in the region. She writes:

"The U.S. must avoid abrupt action like stopping like stopping all aid, which would come at a steep price to U.S. interests in the region. Pakistan could react by cutting off all NATO supply lines that run through Pakistan to coalition troops in Afghanistan. It could also expel U.S. intelligence officials from the country, thus denying the U.S. access to valuable information that helps the CIA track terrorists."

U.S. civilian aid must continue to flow into Pakistan, Curtis argues, to strengthen the country's civil society and social institutions but with better oversight mechanisms to ensure that aid money is not misdirected but used for the purposes intended.

Read more at: http://www.investigativeproject.org/3064/pakistan-double-cross

Mystery Rises Over Borderland Handover At Tamabeel

Bangladesh is at the crossroads. Here the Awami League-led grand coalition government has reportedly handed over part of the country's border territory to the Indians although the people are yet to know anything about it.

The land in question covers 261 acres of land at Sylhet-Tamabeel border. The decision to hand over the land was taken last week when Indian Home Minister had talks with Bangladesh Home minister Sahara Khatun and other Bangladesh leaders.

The news of the land handover was reported last Saturday in the Kolkata based Bengali daily Anandbazar Patrika when Chitamboram was still in the city. It said the handover has already taken place and the Indian border security forces (BSF) have also moved in their pillars covering the land that Bangladesh has ceded in total secrecy. Dhaka has not made any statement on it to avoid public outcry, the report said. It said the Hasina has government has carried out the decision as a gesture of goodwill to its neighbour prior to Dr Manmohans visit.

The Assam Tribune last week in a report said since Dhaka has made a number of significant strategic concessions to India including transit facility, handing over border land, handing over of ULFA outfits and dismantling their hideouts, joint border management etc, Delhi has decided to extend the hand of cooperation and resolve other outstanding issues including the water sharing.

It further said Chitamboram has requested Dhaka to handover ULFA outfit leader Anup Chetiya before Manmohan's visit early next month and Bangladesh Home Minister advocate Sahara Khaton said the government is processing the request although he is having an asylum application case pending.

Interestingly while the Indian media outlets are awash with such reports, Bangladesh government officials have kept the local media in total darkness. Some analysts wonder what price Bangladesh would be paying during Dr Manmohan's visit next other than borderland surrender which took place during the just concluded Chitambaram visit to Dhaka.
  
Gen. Ibrahim   

Major Gen. (retd) Syed M Ibrahim said the news of the secret handover of land has already scared the nation. He believed the government should issue a statement explaining the latest development to remove fears and confusion and restore people's confidence. He demanded transparency of actions from the government side. The major opposition BNP has also demanded a government statement on the issue.

 State minister for Home affairs Shansul Haque Tuku last week however said, there is nothing secret in the border agreement that need to be published. He avoided clearing the land handover issue agitating public mind.

Former BDR chief Maj Gen. FazlurRahman, a veteran of a border skirmish with the Indian border security forces (BSF) over the control of Padua at Sylhet Tamabeel border in 2001 said Indian forces in fact came to the spot initially to support the training of freedom fighters in 1971 at a camp set up inside the country. Now they have claimed the land and the India friendly government of Sheikh Hasina is reportedly handed over without telling anything to the nation.  He said we liberated the country but lost part of the territory now to the forces which came to help us.

Fazlur Rahman said the Indian forces continued their presence in the camp even after the liberation taking advantage of the friendly relations. Political leadership at that time ignored the presence without anticipating that it may one day cost the nation's ownership over the land

.

The Anandbazar Patrika report said the government has ceded 220 acres of land at Padua along with 33 acres at Naljuri and 8 acres at Linkhaat border. It said Bangladesh border security forces had forcefully occupied the land during the liberation war and afterwards and all subsequent governments in Dhaka have declined to entertained the Indian claims over the land.

Since coming to power, the government of Sheikh Hasina decided to resolve all outstanding issues with India and the handover of land at Padua and two other places took place recently as part of this resolve, the report said.

Fazlur Rahman dismissed the Indian claim that BDR had forcefully occupied the land. He said the border pillars in the area were laid during the Pakistani days and we only claim the ownership of land inherited from the past within these pillars

.

How could it be possible that BDR forcefully occupied the Indian land and moved out pillars inside India and it maintained silence at the time of such occupation, he wondered. He said the Padua camp which India held in its hand is located inside 1.25 km of the international border. As BSF continued their presence, the former BDR had made inspection to original pillars; which is part of its border patrolling responsibility, to advanced locations from both sides of the India held camp leaving it behind within Bangladesh.

He said the initial dispute flared up when BSF made an attempt to build a feeder road over the no-man's land connecting the camp with one of their nearby border outposts about 10 km away. He said BDR resisted the move in a protracted border war in which BSF landed a surprise attack with a brigade capacity but they were severely beaten back. They then attacked BDR outpost at Roumari in an attempt to hit back but also lost the bid

.

He said, Bangladesh maintained its hold on Padua all along after the border war. The Indian government then invited Bangladesh government to a meeting in which claims made by both sides were discussed. The meeting decided that a final settlement of the dispute may be reached when the Indira-Mujib agreement will be finally implemented. He wondered how the present government can surrender the land now without working out all outstanding disputes, why it did not even wait until all such issues were resolved.

Gen Ibrahim wondered why the government is handing over the border land unilaterally and moreover, what is the status of Bangladesh's claims at other border points. The government should ensure transparency and clear all such mysteries, he argued.

BGB sources said Bangladesh has claims over several hundred acres of land at Kustia and Rajshjahi zones, besides other spots at other places and the initial arrangement was that, joint survey teams would identify the areas in the first place and the exchange would take place then on the basis of a political decision in the second phase. Now Bangladesh's claims appears to have been passed unheeded.

Former Chief of Bangladesh Army and now a member of BNP standing Committee Gen. Mahbubur Rahman Padua issue came up for discussion with Indian BSF chief Ashwani Kumar in 1989 at the annual conference of the two countries border forces in Delhi.

He said in that meeting Indian agreed to Bangladesh's claim on the land from documentary evidences and even Kumar agreed to remove the structures from the spot. The decision was recorded in the agreed minutes of the meeting and is still available. But it was not later followed up.

Surprisingly BGB chief Anwar Hossain last week denied altogether the handing over of the border land at Tamabeel zone saying such things are scheduled to take place under Indira-Mujib agreement and to be sealed during Dr Manmohan's visit. One would only wonder if he told it knowingly or without knowledge of what is happening in the ground.

 Fazlur Rahman, said as far as he understands, besides the disputed enclaves, the total of adversely possessed land from both sides may stand at three to four thousand acres. Bangladesh may get roughly 17,000 acres against losing about 7,000 acres to India under the enclaves exchange deal. Here why unilateral piecemeal settlement has been resorted to, he wondered.

From Burma Road to Road Map

Concerns over Burma’s ties with North Korea and China have prompted the US to sit up and take notice of the country. But it needs a road map.

The last time Burma really mattered to the United States, Imperial Japanese forces were marching on Asia. Vinegar Joe Stillwell built a road through the Burmese jungle to resupply China during the Pacific War, a backbreaking project that cost the lives of some 1,100 US soldiers before its completion in 1944. The Stillwell Road was pivotal then, but just like American interest in Burma, it soon fell into disrepair. 

Burma matters to US strategy again. Human rights concerns about the military grip on the region’s poorest country are overshadowed by geostrategic concerns about the regime’s ties to China and North Korea. China’s desire for strategic real estate and hunger for natural resources are turning Burma into a proxy state, while North Korea’s weapons export business shifts Burma into a potential nuclear weapon state. Beijing has recently reconstructed the old British and American Burma Road.

The Obama administration has responded by naming an ambassadorial-level coordinator: Derek Mitchell, presently acting assistant secretary of defence. But what’s next? US Burma policy is notoriously feckless. Well-intentioned support for the iconic Aung San Suu Kyi, the last democratically elected leader, makes for a photo opportunity, but is failing to affect Burmese bad behaviour or constrain Chinese encroachment. In the past, an almost exclusive focus on human rights has done little to change Burma, but a great deal to isolate the United States from its allies and friends in South and East Asia.

A new approach is needed. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton took the essential first step last month in Bali by giving further definition to the policy of principled engagement.  She demanded compliance with UN Security Council resolutions, a reference to the regime’s nuclear ambitions. She also called for releasing 2,200 political prisoners and opening dialogue with the opposition and ethnic minorities. But given the administration’s determination to reenergize US influence in a vibrant region, it’s noteworthy that Clinton put the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) on notice not to bestow chairmanship on Burma chairmanship for 2014 unless it earns it. At the same time, she in effect dangled the carrot of international legitimacy should Burma embrace change.

The gap between Burma and the United States yawns. We therefore need a road map for navigating between the Scylla of human rights and Charybdis of realpolitik. The original Burma Road overcame gnarly mountainous terrain; a new road map must traverse seemingly intractable machinations emanating from the new palatial capital in Naypyidaw. The first road linked Burma to China; this pathway must provide both an alternative to Chinese domination, as well as greater freedom for all Burma’s people.  Gen. Stillwell built the first road; Clinton must connect this one.

There’s precedent for building US ties with an adversarial, autocratic state: Vietnam. In fact, some of the same voices who would like to test Burma’s seriousness about a new relationship have experience with this kind of challenge. Senators John McCain and John Kerry helped to convert a former enemy into a flourishing economic and security partner, despite nagging differences over human rights. If a US Navy destroyer can make a port visit to Da Nang, Vietnam (as USS John S. McCain did last year), then finding a gradual opening to Burma must be possible.