- Posted December 25, 2013 by
This iReport is part of an assignment:
Beyond Bangladesh: Recharging Indian Foreign and Security Interest
Worried at the deteriorating political crisis in Bangladesh, where foreign diplomats based in Dhaka transformed their call for resolving differences through dialogue and peaceful means to hold a free and fair election. India attempts to integrate hard power components for their security interests and argues that while their consolidation may force and redraw its international image, the fundamental principles of India world policy approach will remain basically intact. So they would like to survive their interest in the Bangladesh from the different corner as like economic or political arena. India has chosen of their own motivated government in the Bangladesh who will cooperate with them from their real demands as like Tipaimuk Dam or Farakka Barrage.
BDR Mutiny and Insightful Benefit for India:
We all of are known about the incident of 2001, when BSF attacked in the Roumari, Rangpur but the bravery role of BDR, there have no BSF to went to India border. We also had known about the previous regime of the Bangladesh, by which time there were no scope to business of drugs or any other prohibited Indian possessions in the border for the role of BDR. After the liberation war India would like to same border security force leading by BSF but that time Mujib government had rejected this plan. So India waits for the revenge on the BDR which insightful and reflection is BDR mutiny. By this mutiny India is most advantageous part for their future interest in the Bangladesh which as security or political interest. India vastly hit on the Bangladesh Army and BDR especially in the security sector of Bangladesh. After the 2009 BDR mutiny, Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina telephoned India’s external affairs minister Pranab Mukherjee requesting assistance from the international community; The Hindu reported citing a leaked US embassy cable. Though Hasina had not been specific about the kind of help she needed, Pranab Mukherjee had offered “to be responsive” if needed and the Indian government had also rallied London, Beijing and Tokyo. On March 26, 2009, the US Embassy in Delhi cabled (198952: confidential) that India's main concern was to stabilize Prime Minister Hasina's government, the Hindu article wrote. On 5 November 2013, by Dhaka Metropolitan Sessions Court sentenced 152 people to death and 159 to life imprisonment; another 235 people received sentences between three and ten years for their involvement in the mutiny. The court also released 277 people who had been charged which loose the Second World War punishment as called Nuremburg Tribunal for the German military. A Human Rights Watch spokesperson described the mass trial as "an affront to international legal standards. UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navi Pillay has drawn attention to flaws in the trial, calling it “rife with procedural irregularities, including the lack of adequate and timely access to lawyers”. A spokesperson for Amnesty International condemned the sentences, stating that they “seem designed to satisfy a desire for cruel revenge.” We were looses 57 Army officers and at least 70 BDR died while in custody. So what we get and who get the benefit and who is the real culprit of this mutiny, for whose interest this mutiny has been happened? Those questions are rising in the people’s mind of Bangladesh.
War Crimes Trails and India’s Interest:
There are many international observers is that the war crime tribunal's governing law defines the offence of ‘crimes against humanity' without a number of basic elements that are required in international law. So many victims’ lawyers have also criticized the lack of preparation time they have been given for the trial and questioned the legislation that requires them to provide to the prosecution all the witness statements in support of their client right at the beginning of the trial.
The opposition Bangladesh Nationalist Party issued a statement calling the tribunal a ‘rubber-stamping body' and accusing it of being “an illegal and unconstitutional process for extra-judicial persecution of political opponents.” Whilst legitimate concerns about the tribunal exist, there would appear to be nothing in the tribunal's governing law or current practice that justifies such trenchant criticism. Indeed as stated above it is an improvement in many ways from most domestic trials.
Meanwhile, war crime trials held by the International Crimes Tribunal in Bangladesh, which was set up in 2009 to try people accused of committing atrocities during the 1971 war with Pakistan, have targeted opposition leaders on the wish of India. Especially India thinks about the Jamatee Islami is one of the anti-Indian party in Bangladesh. So by the name of war crimes trails, the leader of Jamat will be hanged and there have no anti-political party in Bangladesh who will be the future impediment of India security and political interest in the Bangladesh. When there is a crime there should be a punishment and the government is doing its job. Now what is interesting is that how they see India in everything or indo-phobia. India has interrupted in many internal problems of Bangladesh for their own interest.
Impending Election and Hard Power’s Arrival from India:
We all of are concerned about the article carried by the Times of India which wrote by Subir Bhaumik on the issue of “Bangladesh is in a violent phase and India must do all it can to see a friendly regime return to power” where he has been written with a myopic vision which gone into denial over the present political realities in Bangladesh. He has urged New Delhi to militarily intervene in Bangladesh to keep the Awami League in power so that the BNP and its fundamentalist allies do not assume power! The article would have been trashed except for the paper that carried it. It is frequently called that the Times of India is not just any newspaper; it is an opinion maker in New Delhi. So it is unbelievable that why it published this article in the news paper. India’s leading newspaper has advocated New Delhi to intervene in a small neighbor militarily so that there would be no democratic elections there and a regime that serves its interests would retain power for the foreign and security interest of India.
From the different diplomatic arena upcoming election of Bangladesh should be free and fair with involving of multiple parties. Washington’s page is clear, they wants a free, fair and inclusive national election. The US Secretary John Kerry has written letters to the two leaders to this effect. Therefore if Washington and New Delhi were on different pages, it would mean India supports an autocratic type of election in Bangladesh for their economic, political, foreign and security interests. So this is high time for Bangladeshi people should wake up because the sovereignty of the country is under threat.
Student of the University of Dhaka.