HAQUE'S TALKING

Copenhagen; the Comedy of Compensation Carrot

2010-01-22T18:27:00.000-08:00

Officials from Different Countries in Cop15

The greatest comedy (or tragedy!) of the year 2009 has already been screened on the Copenhagen theatre hall and the title of the comedy was The 2009 United Nations Climate Change Conference. Yes, it is Bella centre, read Bella theatre hall, where actors and actresses from more than 170 countries gathered to draft a new treaty, supplement to Kyoto protocol, depicting with compulsory clauses as Kyoto is going to be expired in 2012. So it is lucid to all that they did not come to play a comedy but congregated with a grand view to saving the world from the threat of extinction instigated by the devastating clutch of environmental degradation. This was an accumulation of 15,000 delegates and officials, 5,000 journalists and 98 world leaders who even can destroy the whole world hundreds of times with a single signal of finger. Actually this COP15, the surname of the conference, is a part of a series of conferences organized by the UN. This summit got a maximum media coverage and priority of chatting as people believed that the recurrence of natural disasters in past two years indiscriminately everywhere in the world might make the world’s leaders more cooperative and more considerate about environmental degradation particularly concerning the emission of carbon dioxide, the real culprit of global warming. But alas! World leaders could not even draft a treaty let alone a promise to follow it. Instead of a well accepted all-signed pact we observed merely a comedy in which the climax point was a compensation carrot. Let’s turn to that climax point.

Protesting People from Different Part of the World

This was a carrot hung by the developed powers, the decisive carbon producers, to turn the concentration of the developing countries, the real scapegoats of environmental degradation, from real bargain, the issue of reducing carbon emission, to a fade and undefined affairs. They, the developed powers, thus could spend most of the time in the name of compensation collection and promise. Why is this compensation? The easy answer is to compensate for the losses of underdeveloped and developing countries created by natural disasters as a result of excessive emission of Co₂by developed countries. But with the continuation of more emission! What a comedy it is to make a compensation deal for stolen goods letting the door open for further stealing! Yes, the developing countries, being trapped by the lofty carrot offered by the counterpart developed countries, engaged all their endeavors not to stop future emission but to get past reparation. Through this tricky policy the developed could manage to make a crack among developing countries in the question of ratio from the recompense fund. Whenever the developing countries should have to take a united action and stand to ensure reduction of Co_2,they started quarreling one another about the proportion of compensation fund spent time to find a formula whether on population based or geographical area based. Thus both consumption of time and widening of fracture became possible for the environmental criminals. A 12 day-gathering, 06 to 18 December, of world leaders went in vain only by signing a symbol of treaty. The world got a pen without ink, a book without page, a day without hope and a night with day dream!

A Moment of Conference

You may ask why the developing countries let to stage so great a comedy of compensation without any hesitation. The calculation is very simple. Who went to the summit? Are there any tsunami affected people or people lost every thing by sidre or orphan missing his parents by nargis? No, there were people composed of politicians, NGO agents, people from so called civil society and bureaucrats. These four parties are more concerned about their benefits. They know, no matter from which country they are, any amount of compensation money will fatten their never ending gulp of wallet. As this money may be disbursed by NGOs, they showed big interest in this issue and placed to the priority place. Through the same process the bureaucrats, with their red tap power, want to smuggle the money and hopping this they insisted government to engage them in this misleading issue. Thus the civil society has greed to steal the money in form of seminars, symposium research papers. Who remains in bottom? Oh the politicians! No there is no need to describe their character as people round the globe know them from head to tail. Thus in face of elite interest the common interest of the whole world went to the back bench of discussion. The comedy of compensation carrot could be played on the stage of Copenhagen. Don’t think this is the last play, the last one play will be staged and the real play maker will be nature itself. At that time you will realize, no matter who you are, what’s the difference between comedy and tragedy.

TWO YEARS (009-2010) UNDER LENS; VIEWING THROUGH BINOCULAR AND MICROSCOPE

2009-12-28T01:03:00.000-08:00

They have already been replaced, the old one is thrown away or going to be used as a book’s cover and a new one is twinkling in the old place. Your desk or table has got a new one; your room-wall has also welcomed another one. Are they still unclear to you about whom there has been given the above description? Remember the time when you were standing in front of them and turning over the pages one after another with an investigating mood concerning the pictures or paintings portrayed on them. Oh yes, now you got the point- they are the calendars! They are the must who indicate the arrival of a new year with great expectation and, in the same time, focus the departure of an old year. But is that all? The pages we through away after the passing of the year are full with so many events of happiness, pleasure and contentment in one side and grief, gloom and melancholy on the other that they can’t be considered only collection of pages with list of dates. Some of those events shake hearts of mass and bring people together from different places in a single stage. On the reverse side of the coin there are also some other happenings that make people divided and push them to different opinions. The accounts are also diversified in various zones i.e. economic, political, and social and so on. The new calendars are also full with uncertainties, dangers, opportunities and such other facts of which some can be forecast and some are mysterious from any point of view. Standing on the marginal line between 2009 and 2010, if we take to calendars in two hands, one in left hand as it is left out and another in right hand as this one is for right now, we can play the role of historians and parrots.

To click on the folder having the events of 2009 will result a series of sub folders or files with description of so many occurrences that it is impossible for any one to asses or recall them all in a short while because, in reality, a single second is nothing but a combination of hundred thousands of events. For avoiding this lengthy upsetting phenomenon there is going to be screened merely short listed events those have traumatized the world tremendously. In picking up events there has been accepted a tight filtration process where politics got the first and foremost precedence. But with which event can it be started? Oh no, there is no chance of confusion! There is the topic of Middle East and you know Middle East is really in the middle (centre) of any discussion. The one sided Gaza strip assault by Israel, the Middle East version of the USA, on the Palestinian, the scapegoat of western brutal policy, and its after math is one of the heart tearing events in the chronicle of the year. This attack made mistrust between Hamas, the democratically elected government of Gaza strip, and Palestine authority led by Mahmud Abbas and this was the first time when Hamas pointed its finger to Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) for assisting Israel against Hamas. This molest, however, included every type of inhuman activities from using white phosphorus bomb to human-shield including the use of all sorts of ultramodern conventional weapons by navy, army and air force. Through the assail fifty Hamas activists were killed and more than thirteen hundred unarmed people were roughly slaughtered with an unimaginable loss of twenty thousand habitats, one thousand and five hundred mills, factories, workshops, countless mosques and even UN driven schools. Another important scenario was the USA’s u-tern changing stand. Prior to that attack all the affairs related to Middle East were tightly controlled, visualized, organized and even materialized under a full attachment of the USA’s attitude, willing, permission and signal. This is the first time when Israel could manage the USA to resettle the decision in UN and the full control of the USA was shifted to Israel. For this reason the total phenomenon will change, in near future, not only dramatically but also drastically as Israel has no intention to pay any heed towards international law, customs and rituals. After the Gaza assail some of the international humanitarian and human rights institutions made a step to excavate the abusing of human rights law and humanitarian customs in the event. They pay the same game as Israelis are the main guilt so Palestinian should be charged with! What about the on going peace endeavor taken by Obama regarding Middle East? In the previous year the swiftness of the process showed us that any treaty in supporting Palestine is never possible with Israel. It always tries to get one-sided sacrifice, by Palestine, and one-sided gaining, by her. So if Obama does not suit with this notion Israel will take a go slow policy for which no treaty is going to be signed in next coming years. But be sure as it is a new year there will be another assail on Palestine from Israel at any blame.

Economic depression is considered, no matter who you are, to be the most influencing catalyst of the year as many of the world’s giant financial institutions i.e. Lehman Brothers, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, JPMorgan Chase and so on were either announced bankrupted or became bound to cut their employee list though government took bail out scheme by allotting million dollars budget. The depression started from mortgage sector and within in an incredible short while it engulfs the total economic grassland of the whole world. This depression, according to many, is nothing but the result of the corporate criminalization created hopefully by the top most officials of some limited high profile companies. This happened because the US government took away interference from the market completely and competitors did not pay any heed to general rules of market. No matter, however, whoever are the culprits, the main scapegoats of the crisis were surly the mass people who, from any point of view, are never blameworthy but to recompense. In the ending months of the year the crisis was on the healing point and economies were getting normalizing. But the rate of normalization suggests a long way to go for the process to get a full swing.

Sorry and surrender for Osama and Obama respectively as one became zero and another appeared hero. The once talk-of-the-world Osama, add Bin Laden as suffix, now has became a shadow tape recorder through which he, after a regular interval, only can show his survival not any real roar. The Osama issue is now only limited in expressing uncertainty where he may bury him either in Pakistan or in Afghanistan. Contrary to this Obama, add Barrak Hossain as antecedent, is now a fantasy figure round the globe. He may be deemed as the first President who is elected globally in the history of the United States of America. His charismatic slogan Change echoed from the blue oceans to white permafrost, gray desert to green woodland and where not. This ensued because people under Bush administration the world experienced unimaginable bitter conditions, incredible humiliation of human dignity. The blood shedding occurred in different parts of world in such a gigantic degree that only Change was the way to escape. But how much Change will or can Obama bring? The expectation rose up when Nobel committee announced his name as peace prize winner of the year 2009. Before judging the relevance of his assortment as a Nobel laureate, though there is much room for criticism, we can wait for coming days. His over ambitious prospect for nuclear free world, a successful deal with Russia on the issue of missile deployment in Europe are really hopeful. Contrary to this sending new troops in Afghanistan, unethical play with Pakistan, unjust nuclear deal with India and failure to reach a well accepted treaty regarding environment, the burning issue of today’s world, in Copenhagen are some of issues that create negative images over his name and fame. What can we expect from Obama in the year 2010? Before going to expectation you must have to consider Obama as a president of the USA. He is not a person but personnel of the USA’s government. He is to uphold the US interest first and then the question of human expectation. Will you admit any decision by you head of the state hampering your national interest to satisfy international community? If no why American will let it? So if American interest needs to be more drastically in Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, North Korea and Pakistan what Obama can do? He only can assure that information is not to be manipulated for making it just an invasion on another state as Bush did and only can have an opening of discussion before deploying missile. Under his presidency there may be no more direct intrusion against any new country even on Iran but don’t forget about nonmilitary instrument i.e. UN’s embargo, media pressure etc. In such a condition there may be created proxy war created by other but fueled and patronized by the USA in full scale. Iran has to rethink about it regarding nuclear issue under Obama’s administration. Oh no just allot Obama more time to proof his promise for a peaceful world though he uttered roughly in the stage of Nobel peace prize receiving period. Without this allotting time and waiting for future what can we do?

The previous year 2009 was a mixture of romance and horror for the states remaining black list of the USA such as North Korea, Iran and Myanmar. From the real context North Korea was on the zero point, neither in trouble nor in tranquility and next one, Iran, was on the left side continuously under threat and sanction and Myanmar, the last one, was on the right side receiving a hidden blessing from the western power though after an acid test of rivalry within state. For North Korea the nuclear deal or six party talks were only a show down. It is clear to the USA that North Korea is never a direct threat against it and consuming time in this issue is nothing but waste of money and muscle. She only wants to focus North Korea as a nuclear black sheep for justifying her presence in the Korean peninsula and Japan. To do so she is just creating a bad name for North Korea and making rehearsal of talking. But Iran got no sympathy, so she is kept on the left side, from the west even she was on the bank of disorder, political turmoil and distress fashioned calculatedly by the western power through hidden hand. This course of making Iran politically unstable will continue in near future and setting up a puppet government in Iran is the main target of the West as a substitute of war. So Iran in next days will be a place where the opposition will try to make a nonissue as issue and will attract the western media coverage. And obviously Obama will try to hunt the snake, here Iran, without breaking the stick, the blame of war. The more days will go the more the political scenario will get stalemate situation in Iran. Regarding Myanmar, the blessed by the west, the coming days will be easier. Now the question of democracy is only on the screen and the reality is to detach Myanmar from the grasp of China. The West is now confirm that more pressure on Myanmar government will make her more dependent on China and in price of this Chinese support the West will drop the minimum interest from her. So in 2010 Myanmar government may enjoy less pressure from the Western alliance and the Nobel Prize winner Suchi may go to face more hardship. In the middle of 2009 this became luminous when an American was released by the autocratic military government in exchange of Suchi’s extended imprisonment. This is the obvious turning of the USA regarding Myanmar and this process was also observed in case of North Korea when tow of the Americans were arrested and were going to be imprisoned. Three nations Iran, North Korea and Myanmar are going to be treated different ways based on different circumstances.

The condition of other three nations namely Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan; categorized in same class as all of them were and still are the home ground of war on terror, also remains in three different positions. Iraq is now in right side as the puppet government is completely on the side of West and all of the petro resources are under full control of Anglo-American companies. The withdrawal of international army from Baghdad has a profound impact and the Iraqi government showed its capacity to rule them without the assistance of American troops. But the complete withdrawal of American troops is simply an unimaginable affair as USA’s interest in this region is long-term. So, to justify American presence in Iraq in the coming days there may be intensified, by a hidden hand and you know who this hand is, the terrorist attack. Moreover there may be created a blame game situation between Iran and Iraq to engage each against other. In this regard the Shia-Sunni division may be widening by that invisible but clear playmaker. Afghanistan, the real destination of war on terror in 2009, is in the zero point that means it remained neither good nor bad considering the previous years of sufferings. Here the election proved that Western powers are interested to create an unsteady government that can not make any bargain against them. To do so they weakened Hamid Karzia by blaming him about stealing vote and created Abdullah Abdullah as an alternative telephone number of Karzai. So if Karzai is not full filling their demand the second choice is available. Afghanistan got the most priority of Obama government and even before election he was promising the shift of war zone from Middle East to Asia. So, more troops were approached in Afghanistan in 2009 by Obama government. The West is careful about China, Russia, India, Pakistan and Iran. Afghanistan is a country with whom all those countries have boundary. So presence in Afghanistan is an urgent for them. But in the same time they don’t want to wage war as they are shaken with economic depression and tired with lengthiness of war. Moreover they may on the verge of another war front either in Pakistan, to grasp nuclear weapons or Iran, to halt from attaining nuclear weapons. Standing on this stone like reality they, in next years, may go to a compromising attitude. To do so they first want to create alternative choices so that they can have enjoyed bargaining power with different groups to serve their interest. In this regard the accused Taliban may be brought to the table of negotiation in the name of good Taliban. This division of good Taliban and bad Taliban may open another front of war in Pakistan titling her as the home ground of bad Taliban. So Pakistan is now on the left side of the situation. For destroying or capturing nuclear weapons of Pakistan the western powers are now waiting with different cages and traps. Though last year Pakistan got democratic track, the future is gray as western powers think military will serve their interest more. Pakistan has to face some other more challenges people from Afghan border already considering the military and government as their enemies. If another military coup happens in near future it will create more mistrust between military and people which in return will pave the way of being her a failure state. The terrorist attack in Pakistan is signaling such a deteriorating situation for Pakistan.

India with tight hand of economic depression and black stigma of Mumbai occurrence has passed a successful year in 2009. The great, grand and glorious victory of Congress with a new charismatic leadership of Rahul has made the government more decisive and stable to attain national interest. A great deal in nuclear sector with the USA has made her more confident. In such a reality India is now an unchallenged regional power. The coming year may open new doors of opportunities and occasions but any repression on sovereign seekers, more expansion in military sector will push her to grave yard. Her neighbor Sri Lanka gained a total victory over Tamils which in next days may create both chances and challenges. A chance as it has made the country stable and created opportunity to deploy her total resources for economic development. Challenges as the country is now on the necessity of integrating the Tamil and a proper rehabilitation of the rebellions. If it fails to face that challenges the coming up of another Tamil rebellion is a must in future.

Oh yes! Now it is the turn for Bangladesh. In the previous year Bangladesh met a great change that was return to democracy. But some other events such as BDR mutiny, failure of the government to curb price hike made her more vulnerable. The BDR massacre made mistrust between army and BDR which in return causes insecurity for her independence. Some other issues like withdrawal of military from Chittagong Hill Tracts, handing over Indian rebellions to India have made a u-turn between the past and present government. But such a shift in foreign policy may create a big dilemma for future as China feels uneasiness. Failure of world leaders to reach to a treaty about environmental degradation is another red-signal for Bangladesh. In this regard, in Copenhagen, Bangladesh takes a wrong policy as it has emphasized on compensation against reduction of carbon emission. Why is Bangladesh hankering after for compensation money? It is clear that any of the compensation money will open ways of conditions from the donors. It is, moreover, a lengthy process to get any such fund. In the name of compensation money they will interfere in any of the development projects and perhaps they will fund never the government but the NGO’s related to the environmental activities. How can Bangladesh be benefited by such a compensation project? So Bangladesh has to give emphasize on reducing the amount of carbon emission and that should made obligatory for developed nations. In this regard it is to be mentioned that reaching to a well acknowledged treaty, beneficial for developing countries, is a never happening issue. Since all the developed countries and even some developing countries i.e. India, Brazil and China are on the common track to halt to compose a compulsory treaty, all the rest must have to articulate a combined attempt to draft the treaty. If, without doing this, the developing countries make initiative to get compensation money, it will make them more divided on the question of distribution of the money.

Some other scattered events, that shook the world in 2009, are the death of pop emperor Micheal Jackson, emergence of swine flue in an epidemic scale, emergence and decline of Maoist government in Nepal and so on. How many of events are waiting for the New Year! We are really looking forward to meeting for new days with new dreams. The new sun with new songs!

PEACE PRIZE FOR OBAMA; IS A PREMATURE OR PREPARED DECISION?

2009-10-23T05:24:00.000-07:00

Barrak Hossain Obama; Nobel Peace Prize Winner of the Year 2009

‘A prize without price/payment’ and ‘a prize for pressure’ are today’s two most popular buzzwords round the globe. Some other analysts argue that the Nobel Peace Prize, the most prestigious prize in current world, selection is nothing but ‘a prize without performance but for promise’. Yes, the selection of Obama, the much talked and most charismatic president of the USA, for Nobel Peace Prize was no less than a bolt from the blue for the unprepared mass of the world. The sudden jerk of the message made the inhabitants of the earth, indiscriminately any locality, country and even continent, flabbergasted for a while. But within a short while they started expressing, still are expressing no doubt will express, their reactions, remakes and recommendations targeting the selection. All the people, both from mob and professionals, are on their own track, be sure that like all other issues the number of tracks are countless, to justify the nomination. This justification, by some, some times gets so harsh and sharp that they put a question mark over the whole process of the peace prize. It is, however, not a new phenomenon for this year, according to some critics, but an old fashion of using the prize as a political tool in the way of managing dirty western interests. But this year, by the nomination of Obama, the criticism goes to a new dimension that suggests that the offering of the prize is a premature and unprepared step. There is, not surprisingly but obviously, another group who validates the selection by saying it as a right-time-to-click-the mouse type decision. Before penetrating the issue from the criticizing attitude it, in fact, will be an astute choice to scrutinize the Nobel Peace Prize selection criteria with impartial, unbiased and neutral goggles.

Obama; A New Craze for New Generation People

The Norwegian Nobel Committee, deals with only peace prize while five others are dealt by The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, has been authorized to hit upon the real laureates for peace under the light of Alfred Nobel's Will. The will, given by Alfred and considered as guide line to select Nobel laureates, suggests, as a general outline for all fields, the prize “to those who, during the preceding year, shall have conferred the greatest benefit on mankind”. The Will further, particularly for peace prize, advocates “the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity among nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses”. Neither the overall criteria, given in general for all fields, nor the particular criteria, said for peace prize only, admits Obama as a Nobel Peace Prize laureate as the first one imposes time boundary ‘during the preceding year’ and the latter one enforces to halt an arms violence. The time boundary strictly forbids the prize based on future expectation. It also suggests counting the activities only for preceding year. What has Obama done in the preceding year? Election propaganda, a campaign for his own presidency was the only task of Obama in that particular time proposed for selection of the laureates in Alfred’s Will. Yes, Obama has not accomplished a year in his chair and, moreover, the selection process started before some months which can encircle only five or six months of his presidency. How can it be possible for a president to perform such gigantic operations in such a short period that may ensure him a Peace Prize? The second criteria articulated principally for peace prize stands strictly on the way of Obama to keep him away from the prize as it permits the prize only for those who have direct involvement in halting an arms conflict or in some other sectors i.e. disarmament, upholding human rights, fighting for democracy etc. Actually on the way of peace Obama’s achievements include some hasty activities i.e. a speech given in Cairo, Egypt, to the Muslims about making the relations based on mutual dignity, understanding and responsibility; starting a peace accord in middle east though the process is now under a decaying condition because of tricky steps taken by Israel and Obama is silent in this point; negotiation with North Korea, Iran; offering Sudan a lucrative proposal to accept American policy and most notable is to reach a normal relations with Europe and Russia on the question of deployment of missile in Europe on the nose of Russia. Oh sorry! There is another vital issue, uttered by Obama, the ambitious nuclear free world or complete nuclear disarmament. Yes the list now is well sufficient to get Peace Prize if one of them is materialized or, at least, goes to an end with satisfying way. But alas! All of them are only on the beginning point and probably none of them is going to be true but going to turn into a day dream like a book without page, a pen without ink and a ring without hole to pour on a finger. For these reasons there have been stated some connotations regarding the issue as ‘A prize without price/payment’ and ‘a prize without performance but for promise’. But what if promises are not fulfilled? How can you finalize students’ ranking based on only a few class performances without judging the examination script?

Dr. Md. Younus; a Nobel Peace Prize Laureate from Bangladesh

There is, however, another school that really shows no headache about Obama. According to them the Nobel Prize in general and Nobel Peace Prize in particular is nothing but a political tool for the Western allies. This group assumes that peace prize is awarded, without a slight exception, to those whose hands are red colored with the blood of immense common mass of the world. Henry Kissinger, the name related to Vietnam War which caused for limitless loss of life, Theodore Roosevelt, about whom one American news paper wrote “the wielder of the 'big stick' should be crowned as America's great pacificator, Woodrow Wilson, the silent cooperator of the treaty of Versailles which in the long run led to the second world war, Shimon Peres and Yitzhak Rabin two blood seekers of sinless Palestinians and Frederik Willem de Klerk are some of the Peace Prize laureates who have been directly responsible for the war, violence or repression. Citing all these names this particular group never minds who comes to the limelight of media for being a Nobel Peace laureate. For this reason they do not want Obama to be accused of killing Afghan people and attacking Pakistan with drone. When a nuclear free world is expected by a president who continues his assistance in nuclear projects of another country before her signing Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) and based on merely this expectation the prize is awarded why there should be put an exclamatory sign!

Children; Celebrating Nobel Prize Giving Ceremony With a Smiling Face

There really can be drawn a unique but reasonable argument supporting Obama as an awarded person where Bush can play great role. Yes, don’t get confused! It is Bush, and not Bush senior but the immediate past President Bush junior, who has helped and contributed at a large scale in gaining peace prize by Obama. Oh no, why are you considering this a great joke? It is such a reality that can’t be ignored from real point of view. Under Bush administration the world experienced such bitter conditions, so many humiliations of human dignity that only a slight escaping of the situation is considered as a peaceful state and such Obama is awarded the prize. The blood shedding occurred in different parts of world in such a gigantic degree that only a minor reduction made every one so excited to offer the prize. When children can think a day without a new front of war, when a news paper does not need to have its headline with a threat of a new war, when a child does not shiver in fear in its mother’s laps and when one can open his eyes with birds chirping not a sound from drone why all these people would not let Obama a Peace Prize winner. When people become assured that there should be, at least, a negotiation instead of a harsh warning, there should be shown respect on opinions grown internationally, there should be given an experiment of using nonviolent tools before going to violence; people get a notion of relief from fear of bombing or at least they get a chance to dream of war free world. All these phenomena help Obama to get the prize whenever it becomes a slap for Bush, who knows he understands it or not. Though the scenario is not changed in a large scale but there is a fundamental change in the situation and that is under the previous presidency we did not have a chance to have a dream of war free day whenever now, under Obama’s presidency, we at least can hope for dream of war, threat and warning free earth. This is the only justification which can not be taken under a question mark against Obama’s Peace Prize award. So why Obama got the prize! The simple answer is- “Not for being a peace maker but for not being Bush!”

THE AFGHAN ELECTION; FACTS BENEATH THE DEBATE

2009-10-05T21:28:00.000-07:00

Hamid Karzai, The President, Casting His Vote

There lies a strong supposition ‘Democracies do not fight’, given by the western philosophy hawkers to excavate causes of war. Like many other pseudo assumptions this special one also opens the wings of question what the relations there may be drawn between two separate dynamics i.e. democracy, an internal affair of a country, and war among states, an external factor. After making a deep thinking on the argument you will find the real connotation of the assumption but, alas (!), with a slight variation in its inner sense e.g. ‘Democracies need not fight’ or, at least, ‘Selective democracies do not fight’. Are you confused regarding all the three statements given above such as democracies do not fight, democracies need not fight and the last one selective democracies do not fight? Is it clear to you what the difference between first two suppositions as democracies do not fight and democracies need not fight? Do you know what sense gives the term selective democracy? If you can explain all those assumptions and term, it can be assured that ins and outs regarding election in Afghanistan are completely luminous to you. Contrary to that, it will be a task of finding a needle from a dune if you do not have a clear cut idea about those things described in above. So let us first discover the real meaning of them.

The first supposition which is originated, propagated, and campaigned by the western philosophers, suggests that if there are two democratic countries there would never happen war between them. They give a nonsense explanation about the war preventing power of democracy. They prophecies that as a democratic government is to think about the welfare of the people they have no time to commit war and they also have no mandate to war as most of the people are peace loving and real mandate lies in their hands. This interpretation regarding war curbing power of democracy never is in the position to be accepted or believed as there are huge examples where, you will see in third world countries, lots of democratically elected governments turn into autocratic characteristics within a short while of their election. So to get the real explanation there may be suggested another assumption, as there has already been given, democracies need not fight. Why wars occur? When a state can’t achieve its interest because of unwillingness of another state, there may arise a war situation. But with taking full advantage of money-media-muscle power a strong nation can easily shape and reshape any government in a weaker state. In this way the stronger state can achieve its all interests from the weaker state by managing the government of that country. So war, most of the time, does not become a means of obtaining interest as it did in the past. In this circumstances we can make a corollary that democracies need not fight. But when a democratically elected government does not fulfill the requirement of a big power there come the questions of selective democracy. Yes! This is a special type of democracy which is created, nurtured and nourished by massacring or, at least, ignoring a real democratically elected government. Look at the behavior of USA’s treatment with HAMAS, democratically elected government in Palestine, and Musharraf’s government in Pakistan. In these two cases selective democracy was the means to gain interest. This is the fact what is working in case of Afghan election. Before going to beneath of the result and process of the election you must have to go to the real target of the USA and its alliance in this region. The USA along with NATO wants to continue its presence in Afghanistan to slaughter China, and probably India if need in far future. But justifying this presence is not an easy task for the USA without fitting a reasonable excuse. Only an unrest, turbulence and instable Afghanistan can assure a rational justification for the western ally to stay in the region. In such a situation a peaceful Afghanistan is never expected to that party who is critical and real playmaker of the region. Thus it is quite clear to all that only a selective democracy can be expected and must be implemented by that clever and coercive client of the region. Let us make a quick glance to the Afghan election with the goggles that particular perspective.

If we look at the election process and its continuous story from top to bottom with a white eye we can describe in that particular way. The second presidential election in Afghanistan under the present constitution of Afghanistan was held on August 20, 2009. Elections for 420 provincial council seats were held at the same time. In accordance with the announcement of the NATO officials given in May 2009 that 15.6 million voters had registered to vote, roughly half of the country's population; 35 to 38 percent of registered voters were women. These registration numbers have been disputed, however, by the Free and Fair Election Foundation of Afghanistan and media reports, which suggest widespread fraudulent activity in the election process.

Under the 2004 constitution, elections should have been held no later than 60 days before the end of President Karzai's term in July 2009. The Independent Election Commission (IEC) originally recommended that the poll be held at the same time as the 2010 parliamentary balloting to save costs. However, politicians in the country were unable to agree to the details. Concerns about accessibility to mountainous areas in spring 2009 and the ability of getting adequate people and materials in place by then led the IEC to announce the elections would be delayed to August 2009.

The opposition accused Karzai of attempting to extend his power past his term. In February 2009, President Hamid Karzai called on the Independent Election Committee to hold the election according to the country's constitution. Thereby forcing the IEC to reiterate the August date, and silencing critics, who fear a leadership vacuum between May and August. Some potential Afghan opponents complained Karzai's move was an attempt to clear the field of challengers, most of whom would not be ready to campaign for the 2009 election. After the IEC and the international community rejected Karzai's decree, Karzai accepted the date of August 20, 2009. The Supreme Court of Afghanistan announced in March 2009 that Karzai's term would be extended until a new leader had been elected. His opponents called the decision unconstitutional and unacceptable, pointing out that it put Karzai in a position to exploit the office to secure his electoral victory. After all these occurrences there have been played the play of an election where Karzai got the office of presidency by obtaining the minimum required votes with lots of complains i.e. manipulating the result, showing fake vote centers and using governmental mechanism to unsure victory. Moreover boycott by Taliban has also brought the acceptability under question. Low vote casting rate is also another aspect of disqualification of unacceptability of the election.

Now the fact comes first in our mind why the father of democracy, at least according to their demand, is playing such a critical play in Afghanistan’s election. Why Karzai is now under their severe pressure though he is the man who in near past was selected as the savior of Afghan people? Is he not their expected and exclusive choice now? If not why they gave him a chance to exploit his power in influencing election? All these questions require a single answer- selective democracy, already argued above. They usually want to keep pressure both on Karzai and Abdullah Abdullah to get bargaining power with them. They want to inform Karzai that if he is not satisfying their demand(s) and going out of their rudder he will be thrown away as election is not accepted to the world’s mass. In this way Abdullah Abdullah, the opposition of karzai, is being used by them as a triumph card. In the same time they also are trying to eyewash world mass to justify their presence in Afghanistan in the name of instability and disorder and, of course, reestablishment and resettlement of firm democracy. Taliban is, obviously, a genuine excuse to continue their presence but nowadays they are, in fact, tired with war. So Talibans are not to be an option for them. They want their presence ensured without war what can only be justified with an Afghanistan full with political turmoil and chaos.

In such a situation Hamid Karzai, a puppet of western block, will ascend in power through a shabby, shaky and trembling rope which in any time may tear or to be cut with the tricky scissor, Abdullah Abdullah the real name of the scissor. If they can serve the purpose through their puppet government, no matter Karzai or Abdullah, why they will let the war with Taliban, once created and nurtured by them to hunt Russia but letter denied to serve their purpose. As a result Afghanistan is going to be a place of selective democracy, selected by the USA, to ensure western interest without war and at the same time to confirm their attendance in the region to tight, and teach China. If a selected democracy in Afghanistan permits the USA to contain a foreseeable foe, namely China, without any excuse why they will not let it happen. Who keeps it unpracticed to kill a bird keeping the gun on others shoulder?

A woman is casting her vote

Withdrawal of Military from CHT; an Over View on its Aftermath

2009-09-06T10:44:00.000-07:00

Hills, nowadays, have reached to hill of discussion among the people of Bangladesh from all segments indiscriminately religion, class, profession, gender and even age. The fact that lies behind this is neither a matter of negligence nor a fact of easy to handle but a hard nut to crack. The Chittagong hill tracts area, commonly known as CHT, consists of 5,093 square miles which, from real perspective of calculation, covers ten percent of the total land area of Bangladesh. This is, truly, one side of the coin whenever another side suggests that only this numeric calculation never illustrates the genuine value of the area. This area is relatively rich in natural resources, with fruit growing capability in abundance. There is also timber, bamboo and gas, and possibilities for oil exploration have been actively pursued in recent years. The vicinity is to the North-East of Bangladesh as well as to the north-east of India and are, in the same time, remote strategic areas for both which are normally closed to foreigners from Indian side. Moreover India never permits any international organization even United Nations High Commission for Refugee (UNHCR) in any of the so called refugee camps. All these aspects of the matter make Bangladeshis more cautious, fearful and dubious regarding this region.

In such a sophisticated situation and background when Inter Service Public Relations (ISPR) announced in a media release that the Government of Bangladesh had decided to withdraw 35 temporary camps, three infantry battalions and a brigade of the armed forces from the region without any preplanned preparation, people can never remain in a state of certainty and simplicity. The news turns into a bolt from the blue for the nontribal people of the area as they think them vulnerable, because of some apparent reasons, in absence of military. They, branded as settler, accept, acknowledge and agree this withdrawal of 2,100 troops from the hills by no means whenever contrary to this scenario the tribal people justify it as an insufficient and sluggish process though this is the "biggest" withdrawal of army troops from the Chittagong Hill Tracts since the government signed a peace treaty with the Parbattya Chattagram Jana Sanghati Samity (PCJSS) on 2 December in 1997. Now it has become a matter of justification about the impact of the withdrawal of the military from the area.

Before going to excavate the ground of controversy between two groups, we have to reexamine their stands related to the issue. Then, in the second phase, we can also take an initiative to sketch the long term effect of the withdrawal. Let me first make a focus on the first party’s thought regarding the region.

The tribal people, who really are consist of 13 ethnic groups, justify their demand standing on the platform of Chittagong Hill Tracts Regulation 1900 which permitted the region as an autonomously administered district in British administered India. The treaty also prohibited sale and transfer of land to non-indigenous people. Keeping this regulation, done with a colonial power to protect colonial interest, in their mind the PCJSS presented a five-point demand in 1989 which included: Removal of non-indigenous peoples settled in the CHT after 1947; Withdrawal of all Bangladeshi armed forces from the CHT including non-indigenous police force; Retention of the CHT regulations of 1900 and a constitutional provision restricting its amendment; Autonomy for the CHT with its own legislature and recognition of Jumma nations right to self-determination; and Deployment of a United Nations peace-keeping force and implementation of these measures under the auspices of the UN. Though the 1997 treaty does not have a total resemblance with those five demands, the PCJSS never comes back ward from those demands in their activities.

The question that comes now is how much these demands cope with the reality of 21st century. First of all the regulation was signed with a colonial power ensuring colonial interest neglecting the interest of common, real and permanent people of this subcontinent. Now this is an independent state which always should try, as all nation states do, to uphold national interest not any colonial interest. Secondly the regulation came to an end in 1963 when The Chittagong Hill Tracts lost its special status and autonomy under an amendment to the Pakistan Constitution. Thirdly restriction on arrival of people from different parts, though within the state, is never a concept of 21st century when people with a handsome number go abroad passing international boundary. Moreover Bangladesh is a densely populated country where about 1000 people live per square kilometers. Contrary to this reality there, in the hill tract areas, is a very low density of population. Because of river erosion and natural disasters sometimes people from different parts of the country go there for settling with their own accord. In this regard some argue that land is the main source of the earning of tribal people and if they find their land lost they have no way to survive. Yes this is one of the burning questions to be reexamined and rescreened through the goggles of impartiality and reality. Nowadays it is an age of science and technology which has made industrialization a must for Bangladesh as she has a small land with vast population. For this, if industrialization and modernization can be accelerated and materialized, a small segment of land can be used for such a production which in past could be gained by a gigantic area. So question of modernization and industrialization comes first not the amount of land. Bearing this fact in mind the demand of PCJSS is to be redefined and reconsidered.

If the scenario does not change and government prolongs the pullout of military the impact will be beneficiary neither for tribal people nor for settlers and the real loser will be Bangladesh. First of all a power vacuum will be created, if pull out of military is done all of a sudden, and different segments of tribal groups will try to bridge this gap of power vacuum with a jaundiced eye of individual and group interest which in the long run will pave the way of permanent anarchy in the region. In such a poisonous circumstances regaining calm and quiet state will be a matter of building castle in the air and powers outside country will be able to get themselves on the driving seat regarding the issue. Thus this step may turn into an acid test of security and integrity, two unchangeable and permanent values for sovereignty. In this connection it is to be kept in mind that there is no affinity among tribal people and anarchy is an ever continuing picture of hill tracts even with the presence of army. The region has been deteriorated alarmingly in recent times as the two main rival organizations of the region, Parbattya Chattagram Jana Sanghati Samity (PCJSS) and the United Peoples Democratic Front (UPDF), and several groups of armed cadres are resorting to open confrontation. Abductions are being followed by kidnappings while put to death are being avenged by horrific killings. A total of 500 persons were taken life, around 100 abducted and more than 1000 injured during the last five years in CHT. As many as 24 fortified clashes between the militants of PCJSS and UPDF had occurred during the same period. Besides, the scoundrels were occupied in gun battles with army men and police eight times during the last four months. The armed cadres of both PCJSS and UPDF had set fire to tribal villages and markets in isolated hill areas of CHT. Sources said the activities of the rival political parties in CHT resulted in more than 60 gunfights in the last eleven months. Moreover many incidents of abduction took place in the CHT including the kidnapping of three foreigners from Naniarchar under Rangamati district in immediate past.

The above state never permits any pull out of army from the region but it is also as true as the sun comes after night that an unending attendance of military is never can be a solution. Military must have to come back in cantonment either today or tomorrow. But it must be done with a slow but steady process ensuring security of both state and people beyond considering whether tribal or nontribal. At the same time we have to take into consideration the citizens’ psycho-socio-political as well as the civil and economic aspects of their day-to-day life and address them with sufficient care. Industrialization and development should be the first priority work so that dependency over land can be reduced considerably. Bridge between tribal and nontribal people is another must but tough task for government. Mutual belief, respect and dependency should be created by different measures in various fields. The tribal people have to make a concern of an integral part of main stream people. Thus by slow and sluggish but steady and sturdy process the region should be made as a heaven place and military should be pulled out by a preplanned way without hampering national interest and security. Otherwise not only the nontribal people but also the tribal people will have to surrender to an anarchy, mistrust and misfortune. None of the parties will be benefitted and in the long run Bangladesh will be a victim and scape-goat of international politics.

Election in India: implication for Bangladesh

2009-07-04T15:00:00.000-07:00

The inconceivable cut and dried victory of Congress, projected neither by BJP nor by Congress itself, in topical Indian parliamentary election has paved the way for Manmohon Singh, already named to become Prime Minister for another term, to turn into the first PM after Jawaharlal Nehru in 1961 through a successive election. It is, from any point of view, the Congress' greatest show down within more than a half century. The party itself won 203 seats; an amount they scored in 1984 and 1991.In the ultimate reckon, the Congress led UPA triumphed 260 chairs, just humorously squat of the magical figure of 272 through which the parliament is now ready to pledge national interest under steady and balanced circumstances. From the beginning of the 90s of the immediate past century the general fashion for Indian national parliament election was an undefined victory for either BJP or Congress with a torn out shabby alliance with multicolored small parties. The nature of the alliance was never based on any ideology, well established definition, aim or objective rather to grasp power for the leading party and to exercise individual power, hunt ministry, guarantee regional interest and so on with big bargaining power for the small parties of the alliance. Conquering such an elongated stalemate circumstances the recent great-grand-gorgeous gaining of power by Congress has, obviously, a great impact on both of her internal and external affairs. In such a situation how Bangladesh can manage her relations with India, the big and brutal neighbor, and draw interest in a most secure way is a matter to be discussed.

Before going to expose the probable curve line of Bangla-India relations under Awami-Congress regimes, the landslide winner in parliamentary election almost at same time in their own countries, we have to make a glance at the nature on Indian foreign policy formulating process and the role of Congress in this particular issue. Since the independence of India the formulation of foreign policy affairs got the priority choice of the prime minister office. From Jawahar Lal Nehru, Lal Bahadur Sastri to Indira Gandhi and even Raziv Gandhi the prime minister was the pioneer to detect foreign policy of India. After institutionalization of Research and Analysis Wing (RAW), the intelligent unit of India introduced to formulate and craft occurrences in neighboring countries by Indira Gandhi, the relations of India vis-à-vis regional states from South Asia became a dual concern of Prime Minister Office and green signal of RAW. In those days Foreign Ministry or Ministry of External Affairs was nothing but an instrument to implement policy not to generate policy. But day by day the scenario has changed drastically and now a days, in India, foreign policy is not a matter of either one person’s choice or one party’s vision but a well planned outcomes of different organs of government with a practical view of national interest. As a result Indian foreign policy, like most other countries, becomes a true Indian policy not a Congress foreign policy or BJP foreign policy and following this process bureaucrats become the real engineers.

Observing this shifting set-up in policy formulating process of India one may argue there may be no considering point for Dhaka whoever there is in power in Delhi. But the nature of the victory of Congress has given India a stable and firm government to maintain a hard core relations with nations which in near past was a day dream. How much it befalls intricate to take a foreign policy decision when an alliance led government is on rule in India, you will become clear if you recall the situation which was evolved regarding nuclear deals with the USA. In that particular event the then UPA government led by Congress with a great support from Communist block of West Bengal got a crack and even the government could manage a shabby escape from wiping up as Communist bloc did not support the nuclear deal with the USA and withdrew their support from the government. Thus the government stood in front of a question whether it should continue or halt in the midst of tenure. The political drama got its highest climax when both the CPM and Congress were brought to the question of offering bribe to collect vote to their own side. Now this stable government has no probability to face such a pungent impasse state. In the mean time it will be able to concentrate its full energy to invest in policing and solving problems with neighboring countries without any hesitation.

For Bangladesh, the results have opened opportunities on a number of fronts if Congress allows and bears a positive attitude to resolve all problems with Bangladesh in a cooperative way. It will allow Bangladesh’s newly government to interact with a stable government in New Delhi led by a resurgent Congress with which the Awami League has traditional and historical affinity. As a Prime Minister Dr. Manmohon Singh is wise and positive and we can expect that in his second term he will focus more on improvement of relations with neighbors including Bangladesh. The election will bring into Indian politics a new generation of leaders led by Rahul Gandhi who can be expected to look forward to for a better South Asia. We were disappointed at the way relations have been handled since the AL came to office in January, particularly surprised that the Indian Foreign Minister visited Dhaka and had failed to meet the leader of the opposition while meeting the Army Chief. This Indian behavior strengthens the previous assumption that India is greedier to turn Indo-Bangla relations into Indo-Awami relations. We hope the new government will be more sensitive towards this issue. From Bangladesh side it should be given concern that no internal political issue get involved in building tactful relations with India.

The new governments in India and Bangladesh are expected to run parallel over the next five years. These are momentous times when opportunities are knocking at door, who knows how much India will attest to materialize this occasion neglecting one side beneficial but another side irritating activities. In Bangladesh, there is long cherished mindset for better relations with India based on mutuality, equality and solidarity. A strong government under Manmohon Singh can ensure a similar change in the Indian mindset. Bangladesh, in the mean time, should also make diplomatic efforts to reach Sonia Gandhi, the real playmaker in Indian political stage, for her support in building Bangladesh-India relations towards a win-win condition where competition, coercion and compulsion should be replaced by cooperation, concession and compromise. Bangladesh has another task to contact Rahul, the new icon in Indian political theatre, and manage him to change traditional behavior of one party gaining policy from India towards Bangladesh. As it is debut match for Rahul in Indian election he has already become able to manage the young generation towards a new look about everything. Bangladeshi young and energetic professionals have a difficult but not impossible task to draw his attention about new and changed Bangladesh.

The Indian elections have many lessons for us, for internal implication, if we are willing to take. The grace with which LK Advani accepted defeat is a lesson that, if taken by our leading politicians, could really open a world of opportunity for us. His offer to resign to take responsibility for his front and party's defeat is a democratic tradition that we could emulate in Bangladesh. On his part, Manmohon Singh sought Advani's support and constructive criticism to run the new government, saying: “we must open a new chapter in the working relations between the government and the principal opposition.” Sonia Gandhi's leadership style where she has put the nation before self is one our political leaders could follow. Moreover the down word journey of leftist parties especially in West Bengle and Kerala, the leftist heaven house for long period of time, gives us a clear cut idea about invalidity of left side politics in this new world. Their old fashioned common buzzword of class struggle, bourgeois governments etc are not only mysterious to new generation but also invalid to them.

The most important and great observing thing for political parties of Bangladesh, as both Awami league and BNP need to select new leaders in near future, from Indian election is the process of emerging new leaders in politics. The surfacing out of Rahul Gandhi in Congress is a role model about how to become a leader maintaining affinity of senior leaders and conquering people’s heart. The Rahul race in Indian politics has neither released mistrust in senior leaders nor excavated path for flattering people. But we, here in Bangladesh, have seen another scenario in near past because of some reasonable options. Who knows how much we will be able to take lesson from the burning example set by Rahul, Sonya and Obviously Monmohan Singh. Who knows how much we will take time to maintain such a healthy democratic process.

The Deadly Dam; a Dhaka-Delhi Debate

2009-06-30T00:24:00.000-07:00

The Proposed Dam

The Bangla proverb ‘panir moto shohoj’ (as simple as water) has, today, become a matter of jeer as water, itself, is neither easy to get nor easy to treat but a fact of both politics and struggle. The more days are gone, the water politics becoming more severe, difficult to be managed round the globe indiscriminately continent and subcontinent. The world is prevalent with disagreements over waters, especially over use and management of waters of international rivers. Rivers with transnational boundary i.e. Brahmaputra, Mekong, Barak etc are becoming subjects of controversy over the right to manage the waters. Some countries, enjoying the lacking of a central authority of implementing international law, exercise power through military or economic means to weaker countries to justify control of watercourses flow through multinational borders. Conflicts emerge when countries upstream of a water resource use the water available to them to wield more power depriving the downstream country or countries. The curve of Bangla-India relations always gets its ups and downs with the discourse of water sharing issues since the independence of Bangladesh.

In recent years the water issue got the highest peak of debate between Dhaka and Delhi when the latter started to handle Indian River linking project with a view to materializing based on one sided decision and interest which, in near future, will be a hemlock for Bangladesh. In such an ever continuing controversial condition there has been added salt into injury by The Tipaimukh Multipurpose Hydroelectric Project, to be constructed 500 Meters downstream from the confluence of Barak and Tuivai Rivers in Manipur over Barak River with firm generation capacity of 401.25 MW. The North Eastern Electric Power Corporation (NEEPCO) of India was earlier slated to undertake the project with the Manipur Govt at 5% equity till it was replaced recently by National Hydroelectric Power Corporation (NHPC).
Dam Protesting Indian People

The Tipaimukh dam issue currently continues to dominate the domain of political, media, intellectual and civil society’s discourse in Bangladesh with a unilateral demand for revocation of India’s decision for the project. Massive public protest in different forms i.e. rallies, protest meetings, strikes and so on against the dam continue to gain momentum in Bangladesh. The bitter experience of severe water shortage and multifaceted impacts after commissioning of Farakka Barrage over the Ganges River by India has brought the people’s concern to a concrete opposition against any type of barrier in river no matter it is titled as dam or barrage. Concerns raised include staggering environmental degradation, economic crisis and hydrological drought. The damming of Barak River, seriously limiting free flowing Surma and Kushyara rivers will disrupt agriculture, irrigation, drinking water supply, navigation etc and reduce recharge of ground water during lean season, affecting all dug wells and shallow tube wells. Bangladesh gets 7 to 8 percent of its total water from the Barak River. The Surma-Kushyara with its maze of numerous tributaries and distributaries support agriculture, irrigation navigation, drinking water supply, fisheries, wildlife in the entire Sylhet division and in peripheral areas of Dhaka division and industries like fertilizer, electricity, gas. The dam would also leave millions jobless with the drying up of the two rivers. Millions of people are dependent on hundreds of water bodies, fed by the Barak, in the Sylhet region for fishing, agriculture and allied activities.

What is India’s stand about Tipaimukh dam and what they argue to make it a legal project? What the people of India think about the project? Moreover international norms of behavior regarding an international watercourse are to be discussed here with a touch of impartial and neutral position. Firstly India has not released a wide discussion on the project in a detailed form. The authority titled North Eastern Electric Power Corporation Limited has published neither the detailed nor the full description of the project. It only identifies that the project will be one of the largest hydroelectric projects in Eastern India to date and will be located 500 meters downstream of the confluence of the Tuivai and Barak Rivers in the District of Churacchander in the State of Manipur, near the Manipur - Mizoram border. They also inform that the Project will have a 6 X 250 MW power house and will be completed in an estimated time of 12 years. After completion of this Project, the perennial flood problems in the Barak valley in the State of Assam will be stopped, who knows how much reliable, and fertile land in this plain shall become rice bound for entire North East.

Protest in Bangladesh

It is, however, a source of fear that the people of India both inhabit and non-inhabit in this region do not support the project as they argue that the implementation of such projects brings the forests in great pressure, compounding the impacts upon conservation of flora and fauna. Indian people express their experience regarding such indirect impacts which have been seen in such other projects taken in India in different places i.e. Manathody hydroelectric project in Wynad, Bodhghat project, Sardar Sarovar project in Gujarat, Narmada Sagar project in M.P. and Tehri Dam project in U.P. The situation turns even into such an extreme level in case of The Silent Valley Project that it was eventually abandoned in the face of the threat it could cause to the biodiversity of virgin tropical rain forest.
Sources said that Indian different laws e.g. The Promulgation of Wildlife (Protection) Act, Forest (Conservation) Act, and the Environment (Protection) Act as well as the National Forest Policy, Guidelines for Hydropower and Siting of Industry and Policy on Hydro Power Development laid a firm policy approach and statutory provision to strengthen the environmental conservation. Any developmental activity requires environmental clearance from the Central Government. These include river valley projects including hydroelectric projects and irrigation projects. Public hearing meetings in any such activity are mandatory. All of these laws and provisions have not maintained in an accurate and firm way in case of Tipaimukh dam. This is only one aspect of the opinion of Indian people. There is also another strong ally who opposes the project from their question of existence as they will be the real victim of the project because of being the dweller in of the region.

The affected peoples of Manipur and Mizoram have all rejected the construction of Tipaimukh dam project and that the project proponents pursued the project vigorously with little care for the rights of the affected peoples. Consequently, the exaggerated peoples are undisputed and consolidating their postures to guard their land and resources and to shield their sources of survival. While the affected peoples along the Mizoram side complains about lack of transparency, non provision of vital information for basis of decision making, the Zeliangrong peoples of Tamenglong district complains of failure of project proponents to take their consent with due necessary provision of all information on the project. Till date, the affected peoples in Mizoram, Manipur, Assam are still denied the Detailed Project Report. There is another factor of objection that the project has been sidelining the irreparable implications to the intrinsic survival dependence of affected peoples over their land and resources in Manipur and Mizoram. The irresponsible conduct and lack of accountability of project authorities in previous mega projects, as for instance, the National Hydroelectric Power Corporation with the economic, social and environmental devastation caused by its Loktak Multipurpose Hydroelectric Project has also been cited as another reason.

A huge number of citizens, typically Zeliangrong and Hmar tribes, will be displaced enduringly and deprived of the livelihood. The dam will submerge areas of about 311 sq. km covering 90 villages with 1,310 families, including 27,242 hectares of forest and cultivable land and posing serious threat to the rich biodiversity, flora and fauna of the region. The forested hills most in Tamenglong and Churachandpur Districts are the habitat of rare and endangered species of reptiles and mammals, including pythons, gibbons, leopards and deer.
These are some of the realizations and assessments done by Indians keeping the Indian interest and profit in mind. Some other experiences regarding such hydro projects from different corners of the world do not give any positive answers from any point of view.

If we judge the effect of the Tipaimukh dam from our point of view and sketch the real scenario, there is waiting just a nightmare for us. Adverse effects of the Tipaimukh dam will be superbly distressing and damaging for Bangladesh. Environmental degradation, hydrological drought and economic crisis will cause irreversible scratch. Suddenly, the ever living Surma and Kushyara will turn dry and remain so for Nov-May which obviously and immediately will disrupt agriculture, irrigation, drinking water supply, navigation etc. A Six to seven month long dry conditions will either stop or, obviously, lessen recharge of ground water which over the years will lower the ground water level, affecting all dug wells, shallow tube wells, as it happened in south western region of Bangladesh as a result of drastic withdrawal of the Ganges water at Farakka. Agriculture that depends on surface as well as ground water will be affected gravely.
The two rivers with their numerous tributaries and distributaries support agriculture, irrigation navigation, drinking water supply, fisheries, wildlife in numerous haors and low lying areas in the entire Sylhet division and some peripheral areas of Dhaka division. The river system also supports internal navigation, wildlife in haors, industries like fertilizer, electricity, gas etc. The site selected for Tipaimukh project is one of the most active in the entire world, recording at least two major earthquakes of 8+ in the Reichter Scale during the past 50 years. The proposed Tipaimukh HEP is envisaged for construction in one of the most geologically unstable area as the proposed Tipaimukh dam axis falls on a ‘fault line’ potentially active and possible epicenter for major earthquakes. Several earthquakes over magnitude 5-7 on recorded within a radius of 6 km to 100 km of Tipaimukh in the past 150 years and the epicentre of the last earthquake in 1957, with a magnitude of 8 lies at approximately 80 km from the dam site in an east-northeast direction.

Massive environmental dilapidation will come about, drastically affecting weather and climate, turning a wet cooler territory into a hot uncomfortable cauldron. The severity of micro-climate causing heat and dry conditions will, slowly but surely, increase in intensity spreading over a large area over the years. It may be mentioned that rainfall that the area gets for 4 to 5 months and flood water that will be released from the dam for a short period will not be enough to refill the ground water.

Scarcity of water will cause siltation on river beds. Any high rainfall will occur in the catchment area of the dam, enormous quantity of sediment-laden flood water will be released which will cause severity of flood in the Surma and the Kushyara channels which would be already raised for low flow. This will further raise the water level causing floods in adjoining additional areas. Navigation in river channels in the Meghna, a combination of above two rivers, will face depleted water flow and consequent sedimentation and severity of flooding in the wet season. Surface irrigation will be in jeopardy. The Meghna up to Chandpur will suffer from the adverse effects. The Meghna-Padma will have low flow which will accentuate saline backwater intrusion in the Padma channel which is already affected by the low flow for the withdrawal of water of the Ganges at Farakka.

The above scenario knocks on every one’s concern for formulizing a policy to protect establishment of Tipaimukh dam on the demand of our survival. In such a situation Bangladesh has to take two types of initiatives i.e. particular and over all. In particular basis the Tipaimukh will only be focused and in this phase we can work on two phases first governmental and second non governmental public based initiative. In government level negotiation with India focusing on international river law, environmental law and so on. The Indian authorities need to be reminded the UN Convention on the Non-Navigational Uses of International Watercourses might not as yet have come into force but there are still principles of equity that apply. There is recognition and general acceptance that water management and sharing has to be done in a reasonable manner that would help riparian countries to attain optimal sustainable utilization without causing significant harm to other co-riparian nations. In this regard we can inscribe the quotation from Convention on the Law of the Non-navigational Uses of International Watercourses 1997 adopted, but not yet in force, by the General Assembly of the United Nations on 2 1 May 1997. The convention says in its article five to ensure Equitable and reasonable utilization and participation. The article five says

1. Watercourse States shall in their respective territories utilize an international watercourse in an equitable and reasonable manner. In particular, an international watercourse shall be used and developed by watercourse States with a view to attaining optimal and sustainable utilization thereof and benefits there from, taking into account the interests of the watercourse States concerned, consistent with adequate protection of the watercourse.

2. Watercourse States shall participate in the use, development and protection of an international watercourse in an equitable and reasonable manner. Such participation includes both the right to utilize the watercourse and the duty to cooperate in the protection and development thereof, as provided in the present Convention.
Lastly, there are the provisions contained in Article 6 of the Ganges Water Sharing Treaty of 1996, which stipulate that both countries will have to agree with regard to management of all the common rivers.

On government level initiative some other factors and laws will be given priority such as international environmental and ecological perspectives and so on. The Tipaimukh also demands about protecting rights of tribal people. Institutions and organizations work on this sectors should be informed the situation with statistics, data, information prepared by specialists and intellectual of the relevant sectors.

On public level we can work both beyond and within border. The diasporas live in different countries in the world should be attached in this protest. They can arrange rallies, processions, public hearing, public meeting and public awareness programs round the globe which will increase a public awareness and sympathy towards Bangladeshis. In this connection it is accountable that a good figure of people from Sylhet division, the worst victim of the dam, lives in the UK and the USA. They also have to be accumulated to these protecting activities. On public level we can also make a bridge between people live inside India who are also affected by the dam and can take combined initiatives to rethink India about the dam.

What is required today is transparency and political will. One hopes that the visit of our Parliamentary delegation will be followed not only by intensive discussion on the basis of shared data between relevant experts from both countries but also meetings between the two political leaderships. An acceptable equation has to be reached between sovereign rights and national interests. There has to be a careful scrutiny and a bi-partisan approach in this context within Bangladesh. Emotion must not be allowed to affect pragmatism.

For a long term and common solution for all problems, evolved from common rivers and watercourses, we have to make a regional forum comprising South Asia and South East Asian countries just like African Convention on the Conservation of Natural Resources. We also have to a make a look to other regions of the world where international rivers are shared with nondisputed and equity based. Examining all those initiatives taken in different parts of the world we have to draft and formulate a region based every one winning model of river and watercourse management system.

Before going to take all these efforts, first of all, we have to make it sure that all the problems regarding Tipaimukh and other rivers between Bangladesh and India should be handled with unity, patriotism and rationally not focused on irrational perception. Only then we can assure our existence. Who knows when we will understand this easy truth!

US attitude vis-a-vis North Korea

2009-02-02T23:26:00.000-08:00

“I’m the next” was never the feeling of the Democratic Peoples’ Republic of Korea (DPRK), commonly known as North Korea even either after the invasion on Afghanistan or aggression on Iraq by the USA in the name of ‘War on terror’ though she along with Iran was branded as ‘axis of evil’ by the same country, America, based on a common floor of accuse. On the contrary to the set-up of US policy of preemptive attack against any of the parties involved in seeking WMDs, whoever knows what does it mean and whether there really is any country or not, Iran is always under the menace of a possible USA’s front of raid. Why this discriminatory behavior between Iran and North Korea exists though both of them are categorized under the same umbrella of so called ‘rogue state’ or ‘axis of evil’? The answer of this question will probably offer you the principle of USA’s policy and attitude towards North Korea vis-a-vis other discolored states.

The American policy towards North Korea includes neither a complete release of threat nor a panic of assail. This hammer-pillow tricky play is handled concerning two hidden grounds e.g. to eye wash the people that war on terror is not a war on Islam and Muslims and to make a perpetual pressure on North Korea to refrain her from being a nuclear power. It’s as true as the day comes after night that no document, no mater whoever it makes including Mr. Bush himself, can prove any connection of North Korea with any terrorist group, organization and country. But in the same time North Korea is only one country from the list who has a capability to make a physical attack on USA through Taepo-dong-2 missile which covers South Korea, Japan, or perhaps even Hawaii, Alaska, or San Francisco. In this context we have to revisit the American and North Korean objectives towards each other.

America has never considered North Korea as a patron of terrorists either religious or any other forms but, at the time, is always concerned about her aspiration for nuclear weapons, advanced missile technology covering her physical frontier, other conventional and nonconventional weapons. But how much headache does America have regarding North Korea? Perhaps it suffers less annoyance than Iraq, Iran and even Libya. Because of some strategic points of view she always over focuses North Korea as a source of intimidation. The most important reason is, as I’ve already mentioned, to bring a flavor of non Islamic identity on the term ‘war on terror’. With the exception of this eye-puzzling argument there are also real grounds for overwhelming North Korea as an adverse party. The Pentagon has inflated the North Korean threat in order to rationalize its desire for a missile defense system in Asia really for containing China and, if need, Russia; to justify a capacity to fight another war simultaneously, and to explain the need to maintain 37,000 troops in South Korea. The question of legitimization and legalization of the presence of American troops in South Korea comes first for building an image of devastating North Korea in the world or at least in the South Asian region. Moreover since Clinton administration America is trying to over emphasis the necessity for implementing national missile defense system (NMD). Without showing a common, visible and proclaimed enemy how can you employ such a balance of power dismissing military logistics? In a true sense, who bothers you like or not, in this USA guided unipolar world there is no sway to dare her in both economic and military fields, two mutually interdependent elementary sources of muscle and political power. Having no threat at present the USA is planning game for the possible upcoming shadow enemy, some suggest, China. But the problem lies on the matter that it’s not possible for socio-politico-economic rationales to label China as a declared concerned state. In such an odd and mystifying situation the USA is fervent to slaughter China keeping gun on the shoulder of North Korea in the course of making a blame game over her. If a destructive image of North Korea let you an opening to exterminate three birds in one stone i.e. legalization of the deployment of 37,000 troops, implementation of NMD and containing future contender party; why would you not ensure it done?

One may ask if there is no probability of aggression on North Korea why she worked in full swing to acquire nuclear weapon. The answer goes straight forward within two points as increasing bargaining power and, secondly, protecting regime interest. Being an acutely poverty injured country North Korea needs international assistance in energy, food, agriculture and other economic sectors as well as a direct relations with America. She knows if she is not aware of gaining nuclear weapon America will never pay any heed towards her needs and as a result dirty blame game will get the worst point and at last nothing is possible to be obtained. Thus bargaining capability turns into another interpretation of nuclear capability. From the second point of view, described as regime interest, the present government of DPRK, like Saddam Husain of Iraq, is more antagonists to USA rather than state itself. Who does not know the real true that Saddam Hussein would not be dug up and finally Iraq would not be attacked accused of nuclear weapons and WMDs if he really had those things in hand? So the real fault of Saddam was not ‘to try for nuclear weapons’ but ‘not to try for nuclear weapons’. The present government of DPRK did not craft the same slip though it promised four times not to seek for nuclear weapons i.e. through Non-Proliferation Treaty in 1985, Inter-Korean agreement on denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula in 1992, The 1994 Agreed Framework with the United States and Six Party Joint Statement 2005 about not to attain nuclear weapon.

In the coming days America may retake a policy of not to follow hard attitude of implementing fully the UN sanctions to penalize and isolate the regime; but a soft attitude of keeping the door open to discussions through the Six Party Talks. Basically Clinton administration started that policy and ran a long race and at last reached a solution named ‘The 1994 Agreed Framework’. But the step did not get a continuing shape because of Bush’s aggressive attitude. The American presidential election along with economic disruption may insist her to return the old policy but under some conditions. First of all America wants to assure not to develop any nuclear weapons and arrest the programme on the foundation of touch-the-switch-off immediately and trustfully. In return it may recognize the running ruling elite of the DPRK and economic as well as energy aid. In this context you can’t forget the other parties of the table specially Japan and South Korea. The peaceful rapprochement between two Koreas is the fundamental policy of South Korea through “Sunshine policy". On the contrary Japan is willing to contain North Korea in its full meaning by her all means. In this multi dimensional interests of different countries related to the problem will make an awkward state for the USA. Neither the policy of rapprochement nor the policy of full containment is USA’s interest today. So America, in this region, will develop the policy of blame game against North Korea in a soft tune and in the same time will furnish Japan with a better military position obviously under the USA’s management with slight touch of India. Thus in the name of North Korea, which is not the real concern of America, China will be contained. Who does not recognize that this is the genuine diagram of USA in this area?

Policy towards peaceful Palestine; No probability possesses Gaza penetration

2009-02-02T23:22:00.000-08:00

“Blood is the most valueless, worthless and insignificant thing in the world” is probably a statement not to be accepted accusing of its atypical meaning to guarantee respect en route for human community. On the contrary to this account if someone says “The blood of the Palestinian people is the least valuable, most unnecessary and redundant thing in the world” it seems that most of ‘you’ have no say to this corollary. Yes! Here the pronoun ‘you’ has been used in italic completely enthusiastically as the indication of the pronoun varies from person to person. If this ‘you’ encircles the so called world leaders; no matter they are from two Americas, European Union, Arab land or where not let alone atrocious Jews larders, the previous assumption expressed in the second phase is obviously beyond question. On the other hand if this ‘you’ envelops world’s mass and moral based community they will strongly rebuff the blood peeling ferocious assault towards the fortune deprived Palestinian people thought the real tragedy is that the mass are always thrown away from the scale of judgment regarding whatever is to be time-honored as well as abandoned. Consequently the same blood from the Israeli acquires the highest worth but embraces only negligence if drops from the innocent Palestinian people; the real possessor of the Arab land. The last one sided assail on Gaza strip from Israel, really to be read America in lieu of Israel as many argue her as ‘Middle Eastern version of America, is nothing but another burning example of such brutal treatment towards Arab Muslims of Palestine.

The almost month long shadow American molest on Gaza is, in fact, a duplication of frequently, at least once in a year, harassment on Palestinian people to destroy their slow decaying psychological and physical strength for thirst for independency, ownership of own land won unjustly by Israeli hyenas by means of tricky play of international playmakers from the field of international politics. This molest, however, includes every type of inhuman activities from using white phosphorus bomb, though prohibited from any angle of international law, to human-shield. In the name of bringing to a halt the simple rocket firing by Hamas she used all sorts of ultramodern conventional weapons from the tri-sided application I.e. navy, army, air force and what not. Was the target Hamas or the unarmed and sinless deprived people? If Hamas was the goal then the answer is Israeli attack went completely in vain as only below fifty Hamas activists were killed whenever more than thirteen hundred people were roughly slaughtered with an unimaginable loss of twenty thousand habitats, one thousand and five hundred mills, factories, workshops, countless mosques and even schools driven by UN and so forth. For this reason it has been mentioned in the above that the attack was not for hunting Hamas but a routine work of Israel to seal Palestinian independence in a slow and sluggish, but definitely effective, way. The real goal of this writing is, however, to review the upshot and characteristics of the assault from the political backdrop of the region not merely portraying the fact of damage, killing and other physically visible items as you are already well known about those matters including pictures through news papers and other print and electronic media available around you.

Through Gaza assail there has been created a never erasing crack in two fronts i.e. between and among Palestinians as well as Arab leaders since Hamas has already pointed fingers towards Fatah for backing up Israel to rein in Hamas leaders from their dens. This is the first time when one Palestinian is accused of helping their common adversary the Zionist against another of Palestinian. Though there are inescapable differences between Hamas and Fatah from political point of view as well as policy adopting process, there was no direct clash at least in a massive scale till Arafat’s death let alone lending a hand to Israel against one another. But this time honored unwritten principle between Hamas and Fatah is now under question which from any point of view is the most important achievement for Israel. What a wonderful equation it is for Israel that a Palestinian goes against another Palestinian! This tendency of split has been glimpsed in the second level as Arab leaders also became divided in captivating any united choice. Though never in any phase of history Arabs leaders were capable to capture a combined step in any affair, it is also true they have crafted an amalgamated choice whenever there was attack from Israel on the Palestine. But now at the peak of climax of slaughtering, destroying and eradicating Palestinian they showed differences in the question of Hamas. What a tragedy it is for the Palestinian people that the age old policy of divide and rule is now getting on the extreme level against them not only by their national leaders but also by regional leaders through a tactful policy applied by the Western powers. Is that the last catastrophe for Palestine? If you are an open eyed person with a power of filtering politics, some eye-catching changing, which go beyond the region, have already been scanned by you. Let’s excavate that scenario.

In the above lines we have visualized development of state within the region but there have been taken place some apparent transformations in the political behavior beyond the region. The most important one is the USA’s stand which meets a u-turn in the latest Gaza attack. Prior to that attack all the affairs related to Middle East were tightly controlled, visualized, organized and even materialized under a full attachment of the USA’s attitude, willing, permission and signal. This is the first time when Israel could manage the USA to resettle the decision in UN by direct force though taken, nurtured and made with full attachment of her secretary of foreign affairs. America is always used as safeguard for Israel in UN but not by force which happened first in the event of Gaza. What does it say? You may think nothing but the scenario tells that the full control of the USA is shifting to Israel as she is not willing to rule the region via America. If it comes true, the total phenomenon will change not only dramatically but also drastically as Israel has no intention to pay any heed towards international law, customs and rituals. In spite of this interpretation we may have another alternative that this was an exception which was possible for the weak leadership of Mr. Bush and with the visionary and missionary aim of Obama, the new Afro-American black inhabitant in White House, any kind of disobedience from Israel is possible to be curbed. We all hope this to come true but reality, most of the time, does not follow common will. Another significant change was Canada’s new stand about the attack in UN. Though in reality none of the Western powers takes any step goes against Israel, they always try to act as if they did supporting the Palestinian people. Now in this case Canada went directly against Palestine. You can never take it as a usual incident as it may pave the way for other Euro-American nations to go directly against Palestine in future dangers. If it happens frequently Palestine will turn into nothing but a hell or grave for Arab.

After the whole discussion now make a bird’s eye view on the total aftermath of the Gaza assault. The facts that will come in your mind can be described in short as the division of Palestinian people as well as Arab leaders in the region and transformation of power structure from the USA to Israel and at the same time an alteration of Euro-American, excluding the USA, moral support from Palestine to Israel. If those happen why I should not say what I depicted in the first paragraph within inverted commas-“The blood of the Palestinian people is the least valuable, most unnecessary and redundant in the world.” Tell me why I should not say it!

Contemporary Tibet politics

2009-02-02T23:20:00.000-08:00

You need neither to be an academic nor to be a foreign policy analyst to come back with the query regarding the foundation of China’s relations viz-a-viz other countries. Yes! You got the point and it’s cogent not only to you but also to all that the first and foremost prerequisite clause to maintain normal relations with China is to acknowledge ‘One China Policy’. What does it mean by the term ‘One China Policy’ and why does China need an autonomous principle whenever all the countries follow the same core value technically to be told ‘maintaining territorial integrity’ in keeping up both internal and foreign policies without developing an independent code i.e. ‘One America Policy’ or ‘One Pakistan Policy’? This unique policy, admitted by China, confirms us about her great integration problem though she was able to annex Hong Kong fruitfully. It, however, is a principle that there is one China and that mainland China, Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan are all parts of that China. This is the broad aspect of the definition as most of the time the designation refers only the name of Taiwan to be embraced in a narrow perspective under the condition that China’s claim over Macau and Hong Kong is proved and widely time-honored. In this context it is surprisingly noticeable that neither the broad nor the narrow explanation of the term ‘One China Policy’ ever integrates the name of Tibet as though there were no trouble over that particular territory. But the wheel of history has turned. In one hand the relations between China and Taiwan is coming closer particularly after the ascending of the new government in power under Ma Ying-jeou, though the process is tight and tough as USA is always adding fuel to the flame, the question of Tibet has come to focus in the global political arena as a protest of Tibetan has been managed with a bloody way.

The history of Tibet, known as the roof of the world, is full with great clumsy. The debate starts with the question of geographical identity as some argue it is adjoining to Central Asia and in the same time some suggest as a part of South Asia. The history of united Tibet starts under the ruling of Songtsän Gampo(604–50 CE) who spreads the kingdom in the valley of Yarlung River. Latter it came to the contact of Arabs and eastern Turks as some advocate that the word Tibet is derived from the Arabic word Tubbat which is derived via Persian from the Turkic word Tobad, meaning "the heights". Under Kublai Khan, the prominent Mongol warrior and founder of Yuan Dynasty spreading Northern China, much of Central Asia, Russia and modern Ukraine, Tibet came under Yuan Dynasty. No matter Tibet was a part of any dynasty or ruled under tributary rulers the relations between Tibet and China did not go, most of the time, with a straight line. It is true that various Chinese dynasties had on several occasions interfered in Tibetan affairs and simultaneously it is equally true that various Tibetan kings and rulers had invaded China or otherwise exercised influence in Chinese affairs. On one occasion in 763 AD Tibetan troops even occupied Chang’an - the then Chinese capital - deposed the Chinese Emperor who was not friendly towards the Tibetans and appointed the son of another branch of the royal family as Emperor. In 82 it was decided through a treaty that the two countries shall never interfere in each other’s affairs; believing that ‘Chinese shall be happy in the land of China and Tibetans shall be happy in the land of Tibet.’ The text of this Treaty were carved on three stone pillars in two capitals of Lhasa and Chang’an and the third one for the border Gugu Meru. But neither party pursued the commitment and finally China annexed Tibet in between 1949-1951 and signed a treaty titled ‘Agreement on Measures for the Peaceful Liberation of Tibet’ commonly known as ‘17-point Agreement’ in 1951 which confirms in its first point ‘the Tibetan people shall return to the big family of the Motherland-the People's Republic of China. It’s, however, not a matter what contains the agreement as the Tibetan leader 14^th Dalai Lama snubbed the treaty carping that it was not singed by the government and the five-member-delegation party to Beijing led by Kalon Ngapo Ngawang Jigme was enforced to allow the treaty. At the point of a great climax Dalia Lama went to India and founded the exile government in Dharmashala. Since then China is piling the policy of ‘association with China’, ‘genuine autonomy within China’ etc. In this context it is also substantial that none of the big powers or neighbor including India, though it has a great interest regarding Tibet since it could be used as a buffer state, have never disregarded the demand brought by China over Tibet and even astoundingly India held back the question to be conveyed to the United Nations in the name of mutual understanding between China and exile government. So the politics over boycotting Olympic Games arranged firstly in China is not to free Tibet but only to create pressure on China.

If there were no Tibet would there be any issue of refusal about participating in the inauguration program of Olympic by leaders of western countries? Yes and obviously as the day follows night. The question is not Tibet the question is human rights as we see that BBC reported ‘Human rights campaigners accuse China of exaggerating an alleged threat to the Olympics to justify repression of the Muslim Uighur population in Xinjiang.’ Western countries always charge China for violating human rights continuously and why would they allow going the games without any scene creating while it has been practicing for a long history to use the Olympic Games as political pressure in different purposes in several time in numerous occasions. The US boycott of the Soviet games in protest against the invasion of Afghanistan in 1980 and the tit-for-tat boycott by the Soviet and their allies of the LA games in 1984 are proved documentation of politicization of the games.

The dirty political game in the games was started to be carried out from the 1936 Summer Olympics, held in Berlin and frequently repeated in The 1956 Summer Olympics in Melbourne, The 1968 Summer Olympics in Mexico City, the 1976 Summer Olympics in Montreal, Moscow's 1980 Summer Olympics and Los Angeles 1984 Summer Olympics. So the question is not Tibet the issue is human rights the oldest and most used against all countries who are divergent to the west. Tibet has only paved a new front for them. The emergence of new China powerful both economically and militarily with the largest number of population is not a nightmare for the west.

Moreover the frequent stand of China against West in different political views both in and out of United Nations such as regarding Darfur, Iran nuclear deal, support to North Korea, and making obstacle in taking measures against Mugabe is annoying to them. USA also thinks China as a naked threat to its unchallenged hegemony over the globe in near future. In this circumstance the blame game of violation of human rights is exercised as an everyday routine work by the West predominantly USA. In the mean time it’s also true that the rejection by Taiwan government, however, on the proposal of making a rout of Olympic torch through its capital Taipei claiming that such arrangement would make the Taiwan relay be seen as part of China's domestic route, rather than the international route has set China in harassing position. The Tibetan protest in several places such as Canada, European countries, USA and Tibet itself has worsen the situation and opened the door for Bush, Nicholas Sercogy and some other leaders to threat for boycotting the opening ceremony of the games though, at the same time, it was clear to all that it will never happen and subsequently was proved by their proclamation to attend the occasion.

Tibet issue in determining relations between west and China and even India, where the exile government is working, and China is never been considered as to be the boss because they no that freedom of Tibet is nothing but castle in the sky. But, at the same time, the issue will be used for bargaining and blaming over China to keep her in psychological strain. The main game will be started in selecting the next Dalia Lame as it is deemed not a person but an authority over Tibetan having a spiritual power. Traditionally it has been the responsibility of the High Lamas of the Gelugpa Tradition and the Tibetan government to find his reincarnation. The process can take around two or three years to identify the Dalai Lama, and for the 14th Tenzin Gyatso it was four years before he was found. The on going ‘His Holiness’, stands for Lama, told in mid 70s that he might be the last Lama. It creates a big mystification among Tibetan and at last they along with present Dalai Lama they have recognized a child, Gedhun Choekyi Nyima, as the reincarnated Panchen Lama. But Beijing, in the mean time, has selected a different Panchen Lama considering it as her own rights and naturally the Dalai Lama and the Tibetan Buddhists in exile do not regard PRC's Panchen Lama to be the legitimate one. The new Lama, who knows who will be and from which side, is an important issue as he will the real actor of shaping the fortune of Tibetan people as no one including China and India keeps hope to present Lama for an acceptable solution regarding the problem. We are enthusiastically lingering for His Holiness to find a apt and decent elucidation of the problem keeping both sides in pleasant. A new Lama with a new dream!

Chinese economic rising; a shift from ideology to re-shift towards power struggle

2009-02-02T23:12:00.000-08:00

“The disguised economy” perhaps would be the genuine naming of the Chinese economy as it is misread a socialist one from ideological perspective. The real fact is if you want to furnish Chinese economy with the socialist skin, you will not only be aggravated but, at the same time, will be dazed seeing that it has already surpassed the extreme phase of capitalist economy. This dissocialist process in Chinese economic turf was started in 1978 when China’s domestic economy experienced wrenching change. After raising prices for farm products dramatically in 1979, China converted its socialist communes to family farming in the early 1980s, when it also created banks and replaced government budgetary financing for enterprises with bank loans. In the latter 1980s, China shifted operational control of factories from Communist Party secretaries to factory managers, who were given incentives to make money. Thus, by gradual repositioning, it finally hammered the last nail on the coffin of the socialist economic system and instituted keeping the new wine of capitalist system under the old brand of socialism.

But this disguise musky nature and the shifting process of Chinese economy never come to the round table discussion of the economists, specialists, politicians, social workers and even the critiques of the China’s socio-political-economic point of views though the economy itself is well talked from different angles i.e. the question of morality, major challenges such as environmental pollution, inflation, future low paid labor crisis, economic crisis in the world, energy crisis, challenge for or from the USA, Brazil and India etc. Other much talked points regarding the rapid expansion of Chinese economy are its impact on world’s politics, capability and probability of her power expansion, opening new political fronts in south Asia, Africa along with such other places obviously including Latin America. We will also, in the next coming lines, turn one after another all unturned stones of the Chinese economic terrace.

First of all we can click the mouse on the folder carrying the files and documents regarding Chinese economic expansion. If you do so your eye ball may come out of your eye pit after seeing the rate of her economic expansion. Since 1990s China is successfully maintaining a double digit GDP whenever most of the developed countries assume it a kismet to assure the rate in between 3-5 percent and thus her growth rate since 1990 has well outstripped the twentieth-century growth records of Japan other East Asian “miracle” economies like South Korea, Taiwan, and Singapore. Today China is in the longest sustained period of rapid expansion since reforms began. China’s integration into the international community also goes far beyond what Japan or South Korea ever attempted at this stage of their development and obviously her embrace of the World Trade Organization and foreign direct investment is unprecedented and contributes importantly to its growth success.

Though the rotation of the wheel of economic development of China is intact till today, the total process is going under a u-tern shift from affirmative to interrogative. Many of the specialists in the field of economics are arguing that this swift development process may slow down because of some visible and unavoidable reasons. The indiscriminative exploitation of natural resources and unwise treatment with pollutant particles have caused a severe environmental mayhem what may within the shortest possible time cause limitless troubles from natural disasters to epidemic spread of diseases. More over the quick industrialization has opened immense bargaining opportunities for the able employment seekers and at the same time has increased the every day expenses and together these two facts have made the wages higher which, in return, may press the trigger against flow of foreign investment. The current world wide economic crisis is adding salt to the injury. People from different countries, where China has a big share of export, have started to save money and shorten the rate of consumption as a result shoe, motor car and some other markets are now under great depression. Melamine scandal in dairy milk industry, animal food is considered as bolt from the blue and has already inserted a big question mark about the morality of China in business as some allege that China engages in unfair commercial practices, such as policies affecting exchange rate levels, intellectual property rights, subsidies, and accumulation of foreign exchange reserves etc. All these issues may become as catalyst for slowing down the GDP rate though some say China has its own big population to be interpreted as market and consumers which may deter the crisis. Who knows what the decision of time is!

No matter it expands or abbreviates critics are always busy in calculating the after math of becoming China as economic power with exact reference of time. Many suggest after pressing the buttons of calculator for a long while that China’s total GDP will become larger than that of the U.S. sometime between 2035 and 2040. After that, China’s GDP will likely become twice that of the U.S. by sometime in the 2060s. In this connection they also remind that this is not only an economic challenge towards USA from China as head always follows the ears and economic supremacy opens the doorway of political as well as military power. The symptoms of Chinese power and hegemony expansion are clear in different regions with special reference of Africa, South Asia and a slight touch in Latin America. China has already started expanding its investment in energy sector in various African countries along with a hand some number of investment-economic aid oriented projects in some developing countries. A tight military tie with different countries in various fields and levels are also a luminous indication of China’s big military ambition. The feeling of Middle Kingdom, problem of territorial integrity regarding Tibet, Taiwan and so on and USA’s aggressive policy of preemption, making sea boundary safe, assurance of regional stability are the main military headache of China. To acquire all those needs China is triggering her shoot towards space technology whenever navy is also getting a remarkable importance. All these activities seek a close investment which is to be assured by the current economic rising. When it is done, with such a big population, China obviously can craft an everlasting confront towards unipolar world order which is tilted towards America. At least the ill feeling of India and Japan regarding China’s emergence may insist America to interfere in the region which in the long run will open a new form of impasse like situation between China and America.

The rapid rising of China as an economic giant has also another aspect. With her low paid labor China is becoming more and more business counter for Japan, USA, European countries and even India and some other developing countries in spite of their having cheap labor. Chines car, electronic parts and IT to agriculture based industries can provide products in so low price that local entrepreneur of different countries are on the brink of ruin. More over China’s new will to reshape the G8 to G9 has put Japan aside on the table. Thus the rising of China as a commercial magnet has multidimensional effects from soft issues like social, cultural to hard issues such as economic, political, security and strategic fields and so on. But all these will certainly depend on the capability of Chinese leaders how much they can prolong the economic uprising with the best use of every single opportunity. Who knows how it will go!