What's new

Uneven U.S. treatment of Bangladesh and Pakistan makes little sense

Black_cats

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
Dec 31, 2010
Messages
10,031
Reaction score
-5
PINION

Uneven U.S. treatment of Bangladesh and Pakistan makes little sense​

Sanctions against Dhaka officials unlikely to help cause of democracy
Brahma Chellaney
June 12, 2023 17:00 JST
https%253A%252F%252Fcms-image-bucket-production-ap-northeast-1-a7d2.s3.ap-northeast-1.amazonaws.com%252Fimages%252F7%252F1%252F0%252F7%252F46057017-3-eng-GB%252FCropped-16862965972023-04-26T114944Z_2041218291_RC2AM0AQX97U_RTRMADP_3_JAPAN-BANGLADESH.JPG

Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina contends that the U.S. is pursuing a strategy of regime change in her country. (Pool via Reuters)
Brahma Chellaney is professor emeritus of strategic studies at the Center for Policy Research in New Delhi and a former adviser to India's National Security Council. He is the author of nine books, including "Water: Asia's New Battleground."

How does one explain the fact that the administration of U.S. President Joe Biden has made Bangladesh a focus of its democracy promotion efforts by dangling the threat of visa sanctions against officials who undermine free elections while staying silent on the undeclared martial law situation in Pakistan, where mass arrests, disappearances and torture have become political weapons?

The short answer is that U.S. promotion of democratic rights has long been selective, with geopolitical considerations often dominant. The pursuit of moral legitimacy for the cause of democracy promotion has also contributed to making sanctions the tool of choice for U.S. policymakers.

In the case of Bangladesh, the Biden administration is seeking to leverage two other factors: that close relatives of many Bangladeshi politicians live in the U.S. or Britain, including Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina's son who holds an American green card; and that the bulk of Bangladesh's exports go to the West, with the U.S. the top destination.

Few can object to what Secretary of State Antony Blinken says is the U.S. goal: that Bangladesh's next election in early 2024 is free and fair. However, his threat to withhold visas from individuals "responsible for, or complicit in, undermining the democratic election process" is hardly conducive to the promotion of this aim. If anything, it is likely to prove counterproductive.

Hasina, daughter of the country's independence leader and first head of state, contends that the U.S. is pursuing a strategy of regime change in her country. "They are trying to eliminate democracy and introduce a government that will not have a democratic existence," she told parliament in April. "It will be an undemocratic action."

Leading a secular government since 2009 that Bangladesh's Islamists detest, Hasina has given the country political stability and rapid economic growth, although the global economic fallout from the Ukraine war is now weighing on the country's finances.

Bangladesh's impressive growth trajectory stands in stark contrast to the chronic political and economic turmoil seen in Pakistan, which today is teetering on the brink of default. Yet while Bangladesh was excluded from the Summits for Democracy convened in 2021 and earlier this year by Biden, Pakistan was invited both times though it did not attend either.

https%253A%252F%252Fcms-image-bucket-production-ap-northeast-1-a7d2.s3.ap-northeast-1.amazonaws.com%252Fimages%252F_aliases%252Farticleimage%252F6%252F6%252F9%252F6%252F46056966-3-eng-GB%252FCropped-16862961892023-03-29T160343Z_1487409355_RC2S30AN88PH_RTRMADP_3_USA-BIDEN.JPG
U.S. President Joe Biden, bottom left, hosted the Summit for Democracy online in March: Bangladesh was excluded while Pakistan was invited but did not attend.

While continuing to reward Pakistan by prioritizing short-term geopolitical considerations, the Biden administration has been criticizing democratic backsliding in Bangladesh. In 2021, it designated Bangladesh's elite Rapid Action Battalion and six of its current and former leaders as complicit in, or engaged in, serious human rights abuses in relation to the country's war on drugs, effectively freezing all their assets in the U.S.

In December, Peter Haas, the U.S. ambassador to Bangladesh, insolently demanded that the authorities investigate a deadly clash between police and members of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party, which is the country's largest opposition party and has allied itself with radical Islamist parties. More recently, Blinken told Bangladeshi Foreign Minister Abdul Momen of his "concerns about violence against, and intimidation of, the media and civil society," according to a State Department statement.

Blinken's wielding of the visa-sanctions stick is clearly aimed at members of Hasina's government, including law enforcement and other security officials, although the announcement of the new policy also mentioned members of opposition parties.
But sanctioning foreign officials usually serves no more than a symbolic purpose while hampering diplomacy. It can also have unintended consequences.

Earlier this month, Beijing rebuffed Washington's request for a meeting in Singapore between U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and Gen. Li Shangfu, his Chinese counterpart. Beijing cited Li's presence on a U.S. sanctions list to which he was added five years before his appointment in March as defense minister.

It could even be argued that U.S. sanctions against Min Aung Hlaing, the commander-in-chief of the Myanmar military, alongside three other senior commanders, contributed to the coup that ousted the country's civilian government in 2021, as the generals may have felt they had little to lose personally by going ahead. Added sanctions since then have only exacerbated Myanmar's internal situation and driven the country closer to China.

From Myanmar and Iran to Belarus and Cuba, U.S. sanctions have failed to bring about political change. The relative decline of American influence and the ongoing shift in global power from the West to the East are making U.S.-led sanctions less and less effective. However, with the West still controlling the global financial architecture and the dollar remaining the world's primary reserve currency, sanctions are still an attractive option for American policymakers.

The new hard line toward Dhaka makes little sense. The Hasina government could be a significant partner in the U.S. war on terror and in improving Asian security. Instead, bilateral relations are under strain. No one from the Biden administration even met with Hasina when she visited Washington last month for discussions with the World Bank and International Monetary Fund.

While in Singapore this month, Austin declared that America "will not flinch in the face of bullying or coercion" from China. But bullying and coercion are also unlikely to advance U.S. interests in Bangladesh.

In fact, bullying the world's seventh-most populous country, far from helping to promote a free and fair election, is more likely to revive painful memories of how the U.S. looked the other way in 1971 as the Pakistani military brutally resisted Bangladesh's efforts to achieve independence from Islamabad, slaughtering up to 3 million people. What is Washington really after now?

 
PINION

Uneven U.S. treatment of Bangladesh and Pakistan makes little sense​

Sanctions against Dhaka officials unlikely to help cause of democracy
Brahma Chellaney
June 12, 2023 17:00 JST
https%253A%252F%252Fcms-image-bucket-production-ap-northeast-1-a7d2.s3.ap-northeast-1.amazonaws.com%252Fimages%252F7%252F1%252F0%252F7%252F46057017-3-eng-GB%252FCropped-16862965972023-04-26T114944Z_2041218291_RC2AM0AQX97U_RTRMADP_3_JAPAN-BANGLADESH.JPG

Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina contends that the U.S. is pursuing a strategy of regime change in her country. (Pool via Reuters)
Brahma Chellaney is professor emeritus of strategic studies at the Center for Policy Research in New Delhi and a former adviser to India's National Security Council. He is the author of nine books, including "Water: Asia's New Battleground."

How does one explain the fact that the administration of U.S. President Joe Biden has made Bangladesh a focus of its democracy promotion efforts by dangling the threat of visa sanctions against officials who undermine free elections while staying silent on the undeclared martial law situation in Pakistan, where mass arrests, disappearances and torture have become political weapons?

The short answer is that U.S. promotion of democratic rights has long been selective, with geopolitical considerations often dominant. The pursuit of moral legitimacy for the cause of democracy promotion has also contributed to making sanctions the tool of choice for U.S. policymakers.

In the case of Bangladesh, the Biden administration is seeking to leverage two other factors: that close relatives of many Bangladeshi politicians live in the U.S. or Britain, including Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina's son who holds an American green card; and that the bulk of Bangladesh's exports go to the West, with the U.S. the top destination.

Few can object to what Secretary of State Antony Blinken says is the U.S. goal: that Bangladesh's next election in early 2024 is free and fair. However, his threat to withhold visas from individuals "responsible for, or complicit in, undermining the democratic election process" is hardly conducive to the promotion of this aim. If anything, it is likely to prove counterproductive.

Hasina, daughter of the country's independence leader and first head of state, contends that the U.S. is pursuing a strategy of regime change in her country. "They are trying to eliminate democracy and introduce a government that will not have a democratic existence," she told parliament in April. "It will be an undemocratic action."

Leading a secular government since 2009 that Bangladesh's Islamists detest, Hasina has given the country political stability and rapid economic growth, although the global economic fallout from the Ukraine war is now weighing on the country's finances.

Bangladesh's impressive growth trajectory stands in stark contrast to the chronic political and economic turmoil seen in Pakistan, which today is teetering on the brink of default. Yet while Bangladesh was excluded from the Summits for Democracy convened in 2021 and earlier this year by Biden, Pakistan was invited both times though it did not attend either.

https%253A%252F%252Fcms-image-bucket-production-ap-northeast-1-a7d2.s3.ap-northeast-1.amazonaws.com%252Fimages%252F_aliases%252Farticleimage%252F6%252F6%252F9%252F6%252F46056966-3-eng-GB%252FCropped-16862961892023-03-29T160343Z_1487409355_RC2S30AN88PH_RTRMADP_3_USA-BIDEN.JPG
U.S. President Joe Biden, bottom left, hosted the Summit for Democracy online in March: Bangladesh was excluded while Pakistan was invited but did not attend.

While continuing to reward Pakistan by prioritizing short-term geopolitical considerations, the Biden administration has been criticizing democratic backsliding in Bangladesh. In 2021, it designated Bangladesh's elite Rapid Action Battalion and six of its current and former leaders as complicit in, or engaged in, serious human rights abuses in relation to the country's war on drugs, effectively freezing all their assets in the U.S.

In December, Peter Haas, the U.S. ambassador to Bangladesh, insolently demanded that the authorities investigate a deadly clash between police and members of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party, which is the country's largest opposition party and has allied itself with radical Islamist parties. More recently, Blinken told Bangladeshi Foreign Minister Abdul Momen of his "concerns about violence against, and intimidation of, the media and civil society," according to a State Department statement.

Blinken's wielding of the visa-sanctions stick is clearly aimed at members of Hasina's government, including law enforcement and other security officials, although the announcement of the new policy also mentioned members of opposition parties.
But sanctioning foreign officials usually serves no more than a symbolic purpose while hampering diplomacy. It can also have unintended consequences.

Earlier this month, Beijing rebuffed Washington's request for a meeting in Singapore between U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and Gen. Li Shangfu, his Chinese counterpart. Beijing cited Li's presence on a U.S. sanctions list to which he was added five years before his appointment in March as defense minister.

It could even be argued that U.S. sanctions against Min Aung Hlaing, the commander-in-chief of the Myanmar military, alongside three other senior commanders, contributed to the coup that ousted the country's civilian government in 2021, as the generals may have felt they had little to lose personally by going ahead. Added sanctions since then have only exacerbated Myanmar's internal situation and driven the country closer to China.

From Myanmar and Iran to Belarus and Cuba, U.S. sanctions have failed to bring about political change. The relative decline of American influence and the ongoing shift in global power from the West to the East are making U.S.-led sanctions less and less effective. However, with the West still controlling the global financial architecture and the dollar remaining the world's primary reserve currency, sanctions are still an attractive option for American policymakers.

The new hard line toward Dhaka makes little sense. The Hasina government could be a significant partner in the U.S. war on terror and in improving Asian security. Instead, bilateral relations are under strain. No one from the Biden administration even met with Hasina when she visited Washington last month for discussions with the World Bank and International Monetary Fund.

While in Singapore this month, Austin declared that America "will not flinch in the face of bullying or coercion" from China. But bullying and coercion are also unlikely to advance U.S. interests in Bangladesh.

In fact, bullying the world's seventh-most populous country, far from helping to promote a free and fair election, is more likely to revive painful memories of how the U.S. looked the other way in 1971 as the Pakistani military brutally resisted Bangladesh's efforts to achieve independence from Islamabad, slaughtering up to 3 million people. What is Washington really after now?


Where is the unequal treatment?

USA has Pakistan by the balls.

It also wants BD by the pussy.

Hasina, to her credit, is resisting it. Albeit, she agrees with USA over India. So, won’t protest too much.
 
PINION

Uneven U.S. treatment of Bangladesh and Pakistan makes little sense​

Sanctions against Dhaka officials unlikely to help cause of democracy
Brahma Chellaney
June 12, 2023 17:00 JST
https%253A%252F%252Fcms-image-bucket-production-ap-northeast-1-a7d2.s3.ap-northeast-1.amazonaws.com%252Fimages%252F7%252F1%252F0%252F7%252F46057017-3-eng-GB%252FCropped-16862965972023-04-26T114944Z_2041218291_RC2AM0AQX97U_RTRMADP_3_JAPAN-BANGLADESH.JPG

Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina contends that the U.S. is pursuing a strategy of regime change in her country. (Pool via Reuters)
Brahma Chellaney is professor emeritus of strategic studies at the Center for Policy Research in New Delhi and a former adviser to India's National Security Council. He is the author of nine books, including "Water: Asia's New Battleground."

How does one explain the fact that the administration of U.S. President Joe Biden has made Bangladesh a focus of its democracy promotion efforts by dangling the threat of visa sanctions against officials who undermine free elections while staying silent on the undeclared martial law situation in Pakistan, where mass arrests, disappearances and torture have become political weapons?

The short answer is that U.S. promotion of democratic rights has long been selective, with geopolitical considerations often dominant. The pursuit of moral legitimacy for the cause of democracy promotion has also contributed to making sanctions the tool of choice for U.S. policymakers.

In the case of Bangladesh, the Biden administration is seeking to leverage two other factors: that close relatives of many Bangladeshi politicians live in the U.S. or Britain, including Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina's son who holds an American green card; and that the bulk of Bangladesh's exports go to the West, with the U.S. the top destination.

Few can object to what Secretary of State Antony Blinken says is the U.S. goal: that Bangladesh's next election in early 2024 is free and fair. However, his threat to withhold visas from individuals "responsible for, or complicit in, undermining the democratic election process" is hardly conducive to the promotion of this aim. If anything, it is likely to prove counterproductive.

Hasina, daughter of the country's independence leader and first head of state, contends that the U.S. is pursuing a strategy of regime change in her country. "They are trying to eliminate democracy and introduce a government that will not have a democratic existence," she told parliament in April. "It will be an undemocratic action."

Leading a secular government since 2009 that Bangladesh's Islamists detest, Hasina has given the country political stability and rapid economic growth, although the global economic fallout from the Ukraine war is now weighing on the country's finances.

Bangladesh's impressive growth trajectory stands in stark contrast to the chronic political and economic turmoil seen in Pakistan, which today is teetering on the brink of default. Yet while Bangladesh was excluded from the Summits for Democracy convened in 2021 and earlier this year by Biden, Pakistan was invited both times though it did not attend either.

https%253A%252F%252Fcms-image-bucket-production-ap-northeast-1-a7d2.s3.ap-northeast-1.amazonaws.com%252Fimages%252F_aliases%252Farticleimage%252F6%252F6%252F9%252F6%252F46056966-3-eng-GB%252FCropped-16862961892023-03-29T160343Z_1487409355_RC2S30AN88PH_RTRMADP_3_USA-BIDEN.JPG
U.S. President Joe Biden, bottom left, hosted the Summit for Democracy online in March: Bangladesh was excluded while Pakistan was invited but did not attend.

While continuing to reward Pakistan by prioritizing short-term geopolitical considerations, the Biden administration has been criticizing democratic backsliding in Bangladesh. In 2021, it designated Bangladesh's elite Rapid Action Battalion and six of its current and former leaders as complicit in, or engaged in, serious human rights abuses in relation to the country's war on drugs, effectively freezing all their assets in the U.S.

In December, Peter Haas, the U.S. ambassador to Bangladesh, insolently demanded that the authorities investigate a deadly clash between police and members of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party, which is the country's largest opposition party and has allied itself with radical Islamist parties. More recently, Blinken told Bangladeshi Foreign Minister Abdul Momen of his "concerns about violence against, and intimidation of, the media and civil society," according to a State Department statement.

Blinken's wielding of the visa-sanctions stick is clearly aimed at members of Hasina's government, including law enforcement and other security officials, although the announcement of the new policy also mentioned members of opposition parties.
But sanctioning foreign officials usually serves no more than a symbolic purpose while hampering diplomacy. It can also have unintended consequences.

Earlier this month, Beijing rebuffed Washington's request for a meeting in Singapore between U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and Gen. Li Shangfu, his Chinese counterpart. Beijing cited Li's presence on a U.S. sanctions list to which he was added five years before his appointment in March as defense minister.

It could even be argued that U.S. sanctions against Min Aung Hlaing, the commander-in-chief of the Myanmar military, alongside three other senior commanders, contributed to the coup that ousted the country's civilian government in 2021, as the generals may have felt they had little to lose personally by going ahead. Added sanctions since then have only exacerbated Myanmar's internal situation and driven the country closer to China.

From Myanmar and Iran to Belarus and Cuba, U.S. sanctions have failed to bring about political change. The relative decline of American influence and the ongoing shift in global power from the West to the East are making U.S.-led sanctions less and less effective. However, with the West still controlling the global financial architecture and the dollar remaining the world's primary reserve currency, sanctions are still an attractive option for American policymakers.

The new hard line toward Dhaka makes little sense. The Hasina government could be a significant partner in the U.S. war on terror and in improving Asian security. Instead, bilateral relations are under strain. No one from the Biden administration even met with Hasina when she visited Washington last month for discussions with the World Bank and International Monetary Fund.

While in Singapore this month, Austin declared that America "will not flinch in the face of bullying or coercion" from China. But bullying and coercion are also unlikely to advance U.S. interests in Bangladesh.

In fact, bullying the world's seventh-most populous country, far from helping to promote a free and fair election, is more likely to revive painful memories of how the U.S. looked the other way in 1971 as the Pakistani military brutally resisted Bangladesh's efforts to achieve independence from Islamabad, slaughtering up to 3 million people. What is Washington really after now?

Why this writer is crying for democracy in Pakistan when it exists there. IK was ousted from the Prime Ministership majority of MOs voting against him.

On the other hand, Hasina believes in the midnight vote stuffing by her people. America wants democracy re-established in BD.

Why this writer should compare oranges with apples? Indians are trying to fish in the muddy water.
 
This Brahma Chellany is a known hindutva scum apologist with American passport dedicated his energy to influence American foreign policy to punish Indian's geopolitical foes and reward India's ruling BJP govt. This pajeet think American policy makers are stupid and need his unsolicited advices.

In the last 15 years, Pakistan saw multiple change of govt. in democratic process unlike Hasina ruled Bangladesh. Pakistan's judiciary, law enforcement agencies, bureaucracy is not the puppet of an unelected and vote robber dictator like in Bangladesh. Imran khan was disposed within the democratic norm and nobody could do anything his ouster when his coalition partner withdrew their support.

Why Bharatis are crying for Imran Khan? Even Atal Bihari Vajpayee's govt. was once dissolved 16 days within it's formation due to coalition support withdrawal in 1996. Atal Bihari Vajpayee came back power with enough seats and coalition support in the next election. Why Imran Khan could not do that? Why he instigated fire on everything amid serious economic crisis? Why This Brahma Chellany guy think Americans don't now anything about Pakistan and need democracy lesson from him?
 
Last edited:
A democratic Bengal is a death sentence for the Indian Union.

India has learnt from China. In that, fastest way to grow is through authoritarianism.

Modi is a dictator in all but name.

BJP has ensured voting is a futile process - through the stranglehold on media and funding.

Bangladesh is emulating China and India and reaping the results.

Just look at their budget compared to “democratic Pakistan”.

The massive gap in per capita government spending will pull Bangladesh and India farther apart from Pakistan.

You cannot hide from such massive gap in funding.

And Bangladesh is doing it despite paltry tax collection.

Just imagine the size of their budget once they fix their tax collection.

Giving illiterate people the vote just sows chaos and terrorism.

Democracy cannot succeed without an educated and informed citizenry.

South Asia is at least 50 years away from it.

British gift of a Parliament is what created the “Hindu rate of growth”. Chinese are more intelligent and rejected British clap trap.
 
Where is the unequal treatment?

USA has Pakistan by the balls.
What nonsense is that. U.S. policy in Biden administration has been to keep its hands off. At best it can charitably be described as studied indifference.
 
Indian opinions on Bangladesh hold no value right now, even those close to BJP leadership acknowledge that. Probably that's what Modi traded off for Russian oil, letting go of the South Asian hegemon dream, especially when the elections are near.

Looks like even Hasina has realized it which prompted her to give political space to Jamaat, India's biggest horror in Bangladesh. lol
 
India has learnt from China. In that, fastest way to grow is through authoritarianism.

Modi is a dictator in all but name.

BJP has ensured voting is a futile process - through the stranglehold on media and funding.
India has never truly adopted democratic principles. From Nehru to Modi, India has always flirted with totalitarianism and downright fascism.

Chinese accomplishments are not solely attributed to communism. It's as much a capitalist country as the US of A.
Bangladesh is emulating China and India and reaping the results.

Bangladesh has a torrid history much worse than Myanmar. From the populist Pakistani founder Mujibs thirst for ultimate power to his daughters iron fisted ambitions.
 
Where is the unequal treatment?

USA has Pakistan by the balls.

It also wants BD by the pussy.

Hasina, to her credit, is resisting it. Albeit, she agrees with USA over India. So, won’t protest too much.
An Indian cannot go without a second not mentioning the word pussy and Balls - thats all that goes in Indian Mind all day long- no wonder the make good rapists
 
An Indian cannot go without a second not mentioning the word pussy and Balls - thats all that goes in Indian Mind all day long- no wonder the make good rapists

For every Indian rapist there is a Pakistani child groomer.

Pot calling kettle black!
 
This writer is active RSS member.

RSS members want the west to hate china and pak, and do everything that helps modi...moment the west say anything against human rights situation in India suddenly west is bad...

Thats the problem with shit hole india...at the end west will do what is best for them...and India will remain india...a third world super power wanna be
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom