There is a critical City-hall meeting this coming Tuesday, April 13, 2010
regarding the naming of Little Bangladesh. It is very crucial that your
attend this meeting. This meeting will be with the city's sub-committee.
If our Little Bangladesh proposal is granted by the sub-committee, it will
be on the agenda for the main committee to approve. We need everyone to
attend and support our community efforts. We all need to share our
viewpoints with the city councilmen. Bangladesh is not mines alone nor is
it your. Bangladesh is ours and it is very important for all of us to set
aside our differences and values and work together to help promote
Bangladesh in America. By crafting our present to include Little
Bangladesh, we will be creating a enlightening future for our children. A
future that reminds them of their roots and heritages in Bangladesh.
Please attend this meeting and bring your family with you. It is important
for the city councilmen to hear all of our viewpoints. Below is the venue
for the meeting.
Date: Tuesday, April 13, 2010
Time: 3:30PM
Address: 200 N. Spring St. Room #: 1050
Los Angeles, CA 90012
For Free Parking, please e-mail Anna Nunez (Anna.Nunez@LACity.Org). Please make sure to include
the make, model, year, and license plate number of the car you plan to
drive to the meeting.
Thursday, April 8, 2010
Sunday, January 17, 2010
Bangladesh Prime Minister's meeting with her counterpart in India
Prime Minister Sk. Hasina’s Upcoming Visit to India – A Mock Memo
By
Dr. Habib Siddiqui
(Ref: If I were Bangladesh PM what I would have said to my Indian counterpart, Op/Ed, January 7, 2010, http://www.newagebd.com/2010/jan/07/oped.html; Prime Minister’s upcoming Delhi visit: Some Suggestions, New Nation, January 9, 2010, http://nation.ittefaq.com/issues/2010/01/09/news0714.htm)
Prime Minister Sk. Hasina Wazed is scheduled to leave for New Delhi within the next few days. If I were in her shoes, here below is what I would have told Prime Minister Manmohan Singh of India during our official face-to-face meeting.
Dear Mr. Singh, thanks for the opportunity you have provided to discuss the bilateral relationship between our two neighboring countries. As you know, this relationship between our two countries is shaped not only by geography, history, culture and economics but also by geopolitics. We, in Bangladesh, are mindful of India’s timely assistance during our nine-month long liberation war that witnessed genocide of our people and exodus of millions of refugees into India. We also remember the sacrifice of many Indian soldiers that gave their lives so that we could be free and independent. On behalf of 160 million Bangladeshis, let me take this opportunity to express my deep gratitude to the Indian government and its people for all that they did, endured and sacrificed so that Bangladesh would become a reality in the global arena. Thank you.
Today, Bangladesh is a proud member of the UN, OIC, Commonwealth of Nations, SAARC and BIMSTEC; it is the seventh most populous country in the world with a vibrant economy that is listed amongst the Next-11 countries.
Having said that, Mr. Singh, as you are aware, the friendly relationship between our two countries did face some bumps in the last 38 years, especially, after the murder of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman in 1975. Our two countries share waters from 54 common rivers and share common land and maritime boundaries. Just to put into perspective, we share 4096 km of land boundary. Even after the signing of the Mujib-Indira Pact of 1974, there remain 51 enclaves of Bangladesh, measuring 7,083.72 acres, which are land-locked inside India whose residents live in abysmal conditions, with a lack of water, roads, electricity, schools and medicines. That situation is simply unacceptable in the 21st century and needs immediate redress. Six kilometers and a half of border along the Comilla-Tripura area still remain undemarcated. This must change.
In the past, Bangladesh government has frequently protested BSF incursions inside Bangladesh, and shootings which resulted in deaths of many unarmed Bangladeshi citizens. As of last month, the death count alone in our side since 1990 stands at 1090. There is hardly a week when Bangladeshis living along the border are not victims of BSF shootings, thus souring relationship between our two peoples. Such an aggressive and utterly irresponsible practice on the part of BSF must come to a halt. Our tradition dictates that we value life and cannot therefore accept practices that are grossly criminal and inhuman.
Let me now move to the crucial water share issue. It is like a life and death issue for us. Bangladesh is a lower riparian country and is, therefore, vulnerable to any unilateral action on her common rivers by India. While we understand the increasing energy demands within India, we simply cannot welcome any initiative that devastates our people. Already our people have suffered enormously from the adverse effects of dams and barrages that were constructed on many common rivers. Whereas during the lean seasons, the water flow in the Teesta River used to be 4,000 cusec at the minimum before the Gajoldoba barrage was constructed some 70 km upstream from Dalia point in Nilphamari in 1985, we now get less than a thousand cusec. We are not getting our agreed upon due share of water flow.
To meet energy needs, in the last few years India has also constructed several dams across the Teesta. Such measures have resulted in loss of navigation during the dry season and flooding during the wet season, let alone causing loss of livelihood of millions of our people that depend on water. Instead of poverty alleviation, these structures are forcing poverty onto our people.
As to the Farakka Barrage, it has been described, and if I may add, rightly so, as the Death Trap for Bangladesh. A walk along the coast of the Padma and Teesta Rivers inside Bangladesh is sufficient to prove the claim. It will surely pain any conscientious human being, seeing the irreversible damages done on our side. Mr. Singh, please, ensure that we get due share of water from all those common rivers during the dry season. Dear Prime Minister, we cannot consent to any new death trap for Bangladesh. Please, stop the construction of the Tipaimukh Dam. Please, also stop the Fulertal Barrage.
Let me now move on to the bilateral trade issue. As per 2007-08 statistics, Bangladesh imported $ 3.7 billion worth of goods from India while we exported $35 million! (Informal trade is estimated to be at least double these numbers! The smuggling of contraband items from India goes unnoticed!) As is quite evident, there is a huge trade imbalance between our two countries, which needs to be corrected as soon as possible. One of the prudent ways to resolving this trade deficit would be for your government to lift the Tariff, para-Tariff & non-Tariff barriers, which are currently imposed on goods imported from Bangladesh. We would also welcome direct trading facilities with India’s seven eastern states. The import of Bangladeshi goods to those eastern states can also have a positive impact in not only closing the trade deficit with India but also reaping multi-faceted benefits to India in an area that is vulnerable to outside influence.
Let me now move to the security issues. We understand India’s priorities to contain insurgency in her north-east corner, close to the Bangladesh border. As our recent extradition of the ULFA leaders to the Indian government has demonstrated, we are very serious about ensuring that our soil is not used for terrorist and anti-state activities against our neighbor. Suffice it to say that we expect similar reciprocities from India. For years, India has had sponsored and assisted subversive elements in the hilly districts of Bangladesh to destabilize our state. There are some 40 Santi Bahini camps inside India. There are even Bangasena terrorist camps operating inside the state of West Bengal today whose objective remains the disintegration of Bangladesh and the creation a Hindu state called Bangabhumi, curving out 1/3 of Bangladesh in our south-western part. Such hostile activities ought to stop immediately.
We are genuinely interested in the Asian Highway that allows regional states to be connected with each other. We understand Indian government’s rationale for the request for transit routes that connect its north-eastern states with West Bengal via Bangladesh. For instance, the direct transit route from Kolkata in the state of West Bengal to Agartala in the state of Tripura via Bangladesh would reduce the distance from 1880 km to merely 740 km. While we are willing to consider such a request for transit routes via Bangladesh we believe that for greater good of our entire region, a more comprehensive scheme is needed that allows connecting Bangladesh to India, China, Myanmar, Nepal and Bhutan through transit routes inside India. Because of regional security concerns, I must, however, emphasize here that such transit routes ought to be used purely for tourism, trade and commercial use. Suffice it to say that we also expect connectivity to all our enclaves inside India. In accordance with the Mujib-Indira Treaty of 1974, and following the due process (Supreme Court order and constitutional amendment), the Government of Bangladesh promptly handed over the Berubari enclave to India. Sadly, India has neither ratified the treaty nor met its obligations, including the transfer of the Tin Bigha corridor. The enclaves of Dohogram and Angorputa near the border have to have 24/7/365 corridor facility. Denying such transit rights to people living inside the enclaves is simply criminal, inhuman and unacceptable.
According to the 1974 Mujib-Indira Treaty, midstream of border-rivers defines the boundaries of our two countries. However, subsequent dykes and embankments that have been constructed by India have had some adverse effects. These have led not only to severe soil erosion on our side but also changed the course of those rivers. The erosion on the Bangladesh side gives way to new chars (or islands) on the other side which Indian villagers illegally occupy in no time with the help of the BSF. Bangladesh is losing thousands of acres of land to India in this process, and this must stop. Let me remind you here that the 1974 Treaty between our two friendly states stipulated that the line of separation between Bangladesh and India is defined along fixed lines and not shifting lines, which happens as a result of shift in the movement of common rivers along the border. I call upon your government to ensure that the common border along those rivers remain physically where it was back in 1974 when the treaty was signed between our two governments.
Dear Mr. Singh, the maritime boundary demarcation in the Bay of Bengal remains a major contentious issue, especially in the light of offshore oil and gas explorations. Bangladesh Government is genuinely concerned about claims made by India and Myanmar that appear to us to be exaggerated, unscientific, irrational, ill-intentioned and illegal, and aim at sea- or zone-locking Bangladesh. As evidenced from direction of our rivers to the Bay of Bengal, we strongly believe that natural prolongation of continental shelf is from north to south and not east to west. My government has recently registered its objection with the UN to India’s and Myanmar’s claims over certain areas in the Bay of Bengal.
It is disheartening to see that the status of the Talpatty Island, formed by silts brought by southward flowing river Hariabhanga in south-western Bangladesh into the Bay of Bengal, still remains disputed between our two friendly nations. We wonder why! Is India’s might becoming the right to her exaggerated, unscientific claims and illegal possessions? Should not such disputes be resolved mutually and justly between the two friendly countries?
Dear Mr. Prime Minister, many in Bangladesh consider India as a hegemonic power that does not care about legitimate rights of its smaller neighbors. That perception has to change for greater good of our entire region. My government is committed to improving relationship with India. We believe that friendship is based on reciprocity of goodwill, cooperation and trust. Bangladesh’s smaller size should not let any state demean her geo-strategic pivotal status. We believe that contentious matters need to be resolved justly and equitably as soon as possible, failing which we only plant the seeds of distrust. We have the Gujral Doctrine in front of us to guide us resolve our outstanding problems amicably and fairly.
Dear Mr. Singh, let me reassure you that our Bangladesh Government considers yours as a friendly government. We strongly believe that the bumps I mentioned in our roads of friendship can definitely be fixed and we can usher in a new era of regional cooperation, prosperity and friendship. What we need is political will that is forward looking. With that, I believe that we are capable of weeding out mistrust, thereby allowing our peoples on both sides of the border to live peacefully and prosperously. As we move into this New Year, let’s give that present to our peoples. Thank you.
By
Dr. Habib Siddiqui
(Ref: If I were Bangladesh PM what I would have said to my Indian counterpart, Op/Ed, January 7, 2010, http://www.newagebd.com/2010/jan/07/oped.html; Prime Minister’s upcoming Delhi visit: Some Suggestions, New Nation, January 9, 2010, http://nation.ittefaq.com/issues/2010/01/09/news0714.htm)
Prime Minister Sk. Hasina Wazed is scheduled to leave for New Delhi within the next few days. If I were in her shoes, here below is what I would have told Prime Minister Manmohan Singh of India during our official face-to-face meeting.
Dear Mr. Singh, thanks for the opportunity you have provided to discuss the bilateral relationship between our two neighboring countries. As you know, this relationship between our two countries is shaped not only by geography, history, culture and economics but also by geopolitics. We, in Bangladesh, are mindful of India’s timely assistance during our nine-month long liberation war that witnessed genocide of our people and exodus of millions of refugees into India. We also remember the sacrifice of many Indian soldiers that gave their lives so that we could be free and independent. On behalf of 160 million Bangladeshis, let me take this opportunity to express my deep gratitude to the Indian government and its people for all that they did, endured and sacrificed so that Bangladesh would become a reality in the global arena. Thank you.
Today, Bangladesh is a proud member of the UN, OIC, Commonwealth of Nations, SAARC and BIMSTEC; it is the seventh most populous country in the world with a vibrant economy that is listed amongst the Next-11 countries.
Having said that, Mr. Singh, as you are aware, the friendly relationship between our two countries did face some bumps in the last 38 years, especially, after the murder of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman in 1975. Our two countries share waters from 54 common rivers and share common land and maritime boundaries. Just to put into perspective, we share 4096 km of land boundary. Even after the signing of the Mujib-Indira Pact of 1974, there remain 51 enclaves of Bangladesh, measuring 7,083.72 acres, which are land-locked inside India whose residents live in abysmal conditions, with a lack of water, roads, electricity, schools and medicines. That situation is simply unacceptable in the 21st century and needs immediate redress. Six kilometers and a half of border along the Comilla-Tripura area still remain undemarcated. This must change.
In the past, Bangladesh government has frequently protested BSF incursions inside Bangladesh, and shootings which resulted in deaths of many unarmed Bangladeshi citizens. As of last month, the death count alone in our side since 1990 stands at 1090. There is hardly a week when Bangladeshis living along the border are not victims of BSF shootings, thus souring relationship between our two peoples. Such an aggressive and utterly irresponsible practice on the part of BSF must come to a halt. Our tradition dictates that we value life and cannot therefore accept practices that are grossly criminal and inhuman.
Let me now move to the crucial water share issue. It is like a life and death issue for us. Bangladesh is a lower riparian country and is, therefore, vulnerable to any unilateral action on her common rivers by India. While we understand the increasing energy demands within India, we simply cannot welcome any initiative that devastates our people. Already our people have suffered enormously from the adverse effects of dams and barrages that were constructed on many common rivers. Whereas during the lean seasons, the water flow in the Teesta River used to be 4,000 cusec at the minimum before the Gajoldoba barrage was constructed some 70 km upstream from Dalia point in Nilphamari in 1985, we now get less than a thousand cusec. We are not getting our agreed upon due share of water flow.
To meet energy needs, in the last few years India has also constructed several dams across the Teesta. Such measures have resulted in loss of navigation during the dry season and flooding during the wet season, let alone causing loss of livelihood of millions of our people that depend on water. Instead of poverty alleviation, these structures are forcing poverty onto our people.
As to the Farakka Barrage, it has been described, and if I may add, rightly so, as the Death Trap for Bangladesh. A walk along the coast of the Padma and Teesta Rivers inside Bangladesh is sufficient to prove the claim. It will surely pain any conscientious human being, seeing the irreversible damages done on our side. Mr. Singh, please, ensure that we get due share of water from all those common rivers during the dry season. Dear Prime Minister, we cannot consent to any new death trap for Bangladesh. Please, stop the construction of the Tipaimukh Dam. Please, also stop the Fulertal Barrage.
Let me now move on to the bilateral trade issue. As per 2007-08 statistics, Bangladesh imported $ 3.7 billion worth of goods from India while we exported $35 million! (Informal trade is estimated to be at least double these numbers! The smuggling of contraband items from India goes unnoticed!) As is quite evident, there is a huge trade imbalance between our two countries, which needs to be corrected as soon as possible. One of the prudent ways to resolving this trade deficit would be for your government to lift the Tariff, para-Tariff & non-Tariff barriers, which are currently imposed on goods imported from Bangladesh. We would also welcome direct trading facilities with India’s seven eastern states. The import of Bangladeshi goods to those eastern states can also have a positive impact in not only closing the trade deficit with India but also reaping multi-faceted benefits to India in an area that is vulnerable to outside influence.
Let me now move to the security issues. We understand India’s priorities to contain insurgency in her north-east corner, close to the Bangladesh border. As our recent extradition of the ULFA leaders to the Indian government has demonstrated, we are very serious about ensuring that our soil is not used for terrorist and anti-state activities against our neighbor. Suffice it to say that we expect similar reciprocities from India. For years, India has had sponsored and assisted subversive elements in the hilly districts of Bangladesh to destabilize our state. There are some 40 Santi Bahini camps inside India. There are even Bangasena terrorist camps operating inside the state of West Bengal today whose objective remains the disintegration of Bangladesh and the creation a Hindu state called Bangabhumi, curving out 1/3 of Bangladesh in our south-western part. Such hostile activities ought to stop immediately.
We are genuinely interested in the Asian Highway that allows regional states to be connected with each other. We understand Indian government’s rationale for the request for transit routes that connect its north-eastern states with West Bengal via Bangladesh. For instance, the direct transit route from Kolkata in the state of West Bengal to Agartala in the state of Tripura via Bangladesh would reduce the distance from 1880 km to merely 740 km. While we are willing to consider such a request for transit routes via Bangladesh we believe that for greater good of our entire region, a more comprehensive scheme is needed that allows connecting Bangladesh to India, China, Myanmar, Nepal and Bhutan through transit routes inside India. Because of regional security concerns, I must, however, emphasize here that such transit routes ought to be used purely for tourism, trade and commercial use. Suffice it to say that we also expect connectivity to all our enclaves inside India. In accordance with the Mujib-Indira Treaty of 1974, and following the due process (Supreme Court order and constitutional amendment), the Government of Bangladesh promptly handed over the Berubari enclave to India. Sadly, India has neither ratified the treaty nor met its obligations, including the transfer of the Tin Bigha corridor. The enclaves of Dohogram and Angorputa near the border have to have 24/7/365 corridor facility. Denying such transit rights to people living inside the enclaves is simply criminal, inhuman and unacceptable.
According to the 1974 Mujib-Indira Treaty, midstream of border-rivers defines the boundaries of our two countries. However, subsequent dykes and embankments that have been constructed by India have had some adverse effects. These have led not only to severe soil erosion on our side but also changed the course of those rivers. The erosion on the Bangladesh side gives way to new chars (or islands) on the other side which Indian villagers illegally occupy in no time with the help of the BSF. Bangladesh is losing thousands of acres of land to India in this process, and this must stop. Let me remind you here that the 1974 Treaty between our two friendly states stipulated that the line of separation between Bangladesh and India is defined along fixed lines and not shifting lines, which happens as a result of shift in the movement of common rivers along the border. I call upon your government to ensure that the common border along those rivers remain physically where it was back in 1974 when the treaty was signed between our two governments.
Dear Mr. Singh, the maritime boundary demarcation in the Bay of Bengal remains a major contentious issue, especially in the light of offshore oil and gas explorations. Bangladesh Government is genuinely concerned about claims made by India and Myanmar that appear to us to be exaggerated, unscientific, irrational, ill-intentioned and illegal, and aim at sea- or zone-locking Bangladesh. As evidenced from direction of our rivers to the Bay of Bengal, we strongly believe that natural prolongation of continental shelf is from north to south and not east to west. My government has recently registered its objection with the UN to India’s and Myanmar’s claims over certain areas in the Bay of Bengal.
It is disheartening to see that the status of the Talpatty Island, formed by silts brought by southward flowing river Hariabhanga in south-western Bangladesh into the Bay of Bengal, still remains disputed between our two friendly nations. We wonder why! Is India’s might becoming the right to her exaggerated, unscientific claims and illegal possessions? Should not such disputes be resolved mutually and justly between the two friendly countries?
Dear Mr. Prime Minister, many in Bangladesh consider India as a hegemonic power that does not care about legitimate rights of its smaller neighbors. That perception has to change for greater good of our entire region. My government is committed to improving relationship with India. We believe that friendship is based on reciprocity of goodwill, cooperation and trust. Bangladesh’s smaller size should not let any state demean her geo-strategic pivotal status. We believe that contentious matters need to be resolved justly and equitably as soon as possible, failing which we only plant the seeds of distrust. We have the Gujral Doctrine in front of us to guide us resolve our outstanding problems amicably and fairly.
Dear Mr. Singh, let me reassure you that our Bangladesh Government considers yours as a friendly government. We strongly believe that the bumps I mentioned in our roads of friendship can definitely be fixed and we can usher in a new era of regional cooperation, prosperity and friendship. What we need is political will that is forward looking. With that, I believe that we are capable of weeding out mistrust, thereby allowing our peoples on both sides of the border to live peacefully and prosperously. As we move into this New Year, let’s give that present to our peoples. Thank you.
Thursday, December 10, 2009
Expatriates and Their Rights on Bangladesh by Tayeb Husain
Expatriates and Their Rights on Bangladesh by Tayeb Husain
[Note from BEC: Mr. Husain's essay first appeared in the Financial Express on Dec 4, 2009 omitting the last portion of the article below where foreign connections/links of some leaders were alleged by the writer. Mr. Husain lives and wrote the piece from Sweden. The views expressed in the article are entirely his.
BEC's attention was drawn to the article below when it got posted in the News From Bangladesh. In this, Mr. Husain discusses a contentious subject which while being quite important to our expatriate community does not quite agree the views of the BEC and its many members. Still, we felt that our expatriates need to be exposed to dissenting opinions, ideas or thoughts that affect them. We appreciate Mr. Husain for giving us the permission to posting the NFB article. Responses on this article can be directed at the author, which appears at the bottom of the article, and/or at us.]
I vividly remember an announcement made by the then military backed caretaker government’s Chief Adviser Dr. Fakhruddin Ahmed sometime in Feb or March 2008 during a visit in London in which he said that "from now on, British passport-holder Bangladeshis would automatically retain their Bangladeshi citizenships." I protested this unilateral declaration by someone who had no power base or support from the population and was holding a unique position only as a usurper. My protest note was published in Bangladesh media but I do not know if there was a slight dent in public mind or in government’s attitude regarding these rights and privileges for Non-Residential Bangladeshis (NRBs).
The term is, I believe, utterly wrong. These are Bangladeshi origin foreign citizens holding foreign passports and occasionally holders of dual citizenships and not non-residential Bangladeshi. Actually Bangladeshi NRBs are mostly those who work in Arab Countries and earn foreign currency for Bangladesh where they have no social or legal rights but only give their bloods for building Arab’s infrastructures and doing slaves’ jobs. They carry Bangladesh passport and they do not have any other home to go but poor Bangladesh only where they come from and will return there after the end of their job period. Bangladeshi origin foreign citizens, on the other side, are those people well settled in Europe, North America or Australia where again, technically, they are offered equal rights and privileges like any other citizens in their host countries.
Bangladesh offers NRBs’ many rights including no-visa entry in Bangladesh, equal social and political rights including land and business ownership, running elections, holding government offices and even special quota to participate plot allotment lottery to get a plot in Dhaka’s Uttara or Purbachal Model Town projects.
Personally, I am against all such privileges mentioned above to Bangladeshi origin foreign citizens, whether one is a British or a Nepalese passport holder. I strongly believe that poor Bangladesh belongs to Bangladeshi citizens and those who are settled in Europe, North America or Australia should not look back and expect some privileges from the country they left behind.
I strongly oppose dual citizenship, voting right, and other privileges to Bangladesh origin foreign citizens. I oppose expatriates' voting rights vehemently on principle and practical reasons, even though it is against my personal interest. I sincerely believe that no one should have divided allegiance, and one should be fully loyal to the country one lives in, earns a living and, finally, becomes a citizen of. This is the basic principles I am talking about.
I am fully aware of the fact that Bangladesh and many other countries allow dual citizenship to their former citizens, with full rights and responsibilities of a normal resident. Rich western countries do it for certain reasons. For example, many US citizens have Israeli citizenship, where they work and help the Israeli nation. They are mostly American Jews. The British and the French also allow dual citizenship, traditionally, it has been so due to colonial interests of the colonialist powers, but the practice still continues.
Bangladesh is a poor country, and it is very generous of her to offer a Bangladesh origin foreign citizen double citizenship, and even a Bangladeshi passport, knowing well that the person is a foreign citizen and has a passport from his/her adopted country.
This generosity of Bangladesh has offered good and bad opportunities to many people. To a good person it gives a sense of nostalgia, and he/she always fondly remembers his country of origin with deep gratitude and love. Such a decent person returns this generosity of his/her motherland doing good things in return when an opportunity comes. However, these types of people are rare and very few. An individual always looks after his/her personal interest, and there are many who would go to any extent to gain a little extra profit whenever he/she gets an opportunity to do so.
There are also certain criminals who use this opportunity to maximise the benefits of their many horrendous crimes. Often, the generous rules and regulations of the criminals' adopted countries offer them safe haven, and the countries of origin of the criminals cannot take any action against them for their crimes committed in the country of origin.
Many criminals from Arab countries moved to the UK on the pretext of political persecution in their home countries, and the same pretext were used by many people from former communist countries to get a safe sanctuary in Western Europe.
Some expatriates/immigrants from underdeveloped countries can be classified as political touts and ordinary criminals. Sometimes they are politically connected with political touts at home, and very often they co-operate and work with corrupt politicians of their home countries to share their ill- earned money or social or political advantages.
Some well-established expatriates also go back to their countries of origin to take part in direct politics, and hold ministerial posts by offering money to political organisations or directly to party bosses. These people are basically corrupt and live a luxurious life, mostly by corruption at the cost of poor Bangladesh.
Now, what can be done, or what rights and privileges should be offered to a Bangladeshi immigrant/expatriate? Sometime ago one even proposed that two seats of the national parliament should be reserved for the expatriates. I consider such proposal unfair, and dangerous for Bangladesh. I shall suggest that except "No visa requirement" seal, at a reasonable fee, on the foreign passport of an expatriate no other right or privilege should be offered to anybody as long as he/she carries a foreign passport.
The double citizenship business should be cancelled, and every expatriate/immigrant should declare his/her assets in Bangladesh if he/she stays in the country more than three months at any given time. No foreign citizen should be allowed to own agricultural land in Bangladesh if he/she does not use it for agriculture or farming purposes as a permanent resident.
Long time ago I read in the newspaper about an expatriate living in USA asking the government to intervene because another criminal in Bangladesh had grabbed his land. While I do not support any land-grabbing by anybody, I strongly oppose any foreign citizen owning any land in Bangladesh under any circumstances.
Bangladesh is a very small country, land per capita in Bangladesh is lowest in the world, and under such circumstances no expatriate should be allowed to own agricultural or commercial land in Bangladesh if he/she does not return home and live in Bangladesh permanently.
Regarding jobs in Bangladesh, anybody with foreign passport/citizenship should not be allowed to seek any job in Bangladesh, except those foreign experts whom Bangladesh may need for certain specific jobs. Again, anybody who is a Bangladeshi citizen with a Bangladeshi passport but did not live in Bangladesh continuously over a year or so (except those who are abroad on government duty or studying in a foreign country) should not be allowed to vote or to take part in any election, or seek any government office.
Anyone with foreign citizenship and in service with the Bangladesh government should be found out and dismissed. And in case anyone who has hidden his/her foreign connection while serving the government, he/she should be sent out of the country after checking properly his/her assets and foreign links.
Adopting such a strong and draconian measure against the expatriates Bangladesh may seem very unkind or even hostile towards her "lost" children, but these measures are very necessary to safeguard the interests of poor Bangladeshi people and to curb the ill activities of a great number of criminals who are Bangladeshi expatriates/immigrants and foreign citizens.
I take this opportunity to express my utter disgust again against some particular groups of Bangladesh origin foreign citizens who live and earn their living in foreign countries but deeply involved in Bangladesh politics. They are Awami Leaguers, BNPs or even Jamattis. That is why we see whenever the PM of Bangladesh visits any European country, her most important and must to-do-list always is to meet and to attend a reception given by the “Expatriates” (rumour goes that cost is covered by the public fund from Bangladesh) and that is invariable by the people belonging to PM’s own political party.
I have a feeling that Fakhruddin Ahmed is a foreign citizen. He has a million dollar worth house in USA. Gen Moeen has his son and brother living in USA. Former President Ijajuddin has his son living in Canada. Present PM Hasina has her son in USA with a US passport, her daughter is in Canada and her sister lives in UK with security protection from poor Bangladesh. She has again, I am told, employed some Bangladesh origin foreign citizens in top government jobs. One of such a minister sometime ago resigned and went back to USA. Another HT Imam, I am told, a retired civil servant, is reappointed as PM Hasina’s adviser with the rank of a cabinet minister or something of that kind. Who is that Imam and why Bangladesh government needs to recruit him again ignoring someone serving in the administration and looking for this post? Imam stands in someone life-long cherished job, deprived somebody of his career goal and made a long list of people unhappy by snatching from them their rightful job promotions.
I wonder what exceptional service he is capable of offering to Bangladesh government and why he is so much indispensable for Sheikh Hasina and if not for the Bangladesh government. This question I ask and all that I write now are not out of any prejudice to anybody but I consider these sorts of appointments and favour are sinful cronyism, awfully wrong and totally unfair action by the PM. These are no doubt selfish people and they not only deprive poor Bangladeshi citizens of their right to jobs but they are opportunists by nature with their dual citizenships and foreign passports and connections to ignorant and uncanny corrupt politicians. I do not know how civil society, the press and the intellectuals in Bangladesh tolerate these sorts of nonsense and keep quite. It also makes the picture clear to me why and how Fakhruddin Ahmed could so boldly and shameless tell to “his type of people” in London "from now on, British passport-holder Bangladeshis would automatically retain their Bangladeshi citizenships". He was legalizing his own standing as a usurper ruler of Bangladesh by offering little bones to his fellow greedy compatriots.
_______________________________________________________________________
Tayeb Husain
Sweden
E Mail: th12sw@yahoo.com
[Note from BEC: Mr. Husain's essay first appeared in the Financial Express on Dec 4, 2009 omitting the last portion of the article below where foreign connections/links of some leaders were alleged by the writer. Mr. Husain lives and wrote the piece from Sweden. The views expressed in the article are entirely his.
BEC's attention was drawn to the article below when it got posted in the News From Bangladesh. In this, Mr. Husain discusses a contentious subject which while being quite important to our expatriate community does not quite agree the views of the BEC and its many members. Still, we felt that our expatriates need to be exposed to dissenting opinions, ideas or thoughts that affect them. We appreciate Mr. Husain for giving us the permission to posting the NFB article. Responses on this article can be directed at the author, which appears at the bottom of the article, and/or at us.]
I vividly remember an announcement made by the then military backed caretaker government’s Chief Adviser Dr. Fakhruddin Ahmed sometime in Feb or March 2008 during a visit in London in which he said that "from now on, British passport-holder Bangladeshis would automatically retain their Bangladeshi citizenships." I protested this unilateral declaration by someone who had no power base or support from the population and was holding a unique position only as a usurper. My protest note was published in Bangladesh media but I do not know if there was a slight dent in public mind or in government’s attitude regarding these rights and privileges for Non-Residential Bangladeshis (NRBs).
The term is, I believe, utterly wrong. These are Bangladeshi origin foreign citizens holding foreign passports and occasionally holders of dual citizenships and not non-residential Bangladeshi. Actually Bangladeshi NRBs are mostly those who work in Arab Countries and earn foreign currency for Bangladesh where they have no social or legal rights but only give their bloods for building Arab’s infrastructures and doing slaves’ jobs. They carry Bangladesh passport and they do not have any other home to go but poor Bangladesh only where they come from and will return there after the end of their job period. Bangladeshi origin foreign citizens, on the other side, are those people well settled in Europe, North America or Australia where again, technically, they are offered equal rights and privileges like any other citizens in their host countries.
Bangladesh offers NRBs’ many rights including no-visa entry in Bangladesh, equal social and political rights including land and business ownership, running elections, holding government offices and even special quota to participate plot allotment lottery to get a plot in Dhaka’s Uttara or Purbachal Model Town projects.
Personally, I am against all such privileges mentioned above to Bangladeshi origin foreign citizens, whether one is a British or a Nepalese passport holder. I strongly believe that poor Bangladesh belongs to Bangladeshi citizens and those who are settled in Europe, North America or Australia should not look back and expect some privileges from the country they left behind.
I strongly oppose dual citizenship, voting right, and other privileges to Bangladesh origin foreign citizens. I oppose expatriates' voting rights vehemently on principle and practical reasons, even though it is against my personal interest. I sincerely believe that no one should have divided allegiance, and one should be fully loyal to the country one lives in, earns a living and, finally, becomes a citizen of. This is the basic principles I am talking about.
I am fully aware of the fact that Bangladesh and many other countries allow dual citizenship to their former citizens, with full rights and responsibilities of a normal resident. Rich western countries do it for certain reasons. For example, many US citizens have Israeli citizenship, where they work and help the Israeli nation. They are mostly American Jews. The British and the French also allow dual citizenship, traditionally, it has been so due to colonial interests of the colonialist powers, but the practice still continues.
Bangladesh is a poor country, and it is very generous of her to offer a Bangladesh origin foreign citizen double citizenship, and even a Bangladeshi passport, knowing well that the person is a foreign citizen and has a passport from his/her adopted country.
This generosity of Bangladesh has offered good and bad opportunities to many people. To a good person it gives a sense of nostalgia, and he/she always fondly remembers his country of origin with deep gratitude and love. Such a decent person returns this generosity of his/her motherland doing good things in return when an opportunity comes. However, these types of people are rare and very few. An individual always looks after his/her personal interest, and there are many who would go to any extent to gain a little extra profit whenever he/she gets an opportunity to do so.
There are also certain criminals who use this opportunity to maximise the benefits of their many horrendous crimes. Often, the generous rules and regulations of the criminals' adopted countries offer them safe haven, and the countries of origin of the criminals cannot take any action against them for their crimes committed in the country of origin.
Many criminals from Arab countries moved to the UK on the pretext of political persecution in their home countries, and the same pretext were used by many people from former communist countries to get a safe sanctuary in Western Europe.
Some expatriates/immigrants from underdeveloped countries can be classified as political touts and ordinary criminals. Sometimes they are politically connected with political touts at home, and very often they co-operate and work with corrupt politicians of their home countries to share their ill- earned money or social or political advantages.
Some well-established expatriates also go back to their countries of origin to take part in direct politics, and hold ministerial posts by offering money to political organisations or directly to party bosses. These people are basically corrupt and live a luxurious life, mostly by corruption at the cost of poor Bangladesh.
Now, what can be done, or what rights and privileges should be offered to a Bangladeshi immigrant/expatriate? Sometime ago one even proposed that two seats of the national parliament should be reserved for the expatriates. I consider such proposal unfair, and dangerous for Bangladesh. I shall suggest that except "No visa requirement" seal, at a reasonable fee, on the foreign passport of an expatriate no other right or privilege should be offered to anybody as long as he/she carries a foreign passport.
The double citizenship business should be cancelled, and every expatriate/immigrant should declare his/her assets in Bangladesh if he/she stays in the country more than three months at any given time. No foreign citizen should be allowed to own agricultural land in Bangladesh if he/she does not use it for agriculture or farming purposes as a permanent resident.
Long time ago I read in the newspaper about an expatriate living in USA asking the government to intervene because another criminal in Bangladesh had grabbed his land. While I do not support any land-grabbing by anybody, I strongly oppose any foreign citizen owning any land in Bangladesh under any circumstances.
Bangladesh is a very small country, land per capita in Bangladesh is lowest in the world, and under such circumstances no expatriate should be allowed to own agricultural or commercial land in Bangladesh if he/she does not return home and live in Bangladesh permanently.
Regarding jobs in Bangladesh, anybody with foreign passport/citizenship should not be allowed to seek any job in Bangladesh, except those foreign experts whom Bangladesh may need for certain specific jobs. Again, anybody who is a Bangladeshi citizen with a Bangladeshi passport but did not live in Bangladesh continuously over a year or so (except those who are abroad on government duty or studying in a foreign country) should not be allowed to vote or to take part in any election, or seek any government office.
Anyone with foreign citizenship and in service with the Bangladesh government should be found out and dismissed. And in case anyone who has hidden his/her foreign connection while serving the government, he/she should be sent out of the country after checking properly his/her assets and foreign links.
Adopting such a strong and draconian measure against the expatriates Bangladesh may seem very unkind or even hostile towards her "lost" children, but these measures are very necessary to safeguard the interests of poor Bangladeshi people and to curb the ill activities of a great number of criminals who are Bangladeshi expatriates/immigrants and foreign citizens.
I take this opportunity to express my utter disgust again against some particular groups of Bangladesh origin foreign citizens who live and earn their living in foreign countries but deeply involved in Bangladesh politics. They are Awami Leaguers, BNPs or even Jamattis. That is why we see whenever the PM of Bangladesh visits any European country, her most important and must to-do-list always is to meet and to attend a reception given by the “Expatriates” (rumour goes that cost is covered by the public fund from Bangladesh) and that is invariable by the people belonging to PM’s own political party.
I have a feeling that Fakhruddin Ahmed is a foreign citizen. He has a million dollar worth house in USA. Gen Moeen has his son and brother living in USA. Former President Ijajuddin has his son living in Canada. Present PM Hasina has her son in USA with a US passport, her daughter is in Canada and her sister lives in UK with security protection from poor Bangladesh. She has again, I am told, employed some Bangladesh origin foreign citizens in top government jobs. One of such a minister sometime ago resigned and went back to USA. Another HT Imam, I am told, a retired civil servant, is reappointed as PM Hasina’s adviser with the rank of a cabinet minister or something of that kind. Who is that Imam and why Bangladesh government needs to recruit him again ignoring someone serving in the administration and looking for this post? Imam stands in someone life-long cherished job, deprived somebody of his career goal and made a long list of people unhappy by snatching from them their rightful job promotions.
I wonder what exceptional service he is capable of offering to Bangladesh government and why he is so much indispensable for Sheikh Hasina and if not for the Bangladesh government. This question I ask and all that I write now are not out of any prejudice to anybody but I consider these sorts of appointments and favour are sinful cronyism, awfully wrong and totally unfair action by the PM. These are no doubt selfish people and they not only deprive poor Bangladeshi citizens of their right to jobs but they are opportunists by nature with their dual citizenships and foreign passports and connections to ignorant and uncanny corrupt politicians. I do not know how civil society, the press and the intellectuals in Bangladesh tolerate these sorts of nonsense and keep quite. It also makes the picture clear to me why and how Fakhruddin Ahmed could so boldly and shameless tell to “his type of people” in London "from now on, British passport-holder Bangladeshis would automatically retain their Bangladeshi citizenships". He was legalizing his own standing as a usurper ruler of Bangladesh by offering little bones to his fellow greedy compatriots.
_______________________________________________________________________
Tayeb Husain
Sweden
E Mail: th12sw@yahoo.com
How Committed is Bangladesh Government about boosting CPI?
How Committed is Bangladesh Government about boosting Corruption Perception Index (CPI)? by Habib Siddiqui
[Published also as: Question mark over govt.’s anti-corruption stance, New Age, Op/Ed, November 21, 2009, http://www.newagebd.com/2009/nov/21/oped.html]
Nothing could be more gratifying for a government which finds itself being perceived positively in matters of fighting corruption. An improved perception can attract foreign investment. Bangladesh is one of those countries which has been able to drastically improve her corruption perception index. This year she improved her ranking to 139 out of 180 countries. She was 147th last year. Bangladesh scored 2.4 on a 0-10 scale rating (with lower numbers signifying more corruption perception), a number still below the 3.0 - cutoff value for the top 100 and bottom 80 countries, meaning corruption is still rampant. But compared to how Bangladesh began with a score of 0.3 points nearly a decade ago, it is definitely a good achievement. Nor should we forget that the country was placed at the bottom of the list for the fifth successive years from 2001 to 2005 (during the BNP rule).
In recent months, after the Mahajote came to power, the government has taken some positive measures that are bound to improve country's perception index. These include: election commitment of the current government against corruption, continuation of institutional reforms, formation of parliamentary standing committees and information commission. The government has not, thus far, interfered with the activities of the Anti-Corruption Commission giving it freedom to do its tasks independently. These are all positive signs and are sure ways to boost country's perception rating. Unfortunately, there are still areas which may put a dent to Bangladesh's image.
It was not too long ago that the ACC Chairman, Mr. Golam Rahman, had vehemently complained about the impotency of the agency. Sure enough, many of the verdicts by the High Court Bench granting bail to individuals, convicted of corruption, are making a mockery of the agency’s efforts to wipe out corruption from the country. News media accounts suggest that most of those convicts were probably freed on grounds of technicality and not on the weaknesses of the charges brought against them. If such public perceptions are true, unless the ACC is strengthened by bills passed by the parliament or presidential decree, its activities are going to result in zero-sum activities at a tremendous cost to the country’s economy.
In a widely covered interview, Mr. Rahman was bold enough to correctly call the ACC a 'toothless tiger', which finds itself in a no-win, difficult and precarious position to be state’s corruption fighting agency without the right mechanisms set in place to make it more effective. (During my meeting with his predecessor back in February, I heard similar complaints from Lt. Gen. (Retd.) Hasan Mashhud Chowdhury.) And in spite of such candid and correct assessment from its current Chairman and the constraints it has to work under, it is highly gratifying to see the ACC's unwavering battle to put a stopper to corruption by charging many corrupt individuals, including politicians. In recent months, the agency has been more scrupulous than anytime before in its filings of corruption cases against politically connected bigwigs that have siphoned off country’s money through shoddy deals. It is also showing great discrimination and clarity in dropping cases against some individuals who were wrongly charged by the immediate-past interim government.
But like every other things that seem to go wrong with Bangladesh when we least expect them, the recent presidential pardon of sentences against Shahadab Akbar, son of deputy leader of parliament Syeda Sajeda Chowdhury, is sure to put a questionable mark on the government’s sincerity to fight corruption. Chowdhury was sentenced to 18 years' imprisonment and fined Taka 1.6 crore in absentia in four cases filed by the Anti-Corruption Commission and National Board of Revenue during the tenure of the last caretaker government. News reports suggest that Chowdhury had failed to appear before the court and did not even file any appeal against his convictions and yet the President had no qualms about pardoning him. This act of clemency can’t simply be overlooked. Yes, like the presidential pardon of bigwigs under Clinton and Bush before they vacated the White House, Bangladesh’s President Zillur Rahman has all the constitutional rights to pardon anyone, even a serial killer. But when the only criterion appears to be partisanship such an act of presidential clemency gives a bad name to the government, and is neither easily forgotten nor forgiven by the public. They perceive such as an abuse of justice and presidential power. There are even charges that in pardoning Chowdhury, the President had failed to follow usual legal procedures. The ACC lawyers are also calling foul on the matter. If any of these accusations are true, the current government’s high pitched election promise to weed out corruption seems too hollow and insincere. The clemency of Chowdhury also opens the door for other convicts who had not surrendered to the court to follow this backdoor of presidential clemency under political consideration.
The High Court on July 13 this year in a verdict scrapped the 13-year jail sentence against another politician – Awami League lawmaker Dr. Mohiuddin Khan Alamgir -- in a case that was filed by the ACC, adjudging the conviction against him illegal. On Nov. 16 the ACC filed an appeal with the Supreme Court against the High Court verdict that scrapped the sentence against him in a corruption case. While no one likes to see an innocent human being falsely charged and convicted in a kangaroo court, the judiciary branch of the government must carry out its civic duty diligently, transparently and justly so that no one can question its verdicts.
No one should belittle people’s perception since such actually helps to mold our realities (even when perceptions are not always correct). And that is what corruption perception index of Transparency International is all about. All the recent gains in the CPI rating may evaporate unless the government is sincere in its declared commitment to fight corruption. I can only hope that the Hasina government will have the wisdom to take the CPI rating seriously and thus, not to take Bangladesh on a wrong track. People have long memories; it is the politicians who don’t and they are fools.
[Published also as: Question mark over govt.’s anti-corruption stance, New Age, Op/Ed, November 21, 2009, http://www.newagebd.com/2009/nov/21/oped.html]
Nothing could be more gratifying for a government which finds itself being perceived positively in matters of fighting corruption. An improved perception can attract foreign investment. Bangladesh is one of those countries which has been able to drastically improve her corruption perception index. This year she improved her ranking to 139 out of 180 countries. She was 147th last year. Bangladesh scored 2.4 on a 0-10 scale rating (with lower numbers signifying more corruption perception), a number still below the 3.0 - cutoff value for the top 100 and bottom 80 countries, meaning corruption is still rampant. But compared to how Bangladesh began with a score of 0.3 points nearly a decade ago, it is definitely a good achievement. Nor should we forget that the country was placed at the bottom of the list for the fifth successive years from 2001 to 2005 (during the BNP rule).
In recent months, after the Mahajote came to power, the government has taken some positive measures that are bound to improve country's perception index. These include: election commitment of the current government against corruption, continuation of institutional reforms, formation of parliamentary standing committees and information commission. The government has not, thus far, interfered with the activities of the Anti-Corruption Commission giving it freedom to do its tasks independently. These are all positive signs and are sure ways to boost country's perception rating. Unfortunately, there are still areas which may put a dent to Bangladesh's image.
It was not too long ago that the ACC Chairman, Mr. Golam Rahman, had vehemently complained about the impotency of the agency. Sure enough, many of the verdicts by the High Court Bench granting bail to individuals, convicted of corruption, are making a mockery of the agency’s efforts to wipe out corruption from the country. News media accounts suggest that most of those convicts were probably freed on grounds of technicality and not on the weaknesses of the charges brought against them. If such public perceptions are true, unless the ACC is strengthened by bills passed by the parliament or presidential decree, its activities are going to result in zero-sum activities at a tremendous cost to the country’s economy.
In a widely covered interview, Mr. Rahman was bold enough to correctly call the ACC a 'toothless tiger', which finds itself in a no-win, difficult and precarious position to be state’s corruption fighting agency without the right mechanisms set in place to make it more effective. (During my meeting with his predecessor back in February, I heard similar complaints from Lt. Gen. (Retd.) Hasan Mashhud Chowdhury.) And in spite of such candid and correct assessment from its current Chairman and the constraints it has to work under, it is highly gratifying to see the ACC's unwavering battle to put a stopper to corruption by charging many corrupt individuals, including politicians. In recent months, the agency has been more scrupulous than anytime before in its filings of corruption cases against politically connected bigwigs that have siphoned off country’s money through shoddy deals. It is also showing great discrimination and clarity in dropping cases against some individuals who were wrongly charged by the immediate-past interim government.
But like every other things that seem to go wrong with Bangladesh when we least expect them, the recent presidential pardon of sentences against Shahadab Akbar, son of deputy leader of parliament Syeda Sajeda Chowdhury, is sure to put a questionable mark on the government’s sincerity to fight corruption. Chowdhury was sentenced to 18 years' imprisonment and fined Taka 1.6 crore in absentia in four cases filed by the Anti-Corruption Commission and National Board of Revenue during the tenure of the last caretaker government. News reports suggest that Chowdhury had failed to appear before the court and did not even file any appeal against his convictions and yet the President had no qualms about pardoning him. This act of clemency can’t simply be overlooked. Yes, like the presidential pardon of bigwigs under Clinton and Bush before they vacated the White House, Bangladesh’s President Zillur Rahman has all the constitutional rights to pardon anyone, even a serial killer. But when the only criterion appears to be partisanship such an act of presidential clemency gives a bad name to the government, and is neither easily forgotten nor forgiven by the public. They perceive such as an abuse of justice and presidential power. There are even charges that in pardoning Chowdhury, the President had failed to follow usual legal procedures. The ACC lawyers are also calling foul on the matter. If any of these accusations are true, the current government’s high pitched election promise to weed out corruption seems too hollow and insincere. The clemency of Chowdhury also opens the door for other convicts who had not surrendered to the court to follow this backdoor of presidential clemency under political consideration.
The High Court on July 13 this year in a verdict scrapped the 13-year jail sentence against another politician – Awami League lawmaker Dr. Mohiuddin Khan Alamgir -- in a case that was filed by the ACC, adjudging the conviction against him illegal. On Nov. 16 the ACC filed an appeal with the Supreme Court against the High Court verdict that scrapped the sentence against him in a corruption case. While no one likes to see an innocent human being falsely charged and convicted in a kangaroo court, the judiciary branch of the government must carry out its civic duty diligently, transparently and justly so that no one can question its verdicts.
No one should belittle people’s perception since such actually helps to mold our realities (even when perceptions are not always correct). And that is what corruption perception index of Transparency International is all about. All the recent gains in the CPI rating may evaporate unless the government is sincere in its declared commitment to fight corruption. I can only hope that the Hasina government will have the wisdom to take the CPI rating seriously and thus, not to take Bangladesh on a wrong track. People have long memories; it is the politicians who don’t and they are fools.
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
Senator Kennedy's death - Bangladesh and her expatriates lose a great friend and mentor
It is a sad day for America. With the death of Senator Teddy Kennedy, America lost one of its most noble souls. He was an articulate advocate of human rights, an unwavering champion of peace against war, and, of course, immigration rights and health-care for all. His was a life very few could aspire for - from childhood upbringing unto death. He was able to see things very few had dared to consider. He was able to discuss things with ease very few dared to discuss. Often times the stand he took were not politically correct. Yet as a man of parts, a visionary, as one of the best citizens of our planet, he took a bold stand and tried to make America better for all its citizens and inhabitants and by that process he touched the lives of too many, even those who lived outside. He knew that we are all connected somehow. What is good for our world ought to have been good for America, too.
In deep sadness, we recall the demise of this great man whose contribution to the cause of Bangladesh should never be forgotten by our posterity.
In deep sadness, we recall the demise of this great man whose contribution to the cause of Bangladesh should never be forgotten by our posterity.
Issues towards fostering amicable relationship between Bangladesh and the USA
The following is a list of issues which need attention from respective governments to foster a durable friendly relationship between Bangladesh and the USA. These are based on cumulative experience of many of our expats in this country and need resolutions.
A. Bangladeshis visiting the USA: What is needed -
1. Easing visitor visa process for new applicants - takes too long with too many things to fill visa application form, medical tests, etc. Note that American visitors to Bangladesh don't need to go through such tests and lengthy processes for a nominal visitor visa.
2. Easing student visa process for students - too much info beyond what is expected. It is also discriminatory when compared against other Asian countries, including next door India, whose students don't face as much hassel as ours. The F-20 form and support of financial aid/guarantee should be good enough to get them the necessary visa. A student must also have a multiple year student visa for the normative period of his/her visa; e.g., 4-5 year for BS/BA, 2-3 year for MS and 5-7 year for PhD (or overall 5-8 year for graduate students). During this time, the student should be able to visit his/her loved ones whenever he feels. Many students from Bangladesh are afraid to visit their ailing parents fearing that once they are back in Bangladesh they may not be allowed to return to the USA. [Some of our foreign students had to wait 9 years before they could go home to see their parents and siblings when they were doing graduate studies. And that too, only after they got a Green Card through their employers.] There is an obvious discrimination of our students against European students who had no problem visiting their loved ones during the summer.
3. Easing restriction on H-1 visa holders so that they could at ease visit Bangladesh and take their spouses with them upon return to the USA.
4. Easing restrictions of Green card holders to be able to bring their spouses to the USA. What is prevalent is simply inhuman forcing spouses to be separated for years before the other party is called to the US Embassy for visa interview. That process must shorten to maximum of 6 months, reducing family attrition and tension.
5. Easing restrictions of family members of U.S. Citizens to come to the USA - the current process requires almost a year for the non-US spouse to join his/her better half in the States. And that, too, after lots of tests and forms, which are required to be filled by applicants. The naturalization charges are also too high. Parents and siblings now have to wait for more than a decade before they are called by the embassy for interview. By that time, many parents and siblings have become too old and too frail to get excited to move to the USA. Even a child who is more than 18 cannot join his/her US parents immediately and have to wait years before called in for interview for green card. What the US naturalization process is doing to immigrants is simply one of the worst abuses of human right - denying company of their immediate loved ones - parents, siblings and children. It needs REFORM. The fees for the naturalization process must also be reduced significantly to make it easy for people to reunite. The process is so cumbersome with so many forms and papers and tests, very few elderly feel motivated to join their children here. Many believe that the process is made complex and difficult to discourage people to come to the USA. But that is not right from human rights perspective that America preaches.
6. The ordinary citizens should be given priority over political touts and criminals like Saqa Chowdhury. People with criminal records like Saqa Chowdhury who had endangered family properties of the NRBs must be DENIED visa to enter the USA. Such individuals who have intentionally harmed NRB families must be declared persona non-grata.
7. Given Bangladesh's vulnerability against natural disasters and man-made ones, sufficient global efforts are needed to ensure that its tens of millions would be catered from such disasters. America also needs to help Bangladesh develop its energy sector, and rein upon India so that the latter cannot harm the country. American help is crucial for dealing with contentious issues on maritime boundary, dams and barrages with our neighbors.
10. Lowering visa application fee: it has to be mutually done with Bangladesh govt. A high fee only helps the USA, and penalizes Bangladeshis and the family and friends of the NRBs desiring to visit the USA. Too few come to the Bangladesh who are Americans.
B. NRB (non-resident Bangladeshis) or Expatriate (from Bangladesh) Issues:
1. NRBs should be able to apply for dual citizenship like Israeli-Americans in this country.
2. They should be able to vote in national elections from the USA.
3. Bangladesh govt must be held accountable to safeguard their property rights in Bangladesh, esp. from deceased parents in matters of transfer of ownership.
4. Bangladeshis who had harmed NRBs cannot and should not get visa from the USA and its allies. They must be declared pariah or persona non-grata.
5. Job discrimination against NRBs must stop so that they are fairly and equally treated as valuable citizens in the USA for their work.
6. NRBs should be able to bring their immediate family members (spouse, children, parents, siblings) within the shortest possible time thereby ensuring family bondage and human rights of the loved ones.
7. NRBs should be able to bring their family asset/wealth without much restriction to their adopted country. Those emigrating must be able to bring as much money as he/she has so that all other illegal means of money laundering are stopped for good. A govt to govt agreement is necessary here to facilitate such a process. Similarly, when an NRB decides to invest in Bangladesh, there should not be any restriction either from the USA on such gainful, legal business ventures. The overall process need to be transparent, reciprocal and easy for the age of global economy we live in.
8. Visa fee for movement to Bangladesh ought to be waived for the NRBs.
A. Bangladeshis visiting the USA: What is needed -
1. Easing visitor visa process for new applicants - takes too long with too many things to fill visa application form, medical tests, etc. Note that American visitors to Bangladesh don't need to go through such tests and lengthy processes for a nominal visitor visa.
2. Easing student visa process for students - too much info beyond what is expected. It is also discriminatory when compared against other Asian countries, including next door India, whose students don't face as much hassel as ours. The F-20 form and support of financial aid/guarantee should be good enough to get them the necessary visa. A student must also have a multiple year student visa for the normative period of his/her visa; e.g., 4-5 year for BS/BA, 2-3 year for MS and 5-7 year for PhD (or overall 5-8 year for graduate students). During this time, the student should be able to visit his/her loved ones whenever he feels. Many students from Bangladesh are afraid to visit their ailing parents fearing that once they are back in Bangladesh they may not be allowed to return to the USA. [Some of our foreign students had to wait 9 years before they could go home to see their parents and siblings when they were doing graduate studies. And that too, only after they got a Green Card through their employers.] There is an obvious discrimination of our students against European students who had no problem visiting their loved ones during the summer.
3. Easing restriction on H-1 visa holders so that they could at ease visit Bangladesh and take their spouses with them upon return to the USA.
4. Easing restrictions of Green card holders to be able to bring their spouses to the USA. What is prevalent is simply inhuman forcing spouses to be separated for years before the other party is called to the US Embassy for visa interview. That process must shorten to maximum of 6 months, reducing family attrition and tension.
5. Easing restrictions of family members of U.S. Citizens to come to the USA - the current process requires almost a year for the non-US spouse to join his/her better half in the States. And that, too, after lots of tests and forms, which are required to be filled by applicants. The naturalization charges are also too high. Parents and siblings now have to wait for more than a decade before they are called by the embassy for interview. By that time, many parents and siblings have become too old and too frail to get excited to move to the USA. Even a child who is more than 18 cannot join his/her US parents immediately and have to wait years before called in for interview for green card. What the US naturalization process is doing to immigrants is simply one of the worst abuses of human right - denying company of their immediate loved ones - parents, siblings and children. It needs REFORM. The fees for the naturalization process must also be reduced significantly to make it easy for people to reunite. The process is so cumbersome with so many forms and papers and tests, very few elderly feel motivated to join their children here. Many believe that the process is made complex and difficult to discourage people to come to the USA. But that is not right from human rights perspective that America preaches.
6. The ordinary citizens should be given priority over political touts and criminals like Saqa Chowdhury. People with criminal records like Saqa Chowdhury who had endangered family properties of the NRBs must be DENIED visa to enter the USA. Such individuals who have intentionally harmed NRB families must be declared persona non-grata.
7. Given Bangladesh's vulnerability against natural disasters and man-made ones, sufficient global efforts are needed to ensure that its tens of millions would be catered from such disasters. America also needs to help Bangladesh develop its energy sector, and rein upon India so that the latter cannot harm the country. American help is crucial for dealing with contentious issues on maritime boundary, dams and barrages with our neighbors.
10. Lowering visa application fee: it has to be mutually done with Bangladesh govt. A high fee only helps the USA, and penalizes Bangladeshis and the family and friends of the NRBs desiring to visit the USA. Too few come to the Bangladesh who are Americans.
B. NRB (non-resident Bangladeshis) or Expatriate (from Bangladesh) Issues:
1. NRBs should be able to apply for dual citizenship like Israeli-Americans in this country.
2. They should be able to vote in national elections from the USA.
3. Bangladesh govt must be held accountable to safeguard their property rights in Bangladesh, esp. from deceased parents in matters of transfer of ownership.
4. Bangladeshis who had harmed NRBs cannot and should not get visa from the USA and its allies. They must be declared pariah or persona non-grata.
5. Job discrimination against NRBs must stop so that they are fairly and equally treated as valuable citizens in the USA for their work.
6. NRBs should be able to bring their immediate family members (spouse, children, parents, siblings) within the shortest possible time thereby ensuring family bondage and human rights of the loved ones.
7. NRBs should be able to bring their family asset/wealth without much restriction to their adopted country. Those emigrating must be able to bring as much money as he/she has so that all other illegal means of money laundering are stopped for good. A govt to govt agreement is necessary here to facilitate such a process. Similarly, when an NRB decides to invest in Bangladesh, there should not be any restriction either from the USA on such gainful, legal business ventures. The overall process need to be transparent, reciprocal and easy for the age of global economy we live in.
8. Visa fee for movement to Bangladesh ought to be waived for the NRBs.
Monday, July 27, 2009
Confluence Claims Unity - An article from Tehelka.com - on Tipaimukh Dam project
Confluence Claims Unity
Ref: http://www.tehelka.com/story_main42.asp?filename=cr010809confluence_claims.asp
Anti-dam activists in Bangladesh and India have come together to protest against the Tipaimukh dam in Manipur, reports TERESA REHMAN
IN MANIPUR’S HMAR dialect, the name for Tipaimukh is ‘Ruonglevaisuo’, meaning ‘the confluence of two rivers’. The two-decade-long struggle against the proposed 1,500 MW Tipaimukh dam project, to be located 500 metres downstream of the confluence of the rivers Trivia and Barak, in Manipur’s Churachandpur district has brought about another union – that of anti-dam activists of India and Bangladesh. Activists from both countries, who are regularly in touch through emails and meetings held in Bangladesh, are extremely sceptical of the visit made to the controversial crossborder site by a 10-member Bangla deshi delegation of lawmakers and water resources experts in July this year.
According to activists, this first-time visit to the dam site by a Bangladesh team could become a turning point. If construed as a green signal for the dam from the Bangladesh side, it could overturn the long-drawn people’s movement against the dam. Activists from both countries came together at the National Tipaimukh Dam Conference (NTDC) organised in Bangladesh this year by an environmental NGO called the Angikar Bangladesh Foundation and are now planning a concerted effort to fight the 163 metre high dam.
“Ecology doesn’t observe national boundaries. Pakistan and India haven't abrogated the 1960 Indus Treaty despite three wars,” says Darryl D’Monte, Presi - dent, International Federation of Envi - ronmental Journalists. Commending activists who are planning to form a joint co-ordinating committee to oppose the Tipaimukh project, D’Monte says, “It makes great sense for environmentalists to join hands across borders — something that politicians seem incapable of doing, because they always see opposing, rather than common, interests”.
Ramananda Wangkheirakpam, a coordinator of the Manipur-based Citizen's Concern for Dams and Development (CCDD) told TEHELKA that activists’ main worry is that the two countries may come to a hurried water-and-powersharing pact, without taking into account the real issues: reduced water flow in the Barak river, destruction of wetlands and farmlands, increased seismicity and destruction of tribal territories in Manipur.
“We would like to meet the team from Bangladesh and apprise them of what is happening to other rivers in the Northeast,” says Wangkheirakpam. Identified as India's ‘future powerhouse’, the Northeast is the site of 168 proposed large dams, with a cumulative capacity of 63,328 MW.
Activists in Bangladesh draw lessons from the disastrous effect of the Farakka Barrage, built in 1974. Bangladeshi activist Habib Siddiqui refers to the November 1999 Report made by the South Asian Network on Dams, River and People to the World Commission on Dams, which has details about the massive damage the Barrage caused in Malda upstream and Murshidabad downstream.
Siddiqui feels that while the initiative to send a delegation is encouraging, it would have better if it included some technical experts as well as members of the opposition party, the BNP. Siddiqui told TEHELKA, “If this dam is constructed, Bangladesh's ecology, agriculture and environment will be severely affected. It must be resisted.”
Meanwhile, the project has changed hands yet again. On July 15, the Centre replaced power giant North Eastern Electric Power Corporation (NEEPCO) with the National Hydro-electric Power Corporation (NHPC) as the implementing agency. The project will now be a joint venture between NHPC (69 per cent), the Shimla-based Satluj Jal Vidyut Nigam Limited (26 per cent) and the Manipur Government (5 per cent). Earlier with the Brahmaputra Board, the project was awarded to NEEPCO in January 2003.
The proposed mega-dam will be the largest hydroelectric project in Eastern India. The project will have a 6 X 250 MW powerhouse. It will take at least 12 years to complete and will submerge 309 sq. km of land. Its consequences have alarmed anti-dam activists. Wangkheirakpam is firm, “We want the project scrapped.”
Activist mohammad Hilaluddin of Angikar thinks that the Bangladesh delegation’s visit highlights the complexity of Bangladesh-India relations. “In April 2009, the Indian foreign secretary visited Bangladesh, which was then reeling from the BDR mutiny and pushed the contentious issue of the Tipaimukh dam construction upon the newly-elected government,” he says. The dam-building madness prevailing in the policy-making centres of China and India, says Hilaluddin, must be replaced by collective efforts to prevent a water war.
WRITER’S EMAIL
teresa@tehelka.com
Ref: http://www.tehelka.com/story_main42.asp?filename=cr010809confluence_claims.asp
Anti-dam activists in Bangladesh and India have come together to protest against the Tipaimukh dam in Manipur, reports TERESA REHMAN
IN MANIPUR’S HMAR dialect, the name for Tipaimukh is ‘Ruonglevaisuo’, meaning ‘the confluence of two rivers’. The two-decade-long struggle against the proposed 1,500 MW Tipaimukh dam project, to be located 500 metres downstream of the confluence of the rivers Trivia and Barak, in Manipur’s Churachandpur district has brought about another union – that of anti-dam activists of India and Bangladesh. Activists from both countries, who are regularly in touch through emails and meetings held in Bangladesh, are extremely sceptical of the visit made to the controversial crossborder site by a 10-member Bangla deshi delegation of lawmakers and water resources experts in July this year.
According to activists, this first-time visit to the dam site by a Bangladesh team could become a turning point. If construed as a green signal for the dam from the Bangladesh side, it could overturn the long-drawn people’s movement against the dam. Activists from both countries came together at the National Tipaimukh Dam Conference (NTDC) organised in Bangladesh this year by an environmental NGO called the Angikar Bangladesh Foundation and are now planning a concerted effort to fight the 163 metre high dam.
“Ecology doesn’t observe national boundaries. Pakistan and India haven't abrogated the 1960 Indus Treaty despite three wars,” says Darryl D’Monte, Presi - dent, International Federation of Envi - ronmental Journalists. Commending activists who are planning to form a joint co-ordinating committee to oppose the Tipaimukh project, D’Monte says, “It makes great sense for environmentalists to join hands across borders — something that politicians seem incapable of doing, because they always see opposing, rather than common, interests”.
Ramananda Wangkheirakpam, a coordinator of the Manipur-based Citizen's Concern for Dams and Development (CCDD) told TEHELKA that activists’ main worry is that the two countries may come to a hurried water-and-powersharing pact, without taking into account the real issues: reduced water flow in the Barak river, destruction of wetlands and farmlands, increased seismicity and destruction of tribal territories in Manipur.
“We would like to meet the team from Bangladesh and apprise them of what is happening to other rivers in the Northeast,” says Wangkheirakpam. Identified as India's ‘future powerhouse’, the Northeast is the site of 168 proposed large dams, with a cumulative capacity of 63,328 MW.
Activists in Bangladesh draw lessons from the disastrous effect of the Farakka Barrage, built in 1974. Bangladeshi activist Habib Siddiqui refers to the November 1999 Report made by the South Asian Network on Dams, River and People to the World Commission on Dams, which has details about the massive damage the Barrage caused in Malda upstream and Murshidabad downstream.
Siddiqui feels that while the initiative to send a delegation is encouraging, it would have better if it included some technical experts as well as members of the opposition party, the BNP. Siddiqui told TEHELKA, “If this dam is constructed, Bangladesh's ecology, agriculture and environment will be severely affected. It must be resisted.”
Meanwhile, the project has changed hands yet again. On July 15, the Centre replaced power giant North Eastern Electric Power Corporation (NEEPCO) with the National Hydro-electric Power Corporation (NHPC) as the implementing agency. The project will now be a joint venture between NHPC (69 per cent), the Shimla-based Satluj Jal Vidyut Nigam Limited (26 per cent) and the Manipur Government (5 per cent). Earlier with the Brahmaputra Board, the project was awarded to NEEPCO in January 2003.
The proposed mega-dam will be the largest hydroelectric project in Eastern India. The project will have a 6 X 250 MW powerhouse. It will take at least 12 years to complete and will submerge 309 sq. km of land. Its consequences have alarmed anti-dam activists. Wangkheirakpam is firm, “We want the project scrapped.”
Activist mohammad Hilaluddin of Angikar thinks that the Bangladesh delegation’s visit highlights the complexity of Bangladesh-India relations. “In April 2009, the Indian foreign secretary visited Bangladesh, which was then reeling from the BDR mutiny and pushed the contentious issue of the Tipaimukh dam construction upon the newly-elected government,” he says. The dam-building madness prevailing in the policy-making centres of China and India, says Hilaluddin, must be replaced by collective efforts to prevent a water war.
WRITER’S EMAIL
teresa@tehelka.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)