Bangladesh News Shocking Revelation : India Threatened Military Intervention In Bangladesh During 2009 BDR Mutiny.

[Afif]

Introduction

BDR mutiny was one of the darkest chapter in Bangladesh Armed forces history.
On 25 and 26 February 2009, soldiers of the Bangladesh Rifles (BDR), a paramilitary force entrusted with the responsibility of guarding Bangladesh’s land borders mutinied. What initially appeared to be a few disgruntled soldiers taking up arms for better financial and working conditions, soon turned out to be a calculated massacre. Fifty-nine officers of the Bangladesh Army, who were on secondment to the BDR, and some BDR personnel, were killed over a span of thirty six hours. These officers constituted the entire command structure of the BDR. The murder of such a large number of senior army officers at the hands of the BDR members left the entire nation stunned in horror and disbelief those days.

And the tragedy has left an indelible mark on the country's phsyce.

The way the 2 days insidious revolt was handle by the civilian government is still a topic of great debate to this today.

From the early hours of 25th February Bangladesh army stood ready for armed raid of the BDR Rifles compound. Army deployed armoured and mechanized element on the street of dhaka and surrounded the BDR headquarter. Similarly commando units were also put on high readiness.

However, Civilian Government of Sheikh hassina restrained from military operation on the BDR compound.
Hence, Supreme command of the army declined to give 'go to' order.
While pressure from the junior army officers and field commanders were mounting on the army Supreme command and the civilian government to give green signal for commando raid on the rebel compound as each hour passed by, ultimately the The mutiny ended as the mutineers surrendered their arms and released the hostages after a series of discussions and negotiations with the government.

Bangladesh Rifles revolt - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

By some it was always considered a mystery why army supreme command did not allow the commando raid on the BDR headquarter, which at the time seemed to be the most logical choice to reduce hostage casualties and restore authority and control as fast as possible.

Also, it seemed very surprising how government despite immense pressure from the army, stood by its decision not to allow immediate operation on the compound.

Interestingly, over the years some political commentators and analysts strongly alleged India's involvement in 2009 incident.

But there never was any direct acknowledgement or admission on such accusations from any of Indian stablishments.

The shocking revelation

However, recently a respected Indian journalist (Avinash Paliwal, an Associate Professor of International Relations at SOAS University of London, specialises in foreign and security policy analysis with regional focus on South Asia) writing for the country's leading media outlet 'Hindustan times', for the first time directly admitted that, (or to be more precise, almost bragged about how) India has threatened direct military intervention in Bangladesh during BDR mutiny.

As he writes in his article named 'Poll-bound Bangladesh is at an inflection point'

"But there’s one last aspect critical to it all i.e., India’s response. Something not widely known in Bangladesh is that the army was forced into the barracks under Indian pressure. In 2009, when former chief General Moeen Uddin Ahmed was being pressed by his officer corps to give shooting orders to quell the Bangladesh Rifles mutiny, India threatened military intervention if he did so. New Delhi worried about Hasina’s safety, and was unsure of Moeen’s Napoleonic ambitions. It was not a bluff."

Poll-bound Bangladesh is at an inflection point

An impasse between the ruling and Opposition parties in Bangladesh risks unrest, and the army might intervene. But it could dislocate the civil-military balance

www.hindustantimes.com

@Isa Khan @F-6 enthusiast @PutinBro @Nilgiri @Ryder et al.

Full article:-

 

[Afif]

While personally I held the view that India being a democratic country is a rational international actor, however, the recent shocking revelation has forced me to reconsider my view on the national security matter of Bangladesh.

Previously, I understood that, considering all aspect in any given any scenario, the political, economic and military cost of any Indian military intervention, Whether it is an 'special operation' or full scale invasion of Bangladesh would outweigh the benefits by a large margin, thus rationally acting India would refrain from such actions.

And the current strategic posturing of Indian army somewhat support such analysis. Indian strategic planners does not consider Bangladesh as a threat to its sovereignty. Thus, Indian army's Eastern command is not primarily designed or structured to fight full scale war with Bangladesh.
Rather it's main objective to protect the sovereign Indian territory in the Northeast against PLA aggression.

Hence, the Indian army's armoured and mechanised units are not permanently stationed strategically surrounding Bangladesh in big numbers.


However, for a small country like Bangladesh that lack strategic depth, it would be extremely foolish to leave the existential matter of national security on the good will big neighbour and simply expect it to act rationally and responsibly.

It is unfortunate enough that despite Bangladesh posing no threat to India's sovereignty, Indian policy Makers took such aggressive policy toward Bangladesh in 2009 and threatened to directly violate the sovereignty of the country over internal matters, what makes it worse that there is no guarantee, they don't do it again.

While i still think, in any given scenario a full scale Indian invasion of Bangladesh is very much unlikely, however, as the recent revelation suggest, limited military intervention in various forms cannot ruled out in any way.

And as we witness with the Ukraine conflict, Any strategic miscalculation of overly ambitious small numbers of political elites could bring catastrophe for everyone.

 

[Ryder]

Who does Bangladesh see more of a threat?

Pakistan or India.

 

[Nilgiri]

I wouldn't even call this revelation, speculation at best if we are to use a consistent basis on what goes on in world media in general.

It is unfortunate enough that despite Bangladesh posing no threat to India's sovereignty, Indian policy Makers took such aggressive policy toward Bangladesh in 2009 and threatened to directly violate the sovereignty of the country over internal matters, what makes it worse that there is no guarantee, they don't do it again.

Based on what evidence?

Some tier C journalist smoke and mirrors routine doing a transfer function check of current victimisation/conspiracy level within BD? To make further fruit on it for use later? Whatever the actual truth in the rashomon haze as always hidden to us.

I already mentioned to you what I think the role of robust institutions on for countries to minimize impact of this phenomena. What do you think I meant when I spoke of institutional issues and attitudes there w.r.t my BD close friend experience?

I got my plate full already with dealing with "sources say speculating this" what India receives from various media journos (foreign and local) to feed into its own victimisation complex to do a finger to the wind check for whatever optimal agenda item wedge issue, extreme fear-alarmism promotion and insertion at the current moment or some time later.

For BD, it is the job for BD establishment and society to work upon....no one elses. One ought to go to the gym and library and put in the hard work....rather than sit around and muse all day focusing on one's fears and victimization and who is easiest to point finger at.

If fear and victimisation is established in sufficient degree, it just becomes easy tool for smoke and mirrors direction, from some random journo too....forget about another having to deploy actual statecraft to precede nastier things.

It is BD's choice and responsibility to develop a path on finding its independent way to deal with Myanmar compared to what its done so far.

Just like how to analyse why its forex declined so rapidly from 50 billion to 25 billion now, instead of increasing to 75 billion.

Or why its tax base and revenue remains so limited and low. I could keep going....in the end BD has to take itself seriously, or no one else will.

These processes of doing this, analysing these concretely and taking lessons and implementing them.... all of them matter in the end to developing feeding institutional strength to develop optimal autonomy and strength long term....since defense + geopolitical statecraft bills (core strategic strength externally) have to be anchored and supported by something in the end.

I mention the very same here w.r.t Turkiye already, along with our recent chat in geopolitics thread:

Economy & Updates

A current account surplus of $0.67bn in June (first time in 2 years). Hopefully the one for July and August will be even higher. https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/turkish-june-current-account-surplus-$674-million-more-than-forecast

defencehub.live

Otherwise weakness, fear, incompetence are all allowed to cascade and impact everything else thats trying to get better.

 

[PutinBro]

While personally I held the view that India being a democratic country is a rational international actor

LOL bro

 

[PutinBro]

*BNP can't and won't create any major political unrest.Large violent protests are out of the question.

*Army is never going to intervene.You will only see army in Dhaka if govt tells them to....

The writer overexaggerated the political situation in BD and seems to view things from 15-20 year old context.

Now he may be right(or partially right) about the military intervention part as congress's habit of poking its nose in BD internal matters is quite well known.BJP is far better in this regard.

 

[Jackdaws]

I doubt it. I guess there could been an opinion expressed but the Manmohan Singh Govt had its hands full. 2009 was an election year after the 2008 Bombay attacks and much to my surprise the UPA led by Manmohan won. The opposition would had a field day if Indian troops landed in a foreign country. As a matter of policy, after the IPKF fiasco in Sri Lanka, India does not militarily intervene in other countries.

 

[Afif]

For BD, it is the job for BD establishment and society to work upon....no one elses. One ought to go to the gym and library and put in the hard work....rather than sit around and muse all day focusing on one's fears and victimization and who is easiest to point finger at.

If fear and victimisation is established in sufficient degree, it just becomes easy tool for smoke and mirrors direction, from some random journo too....forget about another having to deploy actual statecraft to precede nastier things.

It is BD's choice and responsibility to develop a path on finding its independent way to deal with Myanmar compared to what its done so far.

Just like how to analyse why its forex declined so rapidly from 50 billion to 25 billion now, instead of increasing to 75 billion.

Or why its tax base and revenue remains so limited and low. I could keep going....in the end BD has to take itself seriously, or no one else will.

These processes of doing this, analysing these concretely and taking lessons and implementing them.... all of them matter in the end to developing feeding institutional strength to develop optimal autonomy and strength long term....since defense + geopolitical statecraft bills (core strategic strength externally) have to be anchored and supported by something in the end.

I mention the very same here w.r.t Turkiye already, along with our recent chat in geopolitics thread:

Economy & Updates

A current account surplus of $0.67bn in June (first time in 2 years). Hopefully the one for July and August will be even higher. https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/turkish-june-current-account-surplus-$674-million-more-than-forecast

defencehub.live

Otherwise weakness, fear, incompetence are all allowed to cascade and impact everything else thats trying to get better.

While, i agree with you In general, In fact, I always considered the whole 'India's involvement' thing as conspiracy, (Because, I know how easily people victimise themselves and blame others for something that is totally consequence of their own incompetence.) however, (even if you don’t consider the journalist in question credible,) what is unique this time is, no leading Indian media outlet directly published something so blatant before.

Thus, even though previously I thought it was a conspiracy, But now such flirting from the Indian media makes the water even more muddier. Maybe I overreacted, but as you said, 'the actual truth is hidden from us' which means 50/50 chance for either way.
In this case, even without falling into conspiracy and self victimisation it would make Anybody anxious. For now there is no way for us to know. If it did not happen, then very cool. But if did happen, if Indian actually threatened to intervene militarily, imagine what are the implications would be from BD's point of view.
if you are small country with such big neighbour, you don’t want to take half chance with something so sensitive and existential like that.
I hope, at least you understand that.

 

[Afif]

Who does Bangladesh see more of a threat?

Pakistan or India.

My friend, Pakistan cannot be a military threat to us. There is 1000km distance between our geographies.
All of our problem was solved in 1971.
We kicked them out and it was over.

 

[Afif]

I doubt it. I guess there could been an opinion expressed but the Manmohan Singh Govt had its hands full. 2009 was an election year after the 2008 Bombay attacks and much to my surprise the UPA led by Manmohan won. The opposition would had a field day if Indian troops landed in a foreign country. As a matter of policy, after the IPKF fiasco in Sri Lanka, India does not militarily intervene in other countries.

Also, I am wondering how the operational framework would have looked like. Obviously, BD is not Sri Lanka or Napal.
Any large scale mobilization would have taken months. And then India would have to fight a bloody war.
With China and Pakistan's active threats to its borders, it is unlikely that India would have been able to field enough divisions to achieve 2:1 troop ratio.

Not to mentioned the economic and political cost of such war.

 

[Ryder]

My friend, Pakistan cannot be a military threat to us. There is 1000km distance between our geographies.
All of our problem was solved in 1971.
We kicked them out and it was over.

Or how about India or Burma?

Which is more of a threat?

 

[Afif]

Or how about India or Burma?

Which is more of a threat?

Myanmar Bangladesh share 271.0 kilometres border. Most of its mountainous soil. Heavy troop movements not possible.

While on the other hand, Bangladesh and India share a 4,096-kilometre-long (2,545 mi) international border, the fifth-longest land border in the world.


I can't tell you more than that.
Officially, we are friends with all of our neighbors.

 

[Nilgiri]

While, i agree with you In general, In fact, I always considered the whole 'India's involvement' thing as conspiracy, (Because, I know how easily people victimise themselves and blame others for something that is totally consequence of their own incompetence.) however, (even if you don’t consider the journalist in question credible,) what is unique this time is, no leading Indian media outlet directly published something so blatant before.

When there is no clear evidence, I just treat stuff as op-ed with intent or something similar, i.e in this case something just to see response from BD media/establishment....what attention it gets from larger BD society etc.

This is what I mean by transfer function + finger to the wind stuff.... is a journo with speculation enough to apply pressure like this. Its done all the time broadly in World media in every which way. I use Nordstream as a rough 10 in 1 - 10 rating along with many things related to Ukraine war in general (right from the 1990s till now w.r.t context).

eg. in India case, I rated the journo stuff (e.g extreme conspiracy theory ill will directed towards Biden, Harris and WH admin and even US in general given the perceived potshots taken by some US journos before it too to maybe set up or create this grievance rebound, along with longer term anti-US/West sentiment that resides since Indian independence for various reasons real and fake) w.r.t covid 2nd wave stuff emergency response dynamics....as maybe a 3 / 10 regarding this. Factoring in the power differential and hence which side has more overall victimized prevalence that is exploited (either with intent or without, its always hard to say....was the fire arson or natural etc.).

The Adani short selling market cap thing, maybe around a 5/10 in comparison. It all needed time to play out to see what doesn't come out in the hot wash churn of the speculation flinging and counterflinging when there are narrative/agenda clashes that take tribalist hues....and sticks around as longer consequence for the next round whenever that happens.

Anyway, if there is neutral credible enough BD journalist or other part of BD establishment response to this guy/HT (well essentially HT editor that missed this or permitted it through) please post it for us later. That will give some reference point for next step.

Otherwise its just 1/10 shot across the bow stuff at best by one random journo. I never heard of him before, hence I put him tier C, but it looks like he does have some following....and I see he has taken some potshots before regarding India Afghan Pakistan situation and some other stuff too I would imagine.

Thus, even though previously I thought it was a conspiracy, But now such flirting from the Indian media makes the water even more muddier. Maybe I overreacted, but as you said, 'the actual truth is hidden from us' which means 50/50 chance for either way.

Why does he represent Indian media? If there is even response from other circles of Indian media regarding this, I guess we will have to wait and see. It might need BD response in its official media first....if BD stacks it highly enough for a response.

In this case, even without falling into conspiracy and self victimisation it would make Anybody anxious. For now there is no way for us to know. If it did not happen, then very cool. But if did happen, if Indian actually threatened to intervene militarily, imagine what are the implications would be from BD's point of view.

If I ramp up the media org. power to say NYT or Washpo for the US and think of the 100 things in recent memory they've done w.r.t potshots on op-ed speculation or selective/agenda narrative engineering for Just India alone..... maybe I'd have taken it more anxiously in my earlier years (say pre Iraq war).

That's all well before I even make any pattern fact based connection of what some journo is w.r.t a deep state faction of the US.

BD should be made of sterner stuff for its population size and what it has going for it currently....if it takes some media group with an editor with a journo on one article (with no evidence given) as be all end all on something.

if you are small country with such big neighbour, you don’t want to take half chance with something so sensitive and existential like that.
I hope, at least you understand that.

Again you seem to be assuming this guy is some direct mouthpiece for the Indian deepstate.

Is "the wire" just controlled op (or the reverse foreign controlled anti-national domestic media) against Indian deepstate...merely because it is Indian? They publish a much larger intense degree of things just sticking to topic of India....that I listen to (agree or disagree with what they have to say in their interviews and analysis)....but I never come to conclusion without evidence this is something the Indian deepstate is ultimately pushing (or some cabal of foreigners and anti-nationals etc) as part of some wider controlled op plan etc....because I see a much greateer genuine intent and evidence stacking against that notion....things I have discussed with some wise Indian friends who know the contours of this much better than I do within India.

Again the onus is on BD to toughen itself up (and I would say the same to India and any country in the end)....and assign proper credibility to rumour mill lone potshot/editor slip stuff rather than let confirmation bias in whatever state of victimisation/paranoia in its overall psyche take root. Toughening is work BD has to put in....no one else.

In any case we can first see what the response is in BD if there is one to it.

 

[Isa Khan]

First of all, I thought it's a propaganda or empty claim like any other Indian article about Bangladesh. Technically it's still a propaganda.

There's some problems with this article imo and few points to discuss.

1/ First, this is some serious claim with no evidence attached to back it up. The Hindu should've given full access to the article and provided it with evidence. Instead we had to rely on screenshots from author's twitter account to read the whole thing. It should've been more constructive like that Al Jazeera's report on General Aziz.

This author just wrote this article to promote his next book. He said he will provide evidence in his new book which will be published in April, 2024. Absolutely ridiculous!! Who would wait that long and why would we do that? Most of us may even forget about it. It's like he is showing trailer here and telling us that the picture will be released in 2024.

I understand that he is trying to earn money with his work but what he did for this type of serious allegation seems unethical and stupid. He shouldn't have stirred up people this way for his book sale. Also, he kept telling people to seek official clarification from the BD army/Hasina when he is the one made the allegation so he is the one who is supposed to provide evidence first. It's really rude and annoying. (Check below)

2/ Now to the main part, I don't know what made this guy wrote that our army was forced into barracks because India pressured when it was clearly visible that army took position with tanks, APC, AAA and other equipment before all BDR gates and surrounded the area since day 2 AFTER PM addressed the nation and told them to either surrender or face harsh actions.

Helicopter was flying over Pilkhana. Army was ready for assault, they just didn't get the final go. Even when these traitors surrendered army was seen entering the HQ with tanks, APC. So where did this guy get the info that army was "forced" into barracks because India pressured?

It's a good thing that the revolt was resolved politically without further bloodbath. My uncle lived near BDR-3 No gate and he was told to evacuate but he didn't do it on such short notice. Also, there are lots of civilians live around that area so if the clash intensified there would've be more causalities.

3/ Also, I don't understand why India would be worried about Hasina's safety, she took office less than two months ago. Nothing indicated she's was at risk during that crisis. If remember correctly, intelligence already warned her not to go to the "Darber"/annual meeting. If Moeen really wanted to take her out he could've done it during caretaker govt rule under Minus-Two formula. He would've had more chance then.

Even if India wanted to conduct military operation, would it really save Hasina? It would only caused more trouble for Hasina, BAL and India as general people would seriously react against this invasion. Also other parties in Bangladesh, India would strongly protest against it including other countries.

Invading Indian military specially the army which supposedly lead the rescue role in this scenario would be delayed significantly by BGB, BAF, navy, multiple divisions of army, millions of other forces and people in 2nd line of defense. Forget invading, by the time India managed to finish formulating a plan to intervene Moeen would've been able to eliminate Hasina easily. Mirpur cantonment is only few minutes away from PM's residence. So, it's not gonna be easy to invade a independent sovereign country just to rescue a PM which favors you.

4/ Also why UN withdrawal from Mali will make our army discontent? There are already alternative missions in Qatar and Gambia.

5/ General S M Shafiuddin Ahmed is totally loyal to Hasina. Highly doubt that he will do something against current regime.

Anyway here's Anu Anwar's discussion with the writer, completely agree with him. The writer should've done better.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1690812329665929216

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1690814954947903488

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1690816714030694401

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1690820155020853248

 

[Afif]

First article referred in the tweet

---

​

After 2009 Bangladesh mutiny, India rallied support for Hasina​

New Delhi was concerned about possible instability​

March 27, 2011 01:52 am | Updated November 22, 2021 06:55 pm IST - CHENNAI:

Nirupama Subramanian

The mutiny by a section of Bangladesh Rifles troops in February 2009 set off fears in India that extremist militant groups would gain the upper hand over Sheikh Hasina's government.
U.S. Embassy Charge d'Affaires Steven White was surprised when he was called in for a meeting with Foreign Secretary Shivshankar Menon on the last weekend of February 2009.

That “unusual Saturday meeting” was to discuss the mutiny by troopers of the Bangladesh Rifles a couple of days earlier, and the worry in the Indian government about its implications for the newly elected government of Sheikh Hasina, perceived as being a friend of India.

The cable that was sent on March 2, 2009 ( >194661: confidential ), and accessed by The Hindu through WikiLeaks, details the conversation between the American stand-in envoy and Mr. Menon.


The Bangladesh Prime Minister, Sheikh Hasina, had telephoned External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee during the mutiny to ask for assistance from the international community but had not been specific about the kind of help she needed. Mr. Mukherjee had offered “to be responsive” if needed.

The Foreign Secretary, Shivshankar Menon, revealed that the Indian government had also rallied London, Beijing and Tokyo.

India had two concerns. One, it feared that the Jamat-e-Islami would exploit the instability resulting from the rebellion to “fish in troubled waters.” The Foreign Secretary described the mutiny as long in the planning. Mr. Menon did not blame the Jamat-e-Islami directly for it, but said the party was disappointed by the results of the December 2008 election, and the steps taken by the new government to counter extremism.


Secondly, it appears India was worried that the mutiny could affect the civilian government's relations with the military.

Mr. Menon expressed concern about the likely effect of the violence on the Army, which had lost several officers while quelling the mutiny. The Foreign Secretary indicated this might lead to trouble for the Hasina government with the Army. He noted that the mutineers had thrown the bodies of military officials into sewers. But he was encouraged that the Army chief was working closely with the government to stabilise the situation.


“Menon appreciated the U.S. statement on the violence and stressed the importance of close coordination and consultation between the U.S. and India as the situation developed. He warned that while the initial violence was over, it would take several days before it was clear what would happen next and that further trouble was possible,” the U.S. official cabled.

A month later, India continued to be worried about the after-effects of the mutiny. On March 26, 2009, the U.S. Embassy in Delhi cabled ( >198952: confidential ) that India's main concern was to stabilise Prime Minister Hasina's government.

The Ministry of External Affairs Deputy Secretary told Embassy officials that India was concerned about the possible involvement of “radical forces.”

He related that many of the known culprits in the massacre were recruited under the previous Bangladesh Nationalist Party government and have Jamaat-e-Islami links.

India's concerns appear to have cast a shadow on the Indian Foreign Secretary's visit to Dhaka on April 13 and 14 that year. A day later, he shared with U.S. Ambassador Peter Burleigh his assessment that the situation in Bangladesh was “fragile” following the mutiny.

According to a cable sent on April 16, 2009 from New Delhi ( >202615: confidential ) reporting the meeting, Mr. Menon expressed the Indian government's worry that the current environment would allow extremist groups in Bangladesh to destabilise the democratic government and provide them with a “freer hand” to launch attacks in India.

“Pressed by the Ambassador to identify which groups India was concerned about, Mr. Menon said that India's worries extended from political parties like the Jamaat-e-Islami to extremist groups like the Harkat-ul-Jihad-al-Islami, Bangadesh (HUJI, B),” the Embassy cabled.

The Indian official told the U.S. Ambassador that even though petty issues often consumed politics in Bangladesh, he was surprised that despite the instability created by the mutiny, “politicians were focused on matters such as Opposition Leader Begum Zia's housing.”

“India was concerned about a sense of drift in the government and [Menon] judged that the government was not functioning in a normal fashion,” the cable said.

(This article is a part of the series "The India Cables" based on the US diplomatic cables accessed by The Hindu via WikiLeaks.)

 

[Afif]

Second article referred in the tweet.

---

IAF on stand-by, ready to help Bangladesh​

Hindustan Times | ByRahul Singh, New Delhi
Mar 02, 2009 01:20 AM IST

With Bangladesh caught in a bloody turmoil after the two-day mutiny by a disgruntled border security force last week, the Indian Air Force (IAF) has been put on standby to render assistance to the neighbouring country, if required.​

The IAF’s transport bases, equipped with IL-76 heavy-lift and AN-32 medium-lift aircraft, have been asked to stay prepared for any commitment to Bangladesh whose fragile civilian government is coming to terms with the rebellion by the paramilitary Bangladesh Rifles (BDR).

A senior IAF official, who refused to be identified, told HT on Sunday the force was ready to provide logistics as well as humanitarian help.

“We follow some drills whenever there is any instability or calamity in neighbourhood. Bangladesh returned to democratic rule barely two months ago,” a source in the air headquarters said.

The IAF had flown relief supplies to Bangladesh in November 2007, under Operation Sahayta, after a devastating cyclone tore through the country’s western coast leaving thousands dead and millions homeless.

In a stand-by scenario, the air force prioritises its commitments to make sure that assets are available at any given time for speedy deployment. The focus was on conserving assets to deal with any eventuality, said another official. It could also entail curbing leave temporarily to ensure availability of air crews.

The IAF’s transport base at Jorhat in Assam is the closest to Bangladesh. It is also one of the biggest transport bases of the force.

The mutinous guards went on a shooting spree at BDR’s officer corps at an annual meeting where troops were supposed to discuss grievances with the seniors. The rebels wanted among other things better pay, change in the command and control structure and permission to be part of lucrative UN peacekeeping missions.

 

[Afif]

If his other evidences in the book are like this, then the guy is definitely trying to cook something big out of thin air.

Considering the situation at the time, nothing unusual mentioned in these two articles.

In the first one, author wrote about Delhi's diplomatic activities given the seriousness of the incident.

In the second article,

"The IAF’s transport bases, equipped with IL-76 heavy-lift and AN-32 medium-lift aircraft, have been asked to stay prepared for any commitment to Bangladesh whose fragile civilian government is coming to terms with the rebellion by the paramilitary Bangladesh Rifles (BDR).

A senior IAF official, who refused to be identified, told HT on Sunday the force was ready to provide logistics as well as humanitarian help.

“We follow some drills whenever there is any instability or calamity in neighbourhood. Bangladesh returned to democratic rule barely two months ago,” a source in the air headquarters said."

Again looks very normal.


As @Isa Khan thoroughly explained in the his third point, that's how I thought about the matter.

While personally I held the view that India being a democratic country is a rational international actor, however, the recent shocking revelation has forced me to reconsider my view on the national security matter of Bangladesh.

Previously, I understood that, considering all aspect in any given any scenario, the political, economic and military cost of any Indian military intervention, Whether it is an 'special operation' or full scale invasion of Bangladesh would outweigh the benefits by a large margin, thus rationally acting India would refrain from such actions.

And the current strategic posturing of Indian army support such analysis. Indian strategic planners does not consider Bangladesh as a threat to its sovereignty. Thus, Indian army's Eastern command is not primarily designed or structured to fight full scale war with Bangladesh.
Rather it's main objective to protect the sovereign Indian territory in the Northeast against PLA aggression.

Hence, the Indian army's armoured and mechanised units are not permanently stationed strategically surrounding Bangladesh in big numbers.

But the guy made such a huge claim so boldly that, given his 'Londoni academic credentials' I did question my logic.

Now it looks like he is just trying to sell his next book. But I will still wait and see if something interesting comes out from his new book.
@Nilgiri

 

[Nilgiri]

But the guy made such a huge claim so boldly that, given his 'Londoni academic credentials' I did question my logic.

Now it looks like he is just trying to sell his next book. But I will still wait and see if something interesting comes out from his new book.

Is there larger discussion among other journalists and media groups, i.e do they take the guy credibly etc on this matter?

There have been lot of dead end one-offs lately (just within RUS-UKR war alone) so if it stays just one person with no one else of note backing things up, my eyes glaze over and I lose interest.

If there is book promoting involved, it makes even more sense why he takes this line in advance and does a "just ask the BD govt/military yourself" routine till its released as though their likely non-response will be some vindication.... and I'm pretty confident this book will just be more rumour mill hearsay stuff.

At some point someone has to be on the record or go on the record on something concrete (i.e evidence).....otherwise you can always write a lot of stuff, stick your credentials to it (what do you have to lose?) as there is always any number of black and grey voids on these matters that allow for dancing around for sake of drawing grievance attention (or its inverse projecting some superiority complex) or related agenda promotion.

But will it gather muster and support from larger credible dispensation on these matters? So far I don't see much so I find it unlikely anything will build to some earth shattering apex with the big book reveal at the end.

 

[Afif]

1. Bangladesh army's size is too big for a country like Bangladesh.
2. Even though it has a navy but not sure if it really needs one.
3. The same is with air force.

@Nilgiri See? That’s my problem with these folks. They have comprehension issue with the concept of Bangladesh's strategic autonomy and sovereignty.
And don’t say he is a fringe, this community is not small and I heard similar arguments before from various Indian sources.

 

[Nilgiri]

1. Bangladesh army's size is too big for a country like Bangladesh.
2. Even though it has a navy but not sure if it really needs one.
3. The same is with air force.

@Nilgiri See? That’s my problem with these folks. They have comprehension issue with the concept of Bangladesh's strategic autonomy and sovereignty.
And don’t say he is a fringe, this community is not small and I heard similar arguments before from various Indian sources.

The answer lies like I said earlier already. BD has to actually develop strategic autonomy rather than caring what A B or C thinks and says sitting outside BD and pointing fingers there first thing.

For others to take BD credibly, it needs to take itself credibly first and prove it....rather than expect everyone first thing to donate credibility and comprehension on your own particular terms, when no one in the world has ever done that.

These things come the hard long term way. Would it have been good for India to overfocus on whichever WASP sitting in NE USA or the equivalent in Britain somewhere, when they were predicting several more partitions, malthusian and total economic collapses and this and that, and therefore why did India need this and that in its military + strategic core etc etc? Countries far more richer and powerful than India at the time in the 50s and 60s....and still have inertia in their complex from it it today.

Why does India need a space program a lot of them keep asking even now. Should India care about their comprehension issue...or keep working with greatest diligence and responsibility possible for itself...and simply let the chips fall as they do in whatever perception forms outside.

If its some complex that is unfounded, gee tough....whats that got to do with perseverance along an empowering route. Just put your head down, work hard and prove them wrong.

Large parts of BD privileged society (with time on hands to discuss defence, geopolitics etc) for some reason simply do not understand this....just look at the time they keep wasting in places like PDF or wherever else that has BD defence circles airing out their mental issues.
Short easy shortcuts like GDP and other estimates are this level and just believe it no matter how hard forex drops drastically and whatever hard numbers are in general.... only perpetuates the problem of taking things casually in the strategic wherewithal and proof....but then demanding others need to tick all the boxes in what they say and think in some strict way. Respect and credibility is earned the tough way, not given the easy quick way. BD has lot to do with its population size and scope still on this.....before any establishment sitting in Delhi going to have some great alignment with how BD might perceive itself.

You think Delhi establishment understood the issues of TN within own country from the get go to some 100% respectful principled level by default, or TN earned this the hard way over time with firmness on what is mine is mine...and we will let the proof talk in what we can do.... and its still slow work in process? Then I can continue with this even within just TN, its regions and communities relative to its power setup in its capital city.

Why would all that suddenly change with even more distanced entity politically? BD simply has to tough it out, develop, network and structure its competence in every single way. Then there is less avenue for running roughshod over various things with no basis for it.