MNZGamerX
Full Member
- Dec 12, 2023
- 122
- 68
- Country of Origin
- Country of Residence
Sagorika Sinha
Firstpost - August 18, 2024
Being the world’s only superpower came with the burden of responsibility, or so the US claimed while policing its worldwide domain. Over the last decade, as information escaped its little analogue nooks more speedily and diffused its implications across the world, the American deep state lost its shadowiness.
While much of Europe, understandably, and the US, out of nostalgia and habit, refuse to give up on their anti-Russia rhetoric, democracies have especially borne the weight of American heavy-handedness. At the same time, apart from Donald Trump’s rather ineffective trade war with China, the Democrat establishment that replaced him has not only not penalised Xi Jinping’s authoritarian regime after the Wuhan crisis but, as investigations have shown, helped cover up the nation’s involvement at the cost of American lives.
There has been a word here and a condescension there, but the largest international threat to American hegemony has been treated like a well-tolerated competitive younger brother. China’s rule-breaking works fine as long as western trade dependency remains, as well as until establishment corruption and collusion are inbuilt into the State Department. It is telling that its famous mouthpiece, the Washington Post, recently found that its foreign affairs columnist, Max Boot, is married to a Chinese spy. More, the now-arrested agent, Sue Mi Terry, is a former CIA analyst.
America’s distracted foreign policy kept busy through its constantly churning war machine, and Chinese influence makes too much of India’s necessary and historically relevant closeness to Russia. On the other hand, a few words of concern suffice for a much more globally relevant dragon-bear bond. At the same time, India’s neighbouring democracy, Bangladesh, was constantly harangued at the cost of its peace, with a constant threat of regime change, which was recently executed.
The US’s engagement with anti-government agencies that foment protest is technically the opposite of diplomacy. Global diplomacy standards depend on countries engaging with legitimate governments regardless of the diplomat’s policy preferences. The idea is to build bridges and not posture as a threat. It is why, despite a terrorist government in Afghanistan and the military rule in Myanmar, India’s dealings are with the current governments in power, not those India wishes there.
To an audience consuming content uncritically from CIA-influenced publications, “civil society” reads like an acceptable authority to deal with. Except in democracies, civil societies have literally gone out and voted to choose the government in place. Only, it is a government that the US does not like and one that it will leave no stone unturned to overthrow and replace with a puppet regime. Clearly, that has not worked out well for Ukraine, Afghanistan, or Iran.
None of the moral principles are applicable to the most exceptionalist country in the modern world. The US’ diplomatic personnel consistently pushed to engage with the opposition in India and Bangladesh. Now that the elected Hasina government has been overthrown, it is a Clinton-friendly American man at the helm of Bangladeshi affairs. Mohammed Yunus has been previously indicted in a case where he is accused of embezzling crores of rupees in a nation where the common man struggles to make thousands. Norwegian authorities have also suggested financial fraud through his Grameen Telecom which partners with Norwegian carrier Telenor. He is, however, embellished with a Nobel Prize.
At the same time, Hasina’s pushback against Chinese ambitions in her nation meant that China had vested interests in seeing a different government in power. As Prime Minister, she had refused to allow China to build the Sonadia deep-sea port. Instead, she invited the Japanese to fund one near Chittagong. This is not to say that Bangladesh’s trade or defence partnerships with China suffered during Hasina’s time. However, China maintains a close relationship with the Bangladesh National Party (BNP), and the Jamaat-e-Islami student groups are helped along by their client state of Pakistan.
Similar to their actions in the Maldives, they funded an “India Out” campaign in Bangladesh, garnering success by labelling all Awami League supporters as well as any minority Hindus as “traitors” for India. JeI is a group that violently opposed Bangladesh’s independence from Pakistan and has routinely engaged in heinous crimes against minorities. Unsurprisingly, after the coup, their student groups carried out the desecration of monuments pertaining to Bangladesh’s independence and have broken the statues memorialising the surrender of Pakistan to India as they allowed Bangladesh to separate after years of neglect and violence against the Bengali people.
This volatile background had left the Awami League-led Bangladesh isolated from the US, impacting its trade and further increasing its dependence upon China. At the same time, American haranguing and blockading against Hasina’s party ensured that the extremely radicalised and undisguised Islamic Sharia favouring BNP and JeI were emboldened to throw the nation into chaos. Now that they succeeded in overthrowing Hasina’s elected government, Hindus undergo further ethnic cleansing in a repeat of the horrors of the 1971 genocide. American enablers believe these lives are of little significance in establishing control of the region. So far, there has been little comment on the situation, with the White House merely stating that they will “monitor” the situation, similar to their inaction as the Yazidis and the Hazaras have been wiped out from their lands.
With a third front opening up against India, a China-supported BNP and an ISI-supported JeI, India is left with regional instability in a hostile region. The Narendra Modi-led government has shown extreme disinterest in interventionist foreign policy, unlike earlier governments that offered military support to neighbouring nations or participated in intelligence operations to favour particular governments. It has acted in manners that are exactly contradictory to how the US State Department acts, and for all its composure and conservativeness, is left as the sole politically stable democracy in a region where Communist and military autocracy are the norm.
The subversion of democracy is an American addiction. It is not to say that the citizens whose democracies are subverted did not have legitimate grievances prior to foreign influence. However, US-assisted “Colour Revolutions” and military ousters have left every such country worse off, with any economic growth decimated, media censored, and dictatorships or puppet regimes favoured over the triumph of an actual civil society. Perhaps Bangladesh is a lesson. History rarely teaches those who do not intend to learn, though.
Firstpost - August 18, 2024
Being the world’s only superpower came with the burden of responsibility, or so the US claimed while policing its worldwide domain. Over the last decade, as information escaped its little analogue nooks more speedily and diffused its implications across the world, the American deep state lost its shadowiness.
While much of Europe, understandably, and the US, out of nostalgia and habit, refuse to give up on their anti-Russia rhetoric, democracies have especially borne the weight of American heavy-handedness. At the same time, apart from Donald Trump’s rather ineffective trade war with China, the Democrat establishment that replaced him has not only not penalised Xi Jinping’s authoritarian regime after the Wuhan crisis but, as investigations have shown, helped cover up the nation’s involvement at the cost of American lives.
There has been a word here and a condescension there, but the largest international threat to American hegemony has been treated like a well-tolerated competitive younger brother. China’s rule-breaking works fine as long as western trade dependency remains, as well as until establishment corruption and collusion are inbuilt into the State Department. It is telling that its famous mouthpiece, the Washington Post, recently found that its foreign affairs columnist, Max Boot, is married to a Chinese spy. More, the now-arrested agent, Sue Mi Terry, is a former CIA analyst.
America’s distracted foreign policy kept busy through its constantly churning war machine, and Chinese influence makes too much of India’s necessary and historically relevant closeness to Russia. On the other hand, a few words of concern suffice for a much more globally relevant dragon-bear bond. At the same time, India’s neighbouring democracy, Bangladesh, was constantly harangued at the cost of its peace, with a constant threat of regime change, which was recently executed.
The US’s engagement with anti-government agencies that foment protest is technically the opposite of diplomacy. Global diplomacy standards depend on countries engaging with legitimate governments regardless of the diplomat’s policy preferences. The idea is to build bridges and not posture as a threat. It is why, despite a terrorist government in Afghanistan and the military rule in Myanmar, India’s dealings are with the current governments in power, not those India wishes there.
To an audience consuming content uncritically from CIA-influenced publications, “civil society” reads like an acceptable authority to deal with. Except in democracies, civil societies have literally gone out and voted to choose the government in place. Only, it is a government that the US does not like and one that it will leave no stone unturned to overthrow and replace with a puppet regime. Clearly, that has not worked out well for Ukraine, Afghanistan, or Iran.
None of the moral principles are applicable to the most exceptionalist country in the modern world. The US’ diplomatic personnel consistently pushed to engage with the opposition in India and Bangladesh. Now that the elected Hasina government has been overthrown, it is a Clinton-friendly American man at the helm of Bangladeshi affairs. Mohammed Yunus has been previously indicted in a case where he is accused of embezzling crores of rupees in a nation where the common man struggles to make thousands. Norwegian authorities have also suggested financial fraud through his Grameen Telecom which partners with Norwegian carrier Telenor. He is, however, embellished with a Nobel Prize.
At the same time, Hasina’s pushback against Chinese ambitions in her nation meant that China had vested interests in seeing a different government in power. As Prime Minister, she had refused to allow China to build the Sonadia deep-sea port. Instead, she invited the Japanese to fund one near Chittagong. This is not to say that Bangladesh’s trade or defence partnerships with China suffered during Hasina’s time. However, China maintains a close relationship with the Bangladesh National Party (BNP), and the Jamaat-e-Islami student groups are helped along by their client state of Pakistan.
Similar to their actions in the Maldives, they funded an “India Out” campaign in Bangladesh, garnering success by labelling all Awami League supporters as well as any minority Hindus as “traitors” for India. JeI is a group that violently opposed Bangladesh’s independence from Pakistan and has routinely engaged in heinous crimes against minorities. Unsurprisingly, after the coup, their student groups carried out the desecration of monuments pertaining to Bangladesh’s independence and have broken the statues memorialising the surrender of Pakistan to India as they allowed Bangladesh to separate after years of neglect and violence against the Bengali people.
This volatile background had left the Awami League-led Bangladesh isolated from the US, impacting its trade and further increasing its dependence upon China. At the same time, American haranguing and blockading against Hasina’s party ensured that the extremely radicalised and undisguised Islamic Sharia favouring BNP and JeI were emboldened to throw the nation into chaos. Now that they succeeded in overthrowing Hasina’s elected government, Hindus undergo further ethnic cleansing in a repeat of the horrors of the 1971 genocide. American enablers believe these lives are of little significance in establishing control of the region. So far, there has been little comment on the situation, with the White House merely stating that they will “monitor” the situation, similar to their inaction as the Yazidis and the Hazaras have been wiped out from their lands.
With a third front opening up against India, a China-supported BNP and an ISI-supported JeI, India is left with regional instability in a hostile region. The Narendra Modi-led government has shown extreme disinterest in interventionist foreign policy, unlike earlier governments that offered military support to neighbouring nations or participated in intelligence operations to favour particular governments. It has acted in manners that are exactly contradictory to how the US State Department acts, and for all its composure and conservativeness, is left as the sole politically stable democracy in a region where Communist and military autocracy are the norm.
The subversion of democracy is an American addiction. It is not to say that the citizens whose democracies are subverted did not have legitimate grievances prior to foreign influence. However, US-assisted “Colour Revolutions” and military ousters have left every such country worse off, with any economic growth decimated, media censored, and dictatorships or puppet regimes favoured over the triumph of an actual civil society. Perhaps Bangladesh is a lesson. History rarely teaches those who do not intend to learn, though.
