[Maruf]

Bangladesh is faced with a great military challenge as our next door neighbour is arming itself to the teeth. India boasts a million plus army equipped with highly sopisticated weapons. It has nuclear weapons and various ballistic missiles in its arsenal. On the other hand, Bangladesh has a small military equipped with mainly Chinese weapons. We don't have nuclear or missile power like that of India. The economic disparity is so much that it can be said with certainty that Bangladesh won't be able to match the defense budget of India ever. With a situation like this we have to make a defense plan that is cost effective and compatible with our overall defense need. It is quite clear from the military balance of the two countries that in conventional warfare India will dominate. So, in my opinion, we have two options to meet our security needs.

1. Going nuclear and
2. Making military training mandatory for all people between the age of 18 and 40.

It is a proven fact that nuclear bomb acts as a great deterent. If we look at the examples of India and Pakistan, we see that though Pakistan is inferior in conventional warfare, India pays due respect to its enemy just because the Pakistani military has nuclear weapons in its arsenal. Water sharing, border demarcation, and migration issues don't constitute big problems in the relation between Pakistan and India just because they enjoy nuclear parity.

If we look at the experience of our liberation war, we see that Mukti Bahini played a key role in our victory against the Pakistani forces. Mukti Bahini fought valiantly along with the East Bengal regiment to vanquish the invading Pakistani army. So, in the light of the experience of our liberation war, we should think of making military training mandatory for all people between the age of 18 and 40. If we can provide military training to our youths, external forces will think thousand times before invading Bangladesh. Switzerland, Turkey, and some other nations have mandatory military training for their citizens.

So, what do you guys think about the idea?

[akzaman]

You have rightly pointed out the core issues of country's defence. Everyone should support your idea.

[Maruf]

Thank you for supporting me, Zaman bhai. But the memebrrs of bdsdf are very quiet now-a-days. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/embarassedlaugh.gif)

[Asad Bhai]

excelent and right idea. 2 years back CBC made a program on some countries and china was there. It showed that china has mandatory military program for the youth and I loved it. Yes, I agree and I hope that bangladesh realize this that how well this type of mandatory training good for both the country and in the personal life of the citizens of the country. And nuclear, there is no other option for bangladesh to go nuclear, becuase of the reasons Maruf bhai already made.

[Unknown]

Making military training mandatory is a good idea but in my opinion will not serve the exact purpose which we are looking here for.. going nuclear is the right path but it will take a long time to achive the required and desired expertise for the deterent plus it will also need some sort of delivery system which i think would be a Missile or Plane... what are the future Plans of BAF to buy a new platform that can deliver this deterent, i donot know but i will not support the Idea of a delivery system solely based on one source i.e planes... i think BD should start some research & investment in the missile field and can startup by buying any BRBM with TOT.... this will give us a headstart and we can catchup with a lot of things very quickly....

This post has been edited by Unknown: Jun 9 2008, 04:25 AM

[TigerRules]

Military training for normal people, are we that desperate? Not a good idea at all, but going Nuke sound fine by me as we need nuclear plant to generate electricity for the country any way.

[Patriot91]

It is true that India's defence budget is more than ten times than ours, but see how many neighbours India has to deal with it. India cannot expose much power towards Bangladesh after dealing with powerful China & Pakistan. Going nuclear is not a good idea as it is against humanity. Nuclear attacks can affect people for more than 500 years. In addition, it would not be possible for India to detonate its nuclear warheads, as superpowers like the U.S., Britain, China, and Russia would not accept it. Always remember that India depends on foreign aid for social development.


Again, training each and every adult citizen is extremely risky, as we do not have much of a decent law and order situation,compared to the rest of the world(although much better than India and Pakistan). A simple instance will make things clear for the respected members here. Just imagine, rebel groups such as the UPDF(CHT) sending their members to receive such trainings. The police would get totally disabled after dealing with them then. I am open to opposite opinions. Thank you for reading my inaugral post.

This post has been edited by Patriot91: May 31 2008, 11:03 AM

[Maruf]

If we hold your argument true, then we would have seen non nuclear India and Pakistan in South Asia. India went nuclear in fear of Chinese overwhelming nuclear arsenal that, according to the Indian political leaders, posed a direct threat to its territorial integrity . Pakistan acquired nuclear bombs to deter India as the Islamic nation, with its much smaller economy, was finding it hard to keep pace with Indian conventional military power. Your observation regarding the use of nuclear bomb is not correct. No nation in the modern times think of using nuclear bomb to realize its military goals, even the mighty U.S. forces didn't dare to use nuclear warhead in the gulf war. The nuclear warheads are used to blackmail the weaker and smaller nations and subject themselves to the wishes of the big powers. The same thing is true in the South Asian context. India, if such a situation arises, will use nuclear bomb as a means to force Bangladesh into following their toe. No, as an independent nation, Bangladesh cannot and should not accept Indian domination as a fait accompli. Bangladesh, if it acquires nuclear bomb, will use its as a means to deal with any external power that wishes to interfere in Bangladesh's sovereign right to shape foreign and defense policies to further its own strategic interest within South Asia and beyond.

Your argument that nuclear bombs are able to roll back a nation's achievement and throw it into uncertainty for a long time is partially true. No doubt that nuclear bombs are lethal and play havoc with the lives and properties of a nation but look at Japan. America dropped two nuclear bombs on this nation but after 60 odd years it has established itself as the second largest economy in the world. Besides, as I have told you already that the use of nuclear bomb in this era is almost unthinkable. It is only used as a stratergic means to terrorize the weaker nations.

True, India dependends on foreign assistance but then we have to realize that its one of the fastest growing economies in the world and would reach in a position, say within 15-20 years, to claim its place in the G-8 forum. The richer a nation, the less it cares about world opinion. This has been the case since the time immemorial.

You misunderstood the notion of mandatory military training for the citizens of Bangladesh. We are not talking about providing military training to 150 million people. This is logistically impossible and I don't believe that any government in Bangladesh would take up such a plan. All we are saying that the educated people, the University graduates, should be brought under a programme to provide basic military training. The military can train 5000-10000 people each year and employ them in different military and non military organizations.

There is no way of infiltration by the members of ex-Shanti bahini as Bangladesh army will conduct a thorough background check on each trainee. I am sure they will put a fool proof system in place before initiating such a training programme.

[Wise Whitegoat]

we need lots of modern missiles
surface to surface
surface to air
air to air

[hotfuzzgreat]

Neither is preferable..... cause why spend billons of taka in nukes when 50% is under proverty. And military training is not gud option cause of the security fact and bangladesh doesnt need so many soldiers. I prefer bangladesh should go for tactice and advance warfare than using ww2 weapons for F7 fighters. They r cheap but can they do the job?????

[aonjon]

Havent seen this poll before, even though it was posted more than a year ago. So, heres my response:

Nuclear option, technology & expertise is a must for us, for both the civilian & military purposes. This will give us an asymmetric power projection capability to match India & other countries with large spending, in regards to military, based on vast industrialized economies. This also allows them the ability to raise & sustain large conventional forces. For reasons of economy we cannot match India on defense spending. Pakistan should be taken as an example of what can go wrong when you try to match the defense spending of a country with a larger economy, in this case India, with a much smaller economy of your own; hence Pakistan's nuclear option. Unconventional capability, like nuclear option, when compared to a large conventional one, will be cheaper on the long run. Also the added benefit of a raised stature in the geo-political world is there as well. Not to mention the unconventional option gives us a deterrent capability that the conventional force cannot. I have said this years ago in several other threads, including the previous nuclear thread. Maruf has also mentioned this several posts ago in this thread.

1st strike capability will have to be quite overwhelming, to act as a deterrent against a country with a large landmass & a billion plus population, like India. The biggest problem I see is a sort of 2nd strike capability, and just like the 1st strike capability this too needs to be very overwhelming. Bangladesh has very limited land, when combined with the fact that it is also the most densely populated country in the world, a potential adversary maybe prone to think a preemptive strike with a large enough yield could cripple the country for good & further keep it from launching any retaliation. This is where the 2nd strike capability comes in. I know everyone here will suggest, the true & tried, nuclear triad. But since we are talking about a small GDP & defense expenditure, by comparison, building a credible nuclear triad will be almost ineffective in any kind of deterrence. We will not have sufficient force numbers which can survive a preemptive/1st strike. Hey if it was up to me & we had the money I'd suggest putting ballistic missiles with MIRV capability in orbit around the planet or basing them off a Moon base [the US has one of these planned.]

Given the precarious land situation we have, we can't disperse & isolate our forces enough to withstand any possible 1st strike & still survive intact to launch a retaliation. I would suggest thinking outside conventional wisdom, like portable nukes that can be delivered with SF groups or pre-positioning the warheads in the countries deemed to be potential threats! Sure there are other options, we can have several subs & frigates/destroyers fitted with a number of SLBM's or cruise missiles, we could even have some corvettes fitted with SRBM & cruise missiles, again I do not see these being in sufficient numbers to act as a credible deterrent. We could also have SRBM/MRBM with the land forces & cruise missiles for the air force but these too will be in short supply.

The Soviet Dead Hand nuclear strategy is a good one for studying. I have come across the fact that they could insulate & ensure survival of their nuclear forces was due to the incredible geostrategic depth their landmass possesses. This was also one of the reasons USSR had a no 1st strike policy throughout the Cold War while the US did not.

Several things I would like to clear up before moving on to the next item on the poll:
1] US has a nuclear preemptive/1st strike policy; so does Pakistan and others could follow.
2] US withdrew guarantee of not striking a non-nuclear state with nuclear weapons; others could follow.
3] Nuclear blackmail & intimidation cannot be ruled out; US threatened Iraq with nuclear strike during the 1st Gulf War, eventhough they never possessed a nuclear arsenal; Israel threatened Iran with a similar strike, it too does not posses a nuclear arsenal; DPRK threatened ROK, Japan & the US recently [except US, the other two nations do not posses nuclear weapons].
4] US position as the only global hegemon declines day by day, some leaders are getting more virulent in the head trying to hold onto that position; the nuclear option is now viewed as the first option rather than the last & contemplating using it as a cure for all geostrategic diseases, so to speak. This has set a dangerous precedent where now everyone with a nuclear arsenal want to use it!
4a-A Chinese general said "we will have to respond with nuclear weapons," if the US positions itself against the mainland in a conflict between Taiwan & China.
4b-France threatened, its "ready to use nuclear weapons against any state which launched a terrorist attack against it".
4c-Finally the Russian chief of staff stated "to defend the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Russia and its allies, military forces will be used, including preventively, including with the use of nuclear weapons,"

Making military training mandatory:

Even though I have voted for both options, my opinion on this is slightly different. Not mandatory/forced training, rather voluntary but widespread availability of training to young adults with a nationalist mindset. Similar to the Cadet Colleges that we have now, but instead of creating only officers these students will be provided basic infantry training. Having these training facilities closer to high schools where students can be brought in daily. It can be offered as a full credit subject, maybe even with slightly extra credit than other subjects. It could even be made a mandatory subject for 1 or 2 years as a requirement for graduation, but I'd rather it be voluntary rather than mandating that you take basic training.

This should be offered from both public & private schools so that we don't end up with an officer corps only made up of the rich & the lower ranks by the poor only because they couldn't afford a private school. The crime aftermath has been on my mind too, as this will invariably increase it. So, along with military training the govt. should also offer 2 years of hands on vocational training so those that cannot afford a college/univ. education after graduation, can at least get a decent job or create one for themselves. This however should be a part of a comprehensive modernization of our educational system, which is quite outdated & based on part off at least a century, or more, old British colonial system. More emphasis on science & hands on training for jobs along with revising & modernizing the curriculum & better facilities, like labs. Off course none of this will even have a dent on students if the appropriate candidates are not chosen for teachers positions along with better training for them. I'm going to stop here, as I do not want to make this into post about education, we can discuss that subject else where.

I also have some ideas that I want to put forth about the conventional forces modernization, but I'm sure I can discuss that at a appropriate thread. So will leave the discussion in this thread for the nuclear option.


P.S. to hotfuzzgreat: you can thank the current bunch of foreign funded retards & their 2 year pillaging & unconstitutional misrule for the increase to 50%, the number of people under poverty in this country, which was less than half that only just 2 years ago! In the name of eliminating corrupt politicians [which seems to have been conducted mostly against one particular political party rather than all of them while the armed forces was left untouched; some anti corruption drive that was] now we also have a corrupt military with a very corrupt officer corps too! And after all this stage managed show what do we have now, the same so called "corrupt" political parties along with their same so called "corrupt" leaders runnig for the national elections again; yay!

Maybe I shouldn't call them "retards", after all some very learned people, also staunch nationalists, in this very forum supported these acts too! A shame really, when the brightest of us can be duped so easily. Anyway will discuss that matter in a appropriate thread.

EDIT 1: items in blue added.

This post has been edited by aonjon: Nov 24 2008, 08:39 PM

[difi624]

We should not move for nuclear weaponse now but it is necessary to install several nuclear power plants and researce center immediatly in Bangladesh.

By the by a missile researce and development program should be start now without any hesitation.

For military training program i agree with maruf bhai that at present condition it is not viable to trained all of our 150 million people. But we know that every village there are about 64 VDP members (32 male and 32 female) and all around the country there are more than 45 lac of Anser & VDP members. Only a few percentages of them are able to use any Gun. If we trained them at least use a Gun during any major conflict than those Anser-VDP members will be a great back up support for our military. We do not need any reserve force (as far as i know we don`t have yet) but those trained members will play a vital role during any major conflict. They also can play role in peace time also.

As far as i know Bangladesh is trying to built ATGM and MANPADD locally, so a certain percentages of those members should be trained to use those weapons also.

If the above program would be fruitfull no doubt our enimies will have to think twice before making any conflict with us.

[M M Huq]

1. The defence of the land,air and sea of Bangladesh is not all that is to be defended. Our culture, values, principles and heritage are also required to be defended. This study is focussed on the physical defense aspect which will become hollow without the other metaphysical conditionalities.

2. Of late we have realised that Myanmar is a threat to us. The Burman nation sees Islam as a threat to Budhism their state religion and basis of nationhood. Gas/oil exploration, ill-treatment of Muslim population, expulsion into Bangldesh of more than half of its Arakanese Muslim population and a historical claim to territories known as North Arakan (Barisal, Khulna and Chittagong Divisions) are some of the issues that will never make Myanmar our friend. In fact, in seminars, discussions and military pamphlets Myanmar military percieve Bangladesh to be her number one threat.

3. Never-the-less if we gerared up ourselves for a potential threat from India, we can be miltarily solvent aginst Myanmar too. Due to the nature of this forum let us also remain limited to the military aspect only. In fact national identity, values and principles are areas where sincere input is required by our intellectuals who are not on pay from somewhere.

4. The Doctorine of Bangladesh'es defense must be Traditional Peoples War. With the infrustrucure we already have we can field a resistance force of around 12 million. Our Ansar VDPs shall be the main stay to guard rear ares, KPIs and form the nucleas of resistance in areas run over by the enemy. We must get inspiration from the War of Liberation in our preparedness.

5. The Iranians are perplexing the US Navy with their Swarming Tactics. We need to follow this in the sea, and include islands as static aircraft careers. Shore defennces - outward and in depth must be preplanned to be manned by Ansar VDP and the population.

6. Pursuing the same philosophy we must cover the country with a million stringers and ack ack guns. All to be manned by Ansars and the local population.

7. In the land again we need Swarms of ATGM teams, Tank Hunting Parties, Fighting Patrols, obstacle layers and things of that sort.

8. Teams of our special forces should be trained to engage transborder targets like airfields, bridges, power plants and other enemy KPIs.

9. In the event of war with India we must be able to instantly convert Indias NE as our strategic depth. For this we need to do political and intelligence activities in this area and among its various peoples.

10. Bangladesh military should thus be left free to organise tactical striuke teams. We need to strengthen our fire power unit-wise. Cross-country mobility, riverine mobility, river crossing capability needs to be enhanced, We should have at least one brigade of airborn troops and another brigade of air assault troops. We need to convert one Division into a Mountain Division, and another two into Marine Divisions. We need to build up strategic stocks of fuel in various locations.

[Maruf]

The issue of Myanmar has not been discussed because it is beyond the scope of this thread. We are discussing how Bangladesh should prepare itself to deal with a nuclear and overwhelmingly large conventional threat. India constitutes a major threat to Bangladesh's national security for geographic reasons and this thread is to discuss the options for Bangladesh to build a credible defense against Indian military.

But you are free to discuss myanmarese issue in the following thread:

Military threat from Myanmar

[Maruf]

It's a good move by the government to provide military training to young people but one thing must be remembered that people who will be chosen for this program cannot have any political affiliation, and they cannot be recruited by any political party once they have completed their training program.

http://www.thedailystar.net/story.php?nid=91514

National service for youths on the cards
Post-HSC students to be trained, given jobs for two years; trial run in 3 upazilas from next fiscal year
Staff Correspondent

The government will introduce 'National Service' programme at upazila level in the next fiscal year to train the HSC-passed unemployed youths and recruit them for a two-year term, Finance Minister AMA Muhith said yesterday.

Initially, the programme will be launched in three upazilas and gradually expanded to other upazilas.

Under the project, the youths who have completed HSC will be first trained for six months and then employed in agriculture, social welfare, and housing and public works ministries for one and a half years, Muhith told a press briefing at the National Economic Council (NEC) auditorium.

He said the upcoming budget will have an allocation for the scheme.

The finance minister said the programme has been taken in line with Awami League's election manifesto.

He said the youths would be trained mainly in military education, agriculture and housing works.

Their jobs would be secured as the ministries would not recruit anyone to the posts meant to be filled by the youths, he said.

After two years, they would decide on whether to go for higher education or continue in their current jobs.

The finance minister said the military training would not be compulsory.

Finance ministry sources said the labour ministry's district bureaus would coordinate the efforts in this regard. They will register the unemployed youths.

Yesterday's press briefing was organised to inform journalists about the outcome of the Islamic Development Bank (IDB) conference that the finance minister attended in Turkmenistan last week.

Replying to a question on hike in duties on vehicles, Muhith said, "Everybody knows taxes on cars would go up in the next budget."

He said AL is a people's party that takes populist actions. Since common people cannot afford cars, taxes on the vehicles would rise.

Muhith said the next budget has been termed 'huge', but one year's budget is always bigger than the previous year's. The next one will be even bigger.

He said, "This time we are under pressure. There have to be budgetary mechanisms for offsetting the effects of global recession and also allocations for social security and employment generation. The size of the upcoming budget would be a little bigger as there have to be allocations for new programmes."

Since the government seeks to make the secondary education free, the next budget must have a number of steps to that end, Muhith added.

A proposal was made in parliament to continue budget discussion till July 23 but was turned down.

Muhith said from the next year on, they would try to place the budget at the beginning of June. The government however has no plans to make changes to the budget cycle (July-June).