Responses to my previous articles on the issue were mixed. First, many cognoscenti don't believe that normal, good neighborly relationship can develop in the near future, let alone strategic partnership. The more optimistic view was that because India is our neighbor and was a friend in need in 1971, there is enough scope of improving the relation. As interstate relations grow so do they deteriorate. That is the order of relationship between nation states, as we understand in the post 1850 scenario. My argument has always been that you can have a new car or bicycle, you can even change your wife, but you cannot change your neighbor. With this reality in view, we always have to work towards a better and credible relationship between our two countries. And the onus lies on both, though India must make the first move because history has given her that privilege and position.

India is a regional superpower with gradual reach of a global power, particularly following the NSSP with the United States. They are working hard to improve relationship with China, and Pakistan with success. The Nathula Pass agreement is a landmark development in Indo-Chinese relations. While negotiating the Kunming Initiative in 1999 in the Yunan Province, my paper, the only substantive paper presented from the Bangladesh side, I mentioned Arunachal a part of India! I asked the head of the Chinese Team Ambassador Lui Chi Sheng, former Chinese Ambassador to India: he paused for a moment and said "Ambassador don't worry, this is being negotiated and I am hopeful to find a

mutually satisfactory arrangement”. I presented the paper as it was.

If this is how the Indo-China relationship is developing and with Pakistan advancing faster than expected, why should Bangladesh languish in selfremorse and sometimes self-flagellation. In diplomacy nothing is impossible, provided the necessary goodwill is there. This was the line of my arguments following Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherjee's visit to Bangladesh. He left a good and healthy vive-some felt exalted— but soon it seemed to have evaporated!

Secretary External Affairs Ministry Mr. Shiv Shanker Menon spent three days in Bangladesh. The two Foreign Secretaries signed an agreement on duty free-goods and discussed a variety of other issues impinging our relationship. His meeting with the CA was good and constructive. This is all good but my problem is different. Relations between nations grow and diminish because of an 'a priori' condition of political will of nations. Even during the First WW, when in Paris Napoleon insulted the British Ambassador in public, he immediately sent an emissary to London to apologize. The British were not sitting idle; they were pumping in money to overthrow the French monarchy by using the Jacobins. But the relations continued.

Indo-Bangladesh situation is certainly not like that. Two-way traffic is robust - other areas are about to open up. However, the incipient mistrust is still there. My own analysis is (sometimes against my inner belief) that New Delhi considers Dhaka as a faraway destination - it is a mere dot in their global diplomatic canvas -verbal pronouncements to the

contrary notwithstanding!

What Bangladesh wants is an open mind from India. Indian heritage is our shared heritage, only language is different in some cases. A Hindu scholar translated the Quran and a Muslim scholar translated the Vagabat Gita. Why then this mistrust?

I draw my follow up suggestion from the SAARC summit meeting between Dr. Manmohan Singh and Dr. Fakhruddin Ahmed.

Thoughts for India

a) India must take into consideration that Bangladesh is a small country with a large population. It is no longer Kissinger's basket case. Our only ambition is having peaceful relations with our big neighbor India with economic development as the only priority. Today our export is $ 12 billion dollars—we shall reach about $ 20 billion in the next few years; our manpower

remittance is $ 6 billion dollars—it should reach $ 25 billion dollars in the next 5 to 10 years.

b) Where does India fit in? India as a big power has to demonstrate their political goodwill not by gestures only but by concrete measures;

a) Our overall relationship should be on the basis of nonreciprocity;

b) India has to be more generous;

c) Non-tariff barriers should be done away with forthwith; some progress has been made after the meeting between the two foreign secretaries I believe.

d) The antidumping law about export of our battery (since withdrawn) is still a nightmare to us!

e) The understanding reached between our officials from time to time should be acted

upon, for example the last visit ofourBDR chief to New Delhi.

f) Bureaucratic red tapes more from the Indian side than ours is the biggest handicap;

g) Our borders can be demarcated out if there is political will: 6.5 kilometers of undemarcated border should be sorted out immediately; India must ratify the Indira-Mujib Treaty;

h) Adverse possessions should be sorted outand it is doable.

i) At the heart of some of the cross-border issues are enclaves; we must resolve them.

j) We have signed two landmark agreements---the CHT Accord and the Ganges Water Treaty, all because of political will. Why can't we solve the rest?

k) Last but not the least, India must use its soft power more diligently and sincerely. China

is stealing a march over India in using its soft power so carefully and intelligently. Why can't India do it?

I) India should consider Bangladesh's request for corridor to Nepal and Bhutan with sympathy;

m) India must stop the smuggling of narcotics to Bangladesh. This is destroying a generation of youth. India should consider with sympathy and should play a pro-active role in assisting Bangladesh in containing human trafficking.

Some suggestions for Bangladesh

a) The present government of Bangladesh has shown goodwill in more than one way. Our negotiators must take advantage of that in the future.

b) We should follow a robust policy on energy and energy utilization vis-a-vis India.

c) The water issues should be

negotiated with care and understanding. We have our arguments-but it is also true that after 20 years or so the Ganges-Kobadak Project is working- though haltingly for non-dredging of the canals.

d) I have some sympathy with the argument that 'Water-Management' by Bangladesh can go a long way in helping us. India may extend her assistance towards that.

e) The glacier melting and temperature rise is a common problem. We should concert our efforts with India to save the region and us.

f) When I left the ministry, I initiated very preliminary discussion (not negotiation) on the Extradition Treaty with India. The 1974 enabling Extradition Treaty Act of Bangladesh can be used as our base, as I did in the case of negotiations on Extradition

Treaty with Thailand. I understand from the media that India submitted a draft in 2003. We should work on that. This will help in getting our criminals hiding in India and wanted Indians to be deported without any hassle.

g) The US gesture in handing over Bangabandhu convicted perpetrator Mohiuddin Ahmed should not be used as an alibiit is a friendly gesture. Bangladesh should negotiate with India invoking their historical role in such affairsso that they can start deporting criminals on case by case basis pending the signing of an Extradition Treaty.

h) Above all we should not consider India as our enemy as many tend to suggest! Remember those spin doctors who propagate this are not our friends. Our history is our biggest testimony.

i) Today the relationship between BDR and BSF is much better than a year ago. This is leadership.

In 1820 Asia-with India, China and Japan together were producing 2/3 of global goods and services. This gravitas has now shifted decisively to Asia again after over 150 years. The US owes $ 3 trillion dollars in debt to China, Japan, South Korea, and India.

India should have an inclusive vision for the future. It is the Asian century; it is the Indian centuryif they can show their leadership in making this happen. But India must be generous befitting a global power as they did during the Tsunami.

The writer is a former secretary, foreign ministry and senior member of the International Institute of StrategicStudies (IISS)