[🇧🇩] India's Water Terrorism Against Bangladesh

[Saif]

Can India do whatever it wants with common rivers?

Floods have swept across all the districts in the eastern hilly regions of the country over the past few days. The situation in Feni, Comilla, Noakhali, and the hill districts is devastating. While heavy rainfall is a significant cause of these floods, India cannot evade responsibility for the...

en.prothomalo.com

Can India do whatever it wants with common rivers?
Tuhin Wadud
Published: 30 Aug 2024, 12: 41

Floods have swept across all the districts in the eastern hilly regions of the country over the past few days. The situation in Feni, Comilla, Noakhali, and the hill districts is devastating. While heavy rainfall is a significant cause of these floods, India cannot evade responsibility for the damage. There are dams and barrages on the Gumti and Muhuri rivers. On the one hand there was heavy rainfall and on the other the sudden release of water without prior notice has caused immense damage to Bangladesh. India, however, does not feel the need to inform Bangladesh in advance.

According to the United Nations International Watercourses Convention, an upstream country has to discuss with the downstream country for constructing infrastructure on the common rivers. If an upstream country constructs infrastructure that causes harm to the downstream country, it is required to provide compensation for any damage. India has done neither. India as an upstream country cannot do whatever it wishes. Moreover, it is against the norms of good neighborliness.

Discussions on Bangladesh-India transboundary or shared rivers are virtually non-existent. Bangladesh’s foreign policy on river issues remains subservient, and there is a lack of diplomatic effort. Whatever India has wanted to impose on Bangladesh in the past has been accepted by every previous government.

I have never heard any government official speak out against India’s anti-Bangladesh water policies. A few advisors of the interim government have voiced concerns, but those must be specific.

No office in Bangladesh knows the exact number of Bangladesh-India trans boundary rivers. The commonly accepted figure is 54, but this is just the recognized count. The number of unrecognized rivers could exceed 200. In my book, "Responsibility in River Protection," I mentioned 69 rivers that are not included in the recognized list. We must first ascertain the actual number of these rivers to negotiate with India on transboundary rivers.

None of India’s actions regarding rivers as an upstream country prove that it is a friend of Bangladesh. In some cases, it seems many times as if India wishes for Bangladesh's demise.

I want to mention an incident from October 2021. At that time, there was no rain in Bangladesh. One night, India opened all the gates of the Teesta Barrage at Gajoldoba in West Bengal. This sudden release caused unprecedented damage to Bangladesh during the off-season. No protest was made by Bangladesh. While it is natural for water to flow downstream when there is rain upstream, the method in which the water is released is inhumane.

There is a Teesta Irrigation Project in Dalia, Nilphamari. Although it was designed to irrigate 111,000 hectares of land, it has never been possible to cultivate more than 90,000 hectares. In 2014, only 65,000 hectares were cultivated.

Before 2014, the water that flowed into the Teesta every year was partially used to maintain the river's flow, with the remaining water used for cultivation. In 2014, India unilaterally withdrew all the water. The cries of the farmers under the irrigation project that year did not reach Dhaka, let alone Delhi. Since 2014, India has tried almost every year to withdraw 100pc of the water.

When rivers are dammed upstream in India to hold back water, it causes two types of damage downstream. During heavy rainfall, they suddenly open all the gates, causing the violent current to damage houses, trees, ponds, and the river itself. In the dry season, when there is no water in the river, the groundwater level drops significantly. This disrupts the normal structure of the soil on the riverbanks. When water flows in with great force during the monsoon, erosion is much more severe than under normal conditions.

The unilateral withdrawal of water from the Teesta River was a test case. India wanted to see how Bangladesh would react if all the water from a river was withdrawn. The previous government did not protest India's actions, so now they are working on withdrawing water from the Dharla River. They plan to divert the Dharla's water to the Teesta. India will also withdraw water from the intermediary rivers between the Dharla and the Teesta.

Bangladesh has not yet taken the necessary steps to seek legal redress. In 1997, the United Nations passed a Watercourses Convention, which stated that the convention would come into effect once 35 countries ratified it.

After the 34th country ratified it, the convention remained in limbo for a long time. Bangladesh highly needs this convention. Yet, Bangladesh has not ratified it till date. The convention came into force in 2014 when Vietnam became the 35th country to ratify it. Unfortunately, Bangladesh has still not participated in it. By ratifying the convention, Bangladesh has the opportunity to seek redress through the United Nations.

It is unacceptable that different rivers in the country will continue to suffer various types of damage, and Bangladesh will merely stand by and watch.

Therefore, it is essential to establish basin-based and rights-based bilateral management for each of the approximately 200 shared rivers. If India does not agree, Bangladesh must seek redress through the United Nations as per the International Watercourses Convention.

*Tuhin Wadud is a professor at the Department of Bengali at Begum Rokeya University and the director of the river protection organization Riverine People.​

 

[Saif]

Teesta water issue has to be solved

Chief Adviser Muhammad Yunus has emphasised the need to resolve the longstanding transboundary river water-sharing issue between India and Bangladesh in line with international norms.

www.thedailystar.net

Teesta water issue has to be solved
Says Yunus, calls for humanitarian approach to flood management

Chief Adviser Muhammad Yunus has emphasised the need to resolve the longstanding transboundary river water-sharing issue between India and Bangladesh in line with international norms.

In the second part of the interview with Press Trust of India, conducted at the CA's official residence in Dhaka last Sunday, Yunus said lower riparian countries like Bangladesh have specific rights that must be respected.

Google News LinkFor all latest news, follow The Daily Star's Google News channel.
The second part of the interview was released yesterday.

The chief adviser said Bangladesh's interim government would continue working with India to resolve differences over the long-pending Teesta water-sharing treaty, which has been in limbo since 2011.

"By sitting over this issue [water sharing], it is not serving any purpose. If I know how much water I will get, even if I am not happy and sign it, it would be better. This issue has to be resolved."

Asked about the interim government's stance on fast-tracking the Teesta treaty, Yunus clarified, "Push is a strong word. I wouldn't say we will push, but we will pursue it. Both sides need to sit down and settle it."

The Teesta water-sharing agreement has faced opposition from West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, who has cited water shortages in her state's northern region.

Yunus acknowledged the complexity of the situation, noting that while the Indian central government was prepared to finalise the deal, the state government's resistance has held it back. "This issue predates Bangladesh's independence. It's time to finalise it."

He proposed a humanitarian approach to manage flood crises, even in the absence of a formal treaty between Bangladesh and India.

"When the Indian high commissioner met with me, I suggested better coordination to control flood situations. This can be done on humanitarian grounds, without needing a treaty. Such cooperation would ease the suffering of the people," the chief adviser said.

On the contentious issue of border killings, Yunus strongly condemned the deaths of Bangladeshi citizens along the India-Bangladesh border.

"Killing is not a solution. There are legal avenues for dealing with border issues. Those being shot are not invaders but couriers. This is sheer callousness, and it must stop."

'WILL TRY TO MEET MODI'

Yunus said he will try to meet Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly session in New York later this month.

He also revealed his plans to gather the heads of the SAARC nations for a symbolic photo opportunity.

"SAARC was formed for a great cause. It now exists only on paper and is not functioning. We have forgotten the name of SAARC; I am trying to revive the spirit of SAARC."

The chief adviser said South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) has not held a summit for a long time, and pointed out the potential benefits of renewed cooperation among the member countries.

"The SAARC summit has not taken place for quite a long time. If we come together, a lot of problems will be resolved," he said.

Modi is expected to address the UNGA on September 26, according to a provisional list of speakers issued by the UN.

Yunus emphasised the need to revive the "spirit of SAARC", stating that the eight-member bloc holds the potential to address many of the region's pressing issues.

SAARC comprises Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, the Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka.

Drawing a comparison with the European Union, Yunus noted, "The European countries have achieved a lot through the European Union. We have to ensure that SAARC works…. If there is a problem regarding Pakistan, other ways can be worked out. But the functioning of SAARC must not stop."

On the Rohingya crisis, the chief adviser called for assistance from India and China in convincing Myanmar to repatriate the displaced population.​

 

[Saif]

Dying rivers in independent Bangladesh

DURING the liberation war, people of this land chanted, ‘[The River] Padma, Meghna, Jamuna is our destiny (Padma, Meghna, Jamnuna, tomar amar thikana’). Bangladesh — the birth of the nation...

www.newagebd.net

Dying rivers in independent Bangladesh
Pavel Partha 07 April, 2024, 21:55

DURING the liberation war, people of this land chanted, ‘[The River] Padma, Meghna, Jamuna is our destiny (Padma, Meghna, Jamnuna, tomar amar thikana’). Bangladesh — the birth of the nation and the struggle for its independence were inspired by the rivers of this land. As we celebrate 53rd Independence Day, do we dare to ask how the rivers that bore witness to the heroic struggles and sacrifices of our freedom fighters and carried the dead bodies of ordinary citizens when families were not allowed to bury their dead are doing? Are streams of our rivers enjoying the freedom of flowing freely in an independent nation? Has the geography of the rivers been evolving without any hindrances in the past decades? The environmentally insensitive anti-river development policy has paved the way for the slow death of many rivers. Many rivers are now part of forgotten history. Every day, almost every day, newspapers are burdened with stories of their deaths. The silent cries of dying rivers are ringing, but the state remains unperturbed. Rivers are stolen in plain sight. Barely anyone cares. No brave environmental court is there to speak for the rights of the dying rivers.

Have we always been an anti-river nation? Vernacular history does not say so. Historically, our lives revolved around the rivers of Bangladesh. Yet, a recent report by the National River Conservation Commission says that of the 770 rivers that historically flowed through the country, only 405 have survived. More than 100 rivers have been lost since independence. How did it happen? On Independence Day, we must raise the river question to understand the lost love for our rivers. Why are rivers disappearing? It is because economic development is happening at the cost of our ecological integrity. The neo-liberal development model that successive governments adopted failed to recognise the historical significance of the river for Bangladesh and its people. Sadly, the government celebrates the country’s graduation from the least developed country to a developing nation, standing on the graves of many rivers.

NATURE, ecosystem, life-philosophy, economy, and politics in our country evolved around the river system. All the rivers — Brahmaputra, Padma, Surma, Teesta, Meghna, Karnaphuli, Naaf, Sitalakhya, Mogra, Feny, Dakatia, Monu, Rakti, Kopotakhya, Langla, Dhaleshweri, Karotoa, Ichamoti, Raymangal, Sangkha, Halda, Kangsha, Titas, Piyan, Ubdakhali, Jadukata, Simsang, Boral, Baleswar, Garai, Turag and many more — are either dying or struggling to maintain their mark on our national map.

In the river basins, different forms of production systems developed. The development of capital and the expansion of trade relations also followed the river basins. In 1722, almost 300 years ago, the construction work of the Kantajee temple began in Dinajpur. The terracotta on the walls of this temple has scenes from many boat journeys. Not too far from this temple is the River Tepa, which is now in really bad shape. The way the River Ganga is the god of water, Khoyaz Khizir and Badar Gazi are similarly the prophets of water. This is how the river remains central to the belief system of the subaltern lives. The history of Muslin and Zamdani is intrinsically linked with the river basins of Buriganga and Sitalakhya. Many weaving traditions in Bangladesh — Pabna taat, Tangtail taat, Bana taat of Hajongs and many weaving techniques from the Chittagong Hill Tracts — are also dependent on the local rivers. Many varieties of paddy and diverse agricultural traditions are embedded in the history of the river in Bangladesh. The saying that Bengalis live on rice and fish (‘Mache-bhate Bangali’) is situated in this unique history.

The neoliberal development process has defied the natural growth and life of a river and disrupted the economy dependent on the river system in Bangladesh. In the 1960s, Norman Ernest Borlaug, an American agronomist, was awarded the Noble Peace Prize for his discovery of high-yield crops, which then prompted what is now known as the Green Revolution. This mode of agriculture is technology-dependent and encourages groundwater extraction and the use of chemical fertilizers. In the long run, this mode of agriculture has proven to be harmful for the farmland and ecology in general. Before the introduction of high-yielding agricultural systems, farmers were dependent on rivers, ponds, rainwater, and other forms of natural sources of water. People were following the grammar and philosophy of nature. However, in independent Bangladesh, successive governments uncritically adopted the philosophy and technology of the green revolution, discrediting farmers’ knowledge, silencing the voices of subaltern people, and killing their relationship with the river and their surrounding nature. In the name of food security, through the farming of high-yield crops, subsidised access to chemical fertilisers poisoned the farm land, and the unregulated extraction of groundwater depleted water resources. When rivers and other water bodies are considered the lifeline of forests and biodiversity, the agricultural policy of the government launched an implicit and explicit destructive campaign.

ONE after another, industrial units are established. The largest multinational corporate apparel units, such as Adidas, Hilfiger, Philip Maurice, and Nike, supplied from Bangladesh. These factories serve the profit-seeking interests of the global and local business elite but have no regard for our rivers as they are discharging their industrial waste into rivers. The tanneries in Hazaribagh were responsible for the death of the River Buriganga. The shrimp industry in the north-western region destroyed the river system in the region. The commercial tea gardens, tobacco farming, aggressive acacia and eucalyptus gardens, and farming of hybrid corn contributed to the slow death of our rivers. All these were continued in the name of economic development.

All economic and industrial sectors — agriculture, fishery, apparel — one way or another are responsible for the death of our rivers. Such is the state policy. No one is made accountable; no one is brought to justice. As if the death of rivers would liven up our economy and improve our GDP. And the calculation of GDP follows the logic of capitalism. In the way neo-liberal corporate capital penetrates our economy, it invades our development philosophy with an anti-river mentality.

THE origins of the main rivers of Bangladesh are in India, Myanmar, Tibet, or China. Hence, the violence against rivers is not restricted within national boundaries. Neighbouring countries are equally oppressive and violent towards transboundary rivers. The Farkka barrage, the Teesta barrage, the Tipaimukh dam, and many hydropower projects in India have obstructed river flows, caused flash floods, or contributed to serious water crises in Bangladesh. The corporate-sponsored unplanned coal mining in north-eastern India also influenced our river system, particularly in the Sylhet division. Yet, river diplomacy in Bangladesh is not river-friendly. The state takes pride in not signing the UNECE Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes (the Water Convention) and promotes pro-dam development policy.

Scientific studies now confirm that the arbitrary withdrawal of water upstream across the border by India is slowly but steadily killing Bangladesh’s two major rivers and associated socio-economic and aquatic systems. Recent research conducted by a group of national and international researchers observed that the river’s health has progressively deteriorated since the opening of the Farakka Barage across the River Ganga in India. In the past decades, the water flow in the river Padma has decreased by 26 per cent and the river’s permanent water area has shrunk by 50 per cent during the dry season. The study conducted on a 70-kilometre area of the Padma from Godagari to Sarada in Rajshahi concluded that nearly one-third of the native fish species that were available in 1982 had disappeared. The permanent water area and the depth of the river have also significantly reduced, from 140 square kilometres in 1984 to 70 square kilometres in 2019. India has diverted an increased proportion of flow to the river Hooghly through the Farakka Barrage, which has contributed to the declining river health in Bangladesh.

The anti-river neoliberal development psyche of the state must be challenged. The tide and ebb of a river is its natural right to live that a state must protect. The rivers of Bangladesh can liven up Bangladesh’s sovereign, self-reliant economy. Rivers are not private property or any form of material property that can be owned, but the state’s indifference towards the ecological life of rivers has allowed vested quarters to feast on rivers. There is a High Court directive declaring rivers as legal entities and assigning the National River Protection Commission as the legal guardian to act as their parents in protecting the rights of waterbodies, canals, beels, shorelines, hills, and forests. Yet, violence against rivers continues unabated.

In riverine Bangladesh, how much more injustice to our river should we tolerate? We need real ecological emancipation of our rivers. In this struggle for emancipation, in which the ecological and environmental integrity of the nation will be treated as equally significant as the national economy, we must commit to the cause of our rivers. On the occasion of the 53rd Independence Day of Bangladesh, if we want to remain true to the historic slogan, ‘Padma, Meghna, Jamuna (also Karnaphuli, Simsung) is where we belong’, we must commit to the cause of rivers and resist any violence against our rivers.​

 

[Saif]

River water is about diplomacy, not just politics

Syeda Rizwana Hasan, adviser to the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change, and the Ministry of Water Resources, yesterday called for immediate action on river water management between Bangladesh and its upstream neighbour.

www.thedailystar.net

River water is about diplomacy, not just politics
Says Rizwana

Syeda Rizwana Hasan, adviser to the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change, and the Ministry of Water Resources, yesterday called for immediate action on river water management between Bangladesh and its upstream neighbour.

Speaking during a visit to the flood-damaged Ballamukha embankment in Parshuram upazila of Feni, she emphasised that the time for government inaction on such critical issues is over.

"River water is not just about politics; it's about diplomacy and economics," she said during her visit.

"We are here to understand the suffering and expectations of our people and to engage in meaningful talks with the upstream country accordingly," she added.

The adviser highlighted the longstanding challenges surrounding the Teesta River, noting that despite 53 years of negotiations, no formal water-sharing agreement has been reached.

She urged both countries to prioritise the humanitarian aspect of the issue and work toward a consensus on water management and disaster response.

"Even if an agreement results in less water for us, we must save the people of our country. Our neighbour cannot ignore this demand," the adviser said.

She added that a framework for future discussions has been outlined and will be finalised after further consultations.​

 

[Saif]

Sharing water from common rivers

With some 54 rivers flowing down from upstream India through Bangladesh to the Bay of Bengal, the question of management and sharing of the water from these rivers between the two neighbours cannot be overstated. The late August flash floods caused by incessant rain and sudden onrush of waters from

thefinancialexpress.com.bd

Sharing water from common rivers
Published :
Sep 24, 2024 22:07
Updated :
Sep 24, 2024 22:07

File photo used for representational purpose only

With some 54 rivers flowing down from upstream India through Bangladesh to the Bay of Bengal, the question of management and sharing of the water from these rivers between the two neighbours cannot be overstated. The late August flash floods caused by incessant rain and sudden onrush of waters from upstream state of Tripura in India that devastated the eastern, southeastern and northeastern districts of the country are a stark reminder of the danger a downstream country is exposed to in absence of river water management agreement with a country lying upstream. So far as the information sharing agreement with India is concerned, there was some misunderstanding. The two sides have contrary versions. What really happened should be made public. It is encouraging that the adviser to the environment, forest, climate change and water resources ministry during her recent visit to the flood-damaged eastern and north-eastern districts stressed urgent action on river water management between Bangladesh and India. Also, as a bulwark against future floods, the government, she further noted, was planning construction of embankments at strategic locations downstream. These are welcome decisions long time coming.

That the interim government has finally decided to take up the issue of water sharing from common rivers with India as a co-sharer, not a favour-seeker, is only expected of a self-respecting, sovereign co-basin country. Hopefully, the interim government will follow through with the promise in the future. Talking of the management and sharing of water from transboundary rivers, to date, only one long-term river water management treaty, the Ganges Water Sharing Treaty (GWST), exists between the two countries. But the GWST signed in 1996, too, is going to expire in 2026. So, it is imperative that the interim government start taking preparations for reviewing and renegotiating the treaty for Ganges water sharing after 1996. It is better, if a modified Ganges water sharing deal could be struck in which all the co-basin countries Nepal, Bangladesh and India are involved.

At the same time, Bangladesh should strongly pursue the stalled Teesta water sharing treaty. The irony is, the Teesta water sharing talks hit a dead end at a time when India's most friendly government of deposed Sheikh Hasina was in office in Bangladesh. Whereas, during the military regime in 1983, the two countries could reach a provisional agreement to share Teesta water during the lean pre-monsoon period. Under that agreement, Bangladesh would get 36 per cent of the water, while India would get 39 per cent, and the rest 25 per cent water would be left unallocated. Though the agreement was to expire in 1985, it was extended till 1987. Since then, no further progress on reviving the treaty was reported. However, a Teesta water deal set to be inked by the then-Indian prime minister Manmohan Singh during his Dhaka visit in 2011 was torpedoed by what was said to be India's internal politics. Let India's internal politics be the way it is. But that must not be a reason for depriving Bangladesh of its fair share of a transboundary river.

So, Bangladesh should activate the Joint Rivers Commission (JRC) to continue discussion on sharing waters from transboundary rivers including the Teesta with India. At the same time, it should also involve, if necessary, relevant international forums to get its legitimate share of water from the transboundary rivers between India and Bangladesh.​

 

[Saif]

‘পানির ন্যায্য হিস্যা নিশ্চিতে ভারতের সঙ্গে শিগগিরই বৈঠক’

 

[Saif]

বাংলাদেশের আন্তঃসীমান্ত ১০ নদীর ৪টির নিরাপদ প্রবাহ পথ নষ্ট হয়েছে

বাকি ছয়টি নদীর বিষয়েও সতর্ক করেছেন গবেষকরা।

bangla.thedailystar.net

বাংলাদেশের আন্তঃসীমান্ত ১০ নদীর ৪টির নিরাপদ প্রবাহ পথ নষ্ট হয়েছে
বাকি ছয়টি নদীর বিষয়েও সতর্ক করেছেন গবেষকরা।

হালদা নদী। ছবি: স্টার

বাংলাদেশ বদ্বীপের ১০টি নদীর মধ্যে চারটি তার নিরাপদ প্রবাহ পথ (সেফ অপারেটিং স্পেস-এসওএস) অতিক্রম করেছে, যে কারণে বেশির ভাগ নদীর প্রবাহ উল্লেখযোগ্য পরিবর্তিত হয়েছে বলে আন্তর্জাতিক এক গবেষণায় উঠে এসেছে।

বাকি ছয়টি নদীর বিষয়েও সতর্ক করেছেন গবেষকরা।

ইউনিভার্সিটি অব গ্লাসগোর নেতৃত্বে বাংলাদেশ ইউনিভার্সিটি অব প্রফেশনালস, বঙ্গবন্ধু শেখ মুজিবুর রহমান কৃষি বিশ্ববিদ্যালয় এবং রিভারাইন পিপল যৌথভাবে এই গবেষণাটি সম্পন্ন করেছে।

গতকাল বুধবার গ্লাসগো বিশ্ববিদ্যালয়ের ওয়েবসাইটে 'স্টাডি টু এনহ্যান্স ওয়াটার সিকিউরিটি অ্যান্ড ক্লাইমেট রেসিলিয়েন্স ইন দ্য বাংলাদেশ ডেল্টা' শিরোনামে এই গবেষণার প্রতিবেদন প্রকাশিত হয়।

এতে বলা হয়, বাংলাদেশ বদ্বীপের প্রধান নদীগুলোর নিরাপদ প্রবাহ পথ সংজ্ঞায়িত করার এটিই প্রথম আন্তর্জাতিক গবেষণা, যা বৈশ্বিক জলবায়ু পরিবর্তনে বিশ্বের সবচেয়ে ঝুঁকিপূর্ণ বদ্বীপগুলোর একটির স্থিতিস্থাপকতা বাড়াতে সহায়তা করবে।

প্রতিবেদনে জানানো হয়, এই গবেষণার মূল্যবান বৈজ্ঞানিক তথ্য-উপাত্ত আন্তঃসীমান্ত পানি সম্পর্কিত বিজ্ঞান ও নীতিমালা সম্পর্কে জানাবে এবং বাংলাদেশ ও দক্ষিণ এশিয়ার টেকসই উন্নয়ন লক্ষ্যমাত্রা (এসডিজি) অর্জনে অবদান রাখবে।

জার্নাল এনভায়রনমেন্টাল রিসার্চ লেটারসে এই গবেষণার ফলাফল প্রকাশিত হয়েছে।

গবেষণার নেতৃত্বে ছিলেন ইউনিভার্সিটি অব গ্লাসগোর স্কুল অব সোশ্যাল অ্যান্ড এনভায়রনমেন্টাল সাসটেইনেবিলিটির গবেষক ড. মো. সারোয়ার হোসেন।

তিনি বলেন, 'জলবায়ু পরিবর্তনের প্রেক্ষাপটে এসডিজি অর্জনের জন্য সব টেকসই উন্নয়ন লক্ষ্যমাত্রায় (এসডিজি) পানির অবদান গুরুত্বপূর্ণ। এটি একটি বড় চ্যালেঞ্জ তৈরি করেছে, কারণ বৈশ্বিক জনসংখ্যার প্রায় ৪০ শতাংশ পানির ঘাটতিতে থাকেন, যার মধ্যে বাংলাদেশও আছে, যা বৃহত্তম, সর্বাধিক জনবহুল এবং জলবায়ু-ঝুঁকিপূর্ণ বদ্বীপগুলোর একটি।'

'যদিও বাংলাদেশকে নদীর দেশ বলা হয়, তবে বাংলাদেশের নদীগুলোর আন্তঃসীমান্ত প্রকৃতি মূলত পানি নিরাপত্তার জন্য ঝুঁকি তৈরি করে, যা বৈশ্বিক জলবায়ু পরিবর্তনের কারণে আরও বেড়েছে। অতএব পানি নিরাপত্তার চ্যালেঞ্জগুলোকে না উৎরাতে পারলে এবং আন্তঃসীমান্ত পানি বিরোধ মীমাংসা না করলে বাংলাদেশ বদ্বীপে জলবায়ু পরিবর্তনের ধাক্কা সামলে নেওয়ার সক্ষমতা বাড়ার সম্ভাবনা নেই। যা এখন খুব প্রয়োজন', যোগ করেন তিনি।

গবেষণায় বাংলাদেশ বদ্বীপের সামাজিক-বাস্তুসংস্থান ব্যবস্থায় নিরাপদ প্রবাহ পথের মধ্যে নদী প্রবাহ বজায় রাখার জন্য ন্যায্য এবং ন্যায়সঙ্গত চুক্তি, পরিবেশগত পুনরুদ্ধার এবং প্রযুক্তিগত সমাধানগুলোর প্রয়োজনীয়তা তুলে ধরা হয়েছে। এ ছাড়া, এতে ১৯৯৬ সালে গঙ্গা পানিবণ্টন চুক্তি সই হওয়া সত্ত্বেও গঙ্গা নদীর নিরাপদ প্রবাহ পথ বজায় রাখার ক্ষেত্রে চ্যালেঞ্জগুলোও প্রকাশ করা হয়েছে।

গবেষণায় দেখা গেছে, বেশ কয়েকটি নদীর প্রবাহ তার নিরাপদ প্রবাহ পথ অতিক্রম করেছে, যা চিহ্নিত করে যে, বিদ্যমান ব্যবস্থাপনা এবং চুক্তিগুলো পানির টেকসই ব্যবস্থাপনা নিশ্চিতের জন্য যথেষ্ট নয়।

আন্তঃসীমান্ত নদী প্রবাহের ক্রমহ্রাসমান প্রবণতা মোকাবিলায় মেকং নদী কমিশন ও সিন্ধু জল চুক্তির মতো সাফল্যের গল্পগুলো গঙ্গা নদীর জন্য নেপাল এবং যমুনা নদীর জন্য চীন ও ভুটানসহ ভারতের সঙ্গে দ্বিপাক্ষিক এবং বহুপাক্ষিক চুক্তির জন্য গৃহীত হতে পারে বলে গবেষণায় সুপারিশ করা হয়েছে।​

 

[Saif]

India's hydropower projects, power corridor, and our concerns

Bangladesh will face intensified water shortage in its rivers if India goes ahead with constructing so many hydropower projects by building dams upstream of the Brahmaputra.

www.thedailystar.net

India's hydropower projects, power corridor, and our concerns

There is a serious lack of information in Bangladesh regarding the danger of the hydropower projects in Arunachal Pradesh, India. VISUAL: ANWAR SOHEL

India has recently decided to invest $1 billion to expedite the construction of 12 hydropower projects upstream of the Brahmaputra River in the northeastern state of Arunachal Pradesh. A couple of months ago, the federal finance ministry approved up to 750 crore rupees ($89.85 million) as financial assistance to each hydropower project in the state. Earlier in August 2023, the state government of Arunachal Pradesh signed a memorandum of agreement (MoA) with three central state-owned power companies to generate a total of 11,517 megawatts (MW) of electricity through these projects. Of these 12 projects, five projects of 2,620MW total capacity were allocated to the North Eastern Electric Power Corporation Limited (NEEPCO), five projects of 5,097MW capacity to Satluj Jal Vidyut Nigam Ltd (SJVN), and two projects of 3,800MW capacity to the National Hydroelectric Power Corporation Ltd (NHPC).

These hydroelectric projects with reservoirs of varying capacities will be built on different tributaries of Siang, Dibang and Subansiri rivers, which themselves are major tributaries of the Brahmaputra. For example, the 1,000MW Naying hydroelectric power project with a reservoir capacity of 82 million cubic metres is planned on the Siyom River, which is a major tributary of the Siang. The 680MW Attunli hydroelectric power project with a reservoir capacity of 13.96 million cubic metres will be built on the Tangon River which is a tributary of the Dibang. And the 1,800MW Kamala hydroelectric power project with a reservoir capacity of 623.58 million cubic metres is planned on the Kamala River, a tributary of the Subansiri.

Not only these 12 projects, the total hydropower potential of Arunachal Pradesh is estimated to be over 57,000MW, as per the central electricity authority of the state. To tap into this hydropower potential, India's plan is to construct at least 135 hydroelectric power projects on different tributaries of Brahmaputra River.

If so many hydropower projects are constructed by building dams upstream of the Brahmaputra, it will intensify water shortage in Bangladesh during the dry season, while during monsoon, opening the dams will increase the risk of flash floods. According to a study by the US-based Center for Naval Analyses (CNA), the Brahmaputra provides 75 percent of river water in Bangladesh during the dry season. Bangladesh is already getting 25 percent less than the required water from the Brahmaputra and facing human security pressure, which will be magnified by building dams upstream and water diversion activities.

Regrettably, there is a serious lack of information in Bangladesh regarding the danger of these hydroelectric projects. Moreover, arrangements are being made to facilitate transmission of the electricity generated from these power plant projects from the northeastern part to the northern, western and southern regions of India through Bangladesh. This huge amount of electricity cannot be used in the northeastern region of India due to a lack of demand, and it is also inconvenient for strategic and technical reasons to transmit this electricity through the narrow Siliguri Corridor in West Bengal. As the parliamentary standing committee on energy of 15th Lok Sabha explained, availability of power transmission corridors through the Chicken's Neck area is limited due to the requirement of space for habitation, railways, roads, oil and gas pipelines, communication links, etc and is gradually getting constricted.

For this reason, the Indian government has been pressuring Bangladesh for a long time to approve the construction of a power transmission corridor from northeast India through Bangladesh to other parts of the country. To this end, discussions have been going on for a long time in the meetings of Bangladesh-India Joint Working Group (JWG) and Joint Steering Committee (JSC). At last, at the 22nd meeting of the JWG on July 19—less than three weeks before the Hasina regime fell—the Bangladesh side agreed to start the work to construct a 765kV transmission line from India's Katihar, Bihar to Barnagar, Assam through Bangladesh's Parbatipur, to be completed by 2028.

According to the meeting, the Bangladesh and Indian segments of the cross-border transmission line are supposed to be installed by the respective countries. The Power Grid Bangladesh PLC is set to prepare a technical proposal on the compatibility in equipment design, quality assurance, financial support, and matching completion within six months.

This decision was made despite the fact that technical experts in Bangladesh had raised a number of serious concerns regarding the benefit and impact of installing this interconnection line for Bangladesh in the previous JWG meetings. For example, in the 18th JWG meeting on March 7, 2020, Bangladesh mentioned that the country did not have any additional power import requirement at that time and in the future till 2030 that could justify the construction of the interconnection line. In the 19th JWG meeting on January 21, 2021, Bangladesh expressed concern that this transmission system might be used to evacuate hydropower from northeast India in the future, and Bangladesh being a lower riparian country, the issue also needs to be discussed by the Joint River Commission (JRC) Bangladesh and India. The Bangladesh side also raised the issue of security and the operation and maintenance of the line. Bangladesh proposed to sign a data-sharing agreement in order to get different kinds of information to conduct comprehensive feasibility study, hydrological and water modelling studies, and environmental and social impact assessments.

But, at the higher-level 19th JSC meeting on January 23, 2021, India denied the relation of any specific hydroelectric power project with the Katihar-Parbatipur-Barnagar transmission line and said no riparian issues were involved with the proposed transmission system. Thus the issue of data-sharing and hydrological and water modelling studies involving the Joint River Commission were dropped from the agenda, and it was decided that Bangladesh would carry out its due diligence about social and environmental impact inside its territory, as undertaken for other transmission lines, and evaluation of legal and technical aspects of the projects will be continued parallelly.

Although India refuted the relation of the transmission line with the hydropower projects in Arunachal, it is obvious that transmission through Bangladesh would be a practical necessity for the utilisation of the huge power generated in the Indian state. That's why it would be suicidal for Bangladesh to allow India to transmit the power generated by damming the Brahmaputra river system.

In this context, the interim government of Bangladesh currently has two major responsibilities. First, it should protest India's unilateral decisions to construct 12 hydroelectric power projects on the upstream of Brahmaputra basin and take the necessary diplomatic steps to deter India from moving forward. Secondly, it should cancel the approval of the Katihar-Parbatipur-Barnagar transmission line project immediately so it cannot be used by India to evacuate the hydropower generated by damming the Brahmaputra.

Kallol Mustafa is an engineer and writer who focuses on power, energy, environment and development economics.​