Donate ☕
[🇧🇩] - India's Water Terrorism Against Bangladesh | Page 15 | PKDefense

[🇧🇩] India's Water Terrorism Against Bangladesh

Reply (Scroll)
Press space to scroll through posts
G Bangladesh Defense
[🇧🇩] India's Water Terrorism Against Bangladesh
240
8K
More threads by Saif


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

1725755273206.webp


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.​
 
Analyze

Analyze Post

Add your ideas here:
Cite Fact Check Highlight Respond

River water is about diplomacy, not just politics
Says Rizwana

1727049065149.webp


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.​
 
Analyze

Analyze Post

Add your ideas here:
Cite Fact Check Highlight Respond
  • Like (+1)
Reactions: Bilal9

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

1727227160126.webp

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.​
 
Analyze

Analyze Post

Add your ideas here:
Cite Fact Check Highlight Respond
  • Like (+1)
Reactions: Bilal9
‘পানির ন্যায্য হিস্যা নিশ্চিতে ভারতের সঙ্গে শিগগিরই বৈঠক’


 
Analyze

Analyze Post

Add your ideas here:
Cite Fact Check Highlight Respond
  • Love (+3)
Reactions: Bilal9

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

1727397209331.webp

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।​
 
Analyze

Analyze Post

Add your ideas here:
Cite Fact Check Highlight Respond

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

1727743029658.webp

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.​
 
Analyze

Analyze Post

Add your ideas here:
Cite Fact Check Highlight Respond

India’s river linking project puts Sunderbans in peril
Mostofa Sarwar 14 November, 2024, 23:10

1731633427369.webp

New Age

Unlike Steinbeck’s defamed ‘salt-water-eating bushes’ of the Sea of Cortez, the Sunderbans is an excellent forest treasure for Bangladesh, India’s West Bengal, and the rest of the world. In 1997, UNESCO awarded the Sunderbans the accolade ‘A World Heritage Site,’ with the obvious implication that everything should be done to preserve this incredible wonder of nature, the world’s largest continuous mangrove stand. A decade ago, the part of the Sunderbans that belongs to West Bengal earned the same honour. The Sunderbans is a fascinating interface where the ocean and continent intermingle. If implemented, India’s National River Linking Project will perhaps annihilate this unique treasure with its diverse plant and animal species, including mangroves and Royal Bengal Tigers.

The Sunderbans, named after its dominant mangrove, Sundari is one of the first government-managed mangrove forests in the world. It is located at the lower Ganges delta. This is the largest delta in the world, formed by the outpouring of sediments over many million years by the Ganges, the Brahmaputra, and the Meghna Rivers. The delta building continues to have the world’s largest sediment load, almost one billion tonnes annually. The Sunderbans occupies 10,277 square kilometres of land and water. The eastern 60 per cent is in Bangladesh, and the rest is in the West Bengal Province of India. Approximately one-third of this magnificent forest has distributaries, brackish marshes, and tidal estuaries. The Sunderbans is a protective barrier against coastal erosion, cyclonic storms, and tidal surges. It produces incredible amounts of food, building materials, and fuel for the surrounding communities. Many species of mammals, reptiles, birds, fishes, etc, inhabit this majestic forest. This forest is the largest remaining habitat of the celebrated Royal Bengal Tiger, which is now an endangered species.

The Sunderbans can be divided, based on salinity and plant ecology, into three zones, with overall dominance of the Sundari in the freshwater zone in the northeastern part, Gewa in the mild saltwater zone in the middle, and Goran in the saltwater zone near the coastline. All three prominent mangroves and another species, Nipa Palm, locally known as Golpata, grow throughout the forest, but their concentration and height depend on salinity. The Sunderbans has a wide variety of biota supported by a complex and dynamic eco-environment, the main sustenance of this system being the flow of freshwater by the distributaries of the Ganges-Brahmaputra-Meghna Rivers.

Imagine a world 70 million years ago, when the Indian tectonic plate was almost at the end of its arduous odyssey from the supercontinent, Pangea. Formidable dinosaurs were about to become extinct, and tigers, including other carnivores, began evolving from animals called miacids. After a long evolution, modern-day tigers have evolved in Asia, and early tiger fossils dating 500 thousand years BP have been found in China and Siberia. Almost 65 million years ago, mangroves appeared in the Indo-Malayan realm. Mangroves (dispersing through the ocean water) and tigers (roaming through the primordial land) took many million years to come to their present being in the Sunderbans. Human intervention in the form of India’s National River Linking Project threatens to undo this incredible crafting of evolution and destroy this superb ecosystem. Would it not also be a travesty against human dignity and a despicable act of infinite proportion?

The Sunderbans has undergone significant changes during the last 500 years because the Ganges changed its course three times. Before the 16th century, the trunk stream of the Ganges was the Bhagirathi and the Hooghly, the Bhairab being the main delta-building spill river. In the 16th century, joining the Brahmaputra, the Ganges changed its principal channel to the Madaripur Course (Arial Khan River). From 1830s to 1840s, the last course change took place. The Padma (combined Ganges-Brahmaputra) and Meghna joined to form the present trunk stream, Meghna, the main delta-building river. Meandering and changing course by a river are common in flat topography. However, this eastward shifting of the Ganges is due to the uplifting of the western Sunderbans relative to the global sea level. What is the cause of this uplifting? This is a natural process far beyond the domain of human intervention, and the leading cause is the isostatic imbalance of the Himalayan mountains and the Indian tectonic plate. This shifting has been responsible for the silting of rivers in the western Sunderbans and an increase in freshwater flow down the rivers in the Bangladesh part of the Sunderbans. Remember, this has been a natural process, not a man-made one. Nevertheless, this is a suitable model to assess the impact of freshwater flow on the Sunderbans’ plant ecology.

The Farakka Barrage across the Ganges, located roughly 18 kilometres from the Bangladesh border, became operational in 1975. Diverting the water flow to the Bhagirathi-Hooghly distributaries of West Bengal, India, has reduced the freshwater flow in the lower reaches of the Ganges through Bangladesh. This has led to the salinity intrusion a few hundred kilometres upstream during the dry season, changing the salinity regime of the Sunderbans. The immediate casualty is the Sundari mangrove trees of the Sunderbans. It is reported with depressing anguish from several places of less saline northeastern Sunderbans, where Sundari achieves its maximum height, that this majestic tree is dying with the blight, starting at its top. In several places, with the worsening freshwater flow to the forest due to India’s diversion at Farakka Barrage, the golpata and other plant species are also being affected. The monsoon flood overflow cannot stop this pitiful decay of Sundari and other plants because the damage inflicted during the dry season is irreversible. Sundari’s progressive rot directly correlates to the eco-environmental change of the Sunderbans due to India’s water withdrawal at the Farakka point. Similar effects have been experienced in other countries like Pakistan and Vietnam. This damage is not stopping at Sundari but will ultimately extend its deadly tentacles to this forest’s entire biota.

Now, one can see the immensity of the impending doom if India’s National River Linking Project, envisioned by former prime minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee in 2002, is executed. This project will divert vast amounts of water from the rivers of Bangladesh. The already existing problems of the Sunderbans caused by Farakka Barrage will increase many-fold. The killer bite to Bangladesh’s agriculture, forestry, fishery, public health, livelihood, environment, and wildlife by this National River Linking project would be many magnitudes higher than that of the Farakka Barrage. According to this stupendous plan (with a price tag of more than $168 billion), India would dig 30 links connecting major rivers, including the Ganges, Brahmaputra, and the southern rivers of the Deccan Peninsula, and divert about 200 billion cubic meters of water per year for irrigating the arid western states and semi-arid southern states. This project involves diverting one-third of the water from the Ganges and Brahmaputra — all at a colossal cost to Bangladesh. The Indian province of West Bengal will not be spared as a collateral victim.

If the world community does not stop this naive and dangerous Indian plan, the enchanting Sundari-mangrove, the awesome Royal Bengal Tiger, and other beautiful species — nature’s incredible craftsmanship through many million years — will be lost in oblivion.

Dr Mostofa Sarwar, a scientist and poet, is a professor emeritus at the University of New Orleans. He was dean, provost, and vice-chancellor of Delgado Community College and served as a visiting professor and adjunct faculty member at the University of Pennsylvania.​
 
Analyze

Analyze Post

Add your ideas here:
Cite Fact Check Highlight Respond

Members Online

Latest Posts

Latest Posts