[🇧🇩] India's Water Terrorism Against Bangladesh

[Saif]

Lack of progress on Teesta water sharing deal is frustrating

Takeaways from the PM’s recent India visit

www.thedailystar.net

Lack of progress on Teesta water sharing deal is frustrating
Takeaways from the PM's recent India visit

VISUAL: STAR

It is little wonder that any positive outcome from the PM's recent visit to India has been largely overshadowed by a palpable frustration over the lack of progress on the longstanding Teesta water-sharing issue. Overall, as a former ambassador has put it, the two-day visit was "long on visions but short on details." And one glaring shortage or rather omission in the joint statement issued afterwards was that of the Teesta water-sharing agreement, which has remained pending for 13 years despite assurances from India's highest level. The issue didn't even appear to feature in the talks. Instead, we have learnt of India's interest in a megaproject to manage Teesta River inside Bangladesh, where China's pre-existing interest would more likely complicate things going forward.

But before it becomes another geostrategic battleground for the regional superpowers, we must ask ourselves: what does the project mean for the future of the Teesta water-sharing agenda? Reportedly, it will involve dredging the river, building embankments, setting up townships and industries, irrigation, etc. Clearly, it has its benefits, if planned and executed properly, but can focusing on only one part of a transboundary river resolve the water crisis facing downstream Bangladesh, with upstream India unilaterally controlling its flow? Will India's potential involvement in the project overshadow the water-sharing agenda? Although the PM has said there is no link between the two, concerns remain.

It is, therefore, vital that while the government scrutinises all aspects related to the project, including the viability of massive investments, it also keeps demanding results from India on the water-sharing issue. Bilateral talks during the visit also involved various other issues, with the two countries signing and renewing some agreements. One of the issues that drew significant speculations is rail connectivity, which the PM too addressed in her media briefing. The question that's being raised is, how much of it will really benefit Bangladesh? While greater regional connectivity via rail and road is important and should ideally benefit both Bangladesh and India, experts say the rail transit as it is being conceptualised will mostly benefit India.

There seems to be a widespread perception in Bangladesh that whatever connectivity projects have been implemented over the last few years have benefitted India more than they did Bangladesh, allowing the former greater and more strategic passage. Examples of Europe's rail connectivity clearly do not apply if the interests of all parties are not considered equally. The government, therefore, should approach the issue with greater caution with a more realistic and comprehensive assessment of the costs and benefits of such projects.

Another issue that has caught our attention is the agreement to initiate discussions on the renewal of the Ganges Water Agreement, which will expire in 2026. This is a positive development, and it is vital that the lessons of the past years are reflected in the renewal process. The Joint Rivers Commission should continue to work on the unresolved issues surrounding our common rivers, and Bangladesh must be able to protect its best interests in this and any future water-sharing treaty. We value our friendship with India, but we also believe that our mutual respect should result in equitable benefits in any bilateral issue. This is how the foundation of longstanding relations is kept intact.​

 

[Saif]

The hydro-hegemony in South Asia

India also gets to exploit Bangladesh based on its technological projects.

www.thedailystar.net

New canals from Teesta
The hydro-hegemony in South Asia

FILE PHOTO: AFP

The West Bengal government recently decided to dig two new canals to divert water from the Teesta, a transboundary river that India shares with Bangladesh. Water from another transboundary river, Jaldhaka, will also be channelled to the canals for agricultural purposes. The canals are expected to benefit 100,000 farmers in Jalpaiguri and Cooch Behar, and the West Bengal Irrigation Department has already been allocated 1,000 acres of land for the canals under the Teesta Barrage Project.

However, the benefits will come at the expense of Bangladeshi farmers in northern Bangladesh. As Teesta is a transboundary river, both Bangladesh and India should share its water in an equitable and reasonable manner, as per the international water-sharing convention. Unfortunately, Bangladesh has been denied such equity and reason as upper-riparian India unilaterally constructs barrages, dams, and canals, restricting the river's flow to Bangladesh.

This has also resulted in a scarcity of river water, with only 100 cumecs (cubic metres per second) available during the dry season, compared to the 1,600 cumecs required for agriculture in both countries.

Bangladesh and India share 54 rivers that flow from the Himalayas to the Bay of Bengal. The best practice across the world is to manage such international or transboundary rivers in accordance with international rules and conventions such as Helsinki Rules, Berlin Rules, and the 1997 UN water-sharing convention. But in South Asia, this takes the form of bilateral agreements between the relevant stakeholders. As a result, the upper-riparian countries often enjoy advantages and unequal shares. For instance, India's construction of canals and barrages affects Bangladesh adversely. In the same manner, India also faces the same issue with China in the case of Brahmaputra River. As a result, Bangladesh has managed to get India to sign agreements on only two rivers: the Ganges and the Kushiyara. The Kushiyara agreement came nearly 25 years after the Ganges River treaty. Decade-long negotiations have failed to ink the treaty on Teesta water-sharing.

The delay in signing the Teesta treaty and the uneven water distribution have resulted in serious environmental and agricultural concerns in northern Bangladesh, where the river is drying up, biodiversity is under peril, and food production is being adversely affected. Between 2006 and 2014, the northern region of Bangladesh, known for its ample Boro rice harvest, lost Tk 8,132.6 crore in production due to water shortages caused by India's arbitrary withdrawal from the river.

Why has the water-sharing deal stalled when both Bangladesh and India have built much more fruitful relationships in other areas? The answer probably lies in the concept of hydro-hegemony.

Hydro-hegemony is a relatively new theory that argues that water-sharing, conflicts, and river management between the countries that share transboundary rivers are influenced by their riparian position, power dimensions, and exploitation potential. Prominent Indian scholar Brahma Chellaney used the term to explain China's activity in the upstream that affected India. In the case of Bangladesh-India transboundary rivers, India holds the upper hand as the country is upper-riparian. When India has a demand for river water, it can simply dig canals and redirect the river's flow, or build a barrage to navigate the water flow.

Bangladesh lacks the political and economic power to force India to provide its rightful share of water. Because of this power asymmetry, India influences the negotiation process often in its favour. The decision to drain water from Jaldhaka River without informing Dhaka is a prime example of such influence. Not only that, but India consciously depoliticises bilateral disputes between the two countries.

India also gets to exploit Bangladesh based on its technological projects. Historical water flow data suggests that Bangladesh's share should not fall below 4,500 cusecs (cubic foot per second), but India's upstream interventions with technologically advanced barrages have decreased Bangladesh's share to one-third of that amount. Similar riparian and power dynamics have harmed India's equation with China over water-sharing on the Brahmaputra. The river is shared by China, India, and Bangladesh, but because China is upstream, it can build dams and barrages that threaten water flow to India and Bangladesh in the absence of any treaty. While India narrates China's behaviour as unequal, interestingly it does the same with lower-riparian Bangladesh.

River disputes will persist in South Asia because the region's largest rivers – the Indus, Ganges, Brahmaputra, Teesta, Mahananda, Surma, and Ghaghara – are transboundary. The region is largely dependent on these river basins. As a result, disruption and unjust water flow can lead to conflicts. Brahma Challaney in his book Water: Asia's New Battleground also discussed such.

War or conflict for water has been going on for ages. For decades, conflicts between Egypt and Ethiopia often escalated over the Nile River's water-sharing. Water also played a central role in the civil war in Sudan. Syria, Jordan, and Lebanon also had a series of confrontations with Israel in the 1960s over the Jordan River that ultimately culminated in the Six-Day War.

In the case of Bangladesh and India, river basin management has been always suggested to avoid such conflicts. But for that, the upper-riparian side must acknowledge equity and reason. Yet, the hydropolitics between Bangladesh and India can be of great interest to researchers as it has unique hegemonic elements in river management. How the upper-riparian and its federal governance structure is posing challenges to the lower-riparian is quite a new phenomenon in hydropolitics. Therefore, researchers may take a keen interest in developing further understanding.

Masfi-ul-Ashfaq Nibir is a Dhaka-based independent researcher and analyst.​

 

[Saif]

India's Brahmaputra Board plans project to conserve Teesta water flowing thru north Bengal

Representatives of the Brahmaputra Board, which works for conservation of rivers flowing through the Brahmaputra basin, including the Teesta, have said they intended to take up a project for conservation of water flowing through hilly streams in north Bengal so that it could be used for...

www.thedailystar.net

India's Brahmaputra Board plans project to conserve Teesta water flowing thru north Bengal

Any discussion on the Teesta management should involve a water-sharing agreement with India. FILE PHOTO: STAR

Representatives of the Brahmaputra Board, which works for conservation of rivers flowing through the Brahmaputra basin, including the Teesta, have said they intended to take up a project for conservation of water flowing through hilly streams in north Bengal so that it could be used for different purposes.

This was stated at the 82nd meeting of the board in Kalimpong yesterday, The Telegraph reported today.

The board asked officials of West Bengal irrigation department to submit specific proposals for approval of funds for anti-erosion and flood protection on either bank of the Teesta river, our New Delhi correspondent reports.

Responding to the board's plan, West Bengal state irrigation department pointed out that the areas through which the hilly streams flow are under the Gorkhaland Territorial Administration (GTA) and that the department cannot take up the task on its own.

It was then decided that at the next meeting of Brahmaputra Board, the GTA will also be invited so that the project can be executed.

Officials of West Bengal irrigation department elaborated on the flash flood that had occurred on the Teesta in October last year following a cloudburst in Sikkim.

"We mentioned how the flash flood led to the huge deposition of debris on the Teesta, which led to a rise in the river bed. Also, other issues like erosion caused by the river on its both banks were pointed out," said Krishnendu Bhowmik, chief engineer (northeast) of the irrigation department.

He said Ranbir Singh, the chairman of the Brahmaputra Board, had sought a specific proposal from them.

"We will discuss with Sikkim and submit a joint DPR (detailed project report) to the board so that funds are sanctioned to carry out these works in the Teesta," according to Bhowmik.

At the meeting, the officials also mentioned the DPR of Rs 11 crore which was submitted to the board for carrying out flood protection works on the Teesta river bank in Mekhliganj near the India-Bangladesh border.​

 

[Saif]

Bangladesh-India: Ambiguity over water-sharing persists

The Teesta issue has come to a halt, this will have an impact regarding our other rivers too. The fear of losing our rights remains.

en.prothomalo.com

Bangladesh-India: Ambiguity over water-sharing persists
M Humayun Kabir
Published: 25 Jun 2024, 12: 14

The basic premise of the discussions and MoUs signed between Bangladesh and India during prime minister Sheikh Hasina's Delhi visit was, India-Bangladesh Shared Vision for Future: Enhancing Connectivity, Commerce and Collaboration for Shared Prosperity. From reviewing the discussions and MoUs, it may seem that smaller irritants have been overlooked in the interests of greater objectives.

A summary of this visit will indicate that Bangladesh and India are drawing up the framework of their cooperation with an invisible side in dominance. It is being said, though, that both sides are making an effort to do this in the interests of both India and Bangladesh.

Have we been able to have adequate connectivity with Nepal and Bhutan? That has not happened and that is why people are venting their anger.

Lofty issues such as digital and green partnership and the Indo-Pacific Strategy have come up in the vision, with Bangladesh being a partner to India is these areas, taking steps for implementation. For example, goods train will travel from India's Gede to Hasimara in the northeast. Yet it is not clear how this will operate, and whether Bangladesh will have the authority to know what is being carried in the goods train or not. Perhaps these matters will be discussed at a later date.

This will benefit India strategically. They will be able to bypass the Chicken's Neck and go to the northeast states through Bangladesh and transport their goods too. The reaction evoked in the mind of people in Bangladesh is only natural. After all, a lot has been said and done about connectivity over the past 15 years, and India has been the beneficiary. But we want to benefit too.

When prime minister Sheikh Hasina in 2010 announced that India would be able to use Mongla and Chattogram ports, the main objective was to create a free regional space. That would mean connectivity with not just India, but with Nepal , Bhutan and all other neighbours too. But have we been able to have adequate connectivity with Nepal and Bhutan? That has not happened and that is why people are venting their anger.

There are, however, positive angles to this visit too. This includes enhanced cooperation among India, Bangladesh Nepal and Bhutan. India has given its nod to Bangladesh bringing electricity from Nepal over Indian territory. This will play a positive role to render Bangladesh's power sector multidimensional in the future.

Both the countries have also agreed to commence with the Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA). Negotiations will now take place in this regard. This will further enhance economic ties between Bangladesh and India. However, it will take a few years for the full implementation of CEPA. It involves trade, investment and a lot of factors. Trade investment and a lot of things are involved.

There are no indications of how to overcome the tariff barriers in our trade with India. We face all sorts of hurdles in sending certain items to India. These matters remain unclear. The concept of CEPA is good, though. It will increase opportunities for Bangladesh's participation and investment in the Indian market.

Another positive factor is that India has given directives to renew the Ganges treaty which will expire in two years' time. However, already all sorts of negative statements are being made in West Bengal to this end. But I feel that this is a good decision. We can do whatever is required to implement this decision now. The concepts of digital and green partnership are positive too. India is way ahead of us in digital economy and green energy. It will be beneficial to our partnership of we can work together in these areas.

There have been talks for many years between the two countries regarding water management. Other than with Ganges, we have not been able to reach any agreement concerning any other of the 53 common rivers. While the Teesta agreement was prepared in 2011, this was not signed. This is an ardent demand of the people of Bangladesh. The fate of 20 million people in our northern regions is tied to this. India was pledged to this agreement too. However, there was no mention of this agreement in the declaration this time. As this is a common river, we have a right to a share in the waters. But as the Teesta issue has come to a halt, this will have an impact regarding our other rivers too. The fear of losing our rights remains.

The framework drawn up by India and Bangladesh in 2011 regarding rivers, spoke of paying attention to the Teesta, Brahmaputra and Ganges river basins. But it is difficult to understand what they are saying now. They are saying that talks will continue on the basis of our joint river commission's recommendations, to give priority to exchange of information and an outline for interim water sharing. This does not explain where the Teesta issue stands. As a result, he ambiguity over Teesta remains. We are not comfortable with this. This is, after all, a matter of our rights.

The technical team that is supposed to be coming from India, will work on the Bangladesh side. Does that mean we have shifted away from our focus on the Teesta basic? Dr Ainun Nishat, Sheikh Rokon and several others have raised this issue. It seems that we have entered yet another theoretical complexity regarding the issue of water.

Our prime minister did say that there have been talks in the issue of water sharing. However, the joint declaration offers no clear idea on the matter. India has managed to keep the entire matter behind a smokescreen, a plus point for them. Another matter is that India has now entered the scene where China had put forward a plan regarding Teesta. We have been pitched into a challenge now as to who can do this and how they will do this.

The attention of the two countries regarding this region is another interesting matter. India's attention is particularly sharper. The seven MoUs that have been signed are all focused on North Bengal. They have announces the opening of a deputy high commission in Rangpur. There was no announcement of whether we would be opening any such office.

There was no declaration or even mention regarding the border killings. Broadly speaking, we do not know whether there were any discussions on the issues where India's initiative is required to resolve our problems
India has expressed significant interest in issues of military security. There is talk of this outside too. It seems that India wants to involve Bangladesh in its military planning, with China in mind. India wants to mould Bangladesh to its convenience and it apparently seems that Bangladesh is acquiescing.

There was no declaration or even mention regarding the border killings. Broadly speaking, we do not know whether there were any discussions on the issues where India's initiative is required to resolve our problems. Even if there have been discussions, this has not been reflected in the declaration. In order to implement large visions, it is imperative that we resolve the innumerable smaller problems. We certainly have requirements to be met, but that requires political will. If not, the big visions will throw us into further challenges.

The prime minister will be visiting China next month. They will certainly want to know our areas of understanding with India. They too have plans concerning Teesta. No matter whether it is Teesta or any project, we must decide to whom we will give this on the basis of their experience, competence and financial capacity, and where our interests will be given priority. There may also be discussions with China on a host of other issues including assistance, the Rohingya issue, ensuring that the civil war in Myanmar doesn't harm our interests and so on.

* M Humayun Kabir is a former diplomat and ambassador​

 

[Bilal9]

Bangladesh lacks the political and economic power to force India to provide its rightful share of water.

This is the biggest BS statement we have seen in a while. We consume over US$40 to US$45 Billion of Indian exports and services every year. If not for the capitulating actions from our PM, imposition of higher tariffs on Indian exports to our side will do wonders, just for starters. We have leverage - it is for our PM that we cannot impose them.

The prime minister will be visiting China next month. They will certainly want to know our areas of understanding with India. They too have plans concerning Teesta. No matter whether it is Teesta or any project, we must decide to whom we will give this on the basis of their experience, competence and financial capacity, and where our interests will be given priority

If China has upper-riparian country leverage, we can combine our interest with their interest. If Indian center and states start with drawing water illegally from Teesta or Brahmaputra, then we can ask China to do the same (at least from the Brahmaputra). We have to combine our leverage with Chinese leverage and then see where India stands.

 

[Saif]

This is the biggest BS statement we have seen in a while. We consume over US$40 to US$45 Billion of Indian exports and services every year. If not for the capitulating actions from our PM, imposition of higher tariffs on Indian exports to our side will do wonders, just for starters. We have leverage - it is for our PM that we cannot impose them.



If China has upper-riparian country leverage, we can combine our interest with their interest. If Indian center and states start with drawing water illegally from Teesta or Brahmaputra, then we can ask China to do the same (at least from the Brahmaputra). We have to combine our leverage with Chinese leverage and then see where India stands.

Spineless Hasina and her colleagues in Awami League are the root cause of one sided relationship with India. We have to diversify our import source to reduce Indian influence in our domestic politics. India's exploitative trade policy is hurting our economy.

 

[Saif]

India's River Linking Project is a recipe for disaster.