Transit, not Teesta
India receives transit, but what about sharing Teesta waters?
by ALTAF PARVEZ, M M ALI and K MAHMUD
"Bangladesh will receive 5000 crore taka through transit/transshipment" (The Independent, 26 February 2011 )
The above statement bears serious significance given the prevailing socio-economic circumstances in Bangladesh. Readers will recall that not in the distant past the media was similarly used by quarters interested in the extraction and export of natural gas, coming up with headlines like: "Bangladesh floating on a sea of gas."
The fact that Bangladesh is not floating on a sea of gas is more than obvious to the consumers right now. In many households of the capital city, meals have to be cooked by the crack of dawn as the gas supply dwindles to nothing by the morning and stoves lie useless. Now, following the Bangladesh-is-floating-on-gas hype, quarters in the media are bent on reporting how Bangladesh can earn thousands of crores of taka by granting transit to India. What these quarters are failing to mention is how Bangladesh is being totally deprived of what is rightfully should be getting from India, and that is water.
Why has this particular time been selected to harp on the revenue supposedly to be gotten through transit? This period of March-April is a hard time for the people of the north-west and south-west regions of the country. Inflow of water is at an all time low in the shared rivers with India Though these rivers are of an international category, Bangladesh does not get its fair share of water from them. As a result, the regions through which these rivers run face immeasurable hardship during this period.
Though India and Bangladesh share a total of 54 rivers, over the last 40 years the two countries have only managed to reach an agreement on one river, the Ganges, through a 30-year treaty. And yet India has been holding talks on water and river-sharing issues ever since 1972. The Joint River Commission has had 38 meetings so far. Despite all this, the net result has been zero. Very little has been gained.
Bangladesh has moved far back even from the diplomatic aspects of the water-sharing issue. Even though no agreement may have been reached at least the water crisis was given priority during bilateral talks all along. Now that has been relegated to the back burner and the issues of transit and security have come to the forefront, issues in which Bangladesh's interests are not directly involved. A review of the policy-making level talks held between the two countries over the past two years reveals that all the decision that have been taken are related to transit and security. The other issues, including water, have been left hanging in limbo with the diplomatic politesse of "hopeful outcomes". In the joint declaration signed during Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina's visit to India in 2010, the issue of sharing River Teesta's water was relegated to 27th place.
The only water-related agreement between India and Bangladesh so far is the Ganges Treaty. The last time this treaty was signed was during the Awami League government rule of 1996-2001. Based on this, diplomats had thought that this time the water sharing issue would advance forward another step, particularly the Teesta issue.
In 2010, the Bangladesh government did submit to India a draft of an agreement related to Teesta. India's Water Resources Minister Pawan Kumar also submitted a draft in this regard from his country's side. Neither country has made any public statement about the submitted drafts.
The source of the approximately 246-mile river Teesta lies in Northern Sikkim. Upon entering Bangladesh, Teesta continues for about 83 miles before joining Jamuna. During the ongoing dry season, Teesta's water falls to about 400 to 500 cusecs (1cusec = 1 cft per second). The reason of this unfortunate situation is the unilateral withdrawal of water by means of a barrage newly constructed in Gazaldoba, 50 miles upstream from Bangladesh's border. This barrage has two irrigation canals which diverts 20 thousand cusecs of water to West Bengal and Bihar, providing these Indian states with 10 thousand cusecs of water each for irrigation purposes.
When it comes to common rivers, Bangladesh is the downstream country and so with no water sharing treaty in place, the farmers have no idea how much water they will be receiving in the dry season and so invariably the cultivation in the river basin is severely affected. Additionally, as the population is rapidly increasing in the river basin regions, naturally the demand for water is increasing manifold too. However, the Greater Rangpur region of Bangladesh has never received the internationally recognized amount of water required on the basis of population and agricultural requirements.
So far the discussants have restricted their discussions to the volume of water, but the farmers of the river basin, particularly of the Rangpur region, also want the qualitative aspect of water to be brought to the table. After all, the rate that industries are being set up on both sides of the river upstream, by the time the water enters Bangladesh, it is almost unusable due to industrial pollution. The common consumers want the enforcement of the international laws for the qualitative aspect of shared waters.
Negotiations and bargaining concerning Teesta has been on since 1972. At the 20th meeting of the Joint River Commission a consensus had actually been reached to the effect that India would get 40% of Teesta waters, Bangladesh would get 40% and the remaining 20% would be kept in reserve.
Then in 1983 again this sharing was agreed upon by both sides in an ad hoc agreement. Bangladesh still adheres to this stand, but India now wants the entire flow to be shared, leaving nothing to maintain the normal flow.
The longer the water talks are stalled, the more the upstream country benefits. That is why in 1996 when the Awami League government signed the Ganges water sharing treaty, people welcomed it despite its limitations. However, this treaty hasn't been fulfilled even a fraction of the extent that the 1977 five-year treaty in this regard was fulfilled. The 1996 treaty may have come to an agreement about water sharing, but there is no guarantee of receiving that share of water. Even so, based on Awami League's diplomatic success of this treaty in 1996, from 2009 it has been heard that this government will be signing a Teesta treaty. This is not surprising because after staying away from the table for five long years, India finally agreed to participate in the 37th Joint Rivers Commission meet only after the present government came to power. In the meantime another meeting of the Commission has been held, but it is not known if anything has been finalized regarding the sharing of Teesta waters, or the waters of any other river for that matter.
It has been learnt that the visit of the Indian Prime Minister to Bangladesh is being delayed due to the delay in reaching an agreement regarding Teesta's water sharing. The Teesta treaty is to be signed during his visit.
So far it could be determined, the Teesta treaty is to be of a 15-year term for the time being and applicable in times of need. By means of such a treaty, there would be an increase in irrigation for 7.5 lac hectares of land in Rangpur region. After the Ganges Treaty if the Teesta Treaty is actually signed, then agreements could be reached more easily on the other shared rivers as these treaties would stand as models.
Other than the Teesta water sharing treaty, Bangladesh is also attaching much importance to reaching an understanding with India on advance flood warnings. Bangladesh wants to be informed 55 to 60 hours in advance when there are increased water surges upstream of the shared rivers. India is unwilling to provide flood warnings so much in advance. Yet they have that sort of treaty with Nepal where, since 1989, the ebb and flow of rivers in at least 42 places within Nepal is monitored.
In ninth clause of the 1996 water treaty between Bangladesh and India, it was stated that the two countries were in consensus about having water-sharing agreements concerning other common rivers, with equality, transparency and not harming each other in any way. But it is evident that India has no intention of adhering to the Ganges Water Treaty because a decade and a half since then, it has not come forward to sign any agreement concerning any other common river with Bangladesh. Yet when it raised the transit issue with Bangladesh, it is immediately being granted this facility.
While India may be reluctant to give Bangladesh its fair share of water, it has in the past satisfactorily implemented the Indus water sharing treaty with Pakistan (1960) and the sharing of the Mahakali and Koshi river waters with Nepal (1996). The World Bank provided technical cooperation in certain instances in this connection.
India is wholly involved in Nepal's Buri Gandhaki hydroelectric project. India has created the opportunity to produce 83 thousand MW of electricity from Nepal's rivers. When Bangladesh has proposed to work on the production of hydro-electricity on a tripartite basis, India refused. Yet now, with Bangladesh's approval, it plans to sell that same electricity to Bangladesh!
When Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina visited India last year, the people of Bangladesh were given the idea that if India was given transit, Bangladesh would be given electricity. But the draft agreement sent by India in February 2011 (see www.kalerkantho.com) shows that India wants to provide 250MW of electricity on condition that it will maintain control over disconnecting the line, determining the cost, increasing the cost and, if need be, extracting interest too. India's Central Energy Regulatory Commission would determine the price of electricity from time to time. Not only that, the electricity costs would have to be paid on quarterly basis, that too in advance. Even more shocking is that even though this electricity would be sold by India, Bangladesh would have to bear transmission costs and the risks of transmission. It is rare in the global context that the supplier has such a strong position in today's commodities' market. It is with such a commercial counterpart that Bangladesh is having to fight for its fair share of water decade after decade.
India has always refused for a third party involvement in these agreements so as to conceal this attitude. It always opts for bilateral treaties to extract its political and economic interests from the respective countries. For example, it refused to involve any third party when it comes to water sharing with Bangladesh, but in the case of transit, it is very eager to involve ADB and the World Bank. The Indus river treaty which India has with Pakistan for six rivers was assisted by the World Bank, but India has been accused of violating the treaty. According to the agreement, India would not be able to have any manmade structures on the common rivers. However, recently it has built the Navigation Project structure on the river Jhelum. Pakistan has protested vehemently. Yet when India builds similar structures on rivers shared with Bangladesh, the Bangladesh government, the civil society and the water experts remain mum.
It is ironic that while India itself is creating desertification in downstream Bangladesh through its dams and barrages, it protests loudly against China's Brahmaputra barrage construction.
It may be mentioned here that according to the UN Convention on the Law of the Non-Navigational Usage of International Watercourses (adopted in May 1997), there are three main compulsory requirements concerning the use of international river water. These are: the water must be used responsibly with acceptance of equal rights for all concerned; the normal flow of the river must not be hampered; and, if any project is to be undertaken on the rivers, all the countries of the river basin must be informed. Concerning the international rivers that flow through Bangladesh, the upstream countries are repeatedly violating this convention. Yet there is no awareness in this regard in Bangladesh, no discussions, no protest. And the Teesta Treaty which is around the corner has offer no solution regarding the barrages and dams being constructed.
Various Indian sources report that India is preparing to construct dams in six places in Sikkim and two in West Bengal in order to use Teesta's waters to generate electricity. In West Bengal, the proposed dams at Semco Ropeway and Coronation Bridge will be 27 metres and 39 metres high respectively. These dams will be used to generate 332 MW of electricity from Teesta. During the dry season, these dams will cause drought downstream and during the monsoons when the floodgates are opened, the Greater Rangpur area will be deluged.
__._,_.___
