ANY agreement on sharing of the river Teesta should entail proper negotiations, ensuring Bangladesh’s due rights as a lower riparian country, says Professor Asif Nazrul of Dhaka University. The law professor also laid emphasis on quantum, as opposed to percentage, of Teesta water.
‘Our bureaucrats seem obsessed with percentage,’ he said in an interview with New Age on September ***. ‘Some say 40 per cent and others 30 per cent. However, we need to know first how much water is available at a given period at a given point.’
‘If 50 cusecs of water is available of water is available at a certain point, its 50 per cent would mean very little for us,’ he added. ‘We need an amount of water that ensures uninterrupted irrigation of the Teesta-based projects during dry season.
Nazrul believes there is the need for a coordinated management of the Teesta by all countries in the basin. ‘A basin-wise committee is needed for the management, development, utilisation and protection of shared water flow. All the countries in the basin should be involved in it.’
He acknowledged that such a process might take 5-10 years for completion and said there can be an interim agreement in the meanwhile.
Nazrul was especially critical of the contradictory and obscure statements by the ministers and the prime minister’s advisers on the transit issue.
‘The foreign minister said one day that any deal on transit was yet to be signed and a few days later the prime minister’s foreign affairs adviser claimed that provision of transit already existed in the laws and no deal was required for transport of Indian goods through Bangladesh,’ he said.
He also criticised the adviser’s remarks that Bangladesh should not seek share in the amount that India could save after getting transit facilities. ‘Such statements are against the country’s interests.’
He was of the opinion that connectivity should be spread to South Asian countries and beyond.
Asif also came down heavily on the government’s claim that it did not sign a transit deal as India was not ready to sign the Teesta agreement. ‘Bangladesh has the moral and legal rights to Teesta water but for India it will be a privilege if Bangladesh allows it transit facility,’ he said.
‘These cannot be compared. Yes, transit facilities can be allowed to India through proper negotiation but it has to ensure benefit for the people of both the countries. We want a win-win situation for the people of both the countries,’ he said.
On India’s decision to grant duty-free access for 46 Bangladeshi commodities to Indian market, he observed that such duty waiver would do little for Bangladesh.
Nazrul laid stress on removing all non-tariff barriers for access of Bangladeshi commodities to the Indian market for reducing the trade imbalance. ‘Without removing the barriers Bangladesh would not be benefited,’ he said.
On the land border agreement, Asif said signing of the agreement could not be considered completed till the Indian parliament ratifies it. ‘Once they were claiming that a small part of border was yet to demarcated so they cannot ratify it. Now, there is no such barrier, the remaining 6.5 kilomteres of border has been demarcated. So, where is the obstruction to ratify the agreement?’ he said.
Nazrul was surprised about the Bangladesh government’s role in signing a deal for a Tk 1 billion credit. ‘If it was essential, the same amount of loan could be achieved from the IMF or the World Bank or other agencies. It makes no sense why such a deal was signed. It raises question as to whose interests are protected by it,’ he said.
He said the Bangladesh government had met all the demands of India but the Indians seemed not too serious to meet the major demands of Bangladesh.
‘All they are giving are mere assurances. It is not a balanced friendship. It is exploitation (by a powerful country) of weak country and its less efficient government and bureaucracy,’ he said.
‘Our bureaucrats seem obsessed with percentage,’ he said in an interview with New Age on September ***. ‘Some say 40 per cent and others 30 per cent. However, we need to know first how much water is available at a given period at a given point.’
‘If 50 cusecs of water is available of water is available at a certain point, its 50 per cent would mean very little for us,’ he added. ‘We need an amount of water that ensures uninterrupted irrigation of the Teesta-based projects during dry season.
Nazrul believes there is the need for a coordinated management of the Teesta by all countries in the basin. ‘A basin-wise committee is needed for the management, development, utilisation and protection of shared water flow. All the countries in the basin should be involved in it.’
He acknowledged that such a process might take 5-10 years for completion and said there can be an interim agreement in the meanwhile.
Nazrul was especially critical of the contradictory and obscure statements by the ministers and the prime minister’s advisers on the transit issue.
‘The foreign minister said one day that any deal on transit was yet to be signed and a few days later the prime minister’s foreign affairs adviser claimed that provision of transit already existed in the laws and no deal was required for transport of Indian goods through Bangladesh,’ he said.
He also criticised the adviser’s remarks that Bangladesh should not seek share in the amount that India could save after getting transit facilities. ‘Such statements are against the country’s interests.’
He was of the opinion that connectivity should be spread to South Asian countries and beyond.
Asif also came down heavily on the government’s claim that it did not sign a transit deal as India was not ready to sign the Teesta agreement. ‘Bangladesh has the moral and legal rights to Teesta water but for India it will be a privilege if Bangladesh allows it transit facility,’ he said.
‘These cannot be compared. Yes, transit facilities can be allowed to India through proper negotiation but it has to ensure benefit for the people of both the countries. We want a win-win situation for the people of both the countries,’ he said.
On India’s decision to grant duty-free access for 46 Bangladeshi commodities to Indian market, he observed that such duty waiver would do little for Bangladesh.
Nazrul laid stress on removing all non-tariff barriers for access of Bangladeshi commodities to the Indian market for reducing the trade imbalance. ‘Without removing the barriers Bangladesh would not be benefited,’ he said.
On the land border agreement, Asif said signing of the agreement could not be considered completed till the Indian parliament ratifies it. ‘Once they were claiming that a small part of border was yet to demarcated so they cannot ratify it. Now, there is no such barrier, the remaining 6.5 kilomteres of border has been demarcated. So, where is the obstruction to ratify the agreement?’ he said.
Nazrul was surprised about the Bangladesh government’s role in signing a deal for a Tk 1 billion credit. ‘If it was essential, the same amount of loan could be achieved from the IMF or the World Bank or other agencies. It makes no sense why such a deal was signed. It raises question as to whose interests are protected by it,’ he said.
He said the Bangladesh government had met all the demands of India but the Indians seemed not too serious to meet the major demands of Bangladesh.
‘All they are giving are mere assurances. It is not a balanced friendship. It is exploitation (by a powerful country) of weak country and its less efficient government and bureaucracy,’ he said.
BY : Abdullah Juberee.
