There is no doubt that Teesta water and Tipaimukh dam issues will cut into her votes when Bangladesh goes to polls.
Popularity is a rare quality which begins to elude the rulers when  they need it the most. Bangladesh Prime Minister Shaikh Hasina is in a  similar situation. Her stock has shrunk at a time when she requires it  badly. People had returned her with a sweeping majority. Yet they  increasingly feel, three years after her being in power, that her  non-governance, if not mis-governance, has only made their life  miserable.
After staying in Bangladesh for five days I find that she has not  only lost her sheen but also the trust she enjoyed once. People expected  her to deliver but there is nothing they can recognise as her  achievement. For example, she promised electricity and substantially  supplied it at great cost by borrowing from overstretched banks. But  people wanted to see large power stations to come up since their demand  is ever rising. What India promised is yet nowhere in the horizon.
Alleviating poverty with limited resources is always a challenge, but  she does not appear to be even trying to meet it. She looks content  with whatever she has done and runs down the critics. “Cut electricity  of those who complain about its shortage sitting in their  air-conditioned rooms,” she said when newspapers and television networks  pointed out about the shortage. 
No doubt, Hasina has contained terrorism and there is a sense of  relief that the nation is not at the mercy of fundamentalists like  Bangla Bhai. Secularism is her commitment and she pursues it  relentlessly. She has retrieved the ground her opponent, Khaleda Zia,  president of Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) had lost, knowingly and  purposely. The credit also goes to Hasina that anti-India sentiment  which the BNP fostered has more or less disappeared. And she has taken  unilateral steps like transit which gives quick access to India to its  northeastern states.
But has New Delhi reciprocated to the extent she has gone worries  even the pro-India elements? The loan offered is all tied with Indian  imports and technical know-how. The border between the countries has not  been demarcated and there is no move to transfer the enclaves which  Prime Minister Manmohan Singh agreed to do during his visit to Dhaka a  few weeks ago. (Assam is already up in arms on the enclaves).
The biggest disappointment with India is the denial of sharing of  Teesta river water. They feel they lost it because of political  wrangling between New Delhi and Kolkata. (West Bengal Chief Minister  Mamata Banerjee, who was on board on the formula of sharing the water  changed her mind at the eleventh hour and appointed a River Commission  to look into the matter). Some quarters believe that the Teesta water  would eventually come just as the flow from the Farakka barrage did  through the enlightened approach of the then West Bengal Chief Minister  Jyoti Basu. Again it depends on Mamata because the Manmohan Singh  government is too dependent on her Lok Sabha members for survival to put  pressure on the Teesta issue.
The blow was somewhat losing its impact when the reported signing by  India of a contract for building the Tipaimukh dam on the Barak river in  Manipur, a northeastern state, came to light. It was a BBC story which  lacked confirmation first but was later supported by other sources. The  contract was signed by Delhi and the Manipur government on October 23,  one month after Manmohan Singh’s visit to Dhaka. What has hurt  Bangladesh is the violation of understanding given by Delhi not to do  anything that would affect Dhaka.
The explanation given by New Delhi after 72 hours is that the dam  meant to check flooding will not divert water. This has not assuaged the  feelings of Bangladeshis. That the dam may destroy the environment is a  separate point of complaint. As many as 52 rivers from India flow into  Bangladesh. I think that on the major ones New Delhi should give a clear  understanding to Dhaka that they will not be in any way touched without  consulting it.
The beleaguered Hasina has further lost prestige. Her efforts to  befriend India have got rebuffed. There is no doubt that the Teesta  water and Tipaimukh will cut into her votes when Bangladesh goes to  polls two years later. The fallout will benefit Khaleda Zia who is  sitting pretty and not issuing statement after statement as she did in  the past. But are the Bangladeshis a shuttlecock to be tossed from one  side to another—from Hasina to Khaleda?
They feel exasperated and helpless. They openly talk about the  military takeover. Military too is far from happy by the capricious  postings and transfers by the Hasina government. But the chances of any  coup are very few. The military support to the caretaker government more  than three years ago was of no avail. The armed forces could neither  clean up the administration nor build up an alternative to the two  leaders.
Friendship with India was a straw to which the people in Bangladesh  have clung. Today they wonder if they have any future with India. China  which is trying its best to woo the country is not to their liking  because Beijing is neither democratic nor pluralistic, the two  principles to which they have stuck since the founding of Bangladesh by  Banga Bandhu Shaikh Mujib-ur Rahman. They would want to build their  country according to their own genius.
Bangladesh, like India, is also reeking with corruption. And there  too the nation has been appalled to find the top, the creamy layer,  hobnobbing with the rulers for more concessions and more concealment of  their misdeeds. Even the World Bank has threatened to withdraw its  assistance for constructing the Padma Bridge fearing corruption. Things  may yet sort out now that the Prime Minister’s office has taken the  matter in its own hand.
Hasina bothers little because the haze of popularity has not yet  awakened her to the reality. She believes that a few newspapers are  tarnishing her good name. She does not realise that the papers’  circulation is in proportion to their credibility. They could not be  leading papers if they had reported or interpreted the situation  wrongly. But then, like the communists, she forgives the renegades but  not critics
BY :  Kuldip Nayar.
