Asia Energy (AEC) deal might be suspect and we should examine it to the bone, but does it mean we let our dealing with one company dictate our national policies? It is like saying that because the deal to build a bridge has not been transparent, let us tear it down! We are overlooking the benefits accruing to the nation by going in for the coal mining project weather with AEC or otherwise. A project of this magnitude does not only have direct benefits but also through a multiplier effect has ripple effects across the economy.

Few simple examples: say to transport the coal to its markets, the rail and port networks have to develop. Can you imagine what benefits it would give North Bengal? And what about the hundreds of people employed in the area to support those who have been employed by AEC. Shopkeepers and teacher; policemen and rickshaw pullers; cleaners and security guardsthe list goes on. And think of the ancillary industries that could be developed using coal as raw material. Project of this nature would have made Dinajpur prosperous and the nation with it.

We should examine what are the arguments put up against AEC's project:

1. Open Pit vs. Deep Shaft Mining: The big debate stems around the choice of mining methods. The productivity of the Open Pit mining (up to 90% as opposed to 20%) itself should have been sufficient an argument. But added to that there are other benefits of this method. For example, Shaft mining is notoriously hazardous to human health. Fire, cave-ins, gas leak, etc all lead to quite a few disasters each year across the world. Our Barapukaria mine itself is no exception. Another thing to note is that the coal basin in the area is quite deep underground. I believe more than 400 meters down. This makes shaft mining quite unproductive and unmanageable.

2. Ground Water Management: Experts have rightly pointed out that there is a major issue with ground water system. Apparently the deposit is under an underground aquifer. So to extract the coal all the water has to be pumped out. This creates two problems. Firstly the question of what to do with the excess water that comes up and secondly the general water level of the area might go down. Both these issues need to be managed. Despite what some people are saying, the water will not be just pumped out into the open. Creating an artificial lake and re-using the water in the mining process can be a solution. Why, an irrigation system for the North Bengal itself can be developed, bringing year-round farming to the entire drought (Monga) prone area. Interestingly there are examples in South India where Chennai's water supply comes from mines hundreds of miles away. We could perhaps solve the water crisis that has hit Dhaka through this method.

3. Environmental Management: The idea of soot falling all over the area and creating black skies is as old as the demise of the British mining industry. New environmental systems can easily mitigate such issues. Coal, unlike in shaft mining, is actually dug up by giant excavators and human exposure to it is minimum. Of course a proper environmental management procedure needs to be in place. I understand that the newer open pit quarries are not only up to Kyoto prescribed emission levels but can actually earn tradable credits.

4. Displacement of People: A side effect of this project will be the displacement of people. Now be it 40,000 (as AEC claims) or 100,000+ (as those opposing claim) there will be a lot of people losing their ancestral land. This is not a new thing. Building of any large infrastructure project will result in this. Say for example the new expressway between Dhaka and Chittagong that is being talked about; do you think this will only be on land currently owned by the government? However, proper compensation for this loss needs to happen. This is not only market price of the land being paid, but also finding long-term earning potential of those displaced. Jobs that will be created should of course go to those displaced first.

5. Vast Areas Required: I've heard a few arguments of how the national mining policies have guidelines of how much land a mine should or can use. One needs to re-examine this. Is it not common sense that we should utilise the maximum amount of land so that we have the maximum return? Also the non-coal earth that will be dug out needs to be stored in proper manner so that after all the coal has been brought out the area can be re-filled and re-claimed to be used as farm land.

6. Royalty Earning: there is a lot of confusion regarding this one. 20% vs. 6% the argument goes. Well for one the National Coal Policy has not been agreed upon as yet. We need to ensure that Bangladesh benefits to the most degree possible. If this means 20% or more so be it. We should not let this negotiation be done on anyone's terms but ours. Currently per se 6, 20 or 50 percent makes no sense without proper justifications backing it. Does it mean that we cannot have a new coal mining policy with new royalty levels? No. We need one that all stakeholders need to buy into.

7. Export of Coal: As in the case of Natural gas, we are rightly very possessive about what happens to our limited resources. Some argument has been tabled that most large coal producing countries do not export their coal. That is because of their domestic demands. Energy hungry countries like China need all that they can dig up. I agree that we need to find enough value addition that we can do to the product in our economy. We need to diversify our energy basket and take the pressure of producing electricity away from natural gas (as it has other high value addition use) and use coal (which in this case has a very rich calorific content) for this purpose. So if we can create a substantial domestic market at prices that will allow AEC to offset production costs and earn a reasonable profit, there is no reason why we should not limit, or stop, the amount of coal that they can export.

8. Debate: This argument is my favourite. I hear everyone say that the deal should not be "against national interest." Of course! Is that not a given? I am being bit naive here. Given Bangladesh's history, this has not always been the case. So, yes, a national debate should happen. And the deal needs to be transparent. But how can this happen? The government and the opposition should ideally be discussing it in the Jatiya Sangsad. After all, our elected representatives have been mandate by us to decide this matter. Unfortunately for our young democracy, our leaders have not agreed on being in the same room at the same time, let alone things that effect our lives! So where can this debate happen? Currently this is being conducted via proxy in the media.

While the scrutiny by our journalist friends have ensured we don't get a raw deal, it is not a very conducive or conclusive manner of debate. And running street battle in Phulbari is certainly not the way to go about the issue. Brings me back to square onedebate must happen, but where? Answer to this one I don't know.

At the end of a week of agitation, the Coal, Natural Gas, Port Protection Committee is claiming "people's victory" and celebrations are in the streets of Phulbari and our TV screens. But is it a victory for anyone and everyone? I believe, in the long run, it certainly is not for Bangladesh. We have put in doubt (if not back by half a decade) the much-needed foray into coal mining. A long shadow has been cast on our exemplary record when it comes to the country's sovereign dealings. Further FDI in areas of infrastructure and basic industry development has taken a few leaps back. The country's "risk premium" has gone up quite a few notches!

And scariest thing of all, we have given the people idea that by being able to create a false fervour we can achieve almost anything. So when we give into students protesting and demanding that examination dates be postponed so that they can watch football; when we give into employees and run a loss-making airline; when we give into agitating typists and ensure the growth of bureaucracy; we also give out a signal that the loudest (and not always the brightest) is mightiest! Unfortunately there are times when people do get it wrong.

Nazim Farhan Choudhury is a freelance contributor to The Daily Star. You can read more of his writings at http://nazimfarhan.blogspot.com.