THE Tipaimukh controversy spurred a wave of protests that highlighted a kind of ineptness and indecision of the government for too long a period on a vital matter for our survival. It also focused the confusion that existed in our foreign policy objectives from the beginning, particularly after the SAARC was set up with a set of lofty ambitions much of which remained unfulfilled over the last decade and a half.
The confusion became so compounded as to be best defined now as ambivalent. The policy conundrum now needs to be discussed threadbare, assessed critically, and a consensus worked out unambiguously. It is important that it is achieved in a bi-partisan way that may help us survive as a nation.
A revisit to our foreign policy objectives was necessary as the second largest member-state of the SAARC, Pakistan, was in a disarray with internal strife and the Taliban terror which, in all probability, was to be a long-drawn affair. The delicate balance that the regional small states including Bangladesh had strived to maintain so far between India and Pakistan had now become obsolete and would appear misdirected in the current geo-political and geo-strategic realities. It is imperative that this crucial question be discussed and debated, and an acceptable consensus evolved without any ambiguity.
The foremost of the aching questions of hitherto unresolved disputes with India is the Tipaimukh dam and the diversion of trans-border river waters upstream.
This is an extremely sensitive issue because India helped us gain our independence from a vicious colonial rule -- aimed at wiping out our national identity, resources and subjugating us in a worse way than the British. India suffered a colossal loss of men, material and money.
India might have thought a secular and sovereign Bangladesh could curb terrorism in India and at the same time lessen, if not remove, the constraint of a physical barrier of the then East Pakistan between India's mainland and the far-flung eastern part in former Assam province and Tripura. When it was found that even after liberation, this constraint continued to remain, it caused dismay in India, and it resorted to 'pressure tactics' -- widely practiced in international diplomacy.
Lately, in order to circumvent these constraints with a transit route, a rail-link between Akhaura and Agartala and use of Chittagong port for the eastern states became vital for them in the wake of a growing wide-spread insurgency in most of the seven eastern states, euphemistically called 'seven sisters.'
We seem to be in a dilemma in our dealings with India. The most immediate issue that worries us now is the Tipaimukh Dam across the Barak river just a kilometer upstream from Jakigunj border in Sylhet for hydro-electricity. The river, on this side of the border divides into two -- the Surma (350 km long) and the Kushiara (110km long) providing the life-line for the vast population in entire Sylhet Division.
In addition to this dam, another barrage is proposed to be built further upstream about 100km from the border on the same river at a place called Fulertal . These two -- the dam and the barrage -- are feared to stymie the Surma and Kushiara water flow in Bangladesh leading to virtual desertification of the Brahmaputra basin in the country's eastern part just as the Farakka in 1976 did to the drought-prone Ganges-Brahmaputra river basin on the west..
Consequently, there was an outcry all over the country.
The government, however, was a little tardy in its response. When it did, it was a frail attempt to play to the gallery. A hastily constituted parliamentary delegation drawn mostly from the Treasury Bench lacking the credibility of parliamentary team and its co-committing weight was sent to the barrage site, but they could not land due to inclement weather. No wonder, Khaleda Zia ridiculed it as a 'sight-seeing tour'. For the India-bashing Opposition, this was an opportunity to muster wider support for them.
True, we are a sovereign nation having the freedom of action, but the fact remains that we have the disadvantage of being a small state with a very large population beside giant-size India. A weaker economy and widespread unemployment and poverty make us further vulnerable. We are encircled on three sides by India. India is a very large and strong country in South Asia with a nuclear storehouse. Economically, it is developing at a very high rate.
It may, therefore be wise to maintain a balance of good relations with India but with equal advantage. This, at times may be tight-rope walking, but 'give and take' relations may be the best option.
Reverting to Tipaimukh, ours is a riverine country with 57 trans-boundary rivers, 54 of them with India and three with Myanmar. A significant quantity of the water flow from these rivers is withdrawn and diverted upstream by both countries for irrigation and other purposes reducing their normal flow in Bangladesh. The Farakka Barrage is a notable example.
It has been seen in the past, in the dry season, the quantity pledged to be given to Bangladesh is not given. According to the Farakka agreement, a joint Indo-Bangladesh Joint Rivers Commission (JRC) was to oversee the just and timely implementation of the agreement every three months. There had been no meetings of the JRC at all for the last four years. Repeated reminders for the meetings and reportedly SOS from Bangladesh side had gone in vain. Another agreement was requested for River Teesta by the Bangladesh government to which India remained indifferent. On the other hand, India had built another barrage on the north side of the river rendering the Bangladesh barrage to be of little use.
For the sake of good relations, it is imperative for both sides to follow the principle of "give and take" to resolve the disputed issues. Now is the right time to do this when new governments have come to power in both the countries winning a huge mandate from the people. This is a challenge and an opportunity for both Manmohan Singh and Sheikh Hasina. In doing this, both the governments should try to take along Opposition with them by 'feel good' pleasantries and charm.
It is a happy augury, that our Foreign Minister's recent meeting with her counterpart in New Delhi has broken the ice after a long period of mutual misgivings and fear. It is reported that India has now agreed to ' facilitate' Bangladesh transit to Nepal and Bhutan. The use of Chittagong port by India for its eastern states was 'also discussed', though no final announcement was made on either side. A formal agreement is likely to be signed when the Prime Minister visits India sometime this year.
Though there is no mention of the Tipaimukh dam in the joint communiqué, but the need for a 'separate agreement on Teesta is recognized', and an immediate joint 'hydrological survey' has been agreed to. If this happens, this will be the second water management treaty with India. This will also help restore mutual trust and confidence.
Each side agreed to allow container cargo to be carried through its territory by rail and water routes as it used to be before Indo-Pak War in 1965. It is noteworthy to recall that in those Pakistan days, Railway and Inland Water Transport Authority used to earn a good deal of revenue from this India cross-traffic.
India has unilaterally offered in principle a credit line for Bangladesh Railway for its projects of procuring locomotives and coaches. It also offered to construct the Akhaura-Agartala rail link. This is a kind of a 'package deal' which the government claims will be beneficial for our country, whereas the Opposition has rejected it as 'a sell-out'. One wonders if the two opposite views could be reconciled and inter-woven keeping adequate safeguards for our national pride and sovereignty and thus save the country from another turmoil.
The discerning eye may, however, see a silver lining in the exchange of smiles and niceties between the two national leaders at an Iftar party during the month of Ramadan at the Sena Kunjo. A day later, the Prime Minister appealed to the Opposition leader to return to Parliament, implicitly meaning perhaps that smaller issues of disputes could be sorted out by discussion. If this is responded to, it could turn the tide.
Hemayetuddin Ahmed is a former Director General of External Publicity.