Indo-Bangla maritime boundary talks
THE fact of the matter is that no tangible results have been arrived at by Bangladesh and India at the end of their three-day conference on maritime boundary issues. And yet both the sides at the meeting held in Dhaka have described the outcome as fruitful, which is just as well. When one considers the fact that these talks took place after an inordinately long gap of twenty-eight years, one will surely describe the event as encouraging, to an extent. It must be noted that such issues as maritime boundaries are of crucial significance in relations between states. Indeed, they have international significance given that they are linked inextricably with such legalities as the Law of the Sea. The question therefore arises as to why Bangladesh and India, being such close neighbours, had to wait nearly three decades before getting down to discussing the issue.
All said and done, though, it has to be acknowledged that the very fact of the talks having taken place should be considered as progress of a kind. For its part, Bangladesh has presented its case rather forcefully, as was only to be expected, given especially the compulsions it has been facing as a result of the absence of a deal with India on the issue. That the meeting went off without rancour and that the two sides spoke of it in positive terms and in candid fashion is indicative of a healthy development that could be in the works. In this context, one notes that the expert committees, which surely will apprise their governments of the nature of the recent talks, will meet again. We would like to point out here that the committees should be meeting soon and fairly regularly rather than leaving the issue hanging for another long spell of time. Indeed, the recent meeting should have thrown up a programmed course of negotiations for the two countries. For the immediate future, such a course of action is essential because issues such as maritime and land border demarcation always demand a sustained, updated state of talks between the sides involved.
The urgency of a solution to the problem is particularly important for Bangladesh because of the economic imperatives before it. So far, the absence of an accord with India has prevented it from utilising the resources that are rightfully its own. As a matter of fact, a sense of deprivation where tapping its own gas, fishing and other resources is concerned has logically been working in Bangladesh's perspective. Such a gnawing issue ought not to be there between two close neighbours. And it will not be if Dhaka and Delhi are able, quickly and effectively, to work out a solution to the maritime issue.
Comments