Much ado about nothing

Amitava Mukherjee

(amitavamukherjee253@gmail.com)

In a sense, the visit of Sheikh Hasina Wazed, the Prime Minister of Bangladesh, to India can aptly be described as an instance of missing out on a great opportunity. Plenty of Memoranda of Understanding and agreements have been signed, but the most important one at this moment—the sharing of the Teesta waters—has only been touched on peripherally. Conservation and management of the Teesta—these few words spelt out after the Narendra Modi-Hasina Wazed meeting in Delhi—are not enough to solve the complex Teesta river water sharing issue.

Of the two words, management has a bit more meaning because time has come to divert attention from just sharing river water to total management of the Teesta system. Everywhere, water supply is getting inadequate day by day, and therefore, proper usage of water is the solution.

But how can it be done with regard to the Teesta River system? Which party will get what? This is a complex foreign policy issue. The Indian side has given ample proof that they are unequal to the job. The Bangladesh side is more clever. So far, they have underplayed certain facts, which go against the quantum of demand they have staked for Teesta waters. But in foreign policy, securing national interests is the supreme goal. Hasina Wazed tried to do that even though she knew that her country was on weaker ground.

What did Hasina Wazed do to secure her goal? She simply held her cards close to her and deliberately played a trump card to stump India. This card was from China. Right from the days of the days of the freedom struggle, there has been a powerful anti-India and pro-China lobby in Bangladeshi politics. The Awami League is no exception. It also has an anti-India faction within it. True Hasina is known to be a pro-India political figure. She has reasons to be so. But she has no reservations about using the China card according to the demands of the situation. So, around a week before coming to India, she left an indirect hint that Bangladesh might consider taking China’s $1 billion offer for the development of the Teesta River system.

This created havoc in the amateur diplomatic establishment in New Delhi’s South Block. It suddenly awoke from a slumber. The Teesta issue has been hanging in the balance for a long time, and it is well known that without the cooperation of Mamata Banerjee, the West Bengal Chief Minister, the Government of India will not be able to move an inch forward towards signing any accord with the Bangladesh government. Even after remaining fully aware of it, India’s External Affairs Ministry, under the ‘able’ leadership of S. Jaishankar, did not do anything to untie the knot.

So, Narendra Modi, the Indian Prime Minister, announced the formation of a technical committee that would go to Bangladesh for conservation and management of the Teesta system without uttering a word on the sharing of the Teesta water, which is the principal demand of Bangladesh.

But why has Hasina Wazed agreed to it? It is simply because the Chinese proposal was also unworkable. It proposed to decrease the width of the river to one-fourth of Teesta’s original expanse. By doing so, around 171 square kilometres of land can be reclaimed, and those can be put to use for solar power generation, agriculture, and townships. The proposal also aims to increase the depth of the river to 10 metres from the present five metres. In a word, it is a disastrous proposal.

How many of us have really heard of a decision to decrease the natural width of any river? In the case of the Teesta, it will mean doubling up the velocity of the river water, even if the depth is increased. This will result in erosion of the river bank, which will also make the embankments unstable.

The solution lies elsewhere. Bangladesh must realise that its demand to share the Teesta water available at India’s Gazaldoba barrage on a 50:50 basis is unrealistic. Arithmetically, Bangladesh’s water resource is greater than that of India if the two countries’ respective sizes are taken into account. Rather, Dhaka should make effective use and conservation of its water resources as wastage of this valuable treasure is rampant in that country.

The need is to augment the supply of water at Gazoldoba. That can be done in two ways: by conserving the huge amount of monsoon rainwater in the upper reaches of the Teesta in Sikkim and then connecting the Sankosh river, coming from Bhutan, with the Teesta. For this purpose, plenty of small dams can be constructed in Sikkim, which will entail less submergence of areas and even less displacement of population.

But before reaching a satisfactory formula, facts should be made clear. First, the catchment area of the Teesta is much bigger in India than it is in Bangladesh. So the bigger supply of water to the river comes from India, not  Bangladesh. Secondly, the water requirement in India is greater. Just one estimate will prove it. In response to India’s Gazoldoba barrage, Bangladesh has also constructed a barrage at a place named Dalia in the Neelphamari district. Here, Bangladesh’s Teesta Irrigation Project had fixed a target of 7,50,000 hectares of command area and 5,40,000 hectares of irrigable area. Even if the irrigation target is taken into account, Bangladesh’s demand for an equal distribution at Gazoldoba becomes debatable as India seeks to provide irrigation to 9,22,000 hectares of area in six districts in the northern part of West Bengal.

So the stress should be on the augmentation of water, and it is not clear whether the Modi-Hasina talk has taken note of it. Bangladesh has certain compulsions as its north-western part, particularly the Rangpur division, is known as the country’s rice bowl. So we can find widespread use of high yielding varieties of paddy seeds here, together with fast extension of irrigation systems. In fact, the intensity of irrigation in the north-western part of Bangladesh is much greater than in other parts of the country. While doing this, Dhaka should have taken into account the availability of water. It did not do that.

So, a coordinated, serious approach is now necessary, not any cavalier one. The mandarins of the South Block must realise that Bangladesh is a very sensitive country, and any fiasco over Teesta might have serious political repercussions there. Perhaps Hasina Wazed has realised that her India tour has not been able to deliver much for her country.

So, she has already started singing in a different tune by saying that both China and India have given separate proposals for the Teesta system, and Bangladesh should accept only the one that is good for the people of the country.

So, China is very much in the race, and if its project proposal is accepted in spite of its many limitations, then the reason behind it will be political.

(The author is a senior journalist and commentator.)