AFTER what might seem an eternity, External Affairs Minister I.K. Gujral's visit to Bangladesh raised hopes that the longstanding Ganga water-sharing row is nearing an end. But behind the show of optimism, many questions, relating to the nitty-gritty of the deal, are yet to be answered. This, despite Gujral's statement to journalists at the conclusion of his four-day trip on September 9: "I am now going back with the belief that a new chapter in our relations has opened up.... We should not be prisoners of the past.
Both the governments do not carry the baggage of the past." Gujral's statement was welcomed in almost all quarters, even by the otherwise sceptic press corps. But this has a lot to do with the changed political scenario in both Bangladesh and India. Even before Gujral arrived in Dhaka, the first visit by an Indian minister since the government of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina was installed
last June, an air of conviviality replaced the fog of suspicion that usually descends on high-level visits from Delhi. What made the difference this time is the fact that Gujral has been able to convey an impression that India sincerely wants to improve relations with Bangladesh. And vice versa—the perception in New Delhi is that it can do business with the Awami League government, something that was not quite possible during the regime of Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) leader Khaleda Zia, who often seemed to be doing Pakistan's bidding against India.
It is, however, Gujral's emphasis on find-ing a solution to the Ganga water-sharing dispute before the next dry season which begins in January that has generated euphoria in Bangladesh. Indo-Bangladesh relations have over the years been marred by a number of bilateral issues and till recently there was a feeling in Dhaka that New Delhi had no desire to resolve the problems—which were being used to keep Bangladesh under its thumb.
바카라 웹사이트"We've come here with an open mind
and we'll do our best to resolve all the issues that concern Bangladesh, including water, trade and commerce," Gujral said.
Hopes soared for a number of reasons. First, in the broader sense, there appears to be an enormous fund of political will on the part of the two new governments in Dhaka and Delhi to take initiatives for enhancing mutual understanding and cooperation. Second, for the first time, Delhi has not linked the water-sharing issue with any other matter and decided that it must be addressed on its own merit.
Third, the inclusion of Somnath Chatterjee, Chitta Basu, and Geeta Muk-herjee, the three prominent Lok Sabha members from West Bengal, in the Indian delegation reflected the good intention of New Delhi towards resolving the Farakka problem. West Bengal is vital for settling the issue as it must be convinced that Bangladesh is indeed parched for Ganga water and it must get its due share.
Fourth, India has not raised the demand of transit facilities from Bangladesh in the official talks. "I've not discussed the issue
of transit with anybody. This government (of India) has never demanded transit. I do not know about the past," Gujral told a questioner at the news conference.
His categorical assertion allayed the fear among many that India would extract transit facilities from Bangladesh in exchange for a water-sharing agreement. The transit issue is politically explosive—Bangladeshis feel that that would be an Indian ploy to subjugate Bangladesh by using the facilities for military purposes.
Dropping the transit issue has also apparently convinced the Bangladesh leadership that India is genuinely interested in settling the water problem and that it doesn't want to use it as a bargaining chip.
THIS perhaps explains why Bangladesh Foreign Minister Abdus Samad Azad sounded so optimistic. "Highest priority has been given to resolving the water problem and it would be worked out before the onset of the coming lean season," Azad told journalists. Gujral, standing beside him, concurred: "I fully endorse his views." Samad is travelling to Calcutta on September 17 to meet West Bengal Chief Minister Jyoti Basu to discuss the water problem.
There is unanimity in Indian policy making circles that it is in India's interest that the Awami League government survives. The last five years were considered quite bad in terms of bilateral relations. The Khaleda Zia government was more interested in keeping the water issue alive for its own political purposes. It showed no interest in solving this issue in spite of making a lot of noise about it. In fact, India thrice offered dates to Bangladesh last year for a meeting of the joint river water commission, but in vain. Begum Zia finally went to the United Nations and attacked India on the water issue. This continuous harangue had helped project India as the big bully in the neighbourhood—perfectly suiting Pakistani interests.
Yet, behind all the optimism and euphoria, scepticism persists, especially among political analysts and experts. They contend that the visit produced nothing substantial except a declaration of intent as far as settling the water issue is concerned. "I'm not hopeful," said an expert, who has been involved in water talks with India for more than a decade. What has injected a dose of uncertainty is the statement issued after the talks: the two sides agreed that a joint committee of experts would be convened by the foreign ministers of the two countries. They would examine Bangladesh's exact requirement, how much water is available and the ground reality on both sides during the dry season.
Here lies the catch, say Bangladesh experts. There was no mention of the quantum of water Bangladesh has sought. According to official sources, Sheikh Hasina is believed to have told Gujral that it would be politically unacceptable in the country if Bangladesh got less than 35,000 cusecs. Khaleda Zia, former prime minister and leader of the opposition BNP, has said her party would not accept any deal that would yield less than 34,000 cusecs which her husband Gen. Ziaur Rehman sought from India in 1977. But Gujral reportedly made no commitment on the quantum.
Indian sources too say Gujral refrained from giving a firm figure to the Bangladesh
government. While both the Water Ministry and the West Bengal government seem to be in a flexible mood, it remains to be seen how far they're willing to go. Bihar and Uttar Pradesh are also players in this game.
The problem for India is the amount of water Bangladesh is seeking. Hasina has indeed conveyed that she'd want something that is within the parameters of the 1977 agreement or with minor variations. Otherwise, it will be politically impossible
for her to get it accepted in her country.
Says the Bangladesh expert: "I don't suspect any dearth of political goodwill in Delhi, but the moment you leave the matter to experts it will most likely get bogged down again." If they really wanted a solution, he said, the two ministers should have agreed on the quantum first and then instructed the experts to work out the mechanism.
He also wanted to know why the Indian irrigation secretary was not included in the delegation. Quipped another expert who also requested anonymity: "I don't think there'll be any quick fix. My experience shows it would be very difficult to arrive at a solution at the expert level."
바카라 웹사이트But Gujral is optimistic: "It shall be done this time. Don't worry." To further expedite the matter, Bangladesh Irrigation Minister Abdur Razzak is coming to New Delhi next month.
India sees long term benefits in settling this dispute. One, Bangladesh has assured that it will control the activities of various anti-India groups, many of which are believed to have support from official intelligence agencies, which in turn work in tandem with Pakistani intelligence agencies. Two, it could eventually lead to India getting transit facilities through Bangladesh to the North-east.
바카라 웹사이트It is not clear whether the water accord being envisaged will be a long term one. But this time both India and Bangladesh talked of sharing the water instead of sharing and augmenting it. Both sides have realised that augmenting the water availability in the Ganga is not feasible right now, politically, and that Nepal will have to be involved.
If Gujral is proved right, an agreement could be signed within the next few months. According to a Bangladesh Foreign Ministry official, Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina is likely to travel to Delhi for a joint signing ceremony with her Indian counterpart H.D. Deve Gowda.
Apart from the water issue, Bangladesh and India also discussed trade and economic cooperation, security issues, repatriation of Chakma refugees, exchange of enclaves and demarcation of land boundaries, and simplification of the Indian visa form. Gujral announced a 50 per cent reduction of customs duties on a range of export items from pharmaceuticals to artificial flowers from Bangladesh. Actually, Gujral wants to reduce the tariff to zero per cent but the Commerce Ministry is apparently not too willing. There is a strong case for this because the trade imbalance is huge.
The top priority is solving the water row. And if both the governments keep to their commitments, bureaucratic wranglings notwithstanding, bilateral relations might touch a new high for the neighbours.
