By Farzana Tamannur (TON Bangladesh)

Sharing river water between neighbors is a complex task as it generates upstream-downstream supply disputes. Having the highest number of common rivers with its main neighbor – India, Bangladesh has to face common water sharing clashes with that country. To resolve disputes over water sharing, Bangladesh started dialogs with India after its liberation, but the country has been facing challenges in reaching an agreement on a formula and mechanism to share the common water.

In 2021, with India and Bangladesh all set to memorialize their 50 years of diplomatic bonds right from the time of Liberation War; the Ganga Water Treaty (GWT) contracted at the Silver Jubilee of their bilateral association (1996) till date remains the only water sharing treaty that both countries have decided to. Though, numerous temporary contracts in the form of Memorandum of Understandings (MoUs) are in place, the lack of treaties in this domain highlight the unexploited potential that might be reached collectively which would in turn deliver impetus for improved engagement and collaboration in other aspects of bilateral relationships as well as.

With the work on Barrage ongoing, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman after founding the government in Bangladesh raised the matter on a crucial basis with his Indian counterpart, Indira Gandhi. The resulting significance attached, by both sides, to the concerned issue could be understood by scrutinizing the ‘Treaty of Friendship, Collaboration and Peace’ contracted in 1972 immediately afterward Bangladesh’s freedom. The Treaty laid the formal facility for constituting Indo-Bangladesh Joint Rivers Commission (JRC). The JRC was tasked with the aim of devising an outline for expanding the water supply through sustainable and effective use of the resources available at both sides of the Barrage.

It was only in 1977 that a 5 year contract was reached by both sides. The highlight of this planning was the ‘Warranty Clause’ which was a vast relief for Bangladesh as it confirmed them at least 80% of its share of river Ganga through the thinnest period (from April 21 to May 31). Remarkably, the MoU which succeeded this agreement in 1982 did not have any reference of this section. Rather to India’s benefit, another clause usually referred to as the ‘burden sharing’ clause was added. This meant that both sides would equally face the brunt of exceptionally low flow of the river Ganga. Also, the 1985 MoU which was contracted for three years, followed the suit of the previous MoU in terms of cancelling the Guarantee Clause. It was through these historical conditions that the common Bangladeshi psyche initiated perceiving India as a hydro hegemon of the area which is still a very strong idea in Bangladesh. In fact, even the GWT which is based upon the ideologies of ‘equity, fairness as well as no harm to either party’ has faced criticism ever since it came into force.

The Teesta River, a branch of the Brahmaputra, initiates in the Teesta Kangse glacier and flows over the state of Sikkim and West Bengal beforehand entering Bangladesh. It has been delayed in conflict since 1947 when the catchment regions of the Teesta were assigned to India. After the setting up of the India-Bangladesh Joint Rivers Commission in 1972, an ad hoc preparation on sharing of Teesta waters was prepared in 1983, with India getting 39 percent of the water plus Bangladesh 36 percent of it. The Teesta river issue assumed importance after the end of the Ganga Water Treaty in 1996. Negotiations among India and Bangladesh on the sharing of the river waters initiated soon after but have made limited development.

However, India has constantly shied away from addressing the Teesta water subject and this has annoyed Bangladesh. Despite the friendly relationship between the two countries, India and Bangladesh have not conversed the river water issues (counting the Teesta issue) over their common platform, the Joint River Commission (JRC) in the previous 10 years. Similarly, Daily Star had mourned that despite sharing 54 rivers India and Bangladesh had not contracted a single bilateral treaty on water sharing in the previous quarter of a century.

Due to India’s stubbornness, Bangladesh had tried to cultivate China and was “considering a proposal from China to dredge plus embank big portions of the Teesta River so that it formed a single controllable channel.” India had opposed the project as it did not want Chinese technicians close to the “Chicken Neck” corridor nearby Siliguri that links mainland India to its northeast. Though, leading Bangladeshi scholars have asked India’s position on the issue and implored Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina to go onward with the project with the Chinese.

India also has much to gain from the decision of the treaty. If India signs the treaty, it will be capable to send an affirmative signal to all stakeholders inside Bangladeshi society and lessen fears that exist in the minds of ordinary Bangladeshi about India’s purposes. India will be able to cement its situation as an all-weather friend of Bangladesh in the neighborhood plus in due course of time, it will be capable to further develop a healthy economic and strategic corporation without worrying about the party in power in Bangladesh. Afterward the Land Boundary Contract that was signed in 2014, it is this Teesta water sharing contract that will be remembered as part of the Shonali adhyaya of India-Bangladesh relations. Nonetheless India must act now.

The Way Ahead

Bangladesh and India should jointly invite China to the negotiating table plus seek long-term contracts concerning data sharing and permissible levels of water flow diversion. Bangladesh and India must not delay aiming toward these objectives because China presently views diverting the Brahmaputra as cost inefficient; this might easily change in the future. Therefore, India and Bangladesh have an interest to reach a contract with China that might control its behavior before a prospective water crisis or future energy demand convinces Beijing that diverting the Brahmaputra further is in its best interests.