Visit Cyber_Bangladesh's POLITICS section for NEWS on FARAKKA AND TIPAIMUKH DAM

Farakka issue -- a serious look.

Farakka issue has been a thorn in the Bangladesh-India relations. Yet, I venture to express the opinion that it may be solved to a large degree if more sense prevails. Clearly, it would not do us any good if we, Bangladeshis, express our frustration through rage, hostility and condemnation of India in this and other subcontinent network. We are only tuning off people who could possibly be counted on to pressure their own government, or atbest create a more balanced opinion in their country.

Clearly, Bangladesh itself does not have much leverage in influencing the India government policy. However, there is a chance that enough sensible people in India can be made to understand that the immediate economic benefits of diversion of the Ganges water is not worth the long-term effects. From discussions with many of my Indian friends, it appears that an overwhelming majority of them are in the dark about the real issues.

It should be first pointed out that when the upstream flow of the Ganges river is decreased, the tidal salinity front will march upstream and will cause significant impact on soil salinity (through seepage into ground water) in many of the southern districts of Bangladesh, making them unsuitable for crops. This problem is not solved by creating a canal between the Brahmaputra and Ganges, as Indian experts have suggested since building a canal would not increase the total flow of the Padma river. Further, the economic benefits of creating a Brahmaputra-Ganges canal is at best debatable since this would displace a large number of people.

If many Indians agree that Bangladesh has understandable gripes about Farakka, the next issue is how to redress it. Indians might legitimately argue that in this day and age, every nation looks after its own interest; why should India be any different when it comes to the Ganges water. I think there is a good case to be made for long term economic and political benefit for India if it were to share the Ganges water (say leave BD with 40 thousand cusecs (cubic feet persecond), agreed between Sheikh Mujib and Indira Gandhi).

It should be pointed out that it is not in the interest of India that Bangladesh farmers are unable to sustain themselves; this might worsen the perceived illegal-immigration problem. Further, most people in Bangladesh feel that India has diverted the Ganges water unilaterally; it makes it politically difficult for any Bangladeshi politician to cut economic deals with India; to give an example, it can be pointed out that even controlled access of Indian goods through Bangladesh (where Bangladesh could collect some taxes) to Assam and Meghalaya will economically benefit both India and Bangladesh. This is just an example; I am sure you can find others.