Indian HC’s contention challenged by Bangladeshi water expert

Ganges water sharing and Tipaimukh Dam
Indian HC’s contention challenged by Bangladeshi water expert
Tauhidul Anwar Khan, a veteran water expert of the country and former executive member of Joint Rivers Commission and DG of Water Resources Planning Organisation, has contested and rebuffed Indian High Commissioner Pinak Ranjan Chakravarty’s contention on Ganges water sharing and construction of Tipaimukh dam as well as derogatory remarks about Bangladeshi water experts.
He was talking to The Bangladesh Today in an exclusive interview on Monday.
1) Question: Is the statement of Indian HC that no international law in the world can stop construction of Tipaimukh dam true?
Answer: My comment is that Pinak himself admitted that there is a UN convention regulating non-navigation and water resources which was adopted in 1997 and this convention to be operational requires ratification by 35 countries has been ratified by only 17 countries with Bangladesh and Indian neither signed nor ratified.
He said “It is true but the issue is that although the treaty has not become yet operational but most of the countries today consider this document as a framework document for sharing and management of international water courses. It has been settled principle that rules in this convention have to be followed by upper-riparian countries.”
Apart from this convention, there are some agreed principles and norms in this world stating that if an upper riparian country would like to undertake a project or make an intervention natural flows or flows of the river, that country intending the intervention, must inform the lower riparian countries and must engage in consultation with lower riparian countries in order to obtain consent of lower riparian countries before undertaking those interventions, he added.
He stated that there is no alternative to this rule. Had it not been followed by the countries there would have been chaos and confusion in the world. Certain norms and rules are followed that nothing can be done which is detrimental to other countries, nothing can be done without permission of other countries and nothing can be done in sole interest of a country affecting the citizens of other countries.
“I think Mr Pinak Ranjan should take note of this,” he opined.
2) Question: Is Indian claim that Bangladesh is getting due share of the Ganges water as per treaty of 1996 as stated by Pinak is authentic?
Answer: Mr Pinak has said that under the 1996 treaty over sharing the Ganges water singed December 12, 1996 Bangladesh has been receiving due share of Ganges water. About this our comment is that treaty became operational since January 1, 1997. In the very first year 1997 Bangladesh did not receive its due share as per the treaty. Then there have been occasions in other years the country did not receive its due share and continuous deprivations took place in 2001, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 and even 2009. As per press lease report published by JRC on every 10 day period continuing from January 1 to May 31 mentioning the amount of water that BD received from Ganges at Farakka point and the volume of water the country supposed to receive therefrom as per the schedule II of the 1996 treaty. So in all these press releases it was found that BD has received lesser amount of water and at least in 11 cases out of 15 ten day periods in the current year 2009. These are all on record as stated by JRC press releases.
Pinak may contest India is giving water as per annexure I of 1996 treaty but he has totally forgotten that 1996 treaty says that sharing of water between India and Bangladesh in first 10 day from January 1 to May 31 every year without taking into consideration the indicative schedule referred to in schedule II specifying BD share every 10 days.
Quoting Annexure I he said -in case availability of 70,000 cusecs or less water at Farakka Bangladesh and India will get 50% each, in case 70,000 to 75,000 cusecs Bangladesh will get 35,000 cusecs and India will have balance of flow and in case 75,000 cusecs or more India will get 40,000 cusecs and Bangladesh will get balance of flow.
Drawing an analogy between share of water BD is supposed to get as per Annexure II and that it actually got in 2009, he said (a) January 01 t 10 BD actual share of water is 67, 516 cusecs but it got 56,414 cusecs, (b) from January 11-20 actual share is 57,673 cusecs but it got 50, 654 cusecs, (c) January 21-31 actual share is 50, 154 cusecs but it got 45, 974 cusecs, (d) February 01-10 actual share is 46, 323 cusecs but it got 41, 650 cusecs, (e) February 11-20 actual share is 42,859 cusecs but it got 35,000 cusecs, (f) February 21 -28/29 actual share is 39,106 cusecs but it got 32,429 cusecs, (g) March 01-10 actual share is 35,000 cusecs but it got 30,613 cusecs, (h) March 11-20 actual share is 35,000 cusecs and it got the same, (i) March 21 to 31 actual share is 29, 688 cusecs but it got 21, 114 cusecs, (j) April 01 -10 actual share is 35,000 cusecs and it got the same, (k) April 11-20 actual share is 27,633 cusecs but it got 19,219 cusecs, (l) April 21-30 actual share is 35,000 cusecs and it got the same, (m) May 01-10 actual share is 32,351 cusecs but it got 23,351 cusecs, (n) May 11-20 actual share is 35,000 cusecs and it got the same and (o) May 21-31 actual share is 41,854 cusecs and it got the same. It appears from above statistics that Bangladesh has been deprived of its due share in 11 occasions out of 15 in the current months of 2009 alone. This water sharing amount has been determined studying average availability of water in 40 years from 1949 to 1988 at Farakka. Every effort has to be taken by India as upper-riparian country to protect flow of water to ensure availability of water as indicated in 40 years average but India is not doing so. If the flow is protected, BD will get proper share.
“Pinak’s statement that water level is declining because of climate change is baseless due to the fact climate change resulting in melting ice is rather contributing to rise in the water level and melting of ice at Himayans should augment the flow of Ganges. How can it decrease the flow? Water flow at Farakka is less and less and BD is getting less,” he said.
3) Question: What is your reaction to Indian HC remarks that so-called BD experts are trying to instigate anti-Indian feeling and poisoning the minds of people of Bangladesh against India by bringing undue allegation against India in terms of water sharing and other issues?
Answer: Then the issue of Tipaimukh dam comes. It has got two components -one is dam at Tipaimukh and the other is barrage diverting water meant for irrigation projects in Assam and Tripura. If dam is constructed by modifying flow condition Tipaimukh in turn will affect the flow of Shurma and Kushiara which ultimately joins with Meghna. It will change hydro morphological condition of Shurma, Kushiara and Meghna and it will cause early drainage and drainage congestion of haors at different times of the year affecting fisheries and environment at large. So, BD is reasonably worried about this dam. So, this is why BD is worried about specially for the reason that south west region of Bangladesh is experiencing the detrimental effect of Farakka barrage as it creates serious problems to the life of Bangladeshis and Tipaimukh barrage if it is coupled with dam may bring devastation of life of 3 crore people in the adjoining areas.

Courtesy of The Bangladesh Today