From: khaleq@brahms.udel.edu (Mohame Khalequzzaman)
Subject: Re: Ganga Water sharing 
Summary:  Farakka Barrage is not a solution for anyone
Keywords: Farakka Barrage
Organization: University of Delaware
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1992 17:01:43 GMT

In article <1hg7umINNrbl@hsc.usc.edu> banerjee@hsc.usc.edu (Samit Banerjee) writes:
>In article <Bzu7zC.8C1@news.udel.edu> khaleq@brahms.udel.edu (Mohame Khalequzzaman) writes:
>
>>Bangladesh's proposal does not advocate to take water from any Indian state.
>
>If that is true, why not build the reservoirs in India? Being a bigger

For one reason the source for the Ganges River (I mean for most of the tributaries) is in Nepal.  Nepal is also very sparely populated, especially the source areas.  Building reservoirs will require a huge area to be cleared up, which I
mentioned in my previous posting.  The gradient (slope) of the source area is
much higher (steeper), which is more feasible for hydroelectric projects.
Building reservoirs in India will not be as feasible from a scientific, social,
and economic view point.  Besides, building reservoirs in Nepal doesn't
guarantee more water for Bangladesh.  Water will still flow thru India and will
have to cross the Farakka (!) in order to reach Bangladesh.  So, your assumptionof Bangladeshi paranoid mind is really not true.  We really don't have much
choice to play a game against India.  The Bangladesh's proposal is purely
scientific - not political.
>
>[stuff deleted]
>
>>Yes this is true.  But also true the fact that the building of the Farakka
>>Barrage and diversion of water to "flush" Calcutta Port has not turned out to bea successful undetakig.  The problem of siltation is not solved, but has
>>detereorated.  
>
>The Calcutta port is no longer a issue. After Haldia was commissioned, the
>importance of the Calcutta port has continued to decline and deteriorate.

The Indian Govt. still uses the argument of "flushing" Calcutta Port as a
defence for the need of Farakka.  Haldia may (or will) face the same siltation
problem, so the issue will remain valid from Indian stand point.  The problem
of siltation in an estuarine port is universal.  It is nothing to do with
Haldia, Calcutta, Chalna or Mongla ports.  There is evidence that the Farakka
is causing flooding problem in the downstream region of the Hooghly River.
The farmers living downstream from the Barrage can't be very happy about it.
>
>>Jyoti Basu has admitted that the Farakka hasn't solved any
>>problem that was originally intended for (most of the Indian scientists that
>I wouldn't take everything Jyoti Basu says at face value. Lot of it is pure

We don't either.  Because, he (Basu) is not in position to solve this problem.
It is not a problem between Calcutta and Dhaka; it is between Delhi and Dhaka,
which is the most unfortunate thing.  I don't want to believe that Bengalis
can be so ruthless to other Bengalis.
>
>>Now the reason for such a failure lies in  the lack of scientific feasibity
>>of the project.  I don't think the Indian scientists didn't know that the
>>Farakka wouldn't solve the problem of siltation on riverbeds.  They, especiall
>That is not entirely correct. What the Geological Society of India who did
>the survey for the project, did not take into account was the dimished
>water flow in the Ganga. Whatever else they say now about the feasibility
>of the project is merely to cover their behinds.

I find hard to believe that the geoscientists wouldn't understand the merit
of the project, but you may be right.  Now that they have realized, don't you
think they can make a point to the Govt. in this regard.  After all, it will
ease the relationship bvetween two neighbors.  It will be a political and 
economical (since it doen't for India the way they planned for) gain.
>
>water now as it did in the 1960's, then silting of the Calcutta port would 
>have been avoided.

Even with the 60's water (I don't have any scientific info that the discharge
has decreased drustically since 60's), the siltation problem can't be solved
by flushing.  You need you increase the discharge of the Hooghly 10 times
(even diverting 100% will not increase the discharge by more than 2 to 3 times)
in order to "push" the turbidity maximum towards the ocean by, say, 50-100 km.

>>Hypothetically speaking, if Bangladesh
>>were a state of India, then under no circumstences India would plan to
>>build the Farakka Barrage;. because there is no scientific reason or
>>validity to such an unnecessary undertaking.
>
>Lets just say that like so many things scientific, the barrage also
>has it's political uses.  But when envisaged in the 1960's, it did have
>some necessity. I think that in the back drop of Indo-BD friendship
>in the future, the barrage will loose it's last remaining relevance.

We can only hope and pray, because the ball is on your court.  Yes it is
purely a political issue.  Off the record, all of my Indian geoscientists
friends always understand that and admit so.
>
>
>[interesting scientific stuff deleted]
>
>>The idea of a link canal for the Brahmaputra and the Ganges is the same old
>>political trick.  We the Bangladeshis can't afford to be trapped in another
>>political ambush.  Not only our dependence on India will increase, if India

[deleted]
>The responsible political leadership in Bangladesh will have to get
>off it's "hate-India" platform and start trusting the Indian people and 
>government. Without that element of trust, nothing can be achieved. 
>And in a protracted river water conflict, it is BD people who will at the
>receiving end.

Agreed.  "Hate-India" has not become a political weapon (!) for some of the
politicians until the Farakka and other issues started to affect Bangladeshi
economy.  Following the Liberation War the frienship between these countries
reached a historic height.  For the Bangladeshis there is no reason (I mean
average Bangladeshis like me) to hate India unless they start to humiliate us.
We don't have the ability or need to humiliate India.  But to defend one's
interest is a human right.
>
>Samit


Khaleq

>
>-- 
>Samit Banerjee,			    |  
>University of Southern California   |  A man who smiles when things go wrong,
>Internet: banerjee@scf.usc.edu      |  has found somebody to blame it on.
>Bellnet : (213) 342-1401            |  


Newsgroups: soc.culture.bangladesh