From: khaleq@brahms.udel.edu (Mohame Khalequzzaman)
Subject: Re: Ganga Water sharing
Keywords: Farakka Barrage
Organization: University of Delaware
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1992 23:15:42 GMT

>>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.  
>
>No Haldia unlike Calcutta is a sea port. There will be absolutely no need
>for dredging or flushing as siltation is not likely to occur.

I didn't know that Haldia is a sea port.  Isn't Haldia located at the confluence of Damodar and Hooghly?  Is it already operational?  If Haldia is an estuarine
port, as I know, then still there will be siltation problem.

>Oh they understood the merits alright. What they didn't count on was a 3% per
>year population growth in Northern India and the resulting increased
>water consumption upstream.

Do you know any reference to back up this claim about the decrease in the 
amount of discharge of the Ganges since the 60's?  The rate of population
growth is well known.  Why the planners wouldn't take this into consideration?
>
>Yes you are right. That would be welcome. However, the river waters dispute 
>is one in a series of irritants in Indo-BD relations. My belief is that

Right now the Ganges water sharing is the major obstacle in our relationship.
All other issues are minor and can be dealt with.
>
>No the ball is in your court too. No relation between two countries
>can be a one way street and BD will also have to play it's role. But I agree 
>that India as the bigger neighbour, can take the initiative. 

During the last 21 years there was only one treaty signed on water sharing
(1977-82).  For the rest of the time we simply had to rely on India's
unilateral decision for any water.  The shortage of water during summer months
has already caused a lot of economic, ecological, and navigationl problems.
The consequences of the Barrage on Bangladesh is well documented; also well
established is the fact that India decides unilaterally about the water sharing.Now, how can expect that the polititians will not address this problem?

>>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.  
>
>No, I think issues like Farakka were deliberately played up by politicians
>in your country to pander to a domestic audience. The "hate India"
>

There is probably some truth to this, but as I mentioned earlier BD polititians
couldn't use this as an issue should there were any treaty on the Farakka.
Please read about the history of negotions between India and BD on this issue.
If you want, I can provide you with a list (most of which are writen by western
scientists.
>
>>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.
>
>Oh, the fight is not between you and me. Both of us are essentially products
>of a system in our respective countries. On a personal level, we may be the
>best of friends but it is the political leadership in our countries that
>must have the foresight to forge better relations.

I know that we are products of our system.  At the same time though we are
capable of analyzing the system objectively based on logical thinking and
scientific findings.  By average people I mean the people who are not
into our rotten politics, yet are aware of the issues.

Khaleq

Newsgroups: soc.culture.bangladesh,soc.culture.indian