Chinese Factor in Indo-Bangladesh Relations

Amitava Mukherjee’s write-up captioned “Prime Minister’s Tour of Bangladesh†(Mainstream, September 24, 2011) correctly raises the implications of the ominous Chinese factor which might destabilise our longstanding friendly relations with Bangladesh. Somehow we get the impression that our Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) is bent upon having a mollycoddling relationship with Bangladesh ignoring the real and legitimate concerns of the constituent States of the Indian Union surrounding Bangladesh.

Bangladesh suffers from some economic and geophysical disabilities due to its peculiar geographical position. It is densely populated. There is hardly any determined effort to control its population explosion. Its post-liberation emerging middle class is based entirely on tertiary occupations having hardly any relation-ship with marginal and small farmers and a huge army of unprotected tenantry—whose level of exploitation does not seem to be anybody’s concern. A huge affluent parasitic class has emerged by using and not infrequently misusing foreign aid. Flashly and ostentatious modern residential buildings in Banani, Gulshan and Dhanmondi of Dhaka stand in sharp contrast against the hovels on stilt in the widespread flood-prone areas of the country. The huge com-prador middle class has no roots in the rural society. It is a highly fractured society with a fairly strong religious fundamentalist bias among many. The comprador middle class, which domi-nates the politics and the elite society of Bangladesh, is generally out to get the maximum personal and sectional benefits from all funding agencies and aid-giving countries without giving anything in return. They refuse to feel obliged, far less to be grateful, to the aid-givers.

What have we got in return for the unfair Ganga Water-sharing Agreement with them? Nothing. And we in eastern India are suffering acutely from its disastrous effects on Calcutta and Haldia ports. The port-based export-domi-nated economy of this region of India is still to recover from the shock.

•

I do recognise the validity of some claims of riparian countries at the lower reaches of international rivers. But Bangladeshis should not forget that some major investments in these rivers, like the Farakka Barrage, were done well before Bangladesh was born as an independent sovereign state in December 1971 after the liberation war. The deaths and casualties suffered by the members of the Indian armed forces are comparable to those suffered by the Mukti Bahini. Continuous demands for more and more concessions from India with nothing to give in return would only sour our relations with Bangladesh in future. India suffered as much as Bangladesh in their liberation war. And the Indian armed forces left Dhaka in March 1972 as soon as Mujibur Rahaman requested Mrs Indira Gandhi to do so. India has been showing good faith all along in its relationship with Bangladesh. At hindsight it appears that if the Indian armed forces had stayed back Mujibur Rahaman would not have been assassinated by the Bangladesh Army. But let’s not dwell on the subject which is their internal affair.

Bangladesh should seriously consider whether they can tap the waters of the mighty Brahma-putra to irrigate their northwestern plains. They should also think about a Brahmaputra-Teesta link canal to augment the waters of the Dalia reservoir. They are allowing the Brahma-putra waters to go waste. They should ask for technical assistance for a feasibility study of this project and, if found worthwhile, they should request for Indian financial help. They should think of alternatives instead of always grumbling and moaning against India. They should try to get out of the spoilt-and-pampered-younger-sibling syndrome.

India should also think of upgrading and modernising the Mongla Port and of building an offshore platform in the high sea for allowing supertankers to offload their crude oil cargo to be pumped to the refineries to be built both in Bangladesh and southeastern West Bengal. That project could be posed either to the World Bank or ADB or both. Such technical and economic cooperation would be mutually beneficial to both the countries with potentials for generating employment.

In a “tit-for-tat†reaction Bangladesh jetti-soned the MoU for movement of Indian goods in closed containers to the North-Eastern States through Bangladesh. Bangladesh may be very politely reminded that for the Ganga Water-sharing Agreement, which ruined both the Calcutta and Haldia ports, India got nothing in return. No stable friendly relationship could be built through onesided concessions. While India should help Bangladesh for utilising the Brahmaputra waters in line of the Teesta waters, Bangladesh should reconsider its knee-jerk reaction pre-venting movement of Indian containerised goods through Bangladesh. The possibility of revival of the botched-up Teesta treaty is remote. There is no point in souring our relationship by crying over the spilt milk. It would be prudent and pragmatic to think of alternate schemes for which India should be ready to foot the bill.

Such massive India-sponsored investment for utilising Bangladesh’s own waters may help counter the Chinese menace. While the Chinese are trying to integrate Bangladesh with Myan-mar and China, we should try to bring them nearer to the Indian mainland through massive economic and technical cooperation.

Architect of ‘Operation Barga’ during the Left Front Government in West Bengal, the author was Secretary (Rural Development) and Secretary (Revenue) in the Union Government. Now retired, he is currently a Member of the Rajya Sabha representing the Trinamul Congress.