Editorial
Tipaimukh Project
What should Bangladesh make of the new development?
The Indian government is moving ahead with the plan to execute the 1500MW Tipaimukh Hydroelectric Project. The news cannot but cause serious concerns for us in Bangladesh. The issue of Tipaimukh is not a new one, and the concerns of the government of Bangladesh had been conveyed to the Indian government from time to time also.
The Joint Communiqué of 12 January 2010 issued during Sheikh Hasina's all important visit to India, which marked a new beginning in Bangladesh-India relation, contained the assurance of the Indian government that it would do nothing with regard to Tipaimukh that might prove harmful to Bangladesh. That assurance was reiterated twice during Mr. Manmohan Singh's visit to Dhaka in September this year. Therefore, on the basis of the repeated assurances, it was only natural for Bangladesh to think that for any step on Tipaimukh, Bangladesh would be consulted or taken into confidence or at least informed. From what our government has said so far, we gather it was not the case. We are disappointed and compelled to ask whether India has at all taken cognizance of our concerns.
It is quite inexplicable that while our foreign ministry continues to talk about being in constant touch with India and of Indian assurances, we come to know about the details of the Tipai dam agreement, which was contracted on October 22 this year, through international media and websites, and that too only two days ago.
Failure to reach an agreement on Teesta has been a disappointment for Bangladesh, and the news on Tipaimukh exacerbates our frustrations. From the statement of Mamata Banerjee following her meeting with our foreign minister recently it appears that we are in for a long haul on Teesta, and it makes us wonder what it was that India wanted to sign about on Teesta during Manmohan Singh's Dhaka visit.
We would like to assert that if security was India's basic concern ours happens to be the just sharing of the common rivers. We have more than adequately responded to India's concerns, but regrettably India has not reciprocated in equal measure or has been sufficiently sensitive to ours.
We are still committed to carrying forward the prevailing state of our excellent bilateral relationship and would want nothing to push us backward. But such unilateral action on sensitive issues creates apprehensions in our mind. We would hope that India as a friendly country would address and assuage our concerns.
Comments