INDIA BANGLADESH ON

BRAHMAPUTRA
water dispute

As we know in today’s scenario, water is a biggest resources .It is important for each and every
living beings and the country. What all impacts it put on a country in terms of irrigation (where a
country is mainly dependent on agriculture), economy, individuals etc. One of the main reason
for the instability between the two countries is the reduction in water flow. Water is greatly
trans-boundary by character as a result makes it a possible cause of conflict.This paper assesses
the Bangladesh-India water-sharing disputes. Large rivers such as Ganga ,Indus and
Brahmaputra are born in the lofty heights of the Himalayan and are harnessed for hydroelectric
power(currently at levels far below their maximum potential).Before flowing to the vast plains of
the Deccan and on to either the Arabian sea to the west or the bay of Bengal to the east. The
problem of water resources allocation and sharing ,primarily for irrigation purposes has made the
relations bitter between India and Bangladesh and this has led to a true example of
environmental security-where environmental issues are entwined with national issues,i.e.
environmental scarcity leads to a tensions between common resources. Without any agreement
with Bangladesh, india has embarked on constructing dams and diverting water from many
transboundary rivers such as Teesta, Gumti, Khowai, Dharla, Dudkumar, Monu etc. India also
reportedly blocked rivers such as Muhri, Chagalnaiya, Fulchari, Kachu, and many others in
Tripura flowing into Bangladesh which cause a reduction in water follow.
After the partition of India, Pakistan raised the problem of water sharing of international rivers in
the Indus Basin and Ganges Basin. After the Independence of Bangladesh, it raised the Farakka
Barrage issue and water sharing of Ganges. It tried to internationalize the water dispute. The
attempts were made to resolve the water dispute through the bilateral negotiations1.Indo-
Bangladesh relationship carries not only strong historical and cultural overtones but both sides
1
A process of making offers and counter offers by the two parties of agents with the aim of finding an acceptable
agreement through mobile devices in mobile commerce environment.
also realize the immense benefits of a strong relationship.
About the foreign policy of Bangladesh, Article 25 states2:

“The state shall base its international relations on the principles of respect for national
sovereignty and equality, noninterference in the internal affairs of other countries’ peaceful
settlements of International disputes and respect for international law and the principles
enunciated in the United Nations charter.”
However, there have been a number of setbacks too. To solve the problem, several attempts have
been made. After many years of hardwork the two countries after 30 years come with a treaty on
sharing of Ganges waters was concluded which was intended to bring to an end long running
differences between the two even tough attempts were made earlier also. In 1977, a five year
agreement was signed and two more short term agreements were also concluded in May 1982
and in 1985. Also an agreement on Teesta River started in 1979 with the beginning of
construction of a barrage on the river by Government of West Bengal in India, though efforts
were made to settle the dispute in 1983 by an ad-hoc agreement3 Helmut Kulz argues that,
―”When on September 19, 1960, the Indus Water Treaty (IWT) was signed by Nehru and Ayub
Khan in Karachi, it was to be hoped that once and for all the troubled waters between India and
Pakistan were to become quiet and peaceful, not only the Indus waters which were the direct
object of the treaty, but also the other waters flowing between the two great countries, waters
which henceforth might have been dealt with in the same cooperative spirit. But neither of these
hopes can be held out any longer . . .”4

Ganga-Brahmaputra Basin
The two countries have a long history of water disputes notably over the sharing of Ganga river
waters. India’s diversion of the Ganges from Farakka Barrage to the Bhagirathi Hooghly river
system remained for a decade a major sources of discord between the two. In Bangladesh it is
known as Jamuna. It joins to Ganges to form Padma The Brahmaputra (rises in Tibet, east of
Kailas-Mansarover) known as the Tsangpo or Yalu-Tsangpo until it enters India. Thereafter it

2
Constitution of Republic of Bangladesh
3
a committee is formed for a specific purpose, usually appointed to solve a particular problem.
4
Vol.18 No.3(Jul),p.718 Kulz, Helmut R'Further Water Disputes between India and Pakistan,' The International and
Comparative Law Quarterly(1969)
takes on the name of Dihang or Siang in Arunachal. The Dibang or Sikang and the Lohit meet
the Siang near Saidya below from here combined flow is known as Brahmaputra in Assam.The
main Himalyan tributaries of the Ganges have different names in Nepal. The Mahakali becomes
the Sharda in India. The Karnali is known as Ghagra, the Gandak as the Narayani. Rivers rising
in Bhutan, the Wangchu and the Amo Chu are known in India as the Raidek and The Torsa
respectively5.The relationship between them realizes the size and power of India and also its
hegemonic status in the region.

Origin of dispute
The parties to dispute in this particular research paper is India and Bangladesh
and dispute is regarding trans-boundary river ie. Water dispute between both the countries.
Where on one hand Bangladesh says due to reduction of water level it effected their agriculture
and daily life of people, India declines all the allegation which Bangladesh arose.
India and Bangladesh share 54 rivers between them. Despite the setting up of a Joint River
Commission for water management as early as 1972, tensions between both the countries on how
to share resources has always been a matter of concern. The construction of the Farakka barrage
in 1975 in West Bengal (close to Indo- Bangladesh border) led to serious frictions between both
the nations. The objective behind the construction over the barrage was to increase the water
flow during the lean period flow of Bhagirathi- Hooghly branch of Ganga, and further to increase
the water depth at Kolkota port which was threatened by siltation. Once irrigation withdrawals
increased in Bangladesh, dispute arose between India and Bangladesh over how to share the
water resources during the lean season flow at Farakka. While the Bangladesh Government
shared the view that the reduction in flow due to the barrage has led to extensive damage to its
agriculture fields, industry and ecology over the years, the Indian Government ignores these
claims of Bangladesh, and labels them as baseless. Although an agreement was reached in 1996
between both the nations on how to share the water from the Ganga River during the lean season,
however many still argue that this agreement is more of a political agreement rather than a
technical one, which would resolve the long standing issue completely.
Tensions between India and Bangladesh have resurfaced once again on how to share the water
resources over the Teesta River in 2012. The Teesta River which has its source in Sikkim, flows
5
Oxford, p. xii-xiii Verghese, B.G. Waters of Hope. New Delhi: (1990).
through the northern part of West Bengal in India, before it enters into Bangladesh, from where it
merges with the Brahmaputra River. In 1983, an ad-hoc water sharing agreement was reached
between India and Bangladesh, whereby both countries were allocated 39 percent and 36 percent
of the water flow respectively8. The new bilateral treaty proposes to expand this agreement on
the equal allocation of the Teesta River water resources. However, the deal has fallen through
when Chief Minister of West Bengal Mamata Banerjee refused to comply with this new
agreement, fearing the loss of higher volume of water especially during drier months would
hamper the growth and prosperity of her ruling state. Therefore, both countries now need to
develop a well thought out and balanced treaty/agreement that will enable equitable sharing of
the waters along the Teesta River, which in turn would reduce the possibility of water conflicts
in future.

Issues
Thus Bangladesh has shown its great concern towards the issue. The nature of India-Bangladesh
water conflict is based on three aspects:
a) How to share the river water
b) To make friendly and cooperative agreements about the sources of water.
c) Mechanism of data sharing collecting which is important on Common River to facilitate flood
forecasting.

Attempts to Settle the Issue

Under the concepts of peace and friendship, both states held their regular meetings about their
concerns on common rivers. In the post independence period although the Government of
Bangladesh was not in a hurry to raise the issue immediately, but concerns about the issue were
there. An Indo-Bangladesh Joint Rivers Commission was established in 1972 for studying the
flow and using the river water in a cooperative basis. Finally the Barrage was fully completed in
1975 and a short term agreement was signed between the countries to conduct a 40 day trial in
testing of it throughout the dry season. Unfortunately, the President of Bangladesh was
assassinated four months later by a group of the armed force that found him too supportive with
India and the country was unstable for few months in lack of leadership.
In April 1975 India was able to convince Bangladesh about a limited trial for operating of
Farakka Barrage. Under an interim agreement, India took the right to withdraw 11.000 to 16.000
Cusec water during the dry season of April 21-May 31, leaving 39000 to 44000 Cusec water for
Bangladesh at the same period. As the normal flow of the Ganges during the dry season would
increase from 55000 to 65000 cusec, the amount of water allocated to Bangladesh could rise up
to 49.500. Bangladesh although gave consent but dissatisfaction was always present and shown
there. One of the reasons might be that both sides insisted that a mutual consensus should be
developed about the allocation of the water available during the lean period before the Farakka
Barrage was commissioned.This commitment was not fulfilled and it was commissioned in 1975.

In January 1976, Bangladesh formally registered its protest against India with the General
Assembly at the forum of United Nations. On September 8, 1976, the short term as well as long
term aspects of the Farakka issue was examined.
In September 1976, Bangladesh issued a white paper6. It said that a grave crisis has arisen for
Bangladesh on account of India‘s unilateral action in diverting the waters at Farakka.
Three levels of official talks were held from May to September 1977 and then an agreement was
made by the heads of the delegations. Formally, After some forty-three meetings the agreement
was signed on 5th November 1977 in the capital of india,,delhi. Through the Ganges Water
Agreement of 1977, for the first time India recognized the international character of the water of
an international river. Although the agreement provided a short term solution of the distribution
of water but it opened the way for a long term planning. In the specific provisions of the charter,
it was clearly indicated. After consensus in UN, India sent a ministerial level delegation to
Dhaka. The Indian Minister for Irrigation Jagjivan Ram proposed the water sharing on 50:50
bases. Bangladesh demanded 70 to 80% of the minimum flow of the Ganges at Farakka.
Delegation of Bangladesh was led by eminent water resources expert B.M. Abbas (later he
became a Minister of Flood Control, Irrigation and Power in 1978)7. Indira Gandhi‘s government

6
A white paper is an authoritative report or guide helping readers to understand an issue, solve a problem, or make a
decision. White Papers have tried to perform the dual role of presenting firm government policies while at the same
time inviting opinions upon them. The "publication of a White Paper serves to test the climate of public opinion
regarding a controversial policy issue and enables the government to gauge its probable impact". By contrast, green
papers, which are issued much more frequently, are more open ended. Also known as consultation documents, green
papers may merely propose a strategy to be implemented in the details of other legislation or they may set out
proposals on which the government wishes to obtain public views and opinion. White papers published and green
papers released to launch a public consultation process.
White paper Accessed on 9/11/2018 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_paper.
7
op.cit. p. 59 Rashid, Harun Ur (2002).
did not agree to anything less than 50% share of the water.This agreement fixed water-sharing
during the lean period, that is, January through May. The amount of water for Bangladesh was
calculated on the basis of water available at Farakka between 1948 and 1973. Guarantee clause
was included in the agreement, 80% water was given to Bangladesh. In the clause, it was stated
that India could not be reduced water during the period. This was a victory for Bangladesh. The
agreement criticized in India as a poor example of Janta Party‘s diplomacy.
Second round of talks was held at Dacca from July 28 to August 6, 1977. The Foreign Secretary
Jagat Mehta led the Indian side at the talks said that the differences were further narrowed down.
On September 29, the two countries arrived at a comprehensive long term and short term
agreement on the sharing of the waters. The agreement ended a dispute between the two
countries that had been lingering on since 1962. The Agreement was signed on November 5,
1977 in Dacca by the Indian Agriculture and Irrigation Minister, Surjit Singh Barnala and
Advisor to the Bangladesh President on Flood Control and Irrigation, Rear Admiral Musharraf
Husain Khan.
On October 7, 1982 for sharing dry season flow of Ganges in 1983 and1984. There was no
agreement for 1985 dry season. On November 22, 1985 another MOU was signed for three
years, which expired on May 31, 1988. 78 Mrs. Indira Gandhi once again came to power in
January 1980. Bangladesh President Zia-ur Rahman visited New Delhi in January 1980. He said
problem would be solved ―through bilateral talks8

Provisions of the Agreement Dealing With Teesta Waters

Equity and fairness must be ensured from the Indian side not only in dealing with Teesta but
other common rivers as inequity exists in the current Teesta water sharing pattern. In this regard,
Praful Bidwai argues that, “India reportedly has access to 32,000 cusecs during the lean season
for 8 million people, while Bangladesh makes do with just 5,000 cusecs for 20 million”9.
The agreement contained fifteen articles. The draft of the 1977 Agreement was finalized on
September 29, 1977 at midnight at the Cabinet room of Indian government in New Delhi, but
signed on November 5, 1977. B.M. Abbas from Bangladesh and Jagat Mehta from India were
involved in the negotiations and drafting. Indira Gandhi did not support this Agreement, in

op.cit. p. 117 Bindra S.S. (1982).

8

9
Praful Bidwal,“Missing a historic chance in
Bangladesh”, The Daily Star, September 21,2011
particular to the guarantee clause and criticized the Desai government for agreeing it.74 The
agreement also drew sharp and critical reactions from most of the political parties in West
Bengal. Then Chief Minister Jyoti Basu said, ―This adds to our differences with the Janta
Party10.
During the dry season, especially beginning inSeptember and going up to March,
Bangladeshrequires the Teesta waters for agriculture. Thus, thereis an urgent need for an
agreement on Teesta water sharing with India. During the dry season, the flow of the Teesta goes
down anywhere between 5,000 and6,000 cusecs while the demand for water byBangladesh and
India are 8,000 cusecs and 21,000cusecs respectively.Therefore, it is an issue thatneeds careful
handling. It can be said that the Teestaagreement will definitely be a foundation on whichfurther
cooperation can be forged especially onsharing of the waters of Dhaka, Dudkumar,
Manu,Khowai, Gumti and Muhuri rivers to meet futurewater demands.Moreover, there is a need
to assess the realistic water needs in both countries and should have appropriate plans which will
be supported by adequate budgets toface future water scarcity.Lastly, it is reported that,in the
bilateral meetings with India, we dependmainly on Indian statistics.Thus, the decisions insuch
meetings are usually favorable to India. Wemust take immediate measures to improve
our weaker position in this regard.From the above arguments, it is clear that the existingliterature
supports both the conventional wisdom, aswell as the alternative. But India non-compromising
attitude in the negotiation table and lack of integratedwater sharing management ideas are the
main reasonswhich require immediate attention.11

Criticism on the Treaty

The weaknesses of the Treaty for Bangladesh:
1) In the event of the depletion of flows of water seems at Farakka, India could argue that every
effort was made but could not maintain 40 years of availability at Farakka.
2) If the availability of water is less than 70,000 cusecs, then both countries will get 50% each.
Since there is no stipulation of any firm minimum figure of availability of water at Farakka in the
Treaty, and if falls, for the sake of argument, even below 40,000 cusecs, one can argue that

op.cit. p. 106 Bindra S.S. (1982).

10

Water dispute between India and Bangladesh (Accessed 9/11/2018)

11

https://www.academia.edu/3204779/Bangladesh-India_Water_Sharing_Disputes_Possible_Policy_Responses?
auto=download
Bangladesh will be at a great disadvantage.
3) The use of words no harm to either party‖ in Article X of the Treaty seems innocent. However
if read carefully, it can be argued that if the flow of water falls below the agreed level shown in
Annexure 2, Bangladesh could not possibly demand its increase of share because it might harm
India.The BNP opposed to the ruling Awami League and has been critical of the treaty.
Ramaswamy Iyer rejected the criticism:
1) The treaty is excessively generous to Bangladesh. A 50:50 sharing is as fair a settlement as the
sharing is at Farakka, after upstream uses in India.
2) The treaty will have an adverse impact on Calcutta port. In past agreements the Indian share at
the time of the lowest flow was 20,500 cusecs, and Calcutta port has survived. Now in three 10-
day periods out of six (between 1 March and 10 May), the Indian share will be 35,000 cusecs.
3) There have been complaints in Bihar and Uttar Pradesh that their needs have not been kept in
mind in the treaty. The importance is given to West Bengal and its Chief Minister in the
negotiations. It is necessary to take note of the uneasiness arising from the fact that the treaty
requires the Government of India to make ―every effort‖ to protect the flows reaching Farakka.
This was a necessary provision. Bangladesh could not have been expected to accept the prospect
of steadily dwindling flows.
4) The earlier insistence on a linkage between a sharing agreement and a commitment to reach
agreement on augmentation has been given up. We already had seen that the sharp divergence on
augmentation had led to an impasse in the past, and that unless we were prepared to stop talking
about augmentation no sharing agreement would have been possible.
5) It has been argued that any treaty with another country should involve both give‘ and take‘:
that in this treaty India only ‗gives‘ water but ‗takes‘ nothing. From the point of view of
Bangladesh, the treaty merely rectifies the wrong done by the upper riparian earlier through the
diversion of the natural flow of water away from the lower riparian. The Indian Foreign Minister
made a point to declare more than once that the water issue was an important matter in itself and
would be resolved without being linked with any other issue; and that India would seek nothing
in return for the settlement of the water-sharing dispute12.
Rahaman suggested modifications or revision to the 1996 Treaty.
Important three are:

12
op.cit. p. 137-38 Iyer (1998).
 1. Inclusion of a minimum guarantee clause for Bangladesh. This will insure a minimum flow
for downstream Bangladesh, in case of substantial reduction of the Ganges flow at Farakka due
to upstream abstraction.
2. Revision of the Annexure II of the treaty to share water on the basis of 75% availability of
flow at Farakka rather than average of the total flow.
3. Inclusion of a provision for multilateral cooperation involving all riparian of the Ganges basin,
i, e. Nepal, India, Bangladesh for the integrated management of the basin13

The Aftermath of Water Diversion on Bangladesh:

The history teaches us about the civilizations who have vanished trying to endanger the nature.
Building big dams and barrages has always been a debating issue Environmentalists have always
warned nations about short term benefits of building dams Bangladesh is named “The Country of
Rivers" for its 230 interweave rivers. Additionally, the whole ecological and socio-logical
system is greatly relying on the GBM basins. As located on the lowermost part of the GBM
basin, it encounters high flows on the rainy season and low flows during dry season. Among the
rivers, 57 are international and 54 of theme originated in India and 3 in Myanmar. As a result,
any interference with the flow can cause havoc in the countries water supply.As found in the
reports India is working to divert several rivers and 30 upstream constructions for diverting water
is on process. Farakka Barrage is the major one which is built for diverting the water of Ganges
River. The transferring of water through Bhagirati River with a twenty-six mile long feeder canal
has endangered the natural flow of Ganges River in Bangladesh territory causing various kind of
harmful effect in Bangladesh. Various studies have shown the effects which is explained below:
effect on environment: The supply of water in the Bangladesh part of GBM basin has
substantially decreased since 1975. The minimum discharge of water is now 135 cusecs where it
used to be 1460(1100% less) in the pre-division phrase. The essential flow for the purpose of
agricultural activities and industrial activities is around 55,000- 66,000 cusecs and is also vital
for sustainable navigability ecology and proper salinity intrusion.
International law: To resolve more than 500 international trans-boundary water dispute [28]
International Water Law was developed. The law and its applications largely comes from
i) International conventions

13
op.cit. p. 207 Rahaman, M.M. (2006).
 ii) state practices
iii) the rulings of international courts.
The two most important international treaties in this regards are The Madrid Declaration 1911
and the Helsinki Rules of 1966, as largely contributed by renowned institutions like the
International Law Association (ILA) and the Institute of International Law (IIL)
State Practice:States can play a great role in resolving the dispute between them by following the
framework provided by UN Convention. The project case of Gabcikovo-Nagymaros [36] (25th
September 1997 by the International Court of Justice) can provide Bangladesh a good chance of
resolving the dispute as the case establishes the principle of fair utilization as well as a major
restriction in process that can damage the environment.

Resolution Mechanism
A committee consisting of the representatives nominated by the two Governments therein after
called the Joint Committee (JC) shall be constituted. The Joint Committee shall set up suitable
teams at Farakka and Hardinge Bridge to observe and record. Any difference or dispute arising
in this regard, if not resolved by the JC, shall be referred to a panel of an equal number of Indian
and Bangladeshi experts nominated by the two Governments. If the difference of dispute
remained unresolved, it shall be referred to the two Governments mutual discussions and failing
that, by such other arrangements as they may mutually agreed upon14. Joint Rivers Commission
established by the two Governments in 1972 shall carry out investigations and study. It will
submit its recommendations to the two Governments within a period of three years. Any
difficulty, difference or dispute, if not resolved by the JRC, shall be referred to the two
Governments which shall meet urgently at the appropriate level to resolve it by mutual
discussion. Under Article XIII, the agreement will be reviewed at the expiry of thee years from
the date of coming into force of the agreement.Further reviews shall take place six months before
the expiry of the agreement or as may be agreed upon between the two Governments. Treaty was
for five years. India has certainly taken a generous view of Bangladesh‘s agricultural land and

14
There is provision in Indus Treaty, Questions, if any arose, were to be resolved within the Commission level, the
matter was to be referred to the two Governments: if they too failed to reach agreement, the ‗question‘ would
become a ‗difference‘ to be referred to a Neutral Expert (NE). The Neutral Expert‘s findings on the differences
referred to him would be final and binding. If the NE decided that the matter was in fact a ‗dispute‘, it would have
to go to a Court of Arbitration.
Page.64 Iyer (2007)
fishing interests.
CONCLUSON-:
Recycling and reusing, reverse osmosis, and drip method of irrigation, are some of the many
ways through which technology can help mankind to preserve substantial water resources. And
last but not the least, fulfilling of simple and basic tasks by individuals such as promptly fixing
or repairing leaks in sprinklers, facets, taps and showers at homes or at work place, or simply by
changing one‟s diet or by turning into a vegetarian, precious amount of water resources can be
preserved around the world. The United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE)
Water Convention that came up in 1992 that intends to strengthen national measures for the
protection and ecologically sound management of the trans-boundary surface waters and ground
waters, till 2007, has only been ratified by fifteen countries around the world. The rest of the
countries have either not taken a stand, or have rejected this proposal completely. During the
time of water scarcity, countries around the world should instead cooperate and share, rather than
compete with each other which will benefit no one in particular. Therefore, more and more
countries ratifying this convention and becoming part of the global community in the near future,
would ultimately help everyone in their task of preserving the limited water resources around the
world. Joint programmes of water linking projects should be launched with the cooperation of
countries, which will require minimum input of resources to be incorporated with the project,
while the final output and gains will be substantial for everyone to enjoy. Moreover, the use of
technology needs to be enhanced in order to increase the existing water use efficiency in the
industrial and agricultural sectors of the economy.
The Ganges River is very important for India, particularly for Uttar Pradesh, Bihar and West
Bengal. The Farakka Barrage was built for the main purpose of flushing out the silt of
Bhagirathi-Hoogly River, through it ships can navigate from Bay of Bengal to Calcutta. Initially
Pakistan raised question on the Farakka Barrage. After the emergence of Bangladesh, the Ganges
water dispute becomes an important issue between India and Bangladesh. Bangladesh tried to
internationalize the water sharing issue. It also raised the issue in the United Nations. India tried
to resolve this issue by bilateral negotiations. The 1975 Interim, the 1977 Agreement, two MOUs
in the 1980s and the 1996 Treaty show that India was willing to solve this issue with its
neighbour.
Even, after completing two years, Modi Government could not sign the treaty, because of the
Mamta Banerjee‘s opposition and electoral politics in the West Bengal. In future, Bangladesh
will demand the agreements for other international rivers with India. In Bangladesh, there is
expectation that as a big brother India should take care of interests of Bangladesh. India has to be
alert for any influence of China on Bangladesh. Future water scarcity in Brahmaputra will affect
both India and Bangladesh. Both could discuss with upper riparian China for water-sharing of
Brahmaputra.