Prothom Alo :
Prothom Alo: The tenure of the Ganges Treaty of 1996 is ending on 12 December this year. What kind of preparation does Bangladesh need in this regard?
Mohammad Abul Hossen: Bangladesh’s preparation has two parts: technical and political. There is substantial technical preparation on the part of Bangladesh. If a political understanding or agreement can be reached, then the treaty can be renewed or a new treaty can be formulated through discussions.
Prothom Alo :
Prothom Alo: Some limitations of the 1996 treaty are often discussed. What are these limitations?
Mohammad Abul Hossen: The 1977 treaty had a guarantee clause for Bangladesh, which was not included in the 1996 treaty. According to the guarantee clause, if the water flow of the Ganges at the Farakka point fell below 80 per cent, Bangladesh would receive 80 per cent of its share. In other words, reduced flow would only affect India. Conversely, the 1996 treaty included a provision of 35,000 cusecs. From the second ten days of March alternately, Bangladesh and India would receive 35,000 cusecs of water. When India receives 35,000 cusecs, the flow for Bangladesh becomes much less, even close to 20,000 cusecs. Such a situation becomes critical for the environment and ecology.
Prothom Alo: Given the current reality, should Bangladesh opt for renewing the existing treaty or executing a new one?
Mohammad Abul Hossen: It would be beneficial for us to execute a new Ganges Treaty, including the guarantee clause. If a new treaty cannot be undertaken, then the current treaty should be renewed. There is an opportunity for review or reevaluation within the present treaty. Initially, the treaty can be renewed, and subsequently, it can be reassessed.
Prothom Alo :
Prothom Alo: Besides the Ganges, there are 54 shared rivers between Bangladesh and India. We see that in the dry season our rivers do not receive water, while during the monsoon, sudden floods occur. Bangladesh's agriculture, economy, and livelihood depend on water. How crucial is a water-sharing treaty concerning shared rivers, including the Teesta, for Bangladesh, and what steps should we take?
Mohammad Abul Hossen: Besides the Ganges, water treaties must be formulated for other rivers. According to the Sustainable Development Goals, by 2030, 50 per cent of our country’s total transboundary basins need to be brought under treaty coverage. With a water treaty, we can devise appropriate plans for our rivers. Due to the absence of a treaty, we are unable to implement optimal water use plans. Our government has certain strategies and plans for executing water treaties, and we must work according to these strategies and plans.
Prothom Alo: Bangladesh has repeatedly relied on bilateral solutions in discussions about water with India. Can Bangladesh establish a more effective position by using a multilateral or international river management framework?
Mohammad Abul Hossen: India’s policy is bilateral dialogue, so it is not inclined towards multilateral discussions. However, in the context of international river management, if all the countries of a river basin plan together, the optimal benefits of the river can be achieved. We need to make India understand the advantages of basin-wide management. If Indian policymakers can be made to see the benefits they could gain from multilateral discussions, they might show interest.
Prothom Alo :
Prothom Alo: Besides India, we also share rivers with China. Some believe that it is essential for Bangladesh to take initiatives for broader regional water management with upstream countries. What should we do in this regard?
Mohammad Abul Hossen: If China, Bhutan, India, and Bangladesh form a Brahmaputra River Basin Commission, managing the river would become much easier, and maximum benefits could be derived from the river. Joint planning helps resolve many issues. There are 101 such river commissions globally, but unfortunately, there is none in South Asia. If such a commission were formed, basin-based management of rivers would become easier. If we want to achieve maximum benefits from the river, we must move towards basin-based management. We must establish a river basin organisation.
Prothom Alo :
Prothom Alo: You mentioned basin-based management. Could you explain this a bit more?
Mohammad Abul Hossen: Basin-based management involves countries in a river basin planning jointly to maximise benefits from the water and other resources of the river. It is a win-win solution for both parties where both benefit and none suffer. The main objective of basin-based management is to maximise the overall benefits derived from the river, including hydropower production, irrigation, fisheries, navigation, and environmental benefits.
Prothom Alo: How can basin-based management be implemented in South Asian countries?
Mohammad Abul Hossen: To ensure maximum benefits, a joint master plan can be formulated. For this, a shared information centre can be established, and joint information collection, joint research, and various climate-related studies can be conducted. This would include monitoring glaciers and managing sediment, among other things. Simultaneously, a joint flood forecast model can be developed. Opportunities for transporting goods via the Ganges-Brahmaputra-Irrawaddy-Salween-Mekong waterway should be created and improved, and coordinated initiatives should be taken to protect the river’s biodiversity and health.
Prothom Alo :
Prothom Alo: We see successes and failures in resolving transboundary water disputes around the world. What are the primary reasons for success and failure?
Mohammad Abul Hossen: There are about 276 transboundary rivers in the world, flowing through 145 countries. Shared rivers often become sources of tension and conflict between different countries. Five main reasons can be identified as contributing to success in resolving transboundary water disputes: one, political goodwill, which involves developing mutual trust, confidence, and cooperative relationships. Two, institutional arrangements or river basin organisations. Three, third-party mediation. Four, integrated river basin management (IRBM). Five, benefit-sharing or the method of dividing advantages. Similarly, we can highlight five reasons for failure: one, lack of cooperation or hostile relationships. Two, ignoring international law. Three, water dominance and military power disparity. Four, lack of institutional arrangements or mediators. Five, lack of integrated basin management.
Prothom Alo: You were talking about the concept of benefit-sharing. How can the benefit-sharing strategy be applied to the Ganges-Brahmaputra-Meghna basin?
Mohammad Abul Hossen: The benefit-sharing concept focuses on sharing the broad value created within a river system, rather than merely sharing water quantities. This method can bring benefits to the river by restoring its environment, improving water quality, and preserving biodiversity. By utilising water, direct economic benefits can be increased, such as boosting agricultural production, hydropower production, and fishery yields. When the river acts as a natural boundary, defence expenditures can be reduced. Cooperation over the river enhances regional connectivity, trade, transit facilities, and diplomatic cooperation. Engaging in a conflict over water is strategically unreasonable and economically unsustainable. Therefore, a multilateral benefit-sharing arrangement in the Ganges-Brahmaputra-Meghna basin can provide an effective path to resolution.
#This interview, originally published in Prothom Alo print and online editions, has been rewritten in English by Rabiul Islam