If Prime Minister Modi’s visit to Bangladesh goes down more as a ‘landmark’ than a watershed, it is perhaps because of the failure to ink a pact on the sharing of Teesta waters. However, both Bangladesh and India stand to gain from agreements to open up inland water transportation and coastal shipping routes. The 1972 Protocol on Inland Waterways Transit and Trade, which is renewed periodically, will improve India’s waterways’ access to its north-eastern States, while providing Bangladesh a similar right of way to Nepal and Bhutan. Bangladesh will also provide India access to its Chittagong and Mongla ports, so that goods from Kolkata or Haldia can be shipped by sea to these two ports and sent up north by road or rail to the North-East. The north-eastern States could experience an unprecedented change in their economic and political environment as a result of easier mobility and access to goods. The protocol’s renewal, along with the expectations generated by the Prime Minister’s visit, should give Indian port infrastructure developers the confidence to proceed. However, as researchers have pointed out, it is important to improve navigability along the eight protocol routes, open up new ones, introduce container services, and explore the best transport chain for efficient door-to-door delivery. Funds should not be seen as a constraint by either side, given the long-term economic and political benefits to be had. PPPs should work well in this context.

Despite the fact that the two countries share a 1,000-km-long riverine border and as many as 54 rivers, much of the bilateral trade is routed through land. Inland waterways are a neglected mode of transport in the subcontinent, despite its superior energy efficiency over road and rail. An impetus in Bangladesh could create a wave for the sector’s development in the rest of the region. But for these wishes to come true, the Teesta issue should be resolved soon. If it continues, it may force the Bangladesh government to drag its feet on other pacts as well. A breakthrough looks unlikely before the West Bengal elections due in 2016. India may have won a reprieve by extending a $2-billion line of credit, but the decades of resentment over water-sharing must be addressed.

It is also in India’s interest to ensure a satisfactory flow of water during the lean months — a task that involves a rejuvenation exercise starting from the catchment areas. An integrated river basin approach, not one which looks at water volumes at a particular place and time in isolation of other factors, is the way forward. Inland water transport will generate an ‘enlightened self-interest’ in protecting the health of rivers. It is also worth taking a hard look at upstream hydel projects, which cause flow distortions and disturb ecosystems and livelihoods downstream. If that involves other state actors such as Nepal and China, so be it. Didn’t the Prime Minister say in Dhaka that management of rivers should transcend borders?

Related Topics