Editorial
Death of a crash victim
The death of a woman badly burnt last week when a Bangladesh Air Force training plane crashed into a residence in Uttara raises anew our concerns for the safety of people when planes, commercial as well as military, fly over residential areas. We have written earlier on the issue and we have made it a point to ask the authorities to ensure that the flight paths of various aircraft are adjusted in such a way that they do not pose any risk to life in any way. Apart from the risk to life, there remains the very great danger of noise pollution, a factor that can lead to trouble for such people as children, the elderly and the ailing. Broadly speaking, the general rule in these times is that the trajectory airliners and jet fighters take ensure that the noise level is kept low, so much so that it may not even be noticed by people on the ground.
The Uttara crash should have served as a useful lesson for those who have been in charge of flight operations, of all kinds, in the BAF. However, even as we say this, we realise that the four-member inquiry board tasked with pinpointing the reasons for the crash has not yet submitted its report. One would have thought that a bit of efficiency would come in here, that as disciplined an organisation as the air force would have acted faster to go into the cause of the accident. We have now been informed that the report will be submitted soon and following the submission, the family affected by the jet crash will be compensated. That raises, unfortunately, the question of bureaucracy here once again. The plain and simple fact is that the home into which the jet fighter ploughed its way was destroyed completely by the impact of the fall. The media even reported, the day after the crash, on the very serious worries of the guardian of the family, a woman, about the sudden loss of shelter for her family. That was a week ago. Precisely what conditions the family has lived in since that time are not known. With the additional knowledge that the affected family has not yet been compensated for its loss, we can only imagine the economic troubles it is going through. The appeal that we will, therefore, make today is that the air force authorities make it a point to have the report on the crash submitted at the earliest opportunity. At the same time, though, let not the matter of compensation be kept tied to the report. A very clear reason behind such an argument is that the nature of the crash and the extent of damage it wrought are known in minute detail. It should have been for the authorities to come forth, on their own, with the necessary help to the affected family. That such help has not so far arrived remains a matter of sadness for everyone. While one understands that the jet crash was an accident in the simplest meaning of the term, one knows as well that the crash left some innocent, not very well-to-do people badly injured. And one of them is now dead. A question that one would like to raise here is whether those injured in the crash were and are being taken care of medically by the air force or other relevant governmental departments.
Let us renew our call for better safety standards in flying. Those standards must apply equally to crew, passengers (in the case of commercial airliners) and people on the ground. And that noise level we have been speaking about? It is an area that needs dealing with, quickly and firmly.
The saving of Michael Jackson
The acquittal of the singer Michael Jackson on all ten counts of child molestation comes as a huge relief to his fans the world over. In these past few months, the celebrity case has kept millions glued to the future, or otherwise, of a man who has been a star for nearly the whole of his life. Jackson, who began singing and performing on stage as a child, is in his mid-forties an individual whose every move is followed with unprecedented interest by people all over the world. His fans have included such important people as the actor Elizabeth Taylor. He has been married to some of the most beautiful women he has known. And his music has rocketed him to a position where he is today one of the richest artistes in the world, almost a cult figure. There is a whole generation of people who have grown into mature age on the beat of that well-known song, 'Beat It'.
Given such a background, the case of child molestation against Jackson seemed something of an anti-climax. And yet the charges were serious enough to warrant a fullscale investigation by the American authorities. The sixteen-week trial has clearly left its mark on the pop singer. He has, in the course of the court proceedings, been hospitalised. He has seemed shaken at the nosedive his reputation was taking. At one point, his failure to appear in court led to the judge ordering him to come immediately before the bench. Indeed, the entire trial process appeared to be leading to a situation where Jackson faced the prospect of a life being destroyed. A long spell in prison awaited him, so said some of the pundits. And that would be the ultimate humiliation for a star many of us have seen grow up before our very eyes.
The acquittal is something Michael Jackson may not have reflected on in his wildest imagination. When a convoy of cars escorted him from his Neverland ranch to a court in Santa Maria on Monday, the feeling among many was that he was not going to return to the place and would instead be put in a cell equipped with the very basics of life. None of that has happened. Jackson is now free to go ahead with a rebuilding of his career. Or perhaps he will decide to retire from music and move on to wider causes, humanitarian work, for instance. And then remains the very good possibility of a tell-all story of the self. Expect, too, in the near future quite a few individuals trying out what some call authorised and unauthorised biographies. That is what celebrity status is all about.
Of needs and misplaced priorities
Almost in a parallel world, we do wish India well though apparently they do not need that from the small neighbours, since they command and commandeer what they need in real terms:
water, gas, export market and soon,
writes Syed Muhammad Hussain
Recently there have been press reports indicating that Dhaka and New Delhi would soon sign an accord allowing Bangladesh to increase trade with Bhutan and Nepal, basically as part of a bigger agreement to build a 290-km pipeline from Myanmar gas fields to India. (Asian Times, London, 25 Jan, 2005) Bangladesh state minister for energy and mineral resources was apparently the person to have represented Bangladesh at this 'trade accord' negotiations. He stated to the press that part of the bilateral pact included transmission of power generated at hydro-plants in Bhutan and Nepal across India's grid to Bangladesh. He also informed that 'we proposed a corridor to transport goods to Nepal as well as import hydroelectricity from Nepal and Bhutan. We have also urged India to narrow the huge trade gap between india and Bangladesh'. Even to an uninitiated person the contradictions, the inconsistencies and the built-in dangers that characterise such an agreement, are crystal clear. It is not known whether this news has come out in Bangladesh media in any greater details.
It is to be especially noted here that India exports US$ 1.4 billion worth of products to Bangladesh while importing a mere US$ 100 million worth of goods and this gap has persisted over a very long period despite appeals made at the highest level from time to time. Now we are given to believe that the urging by the state minister of energy is expected to push India to take some corrective measures!
This is just one part of this deeply disturbing news. Let us take a look at the contradictions a little more closely. Under Bangladesh's official Rules of Business, any 'trade accord' must be within the competence of the Ministry Of Commerce and this Ministry is headed by a full Cabinet Minister. Secondly, the state minister admitted the true position of 'huge trade deficit' that continues to create unfair and unbearable pressure on this small country, but he still goes all out for an accord, that he has no authority to do in the first place. It so very visibly serves India's interest without even an assurance from her on the effective reduction in the current alarming trade gap. It is not even a substantive demand from us while an utterly trivial possibility of increased trade with Nepal and Bhutan makes us surrender to Indian machination of gaining a most vital gas supply line traversing through our land from Myanmar to West Bengal and in all possibility to Assam and the 'seven sisters' later. Thirdly, is the state minister aware that the combined trading volume between us and Nepal and Bhutan would hardly exceed US$ 20 million in the best possible future scenario? Is he aware that both these countries depend overwhelmingly on India for everything especially on exiting and transit and that the provision of an assured corridor would never be a reality not only due to India's own commercial interest, but also on the far important grounds of political control and security? It is Nepal's right as a landlocked country (in fact 'lndia-locked' would describe the reality better) to obtain access/transit facilities along the shortest route to seaports.
We have been shown some red herrings and we are being tied up in knots we even have no knowledge about, not to speak of countering such self-centred manouvres by a giant neighbour. And we are led willy-nilly to the slaughter house, perhaps with the assistance of pliant local agents who would sell their souls for thirty pieces of silver or even less. There are several other finer points, such as power generation in the two land-locked neighbours being in total control (and ownership in reality) of India and India's own energy demand will not leave any surplus for export to us. And the state minister ought to think twice if he is led to believe that these two countries would export power to us on their own volition.
II
The second part of the news reveals that on 19 January 2005 energy ministers from Myanmar, Bangladesh and India met in Yangon and discussed the proposed gas pipeline, estimated to cost over US$ I billion. And they agreed to form a six-member panel to finalise the details. Headed by the Director-General of Myanmar Ministry of Energy, the final report would be submitted by March. Bangladesh state minister for energy stated adding with an assurance, which must appear misplaced and presumptuous that "after receiving the report , we will meet again, may be in Dhaka, to sign the agreement". How is he so certain that there would be nothing in that report that goes against the interest of Bangladesh and that the Prime Minister would approve it at that time without wishing to safeguard the country's essential interests, considering the persistent Indian intransigence in other matters?
Have we evaluated a mid-January 2005 statement by the Indian minister of state for Home Affairs, who, while accusing Nepalese Maoist insurgents of operating in Indian territory in Assam, warned Bangladesh not to allow its territory to be used by Indian separatists? Mr.Sriprakash Jaiswal tersely said, "We want Bangladesh to demolish all Indian rebel camps so that they are not able to carry out their hit-and-run guerilla strikes from there." (India Weekly, London,21-27 January,2005 p.22 ).While mentioning that terrorist infiltration across the border in Kashmir had fallen with the border fencing nearing completion, he added, "Similar efforts are on along our border with Bangladesh to put up a barbed wire fence and in some places, to erect electric fences to prevent illegal infiltration of Bangladeshi nationals and to check the movement of militants." Apparently, the Bangladesh Foreign Minister's categorical announcement a few months back that there were no such camps and that he would welcome Indian authorities to visit any place to ascertain the actual position for themselves and its obvious follow-up with in-depth briefing by Bangladesh High Commissioner in New Delhi, have had no credible impact on Indian mind. And this is the kind of neighbour we are bending over backwards to do business with, however demeaning and ruinous that might be. A nation's sovereignty is marked by its honour and dignity-with India we do not seem to have any of it left!
It is further stated that apart from a trade corridor and transmission rights, Dhaka included other conditions for the pipeline,which would enter eastern Bangladesh via Brahmanbaria and cross into West Bengal through the northern Rajshahi border. These included the right for Bangladesh to buy gas from Myanmar, if needed, management of the pipeline and access to transmit Bangladesh gas through the line for export at a later date. State minister for energy has also gone on record by claiming that Bangladesh 'expects' to get about US$35OmiIIion. in investment and to earn US$IOO milIion. in annual transmission fees.
Since the state minister is categorical about signing the agreement, he must be having absolute advance knowledge of the final recommendations the Myanmar Panel would come up with and he must have had the full approval of a trilateral agreement of such magnitude and must have examined all the ramifications on the welfare and interest of Bangladesh. Both these at this stage, can only be an exercise in crystal-ball gazing, unless there are more things in concealment than in the open. Only a joint statement or press release will not be enough. There are extremely sensitive issues and there are a series of legal questions and liabilities of a long pipeline passing through the land and its management, the calculation base of the carrot, merits of the stipulations we are supposed to have included and so on.
Two elements, inter alia, appear deeply intriguing. One, why should we be considering importing gas from Myanmar at this stage or even in the next 20/30 years? And, two: how do we propose to use the same gas pipeline, which IndoMyanmar supplies would keep pretty much occupied, to export our gas and if at all, exactly where and when? Such provisions are meaningless till the pricing at the relevant future date is known to us to enable us to judge whether such imports/exports would benefit us. Do we need to rent a transport right now for possible use far in future, if at all? And why should we become so beholden to them for such obviously non-starter favours and the ones like the trade expansion with Nepal and Bhutan and the 'trade corridor' through India, as referred to earlier.
We have been taken up the garden path many a time, but our persistent inability, ignorance and, shall we add, absence of integrity has utterly devastated our country's prospects for a better life and living over the past three decades.
III
Almost in a parallel world, we do wish India well though apparently they do not need that from the small neighbours, since they command and commandeer what they need in real terms: water, gas, export market and soon. Hence, we are not at all surprised to see 'India's energy diplomacy yields results' headlined in India Weekly (London, 14-20 January, 2005). Though this uncannily coincides with their signal success in dealing with us and Myanmar (we hope Yangon has got a decent deal out of it!) and get the gas pipeline (or is it life line for them?) across poor Bangladesh, this particular high-profile victory relates to India getting assurance of investments and cooperation at the bilateral talks with major oil producing and consuming countries over three days of the Regional Energy Round-Table - first of its kind held in India and attended among others by the petroleum ministers of Saudi Arabia, Iran and China and others such as Kuwait, Qatar and Japan. India not only signed a 25-year agreement with Tehran for supplying 7.5m tonnes of LNG annually from 2009, India has been given stakes in two oil fields in Iran, one yielding 60,000 barrels per day for India and the other with 100 per cent buy-back guarantee. Furthermore, for the first time India has received China's assurance of cooperation, rather than the aggressive competition that has characterised their mutual search for energy. India's gain is highly significant due to her Minister for Petroleum and Natural Gas Mani Shankar lyer's consummate diplomatic skill that outweighed China's obvious advantage with US$ 47 billion investment in overseas exploration ventures, as compared to India's paltry US$ 3 billion. Moreover, India's position has been so much more strengthened through the participating oil producing and consuming countries' assurance of investment not only in refining but also in other downstream sectors in India. Qatar and Saudi Arabia have invited Indian companies to explore further investment opportunities in their countries and in exploration - a huge boost for India's expanding private sector in energy. Japan is also following through some of the proposals discussed at the Round Table, as India is also seeking Japanese expertise to hold longterm stocks for commercial petroleum supplies and emergency needs.
It is noteworthy that India's estimated gap between demand and supply has been increasing due to the fast increase in consumption. By 2020, India will only meet 15 per cent of its demand, as opposed to the current 30 per cent. India's energy aggression, by whatever manner or means is real and ruthless. And Mani Shankar lyer as a seasoned diplomat knows that their national interest and India's almost certain global role, must dictate the shape and contents of their energy policies. And he seems to be very much the right person at the right place at the right time.
IV
The above sets the backdrop and the larger picture. We could if we work hard enough and present our case with knowledge, competence and commitment, still moderate, if not prevent, the deluge. Many years ago I wrote that we are facing a future when we will witness our gas disappearing across the border, while the waters in our rivers stop flowing into our lands, almost. In another artile, I suggested specifically that our discussions on gas exports, pipelines, transit issues with India be kept on hold until some glimmer of hope of a solution to the sharing of waters of Teesta and other international and common rivers, emerged. The Teesta talks have failed yet again, si other rivers are on the back burner, releases of waters in the Ganges have not been as these should be under the 1996 Treaty. But the state minister for energy has gone right ahead and pawned the onlly strong bargaining chips we have had for our sheer survival. But then could he, in fact can he, do it alone!
One can perhaps suggest that the authorities consider as a measure of urgency, taking, inter alia, the following actions:
First, set up of a Cabinet subcommittee with the Ministers of Foreign Affairs, Commerce, Energy, Water Resources and Home Affairs to examine critically all the major paradigms in our current state of relationship with India; assess realistically all our options in all major sectors, and prepare a set of actionable recommendations in the best possible national interest ,commensurate with the sovereign dignity of the state. As is well-known, informed non-action is much preferable to ill-conceived haste in matters affecting so deeply the long-term welfare of the country and its people. This report is to be strictly on a need-to-know basis.
Secondly, major points in the shape of a self-contained 'White Paper' should be presented to Parliament for its consideration in camera. Thereafter, all appropriate aspects of these developments should be brought into the public domain as the people have the right to know where exactly the country is heading from here on.
The writer is a former ambassador and secretary to the government of Bangladesh
MAIN PAGE | TOP
|
|
