Main Page «
Front Page «
Metro «
Business «
International «
Sports «
National «
Op-Ed «
Home «
Timeout «
Letters «

Archive «
Launch Supplement «
Special Supplements «

IT IS shocking, to say the least, that local government, rural development and cooperatives minister Syed Ashraful Islam has chosen to come to the defence of Indian high commissioner Pinak Ranjan Chakravarty over the latter’s denigrating remarks about the country’s water experts and environmentalists, that too at the expense of his cabinet colleague, foreign minister Dipu Moni. According to reports published in the media on Friday, Ashraf defended Chakravarty’s contention that Bangladeshi experts and environmentalists’ concern over the controversial Tipaimukh Dam project was ‘politically motivated’ as ‘frank’ opinion of ‘the representative of a friendly neighbouring country’, in the process dismissing the foreign minister’s ‘personal view’ that the Indian high commissioner ‘might have stepped out of line in his remarks.’ If the LGRD minister really believes Chakravarty has not breached any diplomatic norms, the obvious question that arises is what then, in his view, constitutes a breach of diplomatic norms.
   Here, it is pertinent to revisit the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations and analyse Chakravarty’s statements on Tipaimukh and other issues in light of the convention. Article 41 (1) of the convention stipulates that foreign diplomats ‘have a duty not to interfere in the internal affairs’ of the receiving state. On June 21, for instance, the Indian high commissioner told a seminar on regional connectivity in the capital Dhaka that ‘some so-called water experts’ were making comments about the Tipaimukh project ‘without considering some of the issues’ and ‘basically attempting to poison the minds of friendly people of Bangladesh against India.’ He also dismissed allegations that India was depriving Bangladesh of due share of the Ganges waters as ‘empty political slogans’ and accused ‘some people’ of ‘trying to derive political mileage over the water share of common rivers.’ In a similar vein, Chakravarty criticised in July 2008 ‘huge politicisation’ the issue of transit, which he said was ‘an economic issue’ and ‘not a political issue at all.’
   Chakravarty may be unable or unwilling to recognise that whether or not a country should enter into a deal with another or protest against a potentially harmful project by its neighbour in the international forum is essentially a political issue but the fact remains that it is only natural – and imperative, in fact – that any issue of national interest should be debated in society, especially by the political class. As a diplomat, he is obliged to not take any side of such debates. However, the Indian high commissioner has increasingly become a party to the debate on the Tipaimukh project at the national level, which is nothing short of interference in the internal affairs of Bangladesh. Hence, whether Ashraf realises it or not, Chakravarty is in breach of diplomatic norms as defined in the Vienna Convention.
   Regrettably still, Ashraf sought to justify Chakravarty’s remarks by saying envoys of different countries, including the United States and China, at different times have talked openly about internal issues of Bangladesh. If so, those envoys were also in breach of diplomatic norms and they only got away because of opportunism on the part of the country’s political elite. It is the political leaders who have allowed the diplomats to merrily intrude into our internal affairs, sometimes by brazenly soliciting such intrusion to further their parochial ambitions at the expense of national interests.
   Be s/he the representative of a ‘friendly neighbour’ or a ‘powerful country’, no diplomat has the right to interfere in the internal affairs of Bangladesh. If anyone is found to have done so, the government should immediately ask the sending state for his or her immediate recall. In the case of Chakravarty, the government should do just that, unless, of course, it is willing to compromise the dignity of our sovereign state.

Ill-maintained electric
wires are death traps

DHAKA is not only an overcrowded and disorderly city; it now seems that it is also a very dangerous city. Public safety is not a preoccupying concern of the utility services and civic bodies. Open manholes hidden under rainwater, frail billboards swaying in stormy wind, old and ramshackle houses worn down by torrential rain, besides poor traffic management make living in Dhaka city unnecessarily hazardous. And now the old, live electric wires have become death traps. The electric wires are run down over the years and no maintenance takes place due to which they pose a hazard to city residents. Four people died from electrocution in a couple days in Dhaka when they came in contact with live electric wires. A tragedy occurred in Gabtala, Moghbazar when a woman and her domestic help died by coming in contact with live wires on Thursday. The tragedy came on the heels of an earlier incident on Wednesday when another woman and her four-year-old son died after being electrocuted in Nazimuddin Road in the old town.
   A New Age report published on Friday quotes the Dhaka Power Distribution Company Limited managing director as admitting that power distribution lines in the capital have become risky as they were maintained with age-old wires that had not been rehabilitated in years. The Dhaka Power Distribution Company’s defence is that they have inherited the ill-maintained distribution lines from DESA only a year ago and that they are rehabilitating the supply lines in phases. If safety of residents is a priority with the Dhaka Power Distribution Company then one year must be considered sufficient time to render their system safe. At any rate, has the company identified the priority areas requiring urgent rehabilitation? Did they make any survey or heed the complaint from residents? There is the allegation that torn wires are frequently seen lying on the road, and after transformers burst and the authorities are informed, no prompt action is taken.
   Two committees have been set up to investigate if any negligence occurred causing four valuable lives. We trust the committees will identify the flaws and shortcomings in this regard. It should also be probed thoroughly whether and how promptly the company responds to public complaints. It should be remembered that power distribution is a 24/7 service. Monsoon has set in and the worn out lines can be more risky. Finally, there is the question of compensation to the victims of neglect. Even if no neglect is proved and deaths were just accidents, the company is liable for compensation.

THE concept of Asian Highway was first conceived in 1959 to bring the Asian countries closer through promoting trade and commerce, cultural exchanges, tourism, and people-to-people contact. Rapid economic growth in the Asia-Pacific region created a huge demand for improved, reliable and cost-effective road networks to connect regional countries to transport goods and therefore the Asian Highway project saw tremendous progress throughout the 1960s, 70s and 80s with the help of member countries. The intergovernmental agreement on the Asian Highway project was signed on November 18, 2003 and became effective on July 4, 2005. Twenty-six billion dollars has already been invested in the project and talks are underway with the member countries to raise another $18 billion to improve the road transport capacity and efficiency of the network (www.unescap.org).
   Asian countries are expected to derive the following benefits by connecting through the multi-billion dollar highway project: integration of regional economy through boosting trade and commerce; enhanced economic and social interactions through promoting tourism; regional cooperation in harnessing natural resources to maximise economic benefits; and fostering trust, stability and peace among the member countries.
   Although experts argue that economic benefits overweigh the risks associated with the highway project, there are certain risks involved such as increased exposure to HIV/AIDS and other life-threatening diseases; increased risks of human and drug trafficking; increased risks of environmental degradation; and increased risks of terrorist attacks on people and transport infrastructures.
   The Asian Highway has become a controversial political issue in Bangladesh because of conflicting choice of routes by Bangladesh and India. The three proposed routes are AH-1 – India-Benapole-Jessore-Dhaka-Kachpur-Sylhet-Tamabil; AH-2 – India-Hati Kumrul-Dhaka-Kachpur-Sylhet-Tamabil; and AH-41 – India-Mongla-Jessore-Hati Kumrul-Dhaka-Kachpur-Chittagong-Cox’s Bazar-Teknaf-Myanmar.
   While Bangladesh prefers AH-41 because it is the shortest and most cost-effective to transport goods to ASEAN countries and China, India prefers the other routes because they connect its north-eastern states to the mainland through Bangladesh before connecting to Myanmar. Many experts in the country are of the opinion that the preferred routes of India would diminish strategic and economic advantages of Bangladesh because they are the longest and have both the entry and exit points in India. In light of the above discussion, let’s do an impact analysis for each of the routes proposed by the UNESCAP.
   
   AH 1 and 2
   Economic impact
   These are the longest and economically unprofitable routes to connect to ASEAN states because the additional freight charges, when added to the cost of production, will raise the product price for Bangladesh to lose price competition and therefore the lucrative ASEAN market.
   Bangladesh will lose competitive advantage vis-à-vis India as the latter will be able to transport goods to its north-eastern states at a much cheaper price, and therefore Bangladesh’s chances to expand her export market into India will be lost.
   India, being the entry and exit points of these two routes, will be able to control Bangladesh’s external trade, in particular and the economy, in general. Once India starts to exert its influence on Bangladesh’s external trade relations with other nations, they will expand their influence into other areas of vital national interest.
   Losing strategic advantage to India could mean attaining lower than expected economic growth affecting reduction of poverty level, eradication of unemployment, and Bangladesh’s ambition to be a major economic power in the region.
   The combination of small domestic market and uncertain export markets in the neighbourhood, e.g. northeast India, ASEAN and China may have an adverse impact on the industrialisation process, reducing us to a mere trading nation.
   
   Social impact
   Bangladesh may be a victim of health hazards due to the absence of sound healthcare system in the underdeveloped northeast India and the lack of adequate surveillance and monitoring mechanism in the vast Indo-Bangla border to control the spread of diseases. Contagious and life-threatening diseases such as AIDS might spread within Bangladesh if proper management and control mechanism is not put in place, which, by the way, is exorbitantly expensive.
   Lack of economic opportunities in northeast India may cause mass migration of people to Bangladesh to alter the existing demographic composition, which may create a plethora of socioeconomic problems.
   Due to poor border management, Bangladesh may experience alarmingly high criminal activities such as smuggling, drug trafficking from across the border.
   
   Security impact
   The implementation of these two particular routes may pose grave security danger to Bangladesh as the home-grown insurgent groups within northeast India may conduct subversive activities within Bangladesh to sabotage the trade link between India’s mainland and troubled north-eastern states.
   Local criminals may use these routes for their movements to and from India to commit serious crimes and escape from the law enforcement agencies. The same routes may also be used to smuggle lethal weapons into Bangladesh from India.
   In the absence of adequate inspection and monitoring resources, the customs and other law enforcement agencies will be unable to inspect the contents of each and every northeast-bound transport vehicle. This inadequacy of Bangladesh may be used to transport military hardware to troubled north-eastern states to quell insurgencies.
   The transportation of military hardware to northeast India may be construed as a declaration of war and set the security agencies of Bangladesh on a collision course with the insurgents in northeast India putting the lives and properties of the people in danger.
   
   Strategic impact
   If implemented, these routes will open the door for India to consolidate its foothold in the northeast, stabilise the current turbulent situation in the region, end the geographic isolation of north-eastern region and diminish Bangladesh’s only strategic advantage over India.
   The strategic value of the ‘chicken neck’ will be diminished both to China and Bangladesh and in a conflict situation India will be able to use Bangladesh as a military corridor against China to protect its mountainous state – Arunachal Pradesh.
   As a consequence, China may resort to military action to destroy India’s military supply lines through Bangladesh and cut the north-eastern region off the mainland to gain military advantage. This action could push the war between India and China into Bangladesh territory and cause serious deteriorations in the relationship between Bangladesh and China.
   In overall calculation, Bangladesh will be the net loser for it will end up being a battleground between China and India and lose China as a strategic ally to discover herself alone in a hostile neighbourhood, which will inevitably subject herself to Indian domination.
   
   AH 41
   Economic impact
   This is the shortest and economically profitable route to connect to ASEAN states through which Bangladesh will be able to transport goods at the shortest time and at the minimum cost. If implemented, Bangladesh will be able to gain competitive advantage in the ASEAN market due to time and cost advantage.
   Using her competitive advantage, Bangladesh will also be able to establish profitable economic relations with northeast India by delivering the right product at the right time and at the right price.
   Bangladesh will be able to define her trade relations with the rest of the world independently because, unlike AH-1 and AH-2, AH-41 creates a mutually dependent relationship among the connected countries.
   Using her strategic geographic location and port facilities, Bangladesh will be able to attain high economic growth rate through extracting economic benefits from northeast Indian and ASEAN markets, reduce poverty level, eradicate unemployment and achieve major economic power status in the region.
   The expanding domestic and international market for Bangladeshi products will accelerate the process of industrialisation through product innovation, process improvement and technology development.
   
   Social impact
   The benefits of increased economic activities will be felt through higher standard of living, improved health care system and reduced crimes in the society.
   Economic emancipation will create mass awareness about human rights and social justice to establish social harmony through eradicating exploitation, deprivation and misuse of power.
   The risk of mass migration of people from underdeveloped northeast India to alter the existing demographic composition will be minimised and the opportunity for equal distribution of wealth will be maximised.
   The cross-border criminal activities could be kept at a minimum through sound border management to ensure peace and stability in the border areas.
   
   Security impact
   The threats of sabotaging trade links by northeast Indian insurgent groups will be totally eliminated due to the absence of direct road links with northeast India.
   More efficient and effective control of cross-border movement of criminals, arms smuggling and drug trafficking through small Bangla-Myanmar border.
   The risk of inadvertent involvement in the conflict between India and its northeast insurgent groups will be minimised as India cannot use this route to transport military goods to its turbulent north-eastern states.
   Improved relations between security forces of Bangladesh and Myanmar to remove suspicion and mistrust and to foster understanding and cooperation based on mutual trust and interest.
   
   Strategic impact
   Bangladesh will retain her strategic advantage over India and continue to hold the key to stability and economic development of geographically isolated northeast India to use it as a bargaining chip to extract concessions from India in other areas of interest.
   The absence of a military corridor through Bangladesh means the strategic value of ‘chicken neck’ will not diminish as this will still remain as the only fragile link between India and its north-eastern states.
   India’s perpetual reliance on strategic ‘chicken neck’ to supply military logistics to its north-eastern states will minimise the risk for Bangladesh to get involved in a conflict between India and China.
   If implemented, this route will make Bangladesh the indispensable bridge between SAARC and ASEAN and transform her into the nerve centre of regional economic activities.
   Bangladesh will remain as an important strategic player in South Asia because of her unique geographic location vis-à-vis India and continue to be a valued partner of China and the rest of the world through positively affecting the strategic direction of the region to achieve stability and prosperity.
   In the final analysis, it is imperative that the government of Bangladesh take cognisance of abovementioned factors to choose the most appropriate route to connect to China and ASEAN countries to maximise economic, political and strategic benefits and to minimise the risks of losing strategic advantage by ensuring mutual interdependence and balance of power with other member countries.
   Shah Mohammed Saifuddin is founder of the Bangladesh Strategic and Development Forum