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

Archive «
Launch Supplement «
Special Supplements «

INDIA might exercise unwarranted control over Bangladesh’s transport system, if Dhaka allows New Delhi to invest in development of infrastructure – road, railway and river port – for transhipment of its goods through the country, so fear a number of foreign policy experts. According to a report front-paged in New Age on Thursday, the government should mobilise domestic resources to upgrade the transport infrastructure and thus keep complete control over the movement of vehicles through the country. Both their apprehension and advice appear firmly grounded in logic and geopolitical reality.
   It is common knowledge that New Delhi has long been pressing Dhaka for transit/transhipment facilities and has also offered to invest in development of Bangladesh’s infrastructure. The underlying reason for its persistence is not difficult to ascertain. A transit corridor through Bangladesh would make transportation of goods from one part of India to another, especially in the northeast, easier and cost-effective. Thus, it is quite understandable why Delhi has stepped up its diplomatic oeuvres to secure a transit/transhipment agreement with Dhaka.
   As one foreign policy expert has pointed out, Dhaka should, therefore, try to ‘cash in on India’s compulsion’ and ‘think about long-term funding to establish regional connectivity, not merely India connectivity.’ However, the Awami League-led government has appeared increasingly preoccupied with the Bangladesh-India connectivity more than anything else. Its single-track preoccupation has been apparent in its choice of the route that will link Bangladesh with the Asian Highway. Of three routes proposed by the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific, the government has articulated its preference for the two routes, both of which begin from and exits into India after going through Bangladesh. Its preference runs counter to the very rationale why Bangladesh should be connected with the Asian Highway, i.e. greater interconnectivity. Needless to say, the third route, which starts from India, goes through Bangladesh and enters Myanmar before linking with Southeast Asia, appears a better choice in terms of connectivity.
   Worryingly still, the government has appeared somewhat secretive about its decisions and actions with regard to offering transit facilities to India. In fact, Dhaka agreed to allow India to use the Bangladesh territory to carry goods to Tripura during a meeting the foreign minister, Dipu Moni, and her Indian counterpart, SM Krisna, in New Delhi on September 8. One expects the government to table such a crucial issue for deliberation in the parliament before making any decision in this regard. Now, the government appears inclined to allow Delhi to invest in developing of infrastructure for transportation of goods from one part of India to another, so suggests the comment of a ruling party member of the parliamentary standing committee on the foreign ministry.
   The government needs to realise that development of infrastructure, be it for regional connectivity or state-to-state connectivity, is not only about economic gains but also about national interest and pride. Hence, it should not make any decision that might eventually undermine the national interest and pride.

JS panel gets one right, two wrong

It is heartening that a parliamentary standing committee has recommended repeal of a provision that stipulated appointment of bureaucrats to run the affairs of union councils in case of the absence of the elected representative. The parliamentary standing committee on the local government, rural development and cooperatives ministry reportedly recommended repeal of this provision that was incorporated into the relevant law during the tenure of the military-controlled interim government. The parliamentary committee, however, did not make any recommendations about what could be done in case the union council chairman is absent or indisposed. The matter can be easily likened to the country’s governance at the top level. Appointing a bureaucrat to run the union council should be regarded just as ridiculous as it would be if the cabinet secretary were to fill in as the chief executive in the absence of the prime minister. Although there is no set rule, the prime minister generally nominates a senior cabinet member with wide acceptance to fill in as the government’s chief executive. This happens across the world and there is no reason why this should not be followed at the union council level as well where there are 12 more elected representatives, the ward members, to choose from.
   The same parliamentary committee also recommended scrapping two more provisions of the same act where there are strong reservations. One of the two provisions barred defaulters of government utility bills from taking part in elections and another stipulated the submission of certain items of information—education, criminal record and so on—by every candidate. Both these provisions should be retained, if not made stronger, in the interest of the voters who would then be all the more well-informed. It is not necessary that candidates have a certain level of education or that they have lily white criminal history, but it should be necessary for them to disclose whatever there is to the voters. Furthermore, if one is seeking public office then the individual must show responsibility and accountability in private life. Anyone so irresponsible as to default on public utility bills cannot be expected to perform well with the more demanding responsibilities of a public office.
   The parliamentary standing committee’s recommendations on the whole appear not to be driven by democratic principles but apparently to pander towards a predetermined goal appeasing the political coterie at the grassroots level and relaxing, as much as possible, their public obligations just to make it easier for them to participate in the elections. The government would do well to consider the parliamentary body’s recommendations with a more democratic spirit that would surely warrant appreciation of the first recommendation and ignoring the latter two.

The earthquake that rocked north-eastern India on September 22, which measured 6.3 on the Richter scale and was of a reasonably long duration, was the fifth in the past 40 days. Located in the foothills of the Himalayas, north-eastern India is bracketed in the highest seismic zone of South Asia, where the three Eurasian, Indian, and Myanmar tectonic plates collide in a subduction mechanism. With this unique tectonic setting and coupled with massive geo-tectonic movements recorded during the past several years, geo-scientists have placed this region in the most fragile zone in the seismic map of the continent. North-eastern India has experienced some of the most devastating earthquakes during the past hundred years. Statistics shows that between 1897 and 1952, there were 44 earthquakes that measured 6.5 or more on the Richter scale. Similarly, between 1953 and 1992, the region had 21 earthquakes of similar intensity. Ignoring the geological and seismic vulnerability and recent warning of the rapid melting of the Himalayas, India is going for a 162.8-metre high dam on the river Barak of north-eastern India, with a storage capacity of 15,900 million cubic metres.
   Besides this seismic vulnerability with its hidden dangers of a massive dam break, it has also sparked another serious controversy on water sharing between India and Bangladesh in relation to the Farakka Barrage conflict. India is taking advantages of its regional hegemony and geo-position as upper riparian, causing colossal damage to the Bangladeshi agro-economy by unilateral and disproportionate diversion of the Ganges water by the barrage. The case of the Tipaimukh dam is, however, different from the Farakka Barrage, as it would have a huge storage reservoir.
   The geological constraints of the dam site have been reported by Dr Soibam Ibotombi of the Department of Earth Sciences at the University of Manipur, India. According to the report, the tectonic features of the dam site have developed geological faults and fractures that might undergo strike-slip and extensional movements if loaded with the weight of the dam alone. Therefore, these geological faults could be further displaced with accelerated rate by any moderate and large earthquakes and if the dam axis is displaced by a few centimetres a massive disaster leading to huge loss of lives and property in downstream areas could occur.
   Putting all seismic and geological constraint aside, no heed is being paid to the protest of local communities and lower riparian Bangladesh and completely ignoring the UN convention on international watercourses. The enormous weight, about 15.9 billion tonnes of water, would bear on the substrata of the dam site could not have been taken into consideration, as scientists today have identified more than 100 cases of earthquakes triggered by reservoirs.
   The most serious precedence of dam or reservoir-induced seismicity is the 7.9-magnitude Sichuan earthquake in May 2008, linked to the construction of the Zipingpu Dam. The case of Sichuan earthquake was presented at the American Geophysical Union and, findings also published in the Chinese Geology and Seismology Journal. The devastating earthquake killed 68,000 people and left about 11 million people homeless. China is spending $146.5 billion to rebuild areas ravaged by the earthquake. In a recent study, it was found that the Zipingpu Dam project was the cause of this devastation. Earthquakes were very unusual for the area as no previous seismic activities were ever recorded.
   The Indian authorities ought to remember that triggered by an earthquake of 6.3 magnitude caused because of the filling of a dam flattened the village of Koynanagar in Maharashtra, western India, on December 11, 1967, killing around 180 people, injuring 1,500 and rendering thousands homeless. The dam was seriously damaged and power cut off to Bombay, causing panic among its populace, who felt the quake 230 kilometres from its epicentre. The epicentre of the tremor and numerous fore and aftershocks were all either near the Koyna Dam or under its reservoir.
   At a seminar on ‘water dispute in South Asia’, held in Dhaka on August 18-19, in which the water resources secretary of the Bangladesh government disclosed that the Tipaimukh dam was conceived in 1955 but the then erstwhile Pakistani government never agreed to its construction. But, immediately after the independence of Bangladesh, the Indian prime minister rushed to Dhaka to set the Indo-Bangladesh Joint Rivers Commission and in the very first meeting of the commission, India informed Bangladesh of the Tipaimukh project. And, since the same meeting Bangladesh continuously has been asking India for data on the Tipaimukh Dam project. However, the Indian authorities did not share any study report or design on the dam. This attitude of India shows that there is no technical or scientific study detail behind the theoretically redundant project to share with all stakeholders except agenda to impose its hegemony over South Asia
   The height of the Zipingpu dam is 150 metres and total weight of filled water was 1.12 billion tonnes, thirteen times less than the proposed capacity of the Tipaimukh Dam. Above all, its sub-geological features were more stable than those of the Tipaimukh dam site. In the light of findings of Sichuan earthquake, seismic vulnerability, tectonic plate formation and the presence of geological faults, the Tipaimukh Dam is technically and financially not viable. In this scenario, pursuing a project blindly would be not only sheer waste of public money but also a potential seismic bomb for the region. The objective of a dam which is to control floods and provide hydroelectric power generation could also be achieved by adopting alternative methods.
   There is no doubt that frequency and intensity of floods are on the rise in the region but its root cause is massive deforestation, compounded with rapid population growth and uncontrolled development in Brahmaputra Basin. Because of increased warming of the Himalayas, the solution to floods in the Basin lie in integrated watershed management. This would necessitate immediate afforestation to increase vegetative cover and coupled with rainwater harvesting techniques it could achieve the same objective with less investment and above all without disturbing the ecology of a fragile and fractured region. Similarly, hydro electric power could be generated by run-of-river option requiring minimal water pondage. Indian authorities need to shelve Tipaimukh dam project immediately to avert the lurking danger of a massive earthquake in the region.
   Arshad H Abbasi is a visiting research fellow at the SDPI-Islamabad and conducted research on earthquake 2005 with collaboration of the University of Zurich Switzerland-Southern. ahabasi@gmail.com

THERE are no shortcuts to the problem of Indian students in Australia because Canberra’s desire to become an educational hub – a lucrative proposition – collides with reality on at least two counts. An undercurrent of racial prejudice, which bubbles to the surface on the slightest provocation, is a fact of Australian life. On the Indian side, the tendency to stick together is exacerbated by the character of the student body and the desire of many to employ education as a ploy to become permanent residents Down Under.
   It was not so long ago that a White Australia policy was the law of the land, and for decades Australia has been wrestling with the dilemma of how to define itself. Traditionally, it has considered itself as an outpost of the western civilisation, but it is marooned in an Asian sea. Indeed, some Australian leaders tried somewhat fitfully to engage with Asia to become honorary Asians. Australia has been famously called the lucky country with a small population and an abundance of natural resources, but there is a latent fear of Asian hordes crowding in to claim a share in the pot of gold.
   This Australian dilemma has been exacerbated by the economic downturn, relatively benign in Australia’s case, and the economic empowerment of small town families in India to dream big. In many cases, families set aside their hard-earned money to give their sons a new start in life and seize the rainbow on the horizon. Such students, who go to Australia usually to take courses in areas well-served by Indian entities, are mainly interested in finding long-term employment.
   By the nature of their upbringing, these Indian students are not equipped to deal with an alien way of life and culture, and the fact that they have to scrimp on money and take demanding jobs to see themselves through makes them vulnerable targets. Their lack of proficiency in English is a great handicap. Understandably, they live in rundown or seedy neighbourhoods and often live among Australians on the margins of poverty. A more prosperous student from a metropolitan city would live in better neighbourhoods and possess the ability to cope with Australian mores.
   Against the background of racial prejudice, the evolution of Australia as the poorer Indian student’s foreign education destination has spelled trouble. A host of mushroom institutions and less than sterling travel agents have sprung up to cater to a rising demand and money-making possibilities. Although an attempt is now being made to try to weed out fly-by-night educational institutions and unscrupulous travel and screening agents, the Australian authorities will discover that it is but the tip of the iceberg.
   As attacks on Indian students have mounted, Australia has acted in two ways. It has sent a stream of dignitaries to assure India that it means well and has sought to strengthen the legal and policing instruments to tackle a growing menace. Canberra must realise that screening out unsuitable students at the Indian end must form the basis of any effective plan to reduce the consequences of ill-equipped men and women facing the rigours of Australian life. Inevitably, the level of racial prejudice is highest among the poorer and less well-educated sections of the white population.
   The attempt on the part of the authorities in Australia and India is to control the fallout on inter-state relations of the understandable sense of shock and outrage as one Indian student after another is bashed up, some ending up in hospitals. These incidents have led the students in Australia to organise themselves to protest and give voice to their grievances. However, retaliation in kind is hardly the answer, as the Australian prime minister, Kevin Rudd, has reminded them. New Delhi has made known its concern to Canberra in an ample measure and the efficacy of remedial steps will depend upon their speed.
   On the Indian authorities rests the responsibility of widely publicising the nature of Australian mores and the rigours of student life there. Although it is a citizen’s right to study where he or she wants to, an advisory screening committee should be instituted to draw attention to the obvious misfits. A joint Indian-Australian mechanism to exchange lists of suitable candidates would help.
   Australia is an important country for India for its natural resources and the space it occupies in an area of vital interest. Although Japan’s former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe might have been extravagant in proposing a ‘broader Asia’ partnership among Japan, Australia, the United States and India, there are obvious areas of convergence between India and Australia. From Canberra’s point of view, Chinese opposition to any such plan makes it a non-starter, apart from the fact that New Delhi would have its own reservations.
   Australia is still finding its place in Asia even while its decision to rely primarily on American power in its strategic calculations is being fine-tuned to the reality of the nature and extent of its trade and economic relations with China. Canberra sided with China in voting against India in describing Arunachal Pradesh as disputed territory in a vote in the Asian Development Bank. Later, it has sought to explain that it was neutral on the Sino-Indian dispute and was in favour of development aid for the state.
   Australia’s attitude is not as strange as it might appear because China has a growing regional and international profile and although Canberra is understandably skittish in giving China a significant stake in the country’s major natural resources industries — it vetoed a Chinese stake in a mining major recently — there are compelling reasons for Australia to guard its Chinese flank. Which goes to prove that the emotional issue of the treatment of Indian students should be resolved quickly to ensure that it does not add a new layer of complexity to Indian-Australian relations.