Conclusion

Fresh water resources have become increasingly scarce due to sharp rise

in demand of water for food production, drinking, sanitation and

economic activities like industrial production, hydroelectricity generation,

fisheries, navigation etc. The river run off which is most important source

of fresh water for human consumption and needs are naturally organised

into river basins. River follow its own rule of evolution and flowage and

while flowing ignores man made political boundaries. The transboundary

waters i.e., watercourse or water bodies parts of which are situated m

different states (nations), have become source of dispute due to rise m

demand of freshwater, increasing resource consciousness, diversification

and intensification of use and cross border impacts of ecological

degradation.

There are over 214 such transboundary river basins covering 47 per cent

land area of the world (excluding Antarctica), showing spatial variation in

distribution pattern. The distribution anomaly of nver basins,

superimposed political boundaries of nations disregarding the natural

basin divisions, unequal access and rapidly growing demand of

freshwater have assigned transboundary water resources high

geopolitical significance. The disputes and conflicts related with

transboundary water resources in different parts of the world are usually

product of intertwined relationship of physical geography and regional

international politics.

The comparative study of basins reveal that geopolitics of trans boundary

water resources has many dimensions. Firstly, the upstream­

downstream rights are the most common factor of disputes. The

comparative location of states in the basin assign almost permanent

privileges and disadvantages. The geographical position determines (1)

the possibility for where how and when the multiple use potential of its

waters can be developed and utilized by which of the riparian states, (2)

the nature and degree of dependence of each riparian state on the shared

221

water resources, (3) the relative bargaining power of the riparian states

(4) where and when interstate dispute/conflict may arise, which riparian

state may be involved, what is the urgency and nature of cooperation that

may emerge among and between which states.

Secondly, sovereignty and territorial integrity notions like absolute

ownership over resources which are located within or flowing through its

territory, create tendencies among states towards max1mum

appropriation and minimum sharing of water resources with coriparians.

Newly independent nations of Third World are more emotive towards the

notion of sovereignty and they fiercely resist any dilution of it (actual or

perceived). Though, the doctrine of absolute state sovereignty is

incompatible with hydrological realties of a transboundary river basin

and its optimal utilization.

Thirdly, indispensability of water resource, seasonal variability m

availability, persistent and huge demand supply gap particularly m

subtropical, arid and semi arid regions assign the transboundary water

resource, a strategic significance, as basin are continuously grappled

with issues of "water scarcity'' and "water security". Water scarcity as a

concept encompasses many discrete but interrelated features like

location and reliability of sources, extent of upstream diversions,

depletion or redistribution of sources, spatial distribution of population

in relation to the source and course of water, real or perceived water

needs of population, attitude towards environment, efficiency and

management of water resources at national and sub national level etc.

The consequences of real or perceived scarcity are as complex as the

causes.

In recent decades the notion of scarcity has shifted from traditional

military security to environmental security i.e., protection from threat to

well being of both society and environment at large. It is concerned with

politics to protect the integrity of the environment from human threats

and simultaneously to prevent political conflicts as a result of

222

environmental change and degradation. Hence transboundary water

issues, due to cross border causes and effects assume extra significance.

In the regions of Middle East, Central Asia and South Asia environmental

security concerns are issues of 'high politics' due to high dependencies

for food and economic security.The developed countries have economic

and technological capacities to adapt to water security threats but the

developing countries are constrained by high population growth, poverty,

lack of financial and technological capacities, poor resource management

practices etc.

Fourthly, transboundary water issues of location, sovereignty, scarcity,

security are uniquely intertwined with regional international political

relations in different basins. The history of emergence of nations, colonial

legacies, economic and political competition, ideological disputes, ethnic

differences,political systems and stability, unresolved boundary disputes

etc. influences the npanan relations. Asymmetrical areal size,

population, economic technological and military capacity create power

positions/hierarchy, big and small country complexes and also the

associated behaviours and attitudes among riparian states. While states

may not go to war with neighbours over shared water resources,

unresolved conflicts over transboundary resources may cause non

cooperation on bilateral/ multilateral issues like trade, transport and

communication, national security, regional cooperation. In developing

countries the transboundary water resources often make recurrent

themes in domestic politics and unfortunately have direct/ indirect

linkages with electoral politics. The effects of domestic upheavals spills

over the boundary.

The geopolitics related with transboudary water with all the above

mentioned dimensions can well be illustrated with the cases of

disputes/ conflicts in different parts of the world such as, Tigris

Euphrates basin, Nile basin, Jordan basin, Aral basin, Mekong Basin,

South Asian river basins etc.

223

Over the several decades, the vanous attempts have been made to

address and resolve trans boundary related issues/ disputes and conflicts

though negotiations and agreements. The study reveals that traditional

approaches of site specific and issue limited negotiations have not been

very successful in providing sustainable and comprehensive solutions as

they were basically based on trade-offs between/ among countries for

water quantity, where regional contemporary international politics was

instrumental in "breaking up" deals. These negotiations/ agreements were

not only sectoral in nature and aimed at securing immediate "national

interests" but also lacked sufficient institutional, legal and technological

capacities, participation of all stake holders and long term basin level

approach of policy formulation and implementation.

The transboundary water management means allocating valuable water

resources among competing users in an optimised fashion, both for now

and future. It is a multidimensional concept and multisectoral task;

involving planning, development and control that incorporate physical,

social, economic and environmental interdependencies.Transboundary

water resource management poses greater challenge than national water

management as the former has to deal with incoherent laws, policy

emphasis, priorities, regulations, differential economic development,

scientific capabilities, political systems and their histories. But they are

also interrelated due to cross border cascading effects of policies,

strategies and operations.

Transboundary water resource management has many dimensions,

political, technical, institutional, policy & planning and evaluation etc.

Firstly, unlike national and sub national plans were water management

is primarily the domain of economics, law and governance transboundary

water management is political task as governments themselves are

disputants and claimants. Should they fail, no supreme authority is

automatically available and mutually acceptable to who they can refer.

Secondly, sound and comprehensive data inventory for baseline

assessment of physical, social and economic aspects of water resources is

224

required. Moreover, frequent and transparent exchanges of data,

harmonisation of data collection process, technical upgradation of data ' collection tools and setting of regional information network are necessary.

Thirdly, joint institutional arrangements are required which are based on

equal participation and level playing field for transparency, consensus on

developing priorities, policy coordination among states, liasoning with

governments, cost and benefit sharing, speedy implementation of the

project, monitoring and evaluations and solving post negotiation

disagreements/irritants on interpretations.

For transboundary waters sound policy and plans must be formulated to

meet national and international requirements incorporating national

issues of domestic water budget, national water policy, conservation

issues, peoples participation and awareness, regional cooperation and

environmental sustainability of the whole basin. Different riparian states

must take measures to improve efficiency, reduce wastage, encourage

reuse, technological upgradation, public education and allocation of

sufficient water to environment.

Operational management i.e., application of regulatory, economic,

communicative policy instruments and infrastructure development

directly to the river basin; play pivotal role in transboundary water

resource management. Consensus based operational applications,

preferably by joint institutions, creates transparency and trust among

riparian countries. Further, nationally and internationally harmonised

monitoring and evaluation method should be developed and practiced.

An international legal framework gradually has emerged in form of 1997

UN Law on Non- navigational Use of Watercourses, which can serve as

reference material for transboundary water resource sharing and

management, despite disagreements over its interpretations, vagueness

and its vulnerability to manipulation to legitimise specific agenda.

225

The Ganga-Brahmaputra basin, the second largest hydrologic regwn m

the world spreading over India, Bangladesh, Nepal and Bhutan in South

Asia and Tibet region of China IS a single sprawling integrated,

transboundary drainage system. The region is marked by broad

geophysical and climatic unity. The basin is characterized of very high

population size, rapid population growth, endemic poverty, stagnant and

subsistence agriculture and poor industrial development. The indicators

of education, health and energy consumption present a dismal picture.

The basin countries are severely handicapped by floods, droughts, river

bank erosion, sedimentation, water pollution and environmental

degradation.

Paradoxically, water is the single most important resource of the regwn

which can be harnessed in collaborative manner for the development of

multiple sectors such as energy, flood management, irrigation, ecological

health, navigation etc. Despite the realisation of the urgent need of joint

water resource development and utilisation, cooperation over water

resource have been difficult one due to lack of goodwill, suspicion[real or

exaggerated] , legacy of mistrust and perceptional difference.

The political division of the subcontinent into India and Pakistan and

later Bangladesh without much regard for the geographical integrity of

the river basin lies at the heart of hydropolitics in the Ganga­

Brahamputra basin. The second half of the twentieth century was

marked by nation building process, continuation of colonial legacies,

evolution and diversity of political systems, expansion of agricultural and

energy projects and the rising concerns of food and environmental

security. The states made bilateral agreements with neighbours on issues

of resource, trade, foreign relations and security based on contemporary

geopolitical situation. Simultaneously the notions of sovereignty,

territorial integrity, autonomy and national identity was growing.

India's dominant position in terms of size, population and economic,

technology and military capacities, stable political system have placed it

226

m a potentially hegemonic relationship with other npanan states.

Meanwhile, the smaller countries have experienced the rising resource

consciousness, fear of domination, territorial sensitivities leading to

mistrust, reservation and delay regarding entering into bilateral

negotiations. The complex domestic political structure underwent

frequent upheavals, where opposition parties utilised the fear psychosis

against India for electoral gains. The diagnosis of facts reveals that the

water resource utilisation and management of the basin suffered due to

twin dangers of big country insensitivity or arrogance as well as small

country syndrome; thus decades were lost, incurring huge opportunity

cost of delay.

There is total interdependence and complimentarity over transboundary

water resource development and management (irrigation, HEP, flood

management, navigation environmental management etc., issues)

between India and Nepal. However, relations over water resource

cooperation have been very difficult one because of divergent interests,

extreme sensitivities, emphasis on historical wrongs (real as well as

perceived), failing m understanding each others genume needs,

aggressive posture, inwardly looking dynamics of the faction of political

actors. Nepal's complain about getting unfair deal or being cheated in

earlier treaties like, The Kosi Treaty (1954) and The Gandak Treaty

( 1959), casted its shadow over future collaborations. The opposition

parties frequently opposed the agreements as "encroachments over

sovereignty'', "sell out to India" and "attack on territorial integrity". Nepal

water resource experts complained about unilateral initiatives of India,

nominal and delayed compensations, disregard for Nepal's interest,

unequal benefits, poor site selection etc. India argued that injuries were

unintentional and Nepal was adequately compensated. Further, benefits

far outweighed the cost incurred by the upstream country. While Nepal

showed disenchantment over joint water resource projects, irritant also

arose in bilateral relation due to Nepal's balancing act with China and

turbulence in domestic politics of the kingdom. Decades were lost due to

227

prolonged discussions, bureaucratic apathy, multiple feasibility reports

and Nepal's cautious and deliberate low profile approach to ensure

maximum benefits. Nepal extreme sensitivities and mistrusts found place

in Kingdom's Constitution in form of Article 126, which attached strategic

significance to water resource. India too, learned hard lessons of showing

extra sensitivity to sovereignty and autonomy issues, consensus building

and understanding of internal political dynamics while dealing with

smaller neighbours.

During 1990's a shift m attitude appeared. India and Nepal signed

Mahakali Treaty in 1996 for integrated management of the border river

on the basis of equal partnership, reflecting maturation of understanding

of the water issues as well as progressive evolution of Indo-Nepal water

resource negotiation, much in coherence with international convention

and law on use transboundary waters. Besides ironing out existing

difference there is an urgent need to take concrete steps ahead for

implementation of other projects and finding new possibilities.

Though India and Bangladesh share 54 transboundary watercourses, the

cooperative development and management of water resources has been

hostage to the single issue of sharing Ganges water, for decades.

Bangladesh being a deltaic downstream country attaches great socio­

economic and ecological importance to fresh water supplies of the

Ganges. India regards Ganges as life line of the Northern plains, but

overriding cause of dispute has been the seasonal variability of rainfall

and consequent lean season scarcity of water flows. India constructed

Farakka Barrage (project completed in 1975) to save Calcutta port from

siltation. The diversion of water from Ganges was seen by Bangladesh as

an attempt to harm its interest, independence and national prestige.

India's contention has been that as an upper riparian country it has

every right to utilise waters flowing in its territory. Bangladesh claimed

that unilateral withdrawals by India had severe adverse impacts on

economy, ecology and social life of Bangladesh. India argued that

??R

diversion of Farakka does not create any significant shortage of water

into Bangladesh.

The Ganges water problem remain unresolved during Pakistan period,

however issue took serious turn after emergence of Bangladesh. Both

countries made ad-hoc agreements and MOU's but failed to reach any

permanent solution. India and Bangladesh realise that permanent

solution lies in augmenting lean season flows of the Ganges but till now

they have offered contradictory solutions. India wished to adhere to

bilateral approach. Bangladesh on one hand tried to negotiate with India

on bilateral basis on the other hand followed multilateral approach by

suggesting inclusion of Nepal.Bangladesh strategy to internationalise the

issue further complicated the matter. The domestic political scenario has

not been encouraging. The military regimes of Bangladesh have often

tried to influence popular sentiments to generate political support. The

water dispute with India has been a recurrent theme in domestic politics

of Bangladesh. Farakka politics are part of national psyche and anti

Indian sentiments whipped around the issue has been used by

successive governments to consolidate power.

The impasse over sharing of the Ganges water was broken in mid 1990's

through fresh initiatives taken by India under 'Gujral doctrine',

commitment shown by then Prime Minister of Bangladesh Sheikh Hasina

and facilitatory role played by then West Bengal Chief Minister Mr. Jyoti

Basu. The Ganges Treaty was signed in Dec., 1996 which has beneficial

features for both the countries, for example long duration of the treaty,

joint institutional arrangements, equal sharing, provisions for joint

monitoring etc. The Treaty comes quite close to the spirits of established

principles of international law on non-navigational uses of international

waters.

One less realised fact is that being a large nation situated in the middle

riparian position, India has to show many restraints.lndia has to

accommodate two countervailing demands of water ownership rights to

229

avoid accusations of big country dominance. India has to concede to

Nepal's demand of "territorial sovereignty'', thus lower riparian rights

have been subordinated to upper riparian rights. On the other hand, vis

a vis Bangladesh ,it is the primacy of the lower riparian that has been

implicitly granted. This reflects deep desire in India to be a responsible

,accommodative and a fair minded nation. There is also widespread

acceptance of the proposition that India as a bigger country must go

more than halfway in seeking to build good relations with the smaller

neighbours.

The 1996 treaties of Ganges and Mahakali have opened the floodgate of

new possibilities. Beyond water and power sharing arrangements the

riparian countries can now atm at integrated management of

transboundary watercourses, optimum and sustainable development of

resources, efficient utilisation, coherent policies, institutional

cooperation, integration of approaches and action and basin level

planning. The nations look forward to build upon the diversities and

complimentarities in different sectors.

The Eastern Himalayan sites of Nepal and Bhutan has huge potential for

HEP generation which can be sold to energy starved India and

Bangladesh and thus, can provide energy security to entire basin region.

The power projects under discussion stage (Karnali, Sapt Kosi, West Seti)

needs to be implemented along with enhancement of power exchange

facilities. Various barriers exits at the policy, technical level, institutional

level in the development of interconnections of energy sector in the

Ganga-Brahmaputra basin. The project of Regional Energy Grid can be

realised through cooperative efforts by filling the critical gaps.

Integrated flood management is the important task ahead for the riparian

countries as Bangladesh, India and Nepal Terai region suffers huge

annual losses on account of devastating floods. So far the respective

countries have depended on structural measures for the flood

management, there is need to shift from embankment to reservoir storage

230

based flood management where Nepal has crucial role to play. The non

structural measures of flood plain management (flood proofing, flood

plain zoning etc.) can play complimentary role. Infrastructures and

networks for Flood Forecasting are being developed at the basin level for

real time data collection and dissemination. The regional cooperation is

required for developing a reliable modern and efficient flood forecasting

system to save the people from misery.

The policy planners have continuously emphasised over the need of large

storage capacities for management of transboundary water resources

which are necessary for coping with problems of seasonal variation, lean

season flow, sedimentation, as well as increasing energy production

capacity and navigation possibilities. Various national and international

studies have identified 28 potential reservoir sites in Nepal. The storage

sites in Brahmaputra upper catchment is limited. But the Nepal's

genuine concerns of dam safety, environmental degradation, resettlement

and rehabilitation must be addressed adequately before taking up such

projects.

Inland waterway traditionally has played major role in transport, trade

and commerce in Ganga-Brahmaputra basin; particularly in Bangladesh

and India. There is vast scope of expansion of inland waterway

infrastructure provided an integrated and coordinated regional scheme is

planned by the riparian countries. Existing resources of navigation

between India and Bangladesh can be further expanded and modernised.

Similarly vast opportunity remains unutilised between India and Nepal.

The proposed Karnali, Sapt Kosi and Pancheswar projects can not only

link Nepal with Ganga but can also provide much vaunted "access to the

sea port". The long term planning suggest the need of coordinated

multimodal approach of movement of goods for transnational

transportation for optimising the existing potential in the basin.

The major concern for the sustainable transboundary water management

is the deterioration of the quality of water in the basin region. Rising

231

pollution of water due to industrialisation, rapid urbanisation, intensive

use of agrochemicals and lack of sanitary facilities have affected surface

as well as groundwater in the basin. Urban- industrial areas of India,

Nepal and Bangladesh are facing serious problem of degradation of water

quality. The basin countries aim to address the issue on urgent basis by

setting uniform standards of water quality parameters, reviewing water

quality and pollution laws, strict enforcement, promoting public

awareness etc.' The water policies regarding the quality of water needs to

be harmonised across the basin region.

The study reveals that water resource of Ganga- Brahmaputra basin has

not been managed on the basis of sound and scientific principles. The

fragmented, issue limited and site specific approach based on bilateral

agreement/negotiations have failed to provide long term solutions. The

optimal utilisation of river water can be realised only in regional

framework. The transboundary water management poses many political,

technical, policy level institutional and operational challenges. Strong

political will is required on part of respective riparian states. Besides

transboundary water resource management requires modern

infrastructure, technology upgradation, expansion of data collection

networks, free and transparent sharing of data, frequent meeting of

experts and policy planners. India is expected play a grater role m

technological, financial, institutional and operational inputs due to

comparatively greater capabilities.

The harmony and complimentarity of the water resources policies of the

respective countries will facilitate basin level holistic management.

Meanwhile the respective countries can improve the efficiency level ,

reduce wastage and stop degradation of water resource which can have

cross border effects. Besides legislative framework, strict enforcement of

laws regarding conservation and protection of water bodies are

necessary. The plan formulation can incorporate programmes of area

development, environmental management, border management with

localised projects of afforestation, watershed management, checking soil

232

erosion, social forestry etc. Any operational interference needs to be

undertaken only after consultation and consensus as well as studying

long term implication. These objectives could only be realised by

strengthening transnational institutions. The transnational institutions

based on equal participation can work for joint policy formulation and

speedy implementations, interpretation of treaties, removing irritants and

disagreement, media management, monitoring and evaluation etc.

Simultaneously sensitivities of smaller countries over participation and

level playing field can be taken care of. The Joint River Commission

(India and Bangladesh) needs to be strengthened as well as Mahakali

Commission needs to immediately established to achieve aforesaid

objectives. The participation of stake holders, civil society, non­

governmental organizations can serve as a trust enhancing mechanism.

The treaties of 1996 (Ganges and Mahakali) represents a paradigm shift

in water resource development and management in the region. The era of

conflict, lack of effective dialogue, mistrust, excessive emphasis over

national interest is over. A new window of opportunity has been opened

m the favour of cooperation, consultation, synergetic

bilateral/ multilateral interests, political goodwill, understanding of each

other genuine needs and a shared water vision for the basin. The riparian

countries can now work with perseverance for strengthening cooperation

in water based integrated development. The sustainable transboundary

water resource management can serve as the nucleus or engines of

growth for realising the larger vision of economic growth, poverty

alleviation, better quality of life, environmental security, human

development, peace and stability in the Ganga -Brahmaputra basin.