Geoscience Reference
In-Depth Information
could slow the progress of talks on these crucial issues, already delayed for years.
New Delhi also feared that Nepal would not agree to construction of some 31 reser-
voirs in its territory, because they could submerge a large part of the hilly country.
Curiously, Dhaka's proposal made no mention of this eventuality of submergence
and displacement of people in India or Nepal but it admitted this mistake later.
Besides, the scheme of Bangladesh would have least affected its own territory but
done so much to India and Nepal. As all the dams and reservoirs would be in India
and Nepal, they would submerge, and seismically affect, parts of these two coun-
tries only. Thus, Dhaka's scheme was biased in its favour and lacked equity and
uniformity.
In short, India's proposal was based on following major considerations:
i. It was not possible to store sufficient water in the Ganges basin, which would be
available for augmentation of dry season flow at Farakka after meeting future
requirements of India and Nepal.
ii. Inter-basin transfer of water from the Brahmaputra to the Ganges basin would
not only make available sufficient water for augmentation of the Ganges flow
at Farakka during lean season, but also reduce the flood hazards of both
Bangladesh and India.
iii. Sufficient water is available in the Brahmaputra river even during dry season.
iv. There is a time lag of about two-and-a-half months in the flood flow of the two
rivers, the Ganges and the Brahmaputra, the floods occurring in the Brahmaputra
earlier than in the Ganges.
v. The issue was purely bilateral and therefore, Nepal's inclusion in the formula-
tion of the scheme was not necessary.
vi. The scheme was technically sound, feasible, realistic and uniform.
Bangladesh proposal was based on the following major considerations:
i. It was possible to store sufficient water in the Ganges basin itself, even after
meeting the future demands of Nepal and India, which could be made available
for augmentation of the Ganga flow at Farakka in the dry season to meet the
requirements of both the countries.
ii. The Brahmaputra water would not be sufficient for transfer to the Ganges basin
after meeting future needs of Bangladesh.
iii. As most of the tributaries of the Ganges originate from Nepal, that country
should be directly involved in the augmentation scheme.
However, arguments and counter-arguments continued for and against each
other's proposal for years together and ultimately, none of the proposals could be
consider and therefore ultimately dropped.
Developments after 1982
The agreement of 1977, which was valid for five years, expired in 1982 but no
solution was found to the issue of augmentation of dry-season flow of the Ganga at
Search WWH ::




Custom Search