Editorial
'Consultation' over Tipaimukh dam
Clear the air of all confusion
THE remark of the Indian High Commissioner Pinak Ranjan Chakravarty at a seminar titled "South Asian Connectivity: Bangladesh Perspective" that India had consulted Bangladesh on the issue of construction of Tipaimukh dam has helped little to clear the ambiguities that hang around the vital issue. The Indian diplomat reportedly maintained that the matter was discussed between the two countries in 1972 and 1978. On our side, the chairman of the parliamentary standing committee on water resources ministry Abdur Razzak, MP, said that the issue came up for discussion at JRC meeting in Delhi in 2003.
We, however, wonder whether the mere act of informing can be regarded as consultation having taken place between the two governments before India went ahead with the construction work of the dam. We are indeed in the dark if Bangladesh's viewpoints were taken due note of and the perceived consultations fully incorporated these to allay all our concerns.
It seems only now, on the eve of the visit of a parliamentary committee delegation to Tipaimukh that India has sent data and information concerning the Tipaimukh dam. In the light of this latest development and in order to clear the air of ambiguities pertaining to 'consultation' our government should state its position publicly on the matter.
Centring around the issue of sending a parliamentary delegation to India, BNP has taken the stance that a 5-member expert team of its own choice should first make a trip to Tipaimukh before the visit of the official delegation takes place. This is in response to the government's invitation to BNP to send the name of its representative to the parliamentary delegation. We fail to understand why BNP took such a negative approach when, if included, the BNP delegate could make his independent assessment of the situation and share it with the public, if necessary.
We believe the tendency to play politics with an issue of vital national interest should be shunned by all concerned.
Comments