India's metastases: Farakka barrage to Tipaimukh dam! What next?

India's decision to build Tipaimukh dam 100 km off the Bangladesh border on the river Barak in Manipur state (in north-eastern India) has sparked public outrage, provoked controversy on both sides of the border and drawn huge international attention. Such arrogant and unilateral approach by India is certainly a reminder of the ghost from the past that still haunts Bangladesh. A perfect storm of water war had begun when Farakka barrage was completed in 1974 just 10 km off the Bangladesh border on the river Ganges in West Bengal. The environmental, subsequently human health and livelihood impacts of building Farakka barrage on downstream Bangladeshi side have been immense. Negative impacts have left legacy of environmental damage and human sufferings, which are considerably evident even today and undoubtedly further consequences will follow for many years to come. For those who live in downstream Bangladeshi side, every year it has become the usual event in water scarcity during the dry season, loss of agriculture and fisheries, increased salinity which result on deterioration of public health and  also affecting navigation etc –  and this list goes on and on.

In the past, around-the-world there had been many occasions where dams were unilaterally built however, experiences had shown that unilateralism always did not work. It pushed friendly neighbouring countries withdrawal of bi/multilateral trade relationships and even there had been some cases where countries were very close to go to war, for instance Egypt was ready to use force in 1991 to protect its access to the river Nile and South Africa had come few times very close to war with Namibia due to diversion of water from Okavango system from where Botswana gets its most water.

There are no existing UN laws that could legally prevent any country to build dams or reservoir within their own territories but there is a 'Convention on the Law of the Non-Navigational Uses of International Watercourses', which was adapted by The UN General Assembly In 1997. This convention explicitly expresses responsibilities of the international communities to manage water resources equitably, protection of the aquatic environment, obligation not to cause serious harm, general obligation to cooperate and regular exchange of data and information (Satter, 2009). The convention is still short on the number of countries that requires it to come into force and India abstained from voting in favour from day one, therefore this convention is not sufficient legally binding instrument to renounce India building more cross-border dams. Many experts in the International Water Law, Policy and Science have persistently called countries to ratify the convention and making it legally binding to avoid many future conflicts. Additionally, many water experts have also suggested that the scarcity of water will intensify and it is more likely that some countries will go for regional wars for their water rights.

India has its own long-standing problem with China. One possibility but currently denied by China on the issue of diverting water from the river Brahmaputra, which will certainly affect lower riparian countries like India and Bangladesh. While facing the similar demeanour from China, it will be worthwhile to follow how India will tackle this analogous situation, which India on the other hand is very keen to impose on Bangladesh. Besides UN legal framework which is yet to ratify, there are many other crucial issues which need to be address by India before building Tipaimukh dam. The issues related to impacts of climate change, associated environmental consequences of building a dam, geo-physical characteristics of the area and the uncertainties surround it, aspects of engineering plans and above all rights of the indigenous people.

At the heart of this debate it is fundamentally important to preserve human rights of the indigenous people, which were overwhelmingly backed by The UN General Assembly in 1997. The UN adopted a landmark declaration over the rights of native people to protect their lands and resources and to maintain their unique cultures and traditions (UN Department of Public Information, 13^th September, 2007). According to the declaration, indigenous people have the right to know, prior consent of how to use and develop their lands but for many years recommendations by Sinlung Indigenous People Human Rights Organisation (SIPHRO) of India and World Commission of Dams were ignored.

The world is living in the era of climate change and water scarcity, more specifically Bangladesh is the 'Ground Zero' (Huq, 2010) of the impact of climate change. India is not immune as well; they will also have to bear the consequences. Monsoons will be more unpredictable from one year to the next due to climate change and thereby it will hugely affect Indian agriculture sector and subsequently loss of associated livelihood. The rise of the sea level will affect the fishery industries, increase coastal erosion, intrusion of saline water and accelerate further flooding. However, these are just a few examples among many others. In the face of a common threat, instead of being bound up in inflexibility and antagonism, both countries will need to get together and develop a co-ordinated approach (action plan) to tackle those impacts. The impacts are far greater, which will overshadow all kind of other problems. In this regard, unilaterally building a cross border dam is certainly not a way forward. Questions still loom whether India has a comprehensive plan to escalate their long held aspiration to build more cross-border dams. Fararakka barrage has been India's metastatic tumour which is spreading to other parts of the body. First Farakka, then the Gozaldoba Barrage on the Teesta and now Tipaimukh dam - when will it end?

Even bigger concern is geo-physical characteristic of the area where Tipaimukh dam has proposed to be built. On 28 May 2009, Dr. Soibam Ibotombi from the Dept. of Earth Sciences, Manipur University stated ‘Tipaimukh dam is a geo-tectonic blunder of international dimensions’. Analysis of earthquake epicentres and magnitudes of 5M and above within 100-200km radii of Tipaimukh dam site reveals hundreds of earthquakes in the last 100-200 years. It is found that within 100km radius of Tipaimukh, 2 earthquakes of +7M magnitude have taken place in the last 150 years and the last one being in 1957 at an aerial distance of about 75km from the dam site in the ENE direction (Ibotombi, 2009). While facing such possible danger from the earthquakes, it’s not a matter of if – but it’s a matter of when, one can only imagine the scale of devastation that will bring if the dam splits.

Scientists/Experts can only find the facts & figures, but here we need an honest and constructive dialogue (within the realm of possibility) to reach an agreement with India along with the other International bodies to resolve most significantly the present crisis, and deny India’s deliberate infliction of similar policies in the future. Repeatedly, India’s policy on building dams has inflicted irreparable damage to the lives in Bangladesh particularly on those who share the common water course.

Politicians/policy makers of both countries need to shrug off their differences and accelerate the necessary (if there is any) coordinated adaptation process on climate change. Climate change is an imminent and ever-growing common threat for both countries and further escalation in man-made negative environmental impacts must be tackled at the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) stage; ensure obvious departure from the detrimental policies, which in effect have potential to harm the environment, local livelihoods and economies. Climate-centric cooperation is urgently needed from both sides of the border; the sooner the better. Overwhelming compulsion of domestic politics in Bangladesh need to be transparent and there needs to be a unified voice and strong political will from all political spectrums to avoid another Farakka. Sincerely, we hope that ‘Tipaimukh dam’ issue will not be another local or regional environmental and political shamble.