The Hindu Business Line : Dhaka-New Delhi ties going nowhere

The prospect of "mutually satisfactory solutions" being found to settle bilateral problems is rather bleak in the absence of a change in attitude in New Delhi and Dhaka, particularly the latter.

In late April 2001, the Bangladesh Nationalist Party secretary-general told an Indian correspondent: "If we come to power again, we will have excellent relations.

We believe India is a great neighbour and we will try to solve the border issue through negotiations conducted on the basis of equal respect for each other." The BNP returned to power at the head of a coalition later that year, but it has taken the BNP leader and Bangladesh Prime Minister, Ms Khaleda Zia, more than four years to make the trip to New Delhi. What is one to conclude about the present state of India-Bangladesh relations and their future prospects from this?

But before one studies the ground reality as it prevails today it would be instructive to go over the past a bit, especially the resolutions and promises made by both the countries to tackle issues between them that do not strike a happy bilateral chord.

Appropriately, one should begin with the 1972 India-Bangladesh Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation and Peace (Bangladesh was formed in 1971 with immense material help from India), the fifth article stating that the neighbours "solemnly declare that there shall be lasting peace and friendship between the two countries and each side shall respect the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of the other and refrain from interfering in the internal affairs of the other side."

25-YEAR TREATY

This was a 25-year treaty which was allowed to die a natural death in 1997, indicating that relations were, to say the least, not on a similar footing compared to 1972. The delay in Ms Khaleda Zia making her maiden trip to India (as Prime Minister of the current Dhaka coalition Government) should, therefore, come as no surprise, one interpretation of her visit so late in the day being that the BNP would like New Delhi's support for her party during the upcoming elections. While this may be true, it is also apparent that the right noises so to speak have been made routinely, the latest instance (excluding the recent visit by Ms Khaleda Zia) being the statement released at the conclusion of the New Delhi Foreign Secretaries' meeting in June last year.

A whole lot of issues were discussed "in an atmosphere of warm friendship and cordiality which characterizes the bilateral relationship."

Among other things, the two sides "reaffirmed their commitment not to allow their territory to be used for any activities inimical to each other's interests... expressed satisfaction at expanding economic and commercial cooperation," New Delhi going out of its way to convey "its sincerity to address Bangladesh's concern on the trade deficit, including through measures such as the removal of non-tariff and para-tariff barriers."

TRADE PRINCIPLES

As regards trade, one can go back to the 1980 agreement, which is now in the process of being revised (the job has reportedly been completed). Among other things, the Article III (1980) lays down the principle governing the bilateral trade exchange as follows. "The two Governments agree that expansion of their mutual trade exchanges would make an important contribution towards their development.

To this end, they agree to take appropriate measures through negotiations with a view to augmenting and diversifying their mutual trade specially in respect of specific products currently or potentially of export interest to them."

Article VIII focuses on the transport sector, stating: "The two Governments agree to make mutually beneficial arrangements for the use of their waterways, railways and roadways for commerce between the two countries and for the passage of goods between places in one country through the territory of the other."

So the resolutions are there. But what is the actual state of affairs on the ground? All of 26 years have passed since the trade treaty was signed in 1980 and routinely extended till now (when it is being revised) but with what result — say, in the transport sector?

On March 23, the Commerce Minister, Mr Kamal Nath, was faced with little choice but to lay stress on the "connectivity" issue, the following illustration he gave clearly indicating not only the extent to which the 1980 treaty stipulations have been disregarded but also the scale of the attendant costs to the two partners (in this case to India) in doing so.

Mr Kamal Nath said: "At present, movement of a container between Kolkata and Dhaka (via Singapore) costs $2,500 and takes over 15 days while through our common riverine transportation this will cost only $500 and take just five days."

TERRORIST ISSUES

On the harbouring of terrorists, it is common knowledge that the criminals have sought refuge in both the countries and the two partners have just agreed (for the umpteenth time, that is) to take steps jointly to tackle the menace.

But the Bangladesh Finance Minister has just iterated that his country was not a breeding ground for terrorists and that, more important, "as long as this erroneous impression remains, relations between India and Bangladesh cannot improve."

Trade is another sector where nothing much has happened over the past two decades which can be described as a strategic breakthrough, not even in areas which could help Bangladesh make a dent in the own chronic trade deficit it suffers with its Big Brother neighbour.

Clearly, the prospects of "mutually satisfactory solutions" being found to settle bilateral problems are rather bleak in the absence of a change in attitude in the two capitals, particularly Dhaka.

As of now, there are no signs on the horizons of such a development.

More Stories on : Foreign Relations | Politics | Wide Canvas

Article E-Mail :: Comment :: Syndication :: Printer Friendly Page

Stories in this Section
Dhaka-New Delhi ties going nowhere

REGULATOR IN THE PIPELINE

Capital account revisited

Nehru and election

Vitality hiring — who gains and who doesn't?

`I am focussing on structural issues in specific sectors'