7 ms·

The difference here is that Germany and the US could be counted upon to negotiate in good faith with their riparian neighbors. India... not so much.

shripadk 10y ago
I call BS on this. India has always been a good neighbor. If that wasn't the case we would never have been able to resolve the long standing border dispute that existed between India and Bangladesh: http://www.news18.com/news/india/prime-minister-narendra-modi-signs-land-boundary-agreement-with-bangladesh-pm-sheikh-hasina-1002466.html http://www.news18.com/news/india/prime-minister-narendra-mod... The question that really needs to be asked is: Does India have good neighbors? China and Pakistan illegally occupying lands in Kashmir and Arunachal Pradesh, illegal immigration from Bangladesh into North-eastern Indian states, Sri Lanka capturing and killing Indian fisherman, the list goes on and on. EDIT: There is already a Water Treaty between India and Bangladesh over sharing of Ganges waters at Farakka: http://www.jrcb.gov.bd/attachment/Gganges_Water_Sharing_treaty,1996.pdf http://www.jrcb.gov.bd/attachment/Gganges_Water_Sharing_trea... You still have doubts over India having bad faith in negotiating with it's neighbors? Give me one instance where India has broken a pact with it's neighbors?
- kchoudhu 10y ago
  As I have stated elsewhere in this thread, the 1996 agreement lasts for only 30 years, doesn't cover interlinking projects by India and makes NO mention of the Brahmaputra River, which supplies half the water flowing through Bangladesh today, and forms a massive part of the project linked in the Original Article. The treaty is a woefully inadequate guard against future abuse.
  - shripadk 10y ago
    So what? I just gave you an example of Indo-Bangladesh already having water treaty. There is no evidence to suggest that India would not be willing to have another treaty with Bangladesh for interlinking projects.
    - kchoudhu 10y ago
      It's not a treaty. It is the treaty. And treaties don't "just follow" because there is already a treaty on a similar topic already in place. The time to sign such an agreement on interlinking would have been before breaking ground on the interlinking project. To demand an agreement afterwards is to negotiate in bad faith.
      - shripadk 10y ago
        No the existing treaty is only for a single region. The Interlink project is much greater and broader in scope and the same treaty cannot be applied to the interlink project. It's ridiculous to think that a small water treaty signed in 1996 can have a scope to cover a project as huge as the Interlink. New treaty/agreement has to be signed and will be done by India in the best interests of Bangladesh.
        kchoudhu 10y ago
        In Bangladesh's best interests? Oh sahib, why did you not you say so to begin with? Definitely a burden off my shoulders.
        shripadk 10y ago
        What would India stand to gain by going against Bangladesh and it's best interests? Nothing.
    - shripadk 10y ago
      Interlinking project has been discussed for the past 30 years. Bangladesh took no interest in taking part in the discussions. Bangladesh only woke up to it when India finally decided to go ahead with the interlinking project. In spite of that the Water Resources Minister has said that discussions will be held with Bangladeshi counterpart and come up with an agreement. Also saying that "negotiating in bad faith" after the groundwork has been laid is BS. The first interlink project has nothing to do with Bangladesh. The Water Resources Minister clearly stated: "We are going ahead with five links [of the rivers] now and the first one, the Ken-Betwa link [in Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh] is going to start any time now,". The Ken-Betwa Link is no where close to Bangladesh and it has nothing to do with the Brahmaputra river. Read about it here: http://www.nwda.gov.in/writereaddata/linkimages/0723832353.PDF http://www.nwda.gov.in/writereaddata/linkimages/0723832353.P...
- ramgorur 10y ago
  what do you mean by "india being always a good neighbour"? yes it used to be, long ago, but not any more. You have no idea how this country is pushing around it's neighbours. http://www.felanicamp.com/ http://www.felanicamp.com/ http://www.thedailystar.net/country/felani-killing-justice-denied-border-killings-continue-198391 http://www.thedailystar.net/country/felani-killing-justice-d... and what do you actually mean by "illigal immigration from bangladesh"? It's actually the both way around. In fact, bangladesh is the biggest and the only destination of all the cow smugglers from india's eastern border. http://www.thequint.com/india/2015/10/12/cow-smuggling-pay-500-taka-and-your-cow-is-legal-in-bangladesh http://www.thequint.com/india/2015/10/12/cow-smuggling-pay-5... During the spring/summer, you can cross the Ganges river by walking, if you ever come to rajshahi, chapai-nawabganj border, you will be able to see it yourself. edit: typo
  - shripadk 10y ago
    > what do you mean by "india being always a good neighbour"? yes it used to be, long ago, but not any more. You have no idea how this country is pushing around it's neighbours. Both examples you cited are of illegal immigration. There is absolutely no reason for the BSF to kill anyone crossing the border legally. EDIT: Yes we used to be a good country as long as we allowed illegal immigration and illegal cattle trade. The moment we prevented it we naturally became the bad guys. > and what do you actually mean by "illigal immigration from bangladesh"? It's actually the both way around. In fact, bangladesh is the biggest and the only destination of all cow smugglers from india's eastern border. Those cow smugglers are illegally immigrated Bangladeshi's themselves. Read about your smugglers here: http://www.ibtimes.com/cattle-smuggling-dangerous-illegal-highly-profitable-trade-between-india-bangladesh-1553155 http://www.ibtimes.com/cattle-smuggling-dangerous-illegal-hi.... Specific quote: "However, the Telegraph noted that even when soldiers from India's Border Security Force (BSF) seize stolen cattle, they are often attacked or even killed by mobs of people led by the smugglers themselves. Lawmakers fear that the depletion of local cattle would also hurt the farming economy on the Indian side of the border if police do not crack down on smuggling. Putul Chandra Roy Pradhani, the organizing secretary of the All Assam Students Union (AASU), which is better known for campaigning against illegal immigrants from Bangladesh, warned that strict legislation must be passed against cattle raiders as well. “[Cattle] smugglers are taking advantage of flexible laws,” he told the Telegraph. “In 2009 and 2010, [the local government] enforced rules and regulations that almost stopped the [cattle] smuggling. But those rules and regulations are not being strictly imposed now.” Read about the illegal immigration of Bangladeshi's into India here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_immigration_to_India#Illegal_Immigration https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_immigration_to_India#I... Approximately 3 million illegally crossed over to India. How many Indian's crossed over illegally to Bangladesh?
praneshp 10y ago
Why not?
- sremani 10y ago
  He does not have any good reason, he is just spewing BNP nationalist rhetoric. India has shared waters fairly even with Pakistan following international frameworks. Its just a common practice in Bangladesh, Pakistan and Nepal to piss on India. Its their insecurity towards regional hegemon talking rather than the policy itself.
  - ramgorur 10y ago
    no wonder, I have seen a similar attitude from indian nationalists towards a more powerful country like "china", specially when it comes to the india-china brahmaputra dispute. http://www.ipcs.org/article/south-asia/india-china-a-water-war-over-the-brahmaputra-4415.html http://www.ipcs.org/article/south-asia/india-china-a-water-w... so in that sense, if you find any "bangladeshi nationalist" complaining about this interlink project, I bet it's coming from the same ground.
  - kchoudhu 10y ago
    Hegemons can comport themselves gracefully in their relations with putative allies and neighbors, or they can ride roughshod over everyone just because they are more powerful. As far as South Asian diplomacy is concerned, India is more USSR than USA right now. In any event, thank you for making my point for me.
    - sremani 10y ago
      BD's nationhood is because of India's so called "Roughshod". To compare US and India about regional power in a very skewered form is not even funny, but hey, ask LatAm and Carib about American hegemon and compare that with BD under shadow of India. edit: also India did not take any territory post-1971 in spite of being a victor, now compare that to US and Mexican war. Talking about roughshods!

shripadk 10y ago

I call BS on this. India has always been a good neighbor. If that wasn't the case we would never have been able to resolve the long standing border dispute that existed between India and Bangladesh: http://www.news18.com/news/india/prime-minister-narendra-modi-signs-land-boundary-agreement-with-bangladesh-pm-sheikh-hasina-1002466.html http://www.news18.com/news/india/prime-minister-narendra-mod... The question that really needs to be asked is: Does India have good neighbors? China and Pakistan illegally occupying lands in Kashmir and Arunachal Pradesh, illegal immigration from Bangladesh into North-eastern Indian states, Sri Lanka capturing and killing Indian fisherman, the list goes on and on. EDIT: There is already a Water Treaty between India and Bangladesh over sharing of Ganges waters at Farakka: http://www.jrcb.gov.bd/attachment/Gganges_Water_Sharing_treaty,1996.pdf http://www.jrcb.gov.bd/attachment/Gganges_Water_Sharing_trea... You still have doubts over India having bad faith in negotiating with it's neighbors? Give me one instance where India has broken a pact with it's neighbors?

kchoudhu 10y ago
As I have stated elsewhere in this thread, the 1996 agreement lasts for only 30 years, doesn't cover interlinking projects by India and makes NO mention of the Brahmaputra River, which supplies half the water flowing through Bangladesh today, and forms a massive part of the project linked in the Original Article. The treaty is a woefully inadequate guard against future abuse.
- shripadk 10y ago
  So what? I just gave you an example of Indo-Bangladesh already having water treaty. There is no evidence to suggest that India would not be willing to have another treaty with Bangladesh for interlinking projects.
  - kchoudhu 10y ago
    It's not a treaty. It is the treaty. And treaties don't "just follow" because there is already a treaty on a similar topic already in place. The time to sign such an agreement on interlinking would have been before breaking ground on the interlinking project. To demand an agreement afterwards is to negotiate in bad faith.
    - shripadk 10y ago
      No the existing treaty is only for a single region. The Interlink project is much greater and broader in scope and the same treaty cannot be applied to the interlink project. It's ridiculous to think that a small water treaty signed in 1996 can have a scope to cover a project as huge as the Interlink. New treaty/agreement has to be signed and will be done by India in the best interests of Bangladesh.
      - kchoudhu 10y ago
        In Bangladesh's best interests? Oh sahib, why did you not you say so to begin with? Definitely a burden off my shoulders.
        shripadk 10y ago
        What would India stand to gain by going against Bangladesh and it's best interests? Nothing.
  - shripadk 10y ago
    Interlinking project has been discussed for the past 30 years. Bangladesh took no interest in taking part in the discussions. Bangladesh only woke up to it when India finally decided to go ahead with the interlinking project. In spite of that the Water Resources Minister has said that discussions will be held with Bangladeshi counterpart and come up with an agreement. Also saying that "negotiating in bad faith" after the groundwork has been laid is BS. The first interlink project has nothing to do with Bangladesh. The Water Resources Minister clearly stated: "We are going ahead with five links [of the rivers] now and the first one, the Ken-Betwa link [in Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh] is going to start any time now,". The Ken-Betwa Link is no where close to Bangladesh and it has nothing to do with the Brahmaputra river. Read about it here: http://www.nwda.gov.in/writereaddata/linkimages/0723832353.PDF http://www.nwda.gov.in/writereaddata/linkimages/0723832353.P...
ramgorur 10y ago
what do you mean by "india being always a good neighbour"? yes it used to be, long ago, but not any more. You have no idea how this country is pushing around it's neighbours. http://www.felanicamp.com/ http://www.felanicamp.com/ http://www.thedailystar.net/country/felani-killing-justice-denied-border-killings-continue-198391 http://www.thedailystar.net/country/felani-killing-justice-d... and what do you actually mean by "illigal immigration from bangladesh"? It's actually the both way around. In fact, bangladesh is the biggest and the only destination of all the cow smugglers from india's eastern border. http://www.thequint.com/india/2015/10/12/cow-smuggling-pay-500-taka-and-your-cow-is-legal-in-bangladesh http://www.thequint.com/india/2015/10/12/cow-smuggling-pay-5... During the spring/summer, you can cross the Ganges river by walking, if you ever come to rajshahi, chapai-nawabganj border, you will be able to see it yourself. edit: typo
- shripadk 10y ago
  > what do you mean by "india being always a good neighbour"? yes it used to be, long ago, but not any more. You have no idea how this country is pushing around it's neighbours. Both examples you cited are of illegal immigration. There is absolutely no reason for the BSF to kill anyone crossing the border legally. EDIT: Yes we used to be a good country as long as we allowed illegal immigration and illegal cattle trade. The moment we prevented it we naturally became the bad guys. > and what do you actually mean by "illigal immigration from bangladesh"? It's actually the both way around. In fact, bangladesh is the biggest and the only destination of all cow smugglers from india's eastern border. Those cow smugglers are illegally immigrated Bangladeshi's themselves. Read about your smugglers here: http://www.ibtimes.com/cattle-smuggling-dangerous-illegal-highly-profitable-trade-between-india-bangladesh-1553155 http://www.ibtimes.com/cattle-smuggling-dangerous-illegal-hi.... Specific quote: "However, the Telegraph noted that even when soldiers from India's Border Security Force (BSF) seize stolen cattle, they are often attacked or even killed by mobs of people led by the smugglers themselves. Lawmakers fear that the depletion of local cattle would also hurt the farming economy on the Indian side of the border if police do not crack down on smuggling. Putul Chandra Roy Pradhani, the organizing secretary of the All Assam Students Union (AASU), which is better known for campaigning against illegal immigrants from Bangladesh, warned that strict legislation must be passed against cattle raiders as well. “[Cattle] smugglers are taking advantage of flexible laws,” he told the Telegraph. “In 2009 and 2010, [the local government] enforced rules and regulations that almost stopped the [cattle] smuggling. But those rules and regulations are not being strictly imposed now.” Read about the illegal immigration of Bangladeshi's into India here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_immigration_to_India#Illegal_Immigration https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_immigration_to_India#I... Approximately 3 million illegally crossed over to India. How many Indian's crossed over illegally to Bangladesh?

praneshp 10y ago

Why not?

sremani 10y ago
He does not have any good reason, he is just spewing BNP nationalist rhetoric. India has shared waters fairly even with Pakistan following international frameworks. Its just a common practice in Bangladesh, Pakistan and Nepal to piss on India. Its their insecurity towards regional hegemon talking rather than the policy itself.
- ramgorur 10y ago
  no wonder, I have seen a similar attitude from indian nationalists towards a more powerful country like "china", specially when it comes to the india-china brahmaputra dispute. http://www.ipcs.org/article/south-asia/india-china-a-water-war-over-the-brahmaputra-4415.html http://www.ipcs.org/article/south-asia/india-china-a-water-w... so in that sense, if you find any "bangladeshi nationalist" complaining about this interlink project, I bet it's coming from the same ground.
- kchoudhu 10y ago
  Hegemons can comport themselves gracefully in their relations with putative allies and neighbors, or they can ride roughshod over everyone just because they are more powerful. As far as South Asian diplomacy is concerned, India is more USSR than USA right now. In any event, thank you for making my point for me.
  - sremani 10y ago
    BD's nationhood is because of India's so called "Roughshod". To compare US and India about regional power in a very skewered form is not even funny, but hey, ask LatAm and Carib about American hegemon and compare that with BD under shadow of India. edit: also India did not take any territory post-1971 in spite of being a victor, now compare that to US and Mexican war. Talking about roughshods!