Bangladesh-India Maritime Boundary
Harun ur Rashid
Former Bangladesh Ambassador to the UN, Geneva
e-mail: Harun@ecopac.com.au
The Bangladesh-India maritime boundary has been pending since 1974. Since the waters are not delimited in the Bay of Bengal, Bangladesh cannot explore and exploit certain areas because they are disputed. No foreign company would be willing to explore the area unless it is certain that the area is not disputed. It appears that this issue has become one of the top priorities of the incoming government headed by Sheikh Hasina in Bangladesh and rightly so.
There are four issues involved in the maritime boundary. First, is the determination of the Hariabhanga border river boundary, especially the ownership of South Talpatty Island, which has to be settled. Second, is the determination of boundary of territorial waters up to 12 miles. Third, there is a need for determination of the boundary of the exclusive economic zone of another 188 miles from the end of territorial waters (12 +188 miles=200 miles economic zone.) Lastly, there remains the issue of boundary demarcation of the continental shelf up to another 150 miles from the end of the exclusive economic zone (200 +150 miles=350 miles of continental shelf).
The first session of talks took place in 1974 in Dhaka at the official level. Later, several meetings took place at the level of Foreign Secretaries. When the Foreign Secretaries could not resolve the differences, it was elevated to the Foreign Ministers’ level in 1975 and the Ministers from Bangladesh and India narrowed down the difference. Meanwhile, there was change of government in August 1975 in Dhaka and within two years, in New Delhi, the Janata Party government led Morarji Desai replaced the Congress government of Indira Gandhi in 1977.
Another session took place in 1978 but India did not wish to go back to decisions taken by the Ministers in 1975. The Indian decision was disappointing to Bangladesh. The talks that took place in 1982 were inconclusive. Under the caretaker government in Bangladesh the talks were resumed again in 2008 at the technical level between the two countries.
Bangladesh ratified the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea in 2001 and India in 1995. Accordingly both countries are obliged to comply with the provisions of the UNCLOS. Articles 74 and 83 of the UNCLOS lay down the methods of delimitation of sea boundary between adjacent states, such as Bangladesh and India, to “achieve an equitable solution”.
On the Hariabhanga River boundary issue, it is suggested that a fixed boundary on the river with geographical coordinates may be agreed upon, as was the case between Bangladesh and Myanmar on the Naaf River. The disputed South Talpatti Island that is supposed to have emerged after the 1970 cyclone is actually a low-tide elevation. It is located about 4 kilometres south of the Hariabhanga river (21.37 N latitude and 89.12 E longitude). The direction of the mid-flow (deepest channel) of the river Hariabhanga will determine the ownership of the Island.
What is required at this stage is that the process of negotiation should recommence at a political level and for the government leaders look at the problem from a broader view of bilateral relations without confining themselves to the legal and technical details. The bottom line is that India’s political leaders must decide as to whether Bangladesh would get a fair and equitable share of the economic zone and continental shelf of the Bay of Bengal. India’s claim in the Bay of Bengal constitutes about three per cent of its total economic zone and continental shelf while for Bangladesh its entire economic zone is at stake.
If bilateral negotiations fail to resolve the issue, it is appropriate to refer the issue to an International Tribunal for Arbitration as India and Pakistan referred the Rann of Kutch boundary issue to an International Arbitration Tribunal in 1966. India did not show its interest in arbitration in 1975 when it was proposed at the highest political level, but it could be revived at an appropriate time.
Ordinarily, the delimitation of maritime boundary takes a long time and if there is an issue of overlapping maritime areas that remains disputed and unresolved, the experience and lessons of many states are one of cooperation to a provisional agreement of joint development and exploration of resources in off-shore areas. In June 2008, for example, Japan and China struck a landmark deal to jointly develop gas fields in disputed waters in the East China Sea, pending the conclusion of the delimitation agreement
Bangladesh and India are neighbours and friendly countries. There is no adequate reason why the maritime boundary issue cannot be resolved to reach a mutually accepted.
|
Blink
Del.icio.us
Digg
Furl
Google
Simpy
Spurl
Y! MyWeb
Facebook