Dhaka Thursday February 25, 2010

A wake-up call

S. M. Rashed Ahmed Chowdhury
...................................................
THE fundamental twin objectives of any foreign policy, which applies to Bangladesh as well, are security and development to be achieved through diplomacy, negotiations and constructive engagement.

The issue of the demarcation of Bangladesh's maritime boundary with India and Myanmar is a disappointing record of neglect in the context of Bangladesh diplomacy In my years as a career diplomat with the foreign ministry I do not seem to recall if the maritime demarcation issue was given the importance it deserved. The maritime cell in the foreign ministry was practically an ineffective body with minimum staff and usually with those awaiting postings abroad.

Importantly, there was the absence of the crucial element of the political will. The nation was aroused, as if from slumber, when decision was taken by the Bangladesh government on October 8, 2009 to take the issue of maritime boundary to the international tribunal on the ground of failure to achieve progress at the bilateral levels.

Star File Photo

Fortunately, all these are behind us now. Since then there has been some positive developments towards bilateral resolutions of the maritime boundary dispute. Firstly, at a meeting between Bangladesh and Myanmar held on 8th and 9th January of this year both countries agreed, as stated by foreign secretary Mirajul Quayes, to the method of maritime boundary delimitation between the two countries combining both the principles of equity with equidistance. This is a significant forward movement as both countries hitherto were interlocked in the dispute over equity versus equidistance; Bangladesh favouring equity whereas Myanmar insisting on equidistance. Now with this compromise formula combining the two principles as a basis for a negotiated settlement which seemed to have worked for number of countries should, hopefully, work for resolving the maritime issue involving Bangladesh, India and Myanmar.

Secondly, the maritime boundary issue has figured in the joint communiqué during the visit of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina to India. Para 21 of the joint communiqué states “Both Prime Ministers agreed on the need to amicably demarcate the maritime boundary between India and Bangladesh. They noted the initiation of proceedings under Annex VII of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and, in this context, welcomed the visit of a delegation from Bangladesh to India”. Reading between the lines the joint communiqué embodies both the elements of bilateral negotiations as well as arbitration. The challenge for our diplomacy would be to adroitly move away from arbitration and opt for patient and painstaking negotiations to put the onus on India and Myanmar on bilateral resolution of the dispute in keeping with the spirit of the friendly relationship; there should be no need for arbitration if there is sincere political will to resolve the issue. It would be an acid test of Bangladesh diplomacy in days ahead.

While both the above development augurs well for bilateral resolution of the Maritime demarcation issue there should be no illusion that the negotiations would be in anyway easy. For diplomacy and negotiations to succeed we would need to do prepare our case extremely well, do our home work with seriousness and complete the long pending work on the ground; something which we have largely neglected so far; We have to catch up with the precious time lost.

It may sound incredible but the fact is that Bangladesh was the first country in South Asia to go for demarcation of Maritime boundary as early as 1974 when the parliament enacted the Maritime Zone Act 1974; this now needs to be updated in line with UNCLOS 1982 which has not been done so far. We are required to complete the technical studies, essential marine seismic and other types of surveys and collection of relevant data to backup our claim to the Maritime boundary in the Bay of Bengal; completion of this exercise with competence and efficiency would help both in the bilateral negotiations and for submission of our claim to the UN before July 10th 2011. This vital piece of work clearly seems to have not received the priority of the foreign and other relevant ministries/agencies to the serious detriment of our national interest. I am told that only recently the required fund has been allocated for conducting surveys and other technical work required for preparation and submission of our claim to the UN.

On the other hand both India and Myanmar gave top most priority to the issue of Maritime boundary demarcation including completion of essential work involving surveys and technical works etc. and submitted their respective claims to the Maritime boundary demarcation to the UN; prior to that India and Myanmar entered into bilateral agreement on the demarcation of their Maritime boundary. They have also engaged foreign company's in Gas and Oil exploration. According to reports India has discovered 100 trillion cubic feet of Gas in 2005-06 and Myanmar has discovered 7 trillion cubic feet of Gas in 2005-06. India and Myanmar claims reportedly overlap into Bangladesh's Sea boundary claim; so Bangladesh expectedly reacted and protested with no result. But who is to blame? And where is our claim and to what extent we have been able to establish it backed by surveys, technical details and relevant data?

We cannot continue to squander any more of the precious time left between now and July 10, 2011 to complete all the work required for submission of our claim to the delimitation of the sea boundary to the UN. The case clearly needs to be prepared as strongly as possible with the assistance of the local experts including non-resident Bangladeshi experts, if available and hiring the best possible International experts whatever be the cost to the national exchequer. This is the best investment for our security and development.

The Maritime cell in the foreign ministry needs to be totally overhauled with finest legal and other experts and certainly not with seasonal diplomatic birds perched on the Maritime cell tree for flying abroad!

A strong well, argued case backed by all possible available data and documents would serve Bangladesh interest best for negotiating with strength bilaterally and to avert the need for arbitration. For a variety of reasons including the special circumstances of the case due to geographical and topographical peculiarities of the coasts of Bay of Bengal leading to overlapping claims and the emphasis by LOS convention on 'mutual understanding and cooperation to ensure “equitable and efficient utilization of sea resources' in the ultimate analysis the issue of maritime boundary demarcation would have to be settled through amicable understanding between Bangladesh, India and Myanmar.

As a diplomatic strategy, I would suggest that given the good will generated amongst Indian leadership and public opinion during the visit of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina our diplomacy be fully geared to achieve the much needed break-through with India on the demarcation of Maritime boundary. This would have a salutary impact on negotiations with Myanmar. Now is the time to seize the opportunity; otherwise once the momentum generated by the visit is lost there will be usual foot dragging, delays and procrastination at the technical/bureaucratic levels. The prospect of resolution of the sea boundary issue should be comparatively brighter then before.

To make substantive progress on the sea delimitation issue we need to press with utmost urgency and seriousness for agreements on

a). Joint surveys with India and Myanmar. India has reportedly agreed to this with Pakistan.
b). Joint development and exploration of maritime areas for Oil and Gas exploration with India and Myanmar in the Bay of Bengal; there are examples of such spirit of cooperation including the recent instance of the historic agreement between Japan and China to jointly explore and develop Gas in the East China Sea. This is crucial as Bangladesh is in the throes of serious Gas crisis and cannot afford to wait for the outcome of the maritime dispute.

It hardly needs emphasis that both for India and Myanmar the resources of Bay of Bengal is not critical to its survival as it is for Bangladesh conceding the legitimate energy needs of both the countries. India along with China is poised for an era of unprecedented economic growth and aspiring to join the club of the affluent; so also the potential for economic growth and resources of Myanmar compared to its population Whereas for Bangladesh the resources of Bay of Bengal involving particularly the Continental Shelf (CS) and Economic Zone (EC) are crucial for its survival and future; an LDC grappling with the challenges of poverty compounded by energy crisis, vulnerable to climate change and a burgeoning population of mostly young needs a helping hand to comeout from the vicious circle of poverty and deprivation and graduate into a middle income country. A peaceful, stable and democratic Bangladesh free from extremism and militancy is in the vital interest of India, Myanmar and for regional peace and stability. This can only be achieved on the bedrock of a viable economy; access to and legitimate sharing of the resources of Bay of Bengal is crucial to the survival and future of Bangladesh as a vibrant peaceful and democratic country. A just, fair and equitable resolution of the maritime dispute would give the much needed boost to Bangladesh's progress and development and help avert the real peril of Bangladesh becoming sea locked. This would be seen by its people as the real test of friendship of India and Myanmar towards them and their country beyond the trappings of diplomatic niceties.

In conclusion my appeal would be that we eschew the temptation to subject serious issues of foreign policy and diplomacy to partisanship at the expense of vital national interests. We have to rise to the demands of time and history collectively as a nation to translate the

Dreams of the millions who sacrificed for the independence of the country. 'For whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee'; it tolls for Bangladesh.

The author is former UN Administrator to Kosovo and Bangladesh Ambassador to Japan.

© thedailystar.net, 2010. All Rights Reserved