Dynamics of China Bangladesh Relations

[TopCat]

If only things were that easy. From what I understand India's understanding of the flow of Hariabhanga river is more to the east.

If I were you, I would prefer to count my eggs, not the chickens.

Lesson of Fluid Dynamics might help yu understand why the flow of water should be in the western side of the river. See the flow in the way upstream where the river changed its course. You can try that at your home as for experiment with a bent pipe.

there are also two bigger river on the other side of the Talpatti whose water is also coming out towards westward. So there is no way haribhanga river flow could supersed those two rivers.

 

[kallol]

Dear Damiendehorn,

I am not here to propose a zero sum game. As the thread will go, you will find many of the perceived concerns are politically and emotionaly motivated (or nurtured) and not on actual paper.

Being neighbours, there will be some areas of disagreement and concerns as many of the resources might fall in grey areas or might not be well demarcated. However those are best left for the government to talk to each other and solve. We should only stick to agreements and their violations.

China also has the same with most of its neighbours. So this is a common phenomemnon and it will take some time to have more matured relations.

Neither I have any intention to say that China should not be the trading partner. They are a great country and we all should have trading relations with China.

The main purpose of my questions were to understand if there was perceived feelings or it is real. To understand the feelings towards India vis-a-vis China.

As it comes out, it is more perceived than real.

 

[kallol]

If only things were that easy. From what I understand India's understanding of the flow of Hariabhanga river is more to the east.

If I were you, I would prefer to count my eggs, not the chickens.

In case of doubt Bangladesh has all the right to go to UNCLOS. If their stated facts are right, Bangladesh should go to an arbritrator. What is preventing this ? India is no saint and that way no one is. If there is one organization with better ability & rationality to judge this, that recourse should be taken.

 

[eastwatch]

If only things were that easy. From what I understand India's understanding of the flow of Hariabhanga river is more to the east.

If I were you, I would prefer to count my eggs, not the chickens.

I do not understand your egg/chicken sarcasm. But, there is no reason to believe that the combined flow of Raymangal and Jamuna rivers can be superceded by the single flow of Hariabhanga river and push its flow towards east. Hence, a survey will show that the Haribhanga flow is through the west of south Talpatty. It means that the eastern half of this flow, in which South Talpatty lies, belongs to Bangladesh.

The way your red line has been drawn in the map, you can extend it to Chittagong and claim it, too.

 

[Developereo]

Bangladeshis understand that India's support in 1971 was not motivated by love of Bengalis, but hatred of West Pakistanis. Given half a chance, India would love to dismember Bangladesh as well.

 

[LCA Tejas]

Bangladeshis understand that India's support in 1971 was not motivated by love of Bengalis, but hatred of West Pakistanis. Given half a chance, India would love to dismember Bangladesh as well.

yes, and the kashmiris here understand too that there is no love for them by pakistanis but hatred towards India... is that true??

 

[eastwatch]

Lesson of Fluid Dynamics might help yu understand why the flow of water should be in the western side of the river. See the flow in the way upstream where the river changed its course. You can try that at your home as for experiment with a bent pipe.

there are also two bigger river on the other side of the Talpatti whose water is also coming out towards westward. So there is no way haribhanga river flow could supersed those two rivers.

India is, perhaps, waiting for a natural calamity like a Sumatra type earthquake or a heavy flood that will change the existing hydrological system in and around S. Talpatty. Only then, they will agree to sit for a joint survey　knowing that the result would be in their favour.

Laboratory experiments should be conducted in a MODEL based on open channel　hydraulics. Two different liquid colours shall be spread in the Raymangal/Jamuna water flow and Hariabhanga water flow in the lab. The colour in the former will certainly overtake the colour in the latter.

An extraordinery earthquake may change the flow routes. So, India is waiting for that miracle to happen before they agree to a survey.

 

[toxic_pus]

AFTER 28 years our big neighbour India extended her hands in discussing maritime boundary inclusive of the South Talpatti vs. New Moore island issue. But the outcome was only 'diplomatically successful', in actuality it was just a failure.

-snipitty snipitty snip-

:The Daily Star: Internet Edition

Thanks for the link, although it is a mere opinion piece and not a news report. The 'discussion' referred here was actually a bureaucratic level meeting during mid September, 2008. I haven't found any news report of that time that says that BD members had asked for 'joint' assessment. There is a reason why I found it hard to digest that BD wanted a 'joint' assessment.

They have asserted their sovereignty over the islands though.

Besides the opinion piece spreads some disinformation about enclaves.

 

[toxic_pus]

Lesson of Fluid Dynamics might help yu understand why the flow of water should be in the western side of the river. See the flow in the way upstream where the river changed its course. You can try that at your home as for experiment with a bent pipe.

The way your red line has been drawn in the map, you can extend it to Chittagong and claim it, too.

I may not know fluid dynamics and all the necessary physics associated with rivers, currents, depositions and island formation, but I am sure GoI's oceanographers and other scientists do. I was hoping that my illustration would be able to convey how GoI interprets the situation. You have managed to make it an issue about me. Congratulations.

there are also two bigger river on the other side of the Talpatti whose water is also coming out towards westward. So there is no way haribhanga river flow could supersed those two rivers.

I do not understand your egg/chicken sarcasm. But, there is no reason to believe that the combined flow of Raymangal and Jamuna rivers can be superceded by the single flow of Hariabhanga river and push its flow towards east. Hence, a survey will show that the Haribhanga flow is through the west of south Talpatty. It means that the eastern half of this flow, in which South Talpatty lies, belongs to Bangladesh.

Here is one more amateurish attempt to illustrate GoI's position. The image below clearly shows the silting indicating the thalweg ('the deepest continuous line along the valley or waterway'), and hence the flow of the Hariabhanga river. Also there is a clear border (for the lack of better word) between the water of Hariabhanga and Raimangal rivers.

The original HiRes image can be found here (4 mb)

 

[toxic_pus]

In case of doubt Bangladesh has all the right to go to UNCLOS. If their stated facts are right, Bangladesh should go to an arbritrator. What is preventing this ? India is no saint and that way no one is. If there is one organization with better ability & rationality to judge this, that recourse should be taken.

That Bangladesh hasn't rushed to UNCLOS should have been a clue that something is probably not right. The problem is that the flow of Hariabhanga river is unstable and keeps changing. Currently the flow is favourable to India because it puts South Talpatty within India. But it may change and move westward putting it in BD.

Thats why I said, jury is still out. But it seems our BD brothers have picked up the Pakistani habit of ejaculating hot air and customary chest thumping.

 

[kallol]

That Bangladesh hasn't rushed to UNCLOS should have been a clue that something is probably not right. The problem is that the flow of Hariabhanga river is unstable and keeps changing. Currently the flow is favourable to India because it puts South Talpatty within India. But it may change and move westward putting it in BD.

Thats why I said, jury is still out. But it seems our BD brothers have picked up the Pakistani habit of ejaculating hot air and customary chest thumping.

Dear Toxic_pus (!!!!!!!!),

The geo-politics is not so simple and it is better to engage experts to be the arbitrator. That way none will have much grudge. It is better to have a neutral arbitrator decide than India doing it.

I am a scientist and have dealt a lot with our oceanographers. they are capable no doubt but again these things are more geo-political than pure science. But if you ask my opinion, it would be very difficult for any one to claim with sureity. Best would be - may be common free trade zone (if possible) where the infrastructure cost is borne by both on agreed terms.

However this might not be accepted, so the best option is the arbitrator.

Let's see what this Government of India does about this. Hope it will take advantage of the cooled relations to help bangladesh to grow economically. The present Indian PM is capable and has the right vision in sight. Hope he can guide the relations to a higher plane.

&

 

[toxic_pus]

The geo-politics is not so simple and it is better to engage experts to be the arbitrator. That way none will have much grudge. It is better to have a neutral arbitrator decide than India doing it.

You seem to have missed the point completely.

It is precisely because of complexity of geo-politics, neither country wants to go for neutral arbitrator. A good example would be Pakistan's misadventure with Indus-Water treaty. The verdict of the neutral arbitrator has left Pakistan with no room for negotiation and extracting any concession from India. In a sense, they have been left with a fait accompli. South Talpatty comes close to the scenario. If today BD agrees for neutral arbitrator, BD will flat out plain loose. Thats why you will not catch GoB raising the decibel on Talpatty except for routine protests and claims. India too doesn't want to make too much noise, because in the long run, the island may just disappear completely. Thats why it is almost always in the back-burner and gets a mention in the passing.

Its all geo-politics.

I am a scientist and have dealt a lot with our oceanographers. they are capable no doubt but again these things are more geo-political than pure science. But if you ask my opinion, it would be very difficult for any one to claim with sureity. Best would be - may be common free trade zone (if possible) where the infrastructure cost is borne by both on agreed terms.

Talpatty is all about potential oil and gas, nothing a common free trade zone can solve. If sovereignty on Talpatty can be established by any one country, it will go a long way in extending the 200 NM exclusive zone for it.

 

[TopCat]

That Bangladesh hasn't rushed to UNCLOS should have been a clue that something is probably not right. The problem is that the flow of Hariabhanga river is unstable and keeps changing. Currently the flow is favourable to India because it puts South Talpatty within India. But it may change and move westward putting it in BD.

Thats why I said, jury is still out. But it seems our BD brothers have picked up the Pakistani habit of ejaculating hot air and customary chest thumping.

UNCLOS came into existence after late 90's, if my memory tells me right, it was after 1995 or 1998 when both the countries ratified UNCLOS on the contrary Talpatty dispute gone back to since 1976.

2nd, Bangladesh did not have a case as India did not claim full ownership of the island as they always visit there to test the soil to see its origination.. isnt it??

But Bangladesh rushed to UNCLOS as soon as India officially claimed its ownership by applying it to UN regarding sea boundary. BD was just waiting for it... you just could not see it.

 

[toxic_pus]

UNCLOS came into existence after late 90's, if my memory tells me right, it was after 1995 or 1998 when both the countries ratified UNCLOS on the contrary Talpatty dispute gone back to since 1976.

UNCLOS existed before 90s, albeit in different form.

2nd, Bangladesh did not have a case as India did not claim full ownership of the island as they always visit there to test the soil to see its origination.. isnt it??

But Bangladesh rushed to UNCLOS as soon as India officially claimed its ownership by applying it to UN regarding sea boundary. BD was just waiting for it... you just could not see it.

On May 9, 1981 we hoisted our flag on Talpatty. I believe that counts as a 'claim'.

And as far as I remember, BD didn't exactly rush to UN/UNCLOS with a specific complaint against India with regard to Talpatty. It was more of a generic appeal to delimit maritime boundary.

 

[kallol]

"According to the provisions of UNCLOS, the coastal State that intends to delineate the outer limits of the continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles, is required to submit particulars of such limits along with the supporting scientific and technical data. The claims are required to be submitted by May 2009 and would be examined by the Commission on the Limits of Continental Shelf (CLCS). If the claims are accepted by CLCS India would be in a position to claim substantial area beyond the EEZ.

The States submitting claims are required to determine the (a) baselines (b) foot of the continental slope and 2500 metre isobath, and (c) thickness of sedimentary rocks to establish the outer limits of the continental shelf."

1. I believe the above states the requirement for extending beyond 200 NM. How much does the position of the new island matter ?

2. Going by the picture, I saw, (it was not visible yesterday because of slow update, it seems that the island is formed because of the relative stagnation in that zone because of the direction of the river on western side of the Talpatty island. Going forward the island may increase in size on the west and get connected to Moore island in about 100+ yrs. The flow of the river from the eastern side is intersected by the one on eastern side and hence there is hardly any impact of the river (on eastern side) on the island except for the fact that it also restricts the growth on the eastern side. (my major background is in fluidics, ocean related technologies and exploration)

3. We need to see how much is the impact of this island on the claims of both countries in terms of exploration and exploitation rights. If the concerned area is marginal then joint exploration and exploitation may be possible. If it is substantial then arbitration may be the best solution.

This is my opinion.