IN 1975, India constructed the Farakka Barrage near the Bangladesh border, diverting water from the Ganges River into the Bhagirathi-Hooghly River to enhance the navigability of Kolkata Port. While this might have initially served India鈥檚 economic interest, the consequences for Bangladesh have been devastating. Ecological degradation, agricultural disruption, economic hardship, and severe freshwater scarcity are just a few issues that have plagued Bangladesh for nearly five decades.
From the onset, the Farakka Barrage has violated essential principles of international river law. Under the 鈥楴o Harm Principle鈥� articulated clearly in Article 7 of the 1997 UN Watercourses Convention, any state鈥檚 activity must avoid causing significant harm to downstream countries. Yet, Bangladesh has endured massive ecological and economic damage directly linked to India鈥檚 unilateral water diversion.
Another vital international law principle, 鈥楨quitable and Reasonable Utilisation鈥�, demands that shared water resources be utilised fairly. However, Farakka鈥檚 operation has systematically deprived Bangladesh of its legitimate water rights, dramatically altering the environmental and socio-economic fabric of the nation, particularly harming agriculture, fisheries, and the globally significant Sundarbans.
India also failed its international obligations to adequately consult and inform Bangladesh before the barrage鈥檚 construction and subsequent management, further breaching established diplomatic norms. These actions collectively represent severe legal violations that demand accountability and remediation.
Historically, resistance against the Farakka Barrage is symbolically anchored by the legendary Farakka Long March of 1976, led by Maulana Abdul Hamid Khan Bhashani. On May 16, 1976, thousands marched from Rajshahi to Farakka, vociferously protesting India鈥檚 unilateral water diversion. This event remains a potent symbol of Bangladesh鈥檚 enduring struggle for environmental justice and equitable water sharing. Today, commemorating this day highlights ongoing demands for justice and equitable sharing of transboundary waters.
Globally, similar disputes have found resolutions in international courts or arbitration bodies, providing critical precedents for Bangladesh. The Gab膷铆kovo鈥揘agymaros case (Hungary vs Slovakia) at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), for instance, underscored ecological integrity and fairness in international river use. Likewise, arbitration mechanisms facilitated by the World Bank in the Indus Waters Treaty (Pakistan vs. India) illustrate how impartial mediation can resolve deep-rooted water conflicts. Cases such as the ongoing negotiations around Ethiopia鈥檚 Grand Renaissance Dam emphasise the necessity of multilateral dialogue, while effective bilateral treaty management between the US and Mexico on the Rio Grande demonstrates sustainable diplomatic models.
Considering these global precedents, Bangladesh must now strategically engage in robust international legal action. Firstly, Bangladesh should immediately commission a detailed, multidisciplinary assessment to quantify ecological, agricultural, and economic losses inflicted by the barrage. Such documentation would underpin claims for monetary compensation from India based on clearly defined international liability principles.
Moreover, Bangladesh must consider petitioning international forums such as the ICJ or the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA). The ICJ offers formal, binding judgements suitable for complex interstate disputes, while the PCA provides flexible arbitration tailored to environmental and technical aspects of water conflicts. Utilising these forums can elevate Bangladesh鈥檚 grievances and catalyse fair, transparent solutions.
Interestingly, internal criticism within India provides Bangladesh with significant diplomatic leverage. Prominent Indian voices, including Bihar chief minister Nitish Kumar and respected environmentalist Rajendra Singh, have openly labelled the Farakka Barrage a 鈥榗urse鈥�, highlighting its adverse impact on Bihar and West Bengal through intensified flooding, sedimentation, and riverbank erosion. These domestic criticisms validate Bangladesh鈥檚 concerns and amplify demands for the barrage鈥檚 phased decommissioning.
Bangladesh should strategically leverage these internal Indian critiques in diplomatic discussions, advocating for a bilateral review of Farakka鈥檚 viability. Bangladesh鈥檚 diplomacy must also extend to actively engaging Indian civil society, environmental groups, and media to build consensus for removing this problematic infrastructure.
The current government, led by Dr Muhammad Yunus, stands at a pivotal juncture in Bangladesh鈥檚 diplomatic and environmental future. To succeed, it should promptly assemble a dedicated task force comprising international legal experts, hydrologists, environmental scientists, experienced diplomats, and policy advocates. This multidisciplinary team can guide rigorous assessments, manage strategic international negotiations, and sustain diplomatic momentum toward Farakka鈥檚 reconsideration.
Additionally, Bangladesh must ratify and actively utilise the 1997 UN Watercourses Convention. This action will fortify Bangladesh鈥檚 legal stance, explicitly safeguarding its downstream rights and responsibilities within international law frameworks. Ratification will send a clear international signal of Bangladesh鈥檚 commitment to resolving transboundary water issues through established global norms.
Finally, investing in domestic research and sustainable water management strategies is critical. While Bangladesh pursues justice internationally, it must also build resilience locally, mitigating current ecological damage and developing alternative freshwater solutions to protect millions dependent on the Ganges鈥� flow.
In conclusion, nearly half a century after its construction, the Farakka Barrage remains an undeniable source of environmental, economic, and diplomatic distress for Bangladesh. Yet, within this challenge lies a profound opportunity. By initiating strategic international legal action, leveraging global precedents, capitalising on rising internal Indian criticism, and strengthening diplomatic channels, Bangladesh can transition from victimhood to proactive stewardship. Dismantling or significantly modifying the Farakka Barrage could mark the beginning of a transformative regional shift from destructive water management toward cooperative, sustainable governance. The time for decisive action is now.
听
Dr Matiul Alam, a former professor of education, is an honorary educational research scholar at the University of British Columbia, Canada.
