By Inder Jit
(Released on 29 September 1981)
India’s relations with Bangladesh have been put back on the rails, thanks to the recent visit of the Bangladesh Foreign Minister, Prof. Shamsul Haq, to New Delhi. The visit was marked by cordiality on both sides and, what is more, a fresh and much-needed commitment to resolve all outstanding issues peacefully in a spirit of mutual understanding and good neighbourliness. To begin with, the irritation and tension over the New Moore Island or South Talpatty, as Bangladesh calls it, has been defused and agreement reached to hold talks on the issue during the coming month initially at the level of the Foreign Secretaries. Not many are, however aware of the fact that a bold diplomatic initiative and a great deal of the fact that a bold diplomatic initiative and a great deal of patient hard work went into bringing the two Foreign Ministers together. At one stage, the situation was truly grim and explosive. It was almost a matter of touch and go. But saner counsels prevailed both in Dacca and in New Delhi. Issues of prestige were set aside and a pragmatic formula evolved to enable the Bangladesh Foreign Minister to visit India after the appropriate announcement from the two capitals simultaneously.
Mrs. Gandhi set a welcome tone for the talks and went all out to reassure Prof Haq of India’s basic outlook. New Delhi, she said, was willing to adopt a practical and constructive approach towards all outstanding issues between the two countries. She spoke in broad and genera terms and reiterated India’s commitment to fostering good neighbourly relations with Bangladesh. Prof. Haq responded warmly and reiterated Dacca’s anxiety to have friendly relations with New Delhi even if he did not quite give apt or good parallels. In so many words, he said Bangladesh desired a relationship with India like the one that existed between Canada and the US – or, as at present, between Germany and France, who had now learnt to live together in peace and amity after centuries of hostility, even wars. But the important thing is that Prof. Haq showed eagerness during his subsequent talk with Mr. P.V. Narasimha Rao to work for a solution of various outstanding problems between the two countries. Among other things, proposals for removing the remaining causes of tension over the New Moore Island were considered and broadly accepted.
Why all this fuss over New Moore? Candidly, I too was initially puzzled by all the trouble that erupted over this little piece of real estate, barely 1.5 sq kilometers in area and “born” only in 1970. Earlier it was no more than a “low tide elevation”, in technical jargon. The small land mass was visible only when the sea subsided during the low tide. But I soon discovered that the insignificant island has great economic implications for both India and Bangladesh. The ownership of New Moore involves various maritime and other territorial rights over about 4,000 sq nautical miles of the sea. Whoever owns the island will have the right to exploit not only the waters of this area for sea food but also the seabed and the wealth underneath. The waters of this area are said to be rich in golden shrimps, a hot favourite among gourmets at home and abroad. What lies under the seabed is anybody’s guess. But experts think that it could well yield scarce minerals and valuable natural gas. Remember, Bangladesh has discovered some three trillion cubic feet of natural gas in the region.
India’s case is clear. It has been in possession of New Moore ever since 1970, when it surfaced as a “proper island” and was identified as such. The island was assumed to be Indian territory for the simple reason that it lies at a distance of barely 5.2 km from the nearest Indian land mass as against 7.6 km from the nearest point of the land mass in Bangladesh. (Relative closeness to land is acknowledged in international law as one of the principal factors in determining the ownership of any island.) Indeed, the Indian Navy made an early survey of the island and also erected identification pillars on it in 1974 in accordance with international practice. New Delhi did not stop at that. It next took prompt stems to inform both the British Admiralty and the US Navy about the existence of the island and its Indian ownership. Latest British and American naval maps, I am authoritatively told, show New Moore as an Indian island. Both London and Washington are said to have taken Dacca into confidence in the matter before doing so.
New Delhi, too, brought to Dacca’s notice the same year the fact of the existence of New Moore Island and its Indian ownership. The occasion was provided by talks between the two countries in 1974 for delimiting the maritime boundary. Significantly, Bangladesh did not question India’s claim in any way. The parleys were continued in the first half of 1975 prior to the assassination of Sheikh Mujib. But at no stage did Dacca even vaguely question India’s ownership of the island. More. Talks between the two countries on the maritime boundary were resumed in 1978 under President Ziaur Rahman. But Dacca did not once again question India’s claim. Not long thereafter, the West Bengal police sent one of its patrol boats to the island. The patrol party hoisted the Indian Tricolour on the island and renamed it Purbasha. The Bengali Press publicised the “historic occasion” in a big way with photographs. Everyone seemed happy, especially in Calcutta. Purbasha was welcomed as more appropriate name. But the joy of the event was soon marred.
New Delhi reacted sharply to Dacca’s decision and rushed one if its frigates, INS Andamans. Dacca replied through public anti-Indian demonstrations on May 19. India next rushed some 30 to 40 of its armed personnel to New Moore. One move followed another and eventually Bangladesh sent five naval ships, including a frigate to the island. India responded by sending six naval ships. To cut a long story short, the situation was finally defused earlier this month when both sides agreed to withdraw the ships, end confrontation and hold talks.
Dacca reacted suddenly and sharply to these Press reports — taking New Delhi completely by surprise. It questioned India’s claim to the island for the first time in 1978 and even mounted a so-called popular agitation on the issue. Dacca asserted that no conclusion could be drawn on the basis of India’s view that Dacca had not raised any objection to New Delhi’s stand on the New Moore Island. In December the same year, Bangladesh presented to India a map of the area prepared by the US with the help of a space satellite. An enlarged version of the photograph taken by the satellite, the map shows both India and Bangladesh and the river Hariabhanga, which is acknowledged by the two countries as their common boundary. The map. I am told, also carries a shadow skirting the western side of the New Moore island from the point where the river joins the sea. Dacca then argued that the shadow represented the flow of the Hariabhanga and showed that the island lay on the Bangladesh side of the mutually accepted river boundary —and hence belonged to it.
Dacca thereafter laid serious claim to the island in April 1979 when Mr Morarji Desai visited Bangladesh as Prime Minister. It also proposed a joint survey to determine the ownership of the island. Mr Desai, anxious to build bridges with the neighbours, promptly agreed. Indian advisers accompanying him are believed to have drawn Mr Desai’s attention in Dacca itself to the fact that the concession was not fair to India. New Moore island, they pointed out, had been with India for the past 10 years and there was no doubt about its ownership. Mr Desai, however, stuck to his off-the cuff gesture for a joint survey. Bangladesh followed up the matter actively in June 1979 when its Deputy Prime Minister, Mr Maudood Ahmed, visited New Delhi for a meeting of the Joint River Commission on Farakka and pressed for a joint survey. However, the proposal could not be pursued as Mr Desai’s Government fell in July. Charan Singh, who next became Prime Minister, did not agree with Mr Desai’s line and firmly ruled against any joint survey.
Mrs Gandhi endorsed the stand taken by Mr Charan Singh following her return to power and ignored Dacca’s repeated reminders for a joint survey. The matter was discussed next between the two countries in August 1980 when Mr Narasimha Rao visited Dacca. Broad agreement was reached at these talks in regard to the island and a joint Press statement issued. Significantly, the statement noted that the two Ministers had discussed the, “issue” of the island between the two countries and agreed to exchange data and hold talks for resolving it. Mr Narasimha Rao returned happy that he had succeeded in getting Bangladesh to drop the idea of a joint survey. But Dacca had its own view. It was pleased that India had conceded that the New Moore island constituted an “issue” between the two countries. It was, moreover, happy that New Delhi had agreed to exchange data on the island. Subsequently, Bangladesh presented India an updated version of the satellite map, showing once again the Hariabhange, its estuary and a shadowy streak along the western side of the island.
On April 14 last, India sent the Sandhayak, one of its survey ships to New Moore island for collecting fresh data. Dacca reacted curiously almost a month later and on May 11 summoned India’s High Commissioner, Mr Muchkund Dubey, to the Foreign Office and demanded withdrawal of the ship. New Delhi, however, maintained that New Moore belonged to India and the Sandhayak was merely continuing a ten-year old practice. Unfortunately, Dacca escalated the problem on May 14 by sending two of its gun-boats to the island. New Delhi reacted sharply to Dacca’s decision and rushed one if its frigates, INS Andamans. Dacca replied through public anti-Indian demonstrations on May 19. India next rushed some 30 to 40 of its armed personnel to New Moore. One move followed another and eventually Bangladesh sent five naval ships, including a frigate to the island. India responded by sending six naval ships. To cut a long story short, the situation was finally defused earlier this month when both sides agreed to withdraw the ships, end confrontation and hold talks.
Both sides must, meanwhile, avoid doing anything which may queer the pitch once again. The long-term interests of India and Bangladesh lie in living as good neighbours — in peace and amity.
What of the future? The New Moore issue should be resolved peacefully on the basis of facts and fairness. Dacca is entitled to feel that it has a claim to South Talpatty on the strength of the satellite map. But New Delhi is equally clear about its claim on two counts. First, the main channel of the Hariabhanga at the estuary flows along the eastern side of the island and not western, as claimed by Dacca. Second, New Moore is closer to the Indian land mass. At any rate, there should be no difficulty in determining through a survey and soundings where the actual boundary lies in the case of a river: the centre of its deepest channel. New Delhi is willing to bend over backwards in its efforts to be reasonable vis-a-vis a neighbour, as shown by its generous attitude to Sri Lanka in regard to the Kachha Thivu island. But this cannot be at its own cost. Both sides must, meanwhile, avoid doing anything which may queer the pitch once again. The long-term interests of India and Bangladesh lie in living as good neighbours — in peace and amity. INFA