I still do not see a selling out of sovereignty here. Even if I agreed to ALL your points, we see a poor business arrangement. Let's get past what X or Y tells you (even if X or Y is your father), let us dissect the various agreements to determine whether we are getting shafted or otherwise. I haven't analyzed the proposed agreements in details so cannot, currently, make detailed analyses.
In broad strokes, there is huge mutual benefit to water, trade, transport and power arrangements for both countries especially considering our geographical location. I am hoping others will chime also in with thoughtful and logical analysis of the agreements rather than be driven by partisanship. For example, Madam - I think thou dost protest too much (directed at the other lady).
Lets start with each of your points.
1.The $1B line of credit. From what I have read, the line of credit was not just limited to support the improvement of transport infrastructures that would be needed to support increased traffic if we allow transhipment but to also improve power grid connectivity. The interest is very low at about ~1%, so perhaps we can agree to let that rest for now. Bangladesh had decided to undertake 20 projects with the line of credit - 12 for railway development, 5 for road improvements, and 3 for port development (Mongla, Ctg AND Ashulia). Improving our rickety railway infrastructure would be a internal benefit - the plan did NOT call for building new railways solely to build railways that connect only Indian cities across Bangladesh. Out existing railway network is antiquated and the Western and Eastern networks are not well connected and any improvements there would have helped us immensely. Similarly road and port improvement would have also benefited us immensely. What I do not know is how much cost-benefit analysis have been done to estimate the value of the improvements. At the very minimum the internal financial benefit must exceed significantly the ~1%/per annum interest rates ot be worthwhile. I haven't seen/read any such economic analyses.
As an EE undergrad with an understanding our power-grid system and generation capacity, I do support any work towards power-grid integration. At the very least we could have used excess capacity in Nepal/Bhutan to supplement our perennial electricity shortages.
What I did not like about the line of credit was the fact that ALL goods, services and works must be procured from India. So unless someone can quantify the economic benefit of the loan, that restriction would have been a point of contention with me.
Edit: Added: This would have also given us transit to Nepal and Bhutan and vice-versa.
Here are more details on what Bangladesh was planning to do with the money. No, no 100,100 seat capacity stadium in the hill-tracts:
Quote:
|
The array of infrastructures, equipment and facilities we are looking at includes dredgers for Mongla Port, BIWTA and WDB, internal container river port at Ashuganj, broad gauge locomotive engines and passenger coaches, tank wagon for fuel transportation, second Bhairab bridge, second Titas bridge, double-decker buses for BRTC, developed land port, overpasses at Jurain and Malibagh, connectivity road between Ramgarh and Sabroom, power grid line and capacity-building for BSTI
|
2. I wish moral rights fed our tummies.
3. See 1 but regarding spill-over of insurgency violence into Bangladesh - yes, it is a concern.
4. Hearsay. Cannot comment until we know the details to validate or refute either way. I will refrain to comment on propaganda that makes sense.
