Image description

DURING the liberation war, people of this land chanted, ‘[The River] Padma, Meghna, Jamuna is our destiny (Padma, Meghna, Jamnuna, tomar amar thikana’). Bangladesh — the birth of the nation and the struggle for its independence were inspired by the rivers of this land. As we celebrate 53rd Independence Day, do we dare to ask how the rivers that bore witness to the heroic struggles and sacrifices of our freedom fighters and carried the dead bodies of ordinary citizens when families were not allowed to bury their dead are doing? Are streams of our rivers enjoying the freedom of flowing freely in an independent nation? Has the geography of the rivers been evolving without any hindrances in the past decades? The environmentally insensitive anti-river development policy has paved the way for the slow death of many rivers. Many rivers are now part of forgotten history. Every day, almost every day, newspapers are burdened with stories of their deaths. The silent cries of dying rivers are ringing, but the state remains unperturbed. Rivers are stolen in plain sight. Barely anyone cares. No brave environmental court is there to speak for the rights of the dying rivers.

Have we always been an anti-river nation? Vernacular history does not say so. Historically, our lives revolved around the rivers of Bangladesh. Yet, a recent report by the National River Conservation Commission says that of the 770 rivers that historically flowed through the country, only 405 have survived. More than 100 rivers have been lost since independence. How did it happen? On Independence Day, we must raise the river question to understand the lost love for our rivers. Why are rivers disappearing? It is because economic development is happening at the cost of our ecological integrity. The neo-liberal development model that successive governments adopted failed to recognise the historical significance of the river for Bangladesh and its people. Sadly, the government celebrates the country’s graduation from the least developed country to a developing nation, standing on the graves of many rivers.


Ìý

I

NATURE, ecosystem, life-philosophy, economy, and politics in our country evolved around the river system. All the rivers — Brahmaputra, Padma, Surma, Teesta, Meghna, Karnaphuli, Naaf, Sitalakhya, Mogra, Feny, Dakatia, Monu, Rakti, Kopotakhya, Langla, Dhaleshweri, Karotoa, Ichamoti, Raymangal, Sangkha, Halda, Kangsha, Titas, Piyan, Ubdakhali, Jadukata, Simsang, Boral, Baleswar, Garai, Turag and many more — are either dying or struggling to maintain their mark on our national map.Ìý

In the river basins, different forms of production systems developed. The development of capital and the expansion of trade relations also followed the river basins. In 1722, almost 300 years ago, the construction work of the Kantajee temple began in Dinajpur. The terracotta on the walls of this temple has scenes from many boat journeys. Not too far from this temple is the River Tepa, which is now in really bad shape. The way the River Ganga is the god of water, Khoyaz Khizir and Badar Gazi are similarly the prophets of water. This is how the river remains central to the belief system of the subaltern lives. The history of Muslin and Zamdani is intrinsically linked with the river basins of Buriganga and Sitalakhya. Many weaving traditions in Bangladesh — Pabna taat, Tangtail taat, Bana taat of Hajongs and many weaving techniques from the Chittagong Hill Tracts — are also dependent on the local rivers. Many varieties of paddy and diverse agricultural traditions are embedded in the history of the river in Bangladesh. The saying that Bengalis live on rice and fish (‘Mache-bhate Bangali’) is situated in this unique history.ÌýÌýÌý

The neoliberal development process has defied the natural growth and life of a river and disrupted the economy dependent on the river system in Bangladesh. In the 1960s, Norman Ernest Borlaug, an American agronomist, was awarded the Noble Peace Prize for his discovery of high-yield crops, which then prompted what is now known as the Green Revolution. This mode of agriculture is technology-dependent and encourages groundwater extraction and the use of chemical fertilizers. In the long run, this mode of agriculture has proven to be harmful for the farmland and ecology in general. Before the introduction of high-yielding agricultural systems, farmers were dependent on rivers, ponds, rainwater, and other forms of natural sources of water. People were following the grammar and philosophy of nature. However, in independent Bangladesh, successive governments uncritically adopted the philosophy and technology of the green revolution, discrediting farmers’ knowledge, silencing the voices of subaltern people, and killing their relationship with the river and their surrounding nature.Ìý In the name of food security, through the farming of high-yield crops, subsidised access to chemical fertilisers poisoned the farm land, and the unregulated extraction of groundwater depleted water resources. When rivers and other water bodies are considered the lifeline of forests and biodiversity, the agricultural policy of the government launched an implicit and explicit destructive campaign.

Ìý

II

ONE after another, industrial units are established. The largest multinational corporate apparel units, such as Adidas, Hilfiger, Philip Maurice, and Nike, supplied from Bangladesh. These factories serve the profit-seeking interests of the global and local business elite but have no regard for our rivers as they are discharging their industrial waste into rivers. The tanneries in Hazaribagh were responsible for the death of the River Buriganga. The shrimp industry in the north-western region destroyed the river system in the region. The commercial tea gardens, tobacco farming, aggressive acacia and eucalyptus gardens, and farming of hybrid corn contributed to the slow death of our rivers. All these were continued in the name of economic development.

All economic and industrial sectors — agriculture, fishery, apparel — one way or another are responsible for the death of our rivers. Such is the state policy. No one is made accountable; no one is brought to justice. As if the death of rivers would liven up our economy and improve our GDP. And the calculation of GDP follows the logic of capitalism. In the way neo-liberal corporate capital penetrates our economy, it invades our development philosophy with an anti-river mentality.

Ìý

III

THE origins of the main rivers of Bangladesh are in India, Myanmar, Tibet, or China. Hence, the violence against rivers is not restricted within national boundaries. Neighbouring countries are equally oppressive and violent towards transboundary rivers. The Farkka barrage, the Teesta barrage, the Tipaimukh dam, and many hydropower projects in India have obstructed river flows, caused flash floods, or contributed to serious water crises in Bangladesh. The corporate-sponsored unplanned coal mining in north-eastern India also influenced our river system, particularly in the Sylhet division. Yet, river diplomacy in Bangladesh is not river-friendly. The state takes pride in not signing the UNECE Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes (the Water Convention) and promotes pro-dam development policy.

Scientific studies now confirm that the arbitrary withdrawal of water upstream across the border by India is slowly but steadily killing Bangladesh’s two major rivers and associated socio-economic and aquatic systems. Recent research conducted by a group of national and international researchers observed that the river’s health has progressively deteriorated since the opening of the Farakka Barage across the River Ganga in India. In the past decades, the water flow in the river Padma has decreased by 26 per cent and the river’s permanent water area has shrunk by 50 per cent during the dry season. The study conducted on a 70-kilometre area of the Padma from Godagari to Sarada in Rajshahi concluded that nearly one-third of the native fish species that were available in 1982 had disappeared. The permanent water area and the depth of the river have also significantly reduced, from 140 square kilometres in 1984 to 70 square kilometres in 2019. India has diverted an increased proportion of flow to the river Hooghly through the Farakka Barrage, which has contributed to the declining river health in Bangladesh.

Ìý

IV

The anti-river neoliberal development psyche of the state must be challenged. The tide and ebb of a river is its natural right to live that a state must protect. The rivers of Bangladesh can liven up Bangladesh’s sovereign, self-reliant economy. Rivers are not private property or any form of material property that can be owned, but the state’s indifference towards the ecological life of rivers has allowed vested quarters to feast on rivers. There is a High Court directive declaring rivers as legal entities and assigning the National River Protection Commission as the legal guardian to act as their parents in protecting the rights of waterbodies, canals, beels, shorelines, hills, and forests. Yet, violence against rivers continues unabated.

In riverine Bangladesh, how much more injustice to our river should we tolerate? We need real ecological emancipation of our rivers. In this struggle for emancipation, in which the ecological and environmental integrity of the nation will be treated as equally significant as the national economy, we must commit to the cause of our rivers. On the occasion of the 53rd Independence Day of Bangladesh, if we want to remain true to the historic slogan, ‘Padma, Meghna, Jamuna (also Karnaphuli, Simsung) is where we belong’, we must commit to the cause of rivers and resist any violence against our rivers.

Ìý

Pavel Partha is a writer and researcher. Translated from Bangla by Anmona Zoardar.