--- On Wed, 1/14/09, Jayita Ray <[log in to unmask]> wrote: From: Jayita Ray <[log in to unmask]> Subject: Re: [INT-BOUNDARIES] Bangladesh india news before it happens To: [log in to unmask] Date: Wednesday, January 14, 2009, 7:27 PM Expectations are indeed high that there will be a sea change in India-Bangladesh relations following the elections. As for the maritime boundary demarcation issue, the sticking point seems to be the methodology being used for delimitation. Bangladesh favours the equity principle, while India and Myanmar prefer the equidistance method as the basis of their claims. See, eg.(India-Bangladesh maritime talks inconclusive, Haroon Habib, The Hindu, Sept 19, 2008: http://www.hindu.com/2008/09/19/stories/2008091956481400.htm; also, Bangladesh, Myanmar talks inconclusive, Nov 19, 2008: http://www.hindu.com/2008/11/19/stories/2008111957071400.htm). Have any such maritime boundary disputes been settled on the basis of the equity principle, or is Bangladesh a precedent setting case? droll understatement professor & i am not sure how i got this impression nor if it is at all right but isnt the equidistance principle more presumptive only for facing states & the equity principle more presumptive for adjacent ones & in any case wont the growing energy needs of india soon favor a compromise settlement too more than with myanmar where the need for settlement seems less pressing & the prize in dispute greater On a more optimistic note, two recent articles advocate a more nuanced position, arguing that India should take a diplomatic rather than political approach to the delimitation issue: India-Bangladesh Maritime Dispute in the Bay of Bengal The New Horizon, Dec.26, 2008 - Diganta http://horizonspeaks.wordpress.com/2008/12/26/the-maritime-dispute-with-bangladesh Indo-Bangladesh Maritime Border Dispute: Problems and Prospects Dr. Alok Kumar Gupta, Assistant Professor, National Law University, Jodhpur IPCS: Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies, Article no. 2699, 8 Oct 2008 www.ipcs.org/whatsNewArticle11jsp?action=showView&KValue=2715&status=article&mod=b Dr Gupta makes a cogent point regarding the principle of fairness and justice which is outlined below: The resolution of the maritime border dispute between India and Bangladesh is of utmost importance and should be done in accordance with international law and agreements between the two sides. India's stand is that the solution should be based on "equidistant principle" whereas Bangladesh's claim is that it should be resolved on "equity principle" meaning that the countries adjacent to the Bay of Bengal would get proportional areas in the zone. The Bay of Bengal is located to the south of the land territory of Bangladesh which is in a rectangular domain and that gives Bangladesh the right to claim marine areas in a rectangular orientation extending 200 nautical miles to the south in the Bay from the extremities of its land territory. The fact remains that the delimitation of sea boundary between two lateral or adjacent states, such as Bangladesh and India, is different from that of opposite states such as India and Sri Lanka or Australia and Indonesia. The method of delimitation (equidistant method) between two opposite states may not apply between adjacent states because it grossly distorts the boundary, contrary to the principle of fairness and justice (equity principle). Therefore, any attempt towards maritime border conflict resolution should take into account a few key factors. Prior to the demarcation of the sea boundary, the border of the Haribhanga river is required to be determined first. Ordinarily, in the case of a navigable river, under international law (Article 76 and 82 of the UNCLOS), the boundary line runs through the middle of the deepest navigable channel (Thalweg principle) unless agreed otherwise between the parties. Also, according to international law, the states shall settle the boundary through negotiations. If negotiations fail, the principle of equity will apply, implying that justice and fairness must be the hallmark of the settlement. There should be a joint Bangladesh-India marine survey on the Haribhanga River to determine the exact position of deep-water navigable channel or the main channel of the river. India has so far, been reluctant for a joint survey, which is wrong, given the big brother-small brother syndrome that India's neighbors suffer from. A joint survey will mitigate many of the disputed claims and counter-claims over the entire issue. Both countries should try to involve a neutral third party or if agreed may refer it to an international tribunal. However, India would perhaps be reluctant because of its experience in the case of Rann of Kutch, but this is not to say that things will turn out the same way again. Regards, Dr. Jayita Ray Flinders University Adelaide, Australia