Sub-regional connectivity: Who gains what?

Shamsul Huq Zahid | Published: October 19, 2015 00:00:00 | Updated: November 30, 2024 06:01:00

'Sub-regional connectivity' involving Bangladesh, Bhutan, India and Nepal has, of late, become a buzzword in this part of the world. There are both open support and subtle opposition to such connectivity.
Greater physical infrastructural connectivity between neighbouring countries, undoubtedly, does help promote mutual trade and bring their peoples closer. However, possibility or potential is one thing and use of potential is altogether different. Thus, when the issue of connectivity comes, the parties involved tend to make an assessment of their individual benefit out of such a move.
One obvious question that is asked frequently is: which one of the sub-regional countries would be benefit most from the proposed connectivity that would facilitate transit or transshipment opportunities? The answer is also too obvious. It is India which stands to gain most for the connectivity would facilitate very easy access to its hitherto almost inaccessible north-eastern states.
Nepal and Bhutan two land-locked countries would also be benefit from the connectivity in terms of their external trade and trade with Bangladesh in particular. To help these two Himalayan states reach Bangladesh, India will have to offer corridor to the latter. If such corridors are granted by India, the two countries would be able to use the Bangladesh seaport at Mongla for their export-import trade.
Nepal, which is fully dependent on its giant neighbour India for all essential supplies, including fuel oils, has been feeling the pain of being a land-locked country. Indian trucks and other vehicles carrying food, fuel and other essentials stopped entering Nepal on 'security fear' following unrest developed in the Indo-Nepal border areas over adoption of a new constitution by Nepalese parliament. However, the political leaders in Nepal have accused the Indian government of resorting to arm-twisting tactics.
Now the million dollar question is: How will sub-regional connectivity benefit Bangladesh?
In fact, Bangladesh is the focal point of the connectivity issue. It has more to give than what it stands to gain.
Bangladesh is already well-connected to its giant neighbour and one of the major trading partners, India. The connectivity is expected to accrue some benefits in the matters of its trade with Nepal and Bhutan. That too would be dependent on the India's willingness to allow trade corridor to Nepal and Bhutan.
Rather to offer benefits to others, it would have to spend millions of dollars on the improvement of its infrastructure, particularly roads, highways and seaports. However, not for others, it has to improve its infrastructural facilities for its own sake.
The current state of most roads and highways in Bangladesh is pitiable. They need urgent improvement. But the roads and other physical infrastructures need to be made more durable and tougher if heavy-duty vehicles of neighbouring countries are allowed to pass through Bangladesh. In that case, the size of investment on improvement of roads and other infrastructures would be far greater.
It was estimated at a discussion meeting held in the capital city last Saturday under the auspices of the Dhaka Chamber of Commerce and Industry (DCCI) that Bangladesh will have to invest funds worth about US$2.3 billion for improving its infrastructures to make those suitable for movement of motor vehicles of the sub-regional countries. Â
It is worthwhile to mention here that Bangladesh, Bhutan, India and Nepal (BBIN) have signed a motor vehicle agreement to allow their respective roads and highways for plying of motor vehicles of others. This is seen here as a prelude to granting transit facilities, particularly to India.
Why would Bangladesh spend extra money on improving its infrastructures for others without having a tangible return?
Moreover, the so-called connectivity would pose a risk to both its domestic and export markets, to some extent. While transporting goods from Indian part to another through Bangladesh there could be unsavoury developments unless proper security checks are ensured. Moreover, Bangladesh exports, it is feared, both formal and informal, to the Indian north-eastern states would suffer in the event of connectivity.
Instances of Europe and other developed regions are cited by the proponents of greater connectivity. But they tend to forget that Bangladesh is not as affluent as the countries of those regions are. It has been facing serious difficulties in mobilising resources to meet its own minimum infrastructural needs.
Under the circumstances, it would be nearly impossible on the part of Bangladesh to spend extra fund for making the country's infrastructure suitable for others' use. So, the country that would be benefit most and the international agencies promoting sub-regional connectivity should make available adequate soft funds to Bangladesh to help it improve its infrastructure. Moreover, Bangladesh should not hesitate to levy reasonable fees and charges on goods to be transported through it by its neighbours, big or small.
zahidmar10@gmail.com