Maritime boundary negotiations
Monday, 25 January 2010
THE official announcement made last Saturday about the formation of a joint coordination committee by Bangladesh and India to combat international terrorism, organised crimes and cross-border drug trade is but a follow-up of the January 12 Hasina-Manmohan joint communiqué. While making this announcement about the committee at the Foreign Office in Dhaka, the Foreign Secretary also spoke about the status of negotiations between Bangladesh and Myanmar on the demarcation of the maritime boundary between the two neighbours. His explanations about the three security-related agreements signed during Prime Minister Hasina's January 10-13 state visit to India will possibly be lost in the polemical battle between the government and the opposition on Bangladesh-India relations. But his claim that the differences between Bangladesh and Myanmar on the issue of the demarcation of maritime boundary have narrowed down, is really reassuring. This is more so because an understanding or agreement on the maritime boundary with Myanmar cannot but have a positive impact on resolving a similar maritime boundary dispute of Bangladesh with India.
Bangladesh enacted in 1974 the Territorial and Maritime Zones Act, claiming its jurisdiction on territorial waters, economic zones, and continental shelf in the Bay of Bengal, and held initial negotiations with both India and Myanmar for demarcating the maritime boundary. The issue was pushed to the backburner for decades to the woe and misery of Bangladesh. But India and Myanmar have all through been disputing Bangladesh's claimed maritime area which is estimated to be 2,07,000 square kilometres. The dispute centres on the principles of determining the maritime boundary -- Bangladesh preferring the principle of "equity of resources" and India and Myanmar insisting on the principle of "equidistance".
The present Hasina government rightly prioritised the issue of settling the maritime boundary disputes with India and Myanmar. It decided to go for arbitration under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea and served legal notices on India and Myanmar on October 8, 2009 to settle the disputes. But it also kept the door open for bilateral negotiations with both India and Myanmar. The subject was mentioned in the Hasina-Manmohan joint communiqué. But tangible progress took place in the negotiations with Myanmar when both countries reached a consensus to combine the two principles of "equity of resources" and "equidistance" in deciding the maritime boundary at a meeting held in Chittagong on January 8-9. A follow-up meeting between the two countries is scheduled for April.
It is, however, pertinent to mention that a final resolution of the dispute, culminating in a delimitation agreement on maritime boundary with Myanmar, may still take an inordinately long time. Some experts in the field have suggested that pending a final agreement, it is advisable for the governments to conclude "a provisional agreement of joint development and exploration of resources in the Bay of Bengal." Many countries, including China, Japan, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, France, Spain, South Korea, Iceland, Norway, Thailand and Vietnam, have followed this policy in exploiting their maritime resources. When Bangladesh and Myanmar meet in their next meeting on maritime dispute in April, their negotiators may keep the experiences of these countries in view.
Bangladesh enacted in 1974 the Territorial and Maritime Zones Act, claiming its jurisdiction on territorial waters, economic zones, and continental shelf in the Bay of Bengal, and held initial negotiations with both India and Myanmar for demarcating the maritime boundary. The issue was pushed to the backburner for decades to the woe and misery of Bangladesh. But India and Myanmar have all through been disputing Bangladesh's claimed maritime area which is estimated to be 2,07,000 square kilometres. The dispute centres on the principles of determining the maritime boundary -- Bangladesh preferring the principle of "equity of resources" and India and Myanmar insisting on the principle of "equidistance".
The present Hasina government rightly prioritised the issue of settling the maritime boundary disputes with India and Myanmar. It decided to go for arbitration under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea and served legal notices on India and Myanmar on October 8, 2009 to settle the disputes. But it also kept the door open for bilateral negotiations with both India and Myanmar. The subject was mentioned in the Hasina-Manmohan joint communiqué. But tangible progress took place in the negotiations with Myanmar when both countries reached a consensus to combine the two principles of "equity of resources" and "equidistance" in deciding the maritime boundary at a meeting held in Chittagong on January 8-9. A follow-up meeting between the two countries is scheduled for April.
It is, however, pertinent to mention that a final resolution of the dispute, culminating in a delimitation agreement on maritime boundary with Myanmar, may still take an inordinately long time. Some experts in the field have suggested that pending a final agreement, it is advisable for the governments to conclude "a provisional agreement of joint development and exploration of resources in the Bay of Bengal." Many countries, including China, Japan, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, France, Spain, South Korea, Iceland, Norway, Thailand and Vietnam, have followed this policy in exploiting their maritime resources. When Bangladesh and Myanmar meet in their next meeting on maritime dispute in April, their negotiators may keep the experiences of these countries in view.