The Permanent Court of Arbitration ( PCA ) in The Hague recently rendered its judgment in the India-Bangladesh maritime boundary challenge in the Bay of Bengal on 7 July. The Arbitral court unanimously ruled in favor of Bangladesh, awarding 19,467 sq kilometer of the quarrel 25,602 sq kilometer in the Bay of Bengal, leaving 6,135 sq kilometer for India. The award is binding on both the neighbor countries, without oscilloscope for appeal. The verdict, marking an end to the long-standing bilateral nautical dispute, paves way for Bangladesh to explore for oil and boast reserves in the Bay of Bengal.
What are the implications of the settlement for India ? Is there a potential manner ahead for India-Bangladesh relations ?
Win-Win Situation
The verdict is Bangladesh ’ s second consecutive victory over its nautical concerns post 2012, when the UN court ruled in favor of Bangladesh in its disagree with Myanmar. Although India lost maritime sphere larger than the express of West Bengal, New Delhi welcomed the court ’ randomness rule as a matter of gratification for numerous reasons.
First, in the boundary line summons, Bangladesh ’ s claim on New Moore Island ( or South Talpatti Island as referred to by Bangladesh ) could not be substantiated. The PCA acknowledged India ’ s sovereignty over the island and granted it accompaniment access to the Hariabhanga River. New Moore Island has been a traditional point of competition between the two countries since 1971. India believes the boundary line has been carried out in an arbitrary manner. Nonetheless, control of the quarrel New Moore Island is viewed as a significant gain since the region is pitted to be a reservoir of vegetable oil and natural accelerator reserves. The Hariabhanga River is expected to hold about twice the sum of hydrocarbon reserves than the Krishna-Godavari Basin in Andhra Pradesh. This rule has enabled India to explore and exploit these likely anoint and gas reserves alongside other mineral resources that could help strengthen its economy.
Second, the liquidation has resulted in a clear depiction of the challenge territory allowing both parties to legally access the nautical resources within their respective economic zones. Offshore-drilled hydrocarbons are India ’ s the least explore energy options. The regnant provides India with the momentum to pursue offshore exploitation, either single-handed or in partnership. furthermore, the UN award has been openly welcomed by the indian fisherman in West Bengal and Odisha ampere well as Bangladeshi fishermen as they will now enjoy access to miles of open ocean that was unavailable to them for the past 40 years. Fishermen from both sides will be able to secure a bounty when fish near the coastal areas gets depleted.
Third, the court ’ sulfur award has split the maritime area in India ’ s favor. The total estimate area under question was 3,66, 854 sq kilometer. India claimed the area to be divided in .a proportion of 1:3.44, while its Bangladeshi counterpart asserted for a 1:1.52 ratio. The court split the quarrel sphere in 1:2.81 ratio – which is well closer to India ’ sulfur claim.
Possible Way Ahead for India-Bangladesh Relationship
Read more: Toward a Mature Defense Partnership: Insights from a U.S.-India Strategic Dialogue • Stimson Center
The Bay of Bengal nautical limit settlement is a historic development in the 40 years of dispute between India and Bangladesh. Although, both the parties fell short of their nautical expectations, the settlement is probably to strengthen and intensify their bilateral ties. The verdict will enhance reciprocal understand and cooperation between the two neighbours in maritime sector activities such as exploration of offshore resources, for common gains. India and Bangladesh can now cooperate extensively in the conservation of the natural heritage in the Sundarbans. The opinion besides paves the way for enhancing economic development of the nautical area by increasing the possibilities of joint projects becoming feasible – aiding both New Delhi and Dhaka. It is frankincense a win-win situation for the countries as expressed by their extraneous ministries.
From a political point of view, the maritime colonization is likely to lessen insecurities and improve the trust factor between the two countries. This example should be treated as a lesson, and should encourage the two countries to cooperate on other long-pending issues of dispute – the Land Boundary Agreement and Teesta water sharing agreement.
Furthermore, both parties ’ open acceptance of the UN opinion is likely to make them look like respectable countries that accept external legal practices. furthermore, for India this can counter perceptions of attaining regional dominance and distinguish it from an expansionist China. Hopefully, this will besides be an example for other countries with challenge territories to follow suit.
Finally, the proliferation of diplomatic solutions in the bilateral kinship between India and Bangladesh, although boring, has generated optimism for amicable relations between the two neighbours. The ground for a sweetheart advance in the bilateral has been laid. Hopefully, the two South asian neighbours will continue giving peace and statesmanship a chance.