& çâÌæÚUæð´ ·¤è ¥ôÚU Îð¹Ùæ ÁæÚUè ÚU¹ð´ ¥ÍæüÌ ¥ÂÙð ÜÿØ ÂÚU ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´Ð ãæÚU Ù ×æÙð´, €UØô´ç·¤ ·¤æ× ·¤ÚUÙð âð ¥æÂ·¤ô ©gðàØ ·¤è Âýæç# ãôÌè ãñ ¥õÚU ÁèßÙ ·¤æ ¹æÜèÂÙ ÎêÚU ãôÌæ ãñÐ ÖÜð ãè ÁèßÙ ×ð´ ç·¤ÌÙè Öè ·¤çÆÙæ§ü €UØô´ Ù ¥æ°, çÁ™ææâæ ¥õÚU ©ˆâæã ÕÙæ° ÚU¹ð´Ð ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´, ÜÿØ ã×ðàææ ¥æÂ·Ô¤ Âæâ ãôÌð ãñ´ çÁ‹ãð´ ÂæÙð ·Ô¤ çÜ° ÂýØæâ ¥æÂ ·¤Öè Öè àæéM¤ ·¤ÚU â·¤Ìð ãñ´Ð

Teesta Treaty

’Misjudgement’ led to failure

Indian water resources minister admits 'he failed to readMamata'

Pallab Bhattacharya, New Delhi
The Indian water resources minister thinks there was "a little misjudgement" on his part to assume that West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee was on board on the proposed Teesta water sharing agreement with Bangladesh.
During an interactive session titled "Idea Exchange" with journalists of Indian Express yesterday, Pawan Kumar Bansal, the minister, went on the record for the first time in pointing out the difference of opinion between the Mamata government and the central government on the Teesta issue.
Journalists of the newspaper asked what exactly led to the failure to sign the proposed agreement during Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's visit to Dhaka in September last year following last-minute objections
fromMamata.
“On Teesta, there was a litfle over-enthusiasm on my part in presuming that she was on board. What has been happening all these years is that our water goes unmeasured. We had agreed to work out about 75 percent of the water, but about 25 percent of the water was left. And for that, the treaty was to be worked out,” Bansal replied.
“For the first time, we were putting into the treaty that the regeneration of water in their [Mamata Banerjee government's] portion
would also be treated as water from the river.
“The topography of the area is such that there is huge regeneration of water in a certain stretch of the river which falls on the other side after the water leaves our last barrage,” the newspaper quoted him as saying.
He said they thought that the West Bengal government would accept the terms.
Asked about what gave him the impression that Mamata's government was on board, Bansal said, “That was a little misjudgement. There were discussions with
them. Our view was that it's acceptable or else we wouldn't have included that in the treaty and the prime minister wouldn't have asked her [Mamata Banerjee] to go to Bangladesh.”
Following a remark made by a journalist that the Indian government backs down on the issue of China usurping river waters, Bansal said, “When we talk to any country, we never talk from a position of weakness.
"As far as the suggestion that China is taking away our water, it is not based on facts. The fact is, we don't have a
river water treaty with China and there is no enforceable international law on river water. All that we have are conventions.”
Terming "misplaced" the fears expressed about the Brahmaputra river, Bansal said, “From time to time, there have been reports that China is undertaking construction activity on the Brahmaputra, which could reduce the flow of water to India. But, China has repeatedly said they would never do anything that is against international conventions and laws.”