Bangladesh is accelerating a major shift in its approach to water management and regional diplomacy, moving closer to China as decades of unresolved water-sharing disputes with India continue to fuel environmental, economic, and political concerns. The change comes as Dhaka pushes ahead with multibillion-dollar river infrastructure projects aimed at addressing growing water shortages, salinity intrusion, flooding, and river degradation that affect millions of people across the country.
According to a report published by Nikkei Asia, the Bangladeshi government has approved two major projects that are expected to reshape the country’s river management strategy. These include the $2.8 billion Padma Barrage project and a revised version of the Teesta Mega Project, a large-scale river management and land reclamation initiative backed by China. The decision reflects growing frustration in Bangladesh over what many officials and experts see as years of limited progress in negotiations with India over the sharing of transboundary river waters.
Water has long been one of the most sensitive issues in relations between Bangladesh and India. The two neighboring countries share 54 rivers, making cooperation over water resources essential for agriculture, livelihoods, environmental sustainability, and regional stability. However, disagreements over the distribution of river flows, particularly from the Ganges and Teesta rivers, have repeatedly strained bilateral ties.
Bangladesh has increasingly expressed concern over the impact of upstream infrastructure in India, especially the Farakka Barrage, a major water control structure constructed more than five decades ago. Bangladeshi experts argue that water diversion through the barrage has significantly reduced dry-season river flows downstream, contributing to drought conditions, increasing salinity in southwestern districts, and accelerating ecological degradation.
The scale of the problem has become increasingly apparent in recent years. A study conducted by the Dhaka-based Rivers and Delta Research Centre found that at least 79 rivers across Bangladesh have either dried up completely or are rapidly approaching that condition. Researchers attributed much of the crisis to severe siltation and declining water flows during the dry season, conditions that they say have been worsened by upstream water diversion.
The environmental consequences have been far-reaching. Reduced river flows have affected agriculture, fisheries, transportation networks, and biodiversity throughout the country. In many areas, farmers have struggled with declining crop yields while communities dependent on rivers for their livelihoods face increasing uncertainty. Environmentalists warn that continued degradation could have long-term implications for food security and economic development.
Against this backdrop, the Bangladeshi government announced in mid-May that it would proceed with the construction of the Padma Barrage, a 2.1-kilometer structure designed to store monsoon water for use during the dry season. Officials believe the project could help mitigate water shortages and reduce salinity intrusion in southwestern regions, where declining freshwater flows have allowed saltwater to penetrate further inland.
The government has also revived the Teesta Mega Project, which aims to improve river management, protect agricultural land, reduce erosion, and reclaim land along one of Bangladesh’s most important waterways. The project has attracted significant Chinese interest and financial support, making it one of the most closely watched infrastructure initiatives in South Asia.
The decision to proceed with the Chinese-backed project marks a notable geopolitical development. For years, Bangladesh had hoped to reach a comprehensive agreement with India over the sharing of Teesta River waters. A breakthrough appeared possible in 2011 when negotiators developed a proposed agreement that would have allocated 37.5 percent of dry-season river flows to Bangladesh. However, the deal collapsed after opposition from the government of India’s West Bengal state prevented its implementation.
More than a decade later, the issue remains unresolved, contributing to growing frustration in Dhaka. Former Bangladeshi diplomat M. Humayun Kabir told Nikkei Asia that Bangladesh has not received any significantly positive response from India regarding the Teesta dispute and continues to bear the consequences of prolonged delays.
The unresolved nature of the Teesta agreement has become a symbol of broader concerns regarding water-sharing arrangements between the two countries. Bangladesh has also raised concerns about the implementation of the Ganges water-sharing treaty, which is due to expire later this year. Although negotiations to renew the agreement are ongoing, uncertainties remain over the future framework governing one of the region’s most important rivers.
The strategic implications of Bangladesh’s growing engagement with China have attracted considerable attention among regional analysts. Uttam Kumar Sinha, a senior fellow at the New Delhi-based Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses, told Nikkei Asia that China’s involvement in the Teesta project represents a significant shift with serious implications for India.
According to Sinha, Bangladesh’s decision to deepen cooperation with Beijing is a direct result of New Delhi’s failure to resolve long-pending water-sharing disputes. He argued that China has repeatedly capitalized on opportunities created by Indian hesitation and delays in regional infrastructure and development initiatives.
The Teesta project carries particular sensitivity for India because of its location near the strategically important Siliguri Corridor, often referred to as the “Chicken’s Neck.” This narrow stretch of land in West Bengal serves as the only land connection between mainland India and the country’s eight northeastern states. Any major Chinese involvement in infrastructure development near the corridor is therefore viewed through a broader strategic and security lens in New Delhi.
Despite such concerns, many Bangladeshi experts argue that development needs should not be held hostage to geopolitical rivalries. Imtiaz Ahmed, Executive Director of the Centre for Alternatives and a former professor of international relations at the University of Dhaka, told Nikkei Asia that Bangladesh cannot continue waiting indefinitely for progress on the Teesta project. He emphasized that the initiative should be viewed as a development project rather than a security concern.
For China, the project offers multiple benefits beyond infrastructure development. Analysts note that it allows Beijing to strengthen political and economic ties with Bangladesh, demonstrate its engineering capabilities, and expand its influence across South Asia. The project also aligns with China’s broader efforts to deepen engagement with countries participating in regional infrastructure and connectivity initiatives.
However, the projects have not escaped criticism. Environmental organizations and independent experts have raised concerns about their long-term sustainability and potential ecological impacts. The Bangladesh Poribesh Andolon, an environmental advocacy group, has described the Padma Barrage as a risky undertaking that could damage the country’s fragile delta ecosystem.
Critics argue that the barrage could alter natural river flows, increase sediment accumulation, and potentially worsen flooding in certain regions. Some environmentalists also fear that the project may weaken Bangladesh’s negotiating position in future discussions with India regarding Ganges water allocations.
Questions have also been raised about the Teesta Mega Project. Environmental groups warn that the initiative may require extensive and costly maintenance while failing to address the fundamental issue of inadequate dry-season water availability. Without guaranteed upstream flows, some experts argue, even the most sophisticated river management infrastructure may struggle to achieve its intended goals.
These concerns highlight a central reality confronting Bangladesh. Regardless of how much support it receives from China or other international partners, the country’s water future remains closely tied to decisions made upstream in India.
Md. Khalequzzaman, a professor of geology and oceanography at Commonwealth University of Pennsylvania, emphasized this point in comments reported by Nikkei Asia. He argued that effective planning depends on accurate information regarding the amount of water Bangladesh can expect to receive from India during different seasons. Without sufficient river flow, he noted, infrastructure alone cannot solve the country’s water challenges.
Efforts to resolve these issues continue through diplomatic channels. Technical experts from Bangladesh and India recently concluded a four-day meeting in Kolkata aimed at advancing discussions on renewing the Ganges River treaty. However, neither side publicly commented on the outcome of the talks, leaving observers uncertain about the prospects for a breakthrough.
Analysts believe any future agreement may differ significantly from previous arrangements. Rather than relying solely on fixed water allocations, India is expected to favor a more flexible system based on real-time river flow assessments, periodic reviews, technical cooperation, and basin-wide management approaches. Such a framework could reflect the increasing challenges posed by climate change, shifting rainfall patterns, and growing demand for water resources across the region.
Despite Bangladesh’s efforts to diversify its diplomatic options, experts say the country remains in a difficult negotiating position. Dhaka has attempted to strengthen its international standing by joining the United Nations Water Convention, which governs cooperation on transboundary water resources. Some analysts have also urged Bangladesh to ratify the separate United Nations Watercourses Convention to further reinforce its legal and diplomatic position.
Yet even these measures may not fully address the structural obstacles complicating water-sharing negotiations. Experts point to a combination of hydrological realities, domestic political pressures, India’s federal governance structure, and intensifying climate pressures as factors that make durable agreements difficult to achieve.
