Many hydrologists of South Asia would concur that the project is at best an ill-conceived one. No feasibility studies have been done on the project and no projections have been made to show the ill effects of river interlinking in states or in neighbouring nations wherefrom water will be withdrawn. The other pertinent issues are: who is going to foot the expense, who is going to decide how much water will be withdrawn from the Ganges, Brahmaputra, and other river system in Bihar, Bengal, and Assam. Sharing the water of a river system is an international issue when more than one country is involved. Bangladesh is located at the downstream part of the river system. Therefore, without consulting the next-door neighbour, India cannot give a green light to the project. To complicate the matter, Indian authorities are giving conflicting answers when asked about the prospect of this mammoth project to link at least 37 rivers. One time they said that the whole project is just in the planning stage. However, at other times, Indian authorities have said that they are very eager to start the project in 2005-2006, and that it will take 10-12 years for completion. The issue of withdrawing massive amounts of waters from Bihar, West Bengal, and Assam by building a canal system is so controversial that not a single day goes by that we do not find news or commentary written about it.

India has just finished conducting parliamentary elections, and what is at stake here is the control of power. The BJP was able to form a coalition government with the help of an amalgamation of several regional parties last time an election was held there. Will the BJP secure enough parliamentary seats in the current election to cobble together a loose coalition government as they have done so before? Some political analysts have their doubts. Therefore, the BJP politicians are under pressure to go ahead and rouse their supporters. The BJP chief Atal Behari Vajpayee is doing just that. He has gone out of the way to invoke hydro-politics to make sure that his supporters in the water deficient states would rouse up now and show their support for this religion-based nationalist party. On April 27, 2004, Vajpayee, pledged to go ahead with a controversial plan to divert 37 rivers flowing into the Bay of Bengal for irrigation and electricity projects. AFP reported this news. The Prime Minister of India warned of a "great water crisis" in India unless the multi-billion dollar project was put into action. To justify the expense Mr. Vajpayee said, "Joining rivers is a project meant for generating electricity, irrigation. I warn you that water levels are falling. There is going to be a great water crisis in India. Water is wasted. No other country allows that."

Mr. Vajpayee must have been giving an election speech because he said, "Water must be conserved. If we return to power we will take up the project of joining rivers." The Indian PM is known for his poetic abilities, but never have I heard that he knows much about hydrology. In the last several years, Mr. Vajpayee has become a seasoned politician. He is now trying to capitalise on the fact that there is a severe paucity of water in the western states. Therefore, to woo voters from the water deficient states Mr. Vajpayee is playing the game of hydro-politics. But in the process, he failed to understand that river-linking project is fraught with fear because no scientific studies have been done on this project. No one is sure what would happen to downstream Indian states and in Bangladesh when waters are withdrawn year-round or during the monsoon season. The brackish water will surely move inland and seawater may encroach upon coastal areas.

Take the case of Bangladesh. Here, most crops that farmers grow are not saline resistant. How will the farmers cope with the salinity problem? Also, the ecology will be greatly disturbed in the coastal belt. Many fishermen in Bangladesh will have a hard time making ends meet. This project that Mr. Vajpayee is touting to eke out an election victory in the next election may seal the fate of millions of people living in West Bengal, Bihar, Assam, never mind the people of Bangladesh. They are the ones who will Tbear the brunt of disaster engendered by this ill-conceived plan of interlinking the 37 rivers in northern India.

India is not the first nation on earth to conceive such a plan to withdraw waters from rivers upstream to redistribute the same to the other places where water is deficient. In America, the Army Corps of Engineers has built over 20 massive dams to control the mighty Colorado River in Arizona. The river which once was a massive one in down-river Baja Mexico has become moribund now. Other projects to change the course of rivers in Australia, Russia, and China also did not materialise and ended up with ecological disaster. The northeast quadrant of South Asia may become very water deficient in wintertime. Doing agriculture in the winter months will be out of question. Naturally, the government of India must perform a thorough study to figure out the damage done to agriculture and livelihood of people in the states that will be impacted by the river interlinking project.

In India, already neighbouring states are fighting over the share of a common river flowing through them. The two states, Karnataka and Tamil Nadu, are locked in a bitter fight over the share of Cauvery River. The Karnataka state being situated upstream the river is in full control of how much water could be discharged to Tamil Nadu. In Pakistan, the Kalabagh dam has become a rallying cry for Sindhi people who think that Punjabis will control their life, discharging water at their will. These two are glaring examples of how a state located up-river can control the livelihood of folks living downstream. Can one possibly imagine what could happen among various states in India when river waters from the northeast will be discharged to other states in the west and south? All kinds of litigations among states would start as soon as water is being withdrawn from the main river system. The waters of any river belong to the population through which the river is flowing. Granted, much water will be flowing into Bay of Bengal. This is the nature of things. Nonetheless, Mr. Vajpayee thinks the other way around. He thinks the discharge of water into Bay of Bengal is simply a waste. He is of the opinion that these waters should be directed to western and southern states which we all know is outside the realm of summer monsoon weather system.

May I urge Mr. Vajpayee not to politicise the rivers interlinking project? Hydrologists and river waters expert from India, Bangladesh, and Nepal should sit in several conferences to figure out the negative impact this Herculean project is bound to engender. If the benefit outweighs the loss, only then, the rivers interlinking project may get the nod from the government. Also, the cost of the project should be taken into consideration. What will be the economic impact on western and southern states in dollars and cents? We do not have the numbers. But that is not putting a roadblock in Vajpayee's mind. He is playing games with the contentious issue of rivers interlinking project. As a seasoned politician, he is now invoking this dreadful project to sway the minds of voters from central, western, and southern states where water is a rare commodity. Mr. Vajpayee should not play political games with this serious issue because what is at stake here is the life of millions of people. The Indian government should undertake a thorough feasibility studies and get the expert opinion first before uttering one more word on the benefit of digging canals to take away waters from people to whom this great river system belongs.

A.H. Jaffor Ullah, a senior researcher and columnist, writes from New Orleans, USA.