Understanding Neo-Liberal Perspective

The Neo-liberal tradition is an influential theoretical tradition in international relations. Like the Realists tradition the Neo-liberal tradition also believes that the international system is an anarchic system without a supreme authority to control the behaviours of states. However, the Neoliberals see anarchy as a vacuum that is gradually filled by human processes and intuitions. Liberals and neoliberals are optimistic about transnational cooperation. Neoliberal theory, known as neoliberal institutionalism, revolves around cooperation between states and other actors in international relations. However, the principles of neoliberalism are fully exposed in After Hegemony , in which Robert Keohane develops a theory of why and how international cooperation and governance flourish in the absence of hegemony (Keohane, 1984). The main premise of the theory is that international cooperation is a rational choice of countries, and it is also based on studies of rationality and utility maximization in the economy.

Like realists, neoliberals attach great importance to the state. However, neoliberals are more optimistic about cooperation and believe that opportunities for cooperation in areas of common interest can mitigate the effects of anarchy. But such cooperation can be difficult to achieve in areas where leaders feel they have no common interests, such as military and national security. In a competitive environment, it is difficult to know the intentions of other parties. And the fear that other countries will not comply hinders fruitful cooperation. But neoliberals argue that states can be persuaded to work together for absolute benefit. Fears of non-compliance and fraud can be alleviated, if not allayed, by integrating institutions into the international system. Therefore, the creation of institutions is a necessary condition for the peaceful resolution of disputes.

1.    Complex Interdependence

The "complex interdependence" theory proposed by Robert Keohane and Joseph Nye in Power and Interdependence (2012) challenges the realism's state-centrism. This takes the logic of interdependence to a new level "Complex interdependence" includes multiple interactions at the intergovernmental, international and transnational levels through multiple channels ( Keohane, 2012). According to Keohane and Nye, foreign policy is now about managing interdependencies and the complex processes of globalization. The process of globalization has brought new issues to international politics, such as technological revolutions, increased foreign investment, loosening of government control over enterprises and markets, other forms of communication, and greater human connections. Another new agenda in cross-border relations is the lack of hierarchy between cases. As Keohane points out, "different issues lead to different alliances within and between governments and lead to different levels of conflict Politics is not limited to the quayside" (Keohane, 2012).

Another important feature of "complex interdependence" is the reduction of the use of force. The state is more concerned with "lower politics," such as public welfare, rather than "higher politics," which focuses primarily on national military security. The use of force is not considered a viable option because it can disrupt profitable economic relationships. In such circumstances, even authoritarian governments may be reluctant to use force. Demonstrate the usefulness of the concept of "complex interdependence" in the analysis of political processes in global politics

2.    Security Communities

Concepts of community and interdependence began to characterize international relations. The underlying premise is that increased international activity will strengthen international ties between nations and governments and lead to interdependence. The main proponent of this idea believes that a high level of international relations would help create peace between societies (Nathan, 2006). Such agreements will ultimately lead to the creation of what Karl Deutsch calls a "security community." A security community is a group of "integrated" people, and integration embodies "the realization of a sense of community in a field” (Deutsch, 1957). Therefore, members of this community tend to believe that their conflicts can be resolved "without any help" to great physical strength. Such a security community fosters a "sense of us" that is essential in managing conflicts in the region.

3.    Functional Integration

 Functionalism is considered an important critique of realism in international politics. Functionalism's main concern is the creation of fragmented and apolitical cooperatives that will not only help restore peace and prosperity, but ultimately make war unnecessary. David Mitrany, a leading proponent of the functionalist school of thought, challenged the power-cantered realist approach and emphasized a global organization based on functional relationships with an emphasis on development, prosperity, and peace.  Functionalists such as Joseph Nye, Ernst Haas, JP Sewell, Paul Taylor, and John Burton also made significant contributions to the functionalist tradition of international relations theory Neo-functionalism accepts a dichotomy between "high" politics and "low" politics. It believes in the possibility of greater cooperation in non-political fields such as economics, technology, science, society and culture. These areas are not directly related to national security issues, so the likelihood of resistance is low. However, regional integration is difficult to achieve in high-level politics. One of the assumptions of functionalism theory is "spill over effects". The basic idea behind the outreach concept is that cooperation in one area creates new opportunities for similar cooperation in other areas. Such cooperation will lead to the political unity of a given region. Neo-functionalists such as Ernst Hass were less interested in nationalism (Haas, 1970). For them nationalism is declining because of the importance of welfare state goals that can be achieved through integration.  Joseph Nye continues this theme, arguing that regional political organizations "have made little contribution to the creation of islands of peace in the international system" (Nye, 1987).

Understanding Teesta Water Sharing Issue

The Teesta River originates in Tsolam (Himalayas), in India, flows through Sikkim. In Sikkim, the Teesta drains most of the state. In West Bengal, the Teesta River flows through the northern regions including Kuchi Behar, Jalpaiguri, Darjeeling, North Dinajpur, Dakshindinajpur and Marda districts. Together these areas are known as North Bengal which merge with Bangladesh. In Bangladesh, the Teesta River flows through the Rangpur Division and flows into the Brahmaputra The river mainly flows through Ramoneirhat, Nilpamari, Rangpur, Kurigram and Gaibandar districts. The Teesta River joins the Brahmaputra River (known as the Jamuna River in Bangladesh) at Fulcherry.

Rainfall in the Teesta River Basin

Rainfall is vital for the Teesta River basin because the river and its tributaries are normally rain fed, specifically after the Teesta enters West Bengal.  Average annual rainfall within side the Teesta basin levels from 1200 mm within side the top Lachen and Lachung valleys to 2500 mm within side the relaxation of the basin Rainfall in Sikkim.  During the monsoon season the Teesta river basin in Sikkim gets a median annual rainfall of 2,534 mm. Bangladesh reports the monsoon season from June to August, with the heaviest rainfall within side the coastal and hilly regions. The North-western part of Bangladesh gets much less rainfall than the entire country, in particular due to the fact the quantity of rainfall varies from year to year in specific components of the area. The North-west gets 1,971 mm of annual rainfall in comparison to two to three hundred mm for the relaxation of the country.

The Rangpur station statistics a median annual rainfall of 2,270 mm, inclusive of 1,294 mm among June and August. Based on precipitation statistics from 1972 to 2002, there seems to be an upward fashion within side the range of wet days that offer the equal or more precipitation totals. In short, there appears to be extra severe precipitation over a shorter time period. There has been no massive extrude in summer time on the most and minimal temperatures in northern Bangladesh over the last decade (Gauri, 2017).

Seasonal Variation of the Teesta

Like all perennial rivers of the Ganges-Brahmaputra sub-basin or the Himalayas, the Teesta is characterised via way of means of sturdy seasonal variations. Indeed, whilst the melting of glaciers at their supply maintains the river flowing via the seasons, the river's go with the drift comes nearly absolutely from monsoon or wet season rainfall. Thus, even though the Teesta covers nearly the whole location of Sikkim, the go with the drift of the river stays particularly low till it joins the Rangeet, given that it's far then particularly fed via way of means of glaciers. It is tough to decide the precise seasonal variant because of a loss of research of the Teesta supply glacial location and a loss of particular records on the precise contribution of glacier soften and precipitation to the river. The Ganges stories 85% of its overall annual go with the drift in the course of the monsoon duration from June to September in India. The Yamuna River in India receives nearly 90% of its water from rain. The dry to moist season ratio of the Brahmaputra is 1:12, whilst the Meghna River in Bangladesh debts for approximately 84% of its overall annual runoff among June and October. Therefore, we are able to expect that the seasonal variant of Teesta falls inside this variety and is towards its tributary, the Brahmaputra. If we expect a seasonal variant of 1:10, then we are able to expect that ten to eleven or 90% of the river go with the drift happens in the course of the monsoon season from June to September, i.e fifty four BCM This way off-season or October to May is simplest 6 B CM.

Water Sharing Issue

Despite being endowed with abundant water resources, much of the Indian subcontinent's management problems stem from abrupt seasonal variations in rainfall. This management problem is compounded with the creation of new national borders throughout the region because of the unprecedented rain that tends to alter the boundaries with their flow. This problem arises when an upper riparian country like India refuses to release or releases very less quantity of water to a lower riparian country like Bangladesh.

Although natural resources are limited and unused, natural people have ended up causing man-made disasters in Bangladesh. Thus, they reinforce ongoing efforts for economic development by boosting agricultural production. In this regard, the Government of Bangladesh has undertaken and completed the Teesta Dam Project or the Dalia Dam Project for irrigation purposes to boost agricultural production by clearing more land during the dry season in the lower reaches of Teesta River. However, the Gazoldoba Dam built by India 60 kilometres from the upstream of Teesta River is generating water sharing issue. It’s has rendered the Dalia Dam Project on the Teesta River unusable causing problems such as irrigation, navigation, production electricity, fishing and occupation of local residents, the cause of the floods, increased in temperature due to climate change etc.

The two main structures on the Teesta River after the attack on the Sewok Plains were the Gajaldoba barrage in India and the Dalia Dam in Bangladesh (Mehta, 2017). Each dam is part of a multi-purpose project (each known as the Teesta Dam Project or TBP) to meet the irrigation and power needs of six districts in North Bengal and seven districts in the division of Rangpur, in India and Bangladesh, respectively Bangladesh started building Dalia Dam before India started building Gajaldoba Dam. However, both were done almost simultaneously. The construction of these two barrage has exacerbated the water sharing dispute over Teesta River.

The Neo-Liberal Perspective on Teesta Issue

India and Bangladesh has an “equitable” distribution of Teesta waters, that why on the lines of the Ganga Water Treaty of 1996, but to no avail. Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to Dhaka in 2015 has generated some expectations to take forward the previous issues on fair and equitable water sharing agreement. But Teesta remains an unfinished project, but letter future should be solve them. The Government of Bangladesh has undertaken and completed the Teesta Dam Project or the Dalia Dam Project in the lower reaches of Teesta River. However, the Gazoldoba Dam built by India upstream of Teesta River in India. That create problem between water sharing so we solve them in neo liberal and neo functional perspectives

1. The first step is the establishment of a Joint River Commission (JRC) to examine all disputes in the first instance. The JRC is required to “establish and maintain cooperative arrangements” for the implementation of the Treaty and to promote cooperation between the parties in the development of the waters of the rivers. It can provide a staged procedure for the avoidance and resolution of disputes as it foresees the possibility of disagreements between the parties.

2.  Intensification of Neutral Export Areas (functional areas) can be instrumental in resolving the issue. Functional areas such as economic, social, cultural, environment, and technological can create good relations between both counties and help them to resolve water disputes.

3. Institutional arrangements such as setting up the Permanent Court of Arbitration, depending upon the nature of the dispute can also be an effective measure to resolve Teesta Issue. The Permanent Joint Commission consists of one commissioner, from each state, who should ordinarily be a high-ranking engineer competent in the field of hydrology and water-use can be an effective measure in this regard.

If the JRC fails to reach an agreement between the two parties, then it would be referred to a neutral expert, appointed jointly by both the countries. If the differences continued, as informed by the Neutral Expert, then the matter can be referred to the Court of Arbitration established to resolve the dispute-either by agreement between the two Parties or at the request of either Party.

At the bilateral level the Teesta River water sharing issue can be controlled through various common understanding measures. There can be no release of water without the prior warning. Further, under normal circumstances, notice should be given 15 days in advance of the release of water. Similarly, in emergencies and extreme flood situations, warnings should be immediately dispatched directly to the relevant agencies. Environmental mitigation studies, if needed should be discussed further at a later occasion with the participation of the JRC.