Dr Mohammad Amir Hossain Bhuiyan

By Naznin Tithi
Mar 22 2019 (IPS-Partners)

The depletion of groundwater table in Dhaka has made water crisis in the city acute, especially during the dry season. What are the reasons behind this?

We have conducted many research studies in the last 15/20 years and have found that Dhaka’s groundwater table has been gradually depleting at an average rate of one metre or 30/40 centimetres sometimes. Because of the rapid urbanisation of the city, the demand for groundwater has been increasing. In the multi-storied buildings and towers that are being constructed, high-powered pumps are used to extract water from underground. This contributes significantly to the lowering of the groundwater table. In Dhaka, there is no water in the shallow aquifers (50-70 feet deep). Presently, water is being extracted from the intermediate and deep aquifers, which are 600 to 800 feet deep.

Another reason for this depletion is our total dependency on groundwater. The whole city depends on groundwater. Although we have Sayedabad Water Treatment Plant, which uses the water from Shitalakhya, the capacity of the plant and the quality of water it produces are not satisfactory. Because of industrial pollution, the amount of heavy metals and other harmful elements in the Shitalakhya has increased to dangerous proportions. The Sayedabad plant does not have the required efficiency to treat such extremely polluted water. This treated water is not safe to drink. So we are left with the water supplied through pipelines by the Wasa.

Moreover, industries inside Dhaka use excessive amounts of groundwater. So the shortage of water in the city is particularly acute in industrial areas such as Tejgaon and Old Dhaka.

The World Bank in a recent report found that the sources of water are contaminated with E.Coli and arsenic. Also, harmful bacteria were found in 82 percent of supplied water. What are the reasons for this contamination?

Through my research study, I found that even the deep layers of water have been contaminated with excessive amounts of heavy metals and other pollutants. So even after boiling the water supplied by Wasa and purifying it through regular water filters, the heavy metals cannot be removed. There are pathogens and hookworms in the water supplied by Wasa. When you boil this water, you will notice some residue which looks like white thread. These are nothing but worms. Moreover, the water supplied by Wasa has Faecal Coliform, Escherichia Coli (E.Coli) and many other bacteria.

Contaminants enter the water pipelines in so many ways. The reserved tanks of Wasa, where 50,000 gallons or more water are stored, are not cleaned regularly. Then the water pipelines are getting connected with the sewerage lines. Sewerage lines are filled with faecal coliform which enters the water pipelines through leakages.

Moreover, groundwater gets contaminated during the construction of high-rise buildings. When the soil is dug up for building construction, some weak joints are created in the ground. The pollutants from the surface seep into these weak joints and contaminate underground water, especially when high-powered pumps are used to extract water from underground, the pollutants from the surface seep in through the weak joints. Underground water also gets polluted by pollutants from the rivers.

Can’t anything be done to ensure that the water remains safe throughout the whole process—from extraction to supply?

In the developed countries, when water is extracted from underground, it is boiled to kill the pathogens, bacteria and other pollutants. After this water is cooled, it is distributed for people’s use. But in Bangladesh, after the water is extracted from underground, it is supplied to the pipelines straight away. Although this is a very expensive process, if we can do what developed countries do, the water quality will be better. We should also clean and replace the pipelines from time to time. In addition, if chlorination is done following the proper method, a lot of germs can be killed.

Researchers have also found that bottled and jar water are polluted with E.Coli and other pollutants. Who should be held accountable for this?

The BSTI has been looking after this at present. But the BSTI is not the relevant authority here. Everything related to water, including the quality of bottled water, should be checked by the Department of Public Health and Engineering. Carrying out random drives and fining some illegal businessmen will not solve the problem. The sources of the illegal businesses must be identified and addressed.

I think the government should take a policy decision to ban bottled water, say, after 10 years. Bottled water can be used for drinking purposes, only for the time being. But the use of jar water should be banned. Because if it is not banned, no sincere efforts will be made to make the Effluent Treatment Plants (ETPs) work, and the pollution of the rivers will not stop. This is not possible for the government to do at one go but this can be done in phases. The use of bottled and jar water should be discouraged and the use of river water after proper treatment should be given priority.

The government has been talking about reducing the use of groundwater for quite some time now. What should be done to reduce our dependency on groundwater and ensure optimal use of surface water?

The government has set a target of ensuring safe water for all by 2021. There’s only two years until 2021 but not much progress has been made to ensure this. Immediate steps should be taken to reduce the use of groundwater and ensure the maximum use of surface water. The use of groundwater in the industrial and agricultural sector should also stop.

We have no other alternatives to using river water for all purposes. We have to bring water from the rivers where industrial pollution is much less. The water of Buriganga, Turag, Shitalakhya and Balu cannot be used because these rivers are extremely polluted. If we treat this water and supply it to the consumers, it will create a public health disaster. We have also carried out research on the Meghna river and found its water to be contaminated with the pollutants from nearby factories. However, the water quality of Padma and Jamuna is relatively better. This water can be brought to Dhaka through pipelines and after treatment can be used by the residents of Dhaka.

The use of ETPs should be made mandatory for all factories. If the laws are strictly enforced, the rivers will be pollution-free and the water can be used for industrial and agricultural purposes. The government must ensure that those who violate the law face harsh penalty.

Another thing we should do is store water from Dhaka’s surrounding rivers during the rainy season. During July-August, even the water of Buriganga gets cleaner. We will have to reserve that water by building polders, reservoirs and ponds all around Dhaka. This water can be used from November till April after proper treatment.

We should take a policy decision to not use groundwater for the next 15/20 years. It has to be done immediately. One of the results would be the groundwater table rising up. Water crisis and pollution are major issues in Dhaka and solving these problems should be given due importance by the government.

This story was originally published by The Daily Star, Bangladesh

Excerpt:

By Naznin Tithi
Dec 6 2017 (The Daily Star, Bangladesh)

What made you take up the role of an activist on the Rohingya issue?

Personally, there are layers of connections with this issue.

Dr Maung Zarni

Second, and on a more personal level, my own late great uncle was the deputy commander-in-charge of Arakan in the late 1950s when Rohingyas were considered both an ethnic group of the Union of Burma and full citizens. Since my own relative was directly involved in this issue at a time when the army treated them well, I felt that I needed to get involved when the army is treating them so brutally.

The third reason is that I am a Buddhist. And I cannot keep quiet when I see genocide, the most anti-Buddha Dharma, being committed by the military, aided and abetted by the Buddhist society at large, including monks. Every time Suu Kyi denies and dismisses genocide allegations she too is guilty. For denial is part of genocide.

You said genocide has been going on for a long time. How then did it manage to evade international attention?

The problem is not that the UN-clustered world of governments and human rights organisations had not known this. They have known this for a long, long time. But they did not take the persecution of Rohingyas seriously enough to see the genocidal nature of the persecution, much less take any effective policy measures to end it.

Bangladeshi governments since the 1970s have known what has been happening because refugees were flowing into Bangladesh by the hundreds of thousands. The United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) has been aware of this issue since 1978 because it was brought in to help with the first refugee crisis in mid-1978. So if UNHCR knew, it means the UN knew. Countries like the US and UK and key UN agencies have known this for the last 39 years. In 1978, the late US Senator Ted Kennedy, John F Kennedy’s younger brother, came to Bangladesh and the US Congress donated about USD 150,000 to manage the refugee crisis.

Dawn, Bangkok Post and Far Eastern Economic Review based in Hong Kong all knew about this. Back in 1978 news headlines were something like “Burmese Muslims, machine-gunned down by the Burmese government troops” or “Burma’s brand of apartheid”.

Around two weeks ago, Amnesty International published a report saying dehumanising “apartheid” is ongoing in Myanmar. Well, the word “apartheid” was used as early as July 1978 in a magazine article in the Far Eastern Economic Review. “Burma’s brand of apartheid” was the title! It seems the world’s oldest human rights watchdog was asleep throughout these decades. For Amnesty International to characterise a full, institutionalised genocide in slow motion as “apartheid” is utterly unconscionable. It is just infinitely pathetic!

The UN has passed resolution every year for the last 25 years with the exception of last year. We have had at least six special rapporteurs since 1993 investigating inter alia the persecution of Rohingyas.

UNHCR has a huge operation in Myanmar. To my deep dismay, it has even issued orders to its staff in Myanmar telling them not to say the word “Rohingya” in any writing but to call them “Muslims from Rakhine” in clear violation of the group’s fundamental right to self-identify. The UN Resident Coordinator in Myanmar and World Food Programme were concealing information about the genocide!

So the world did not just “discover” this, it’s a lie. Those in international politics and the humanitarian world are not even lifting a finger because helping the Rohingyas is not profitable. Ending genocide is not profitable. Working with the killers is profitable. Because the killers have monopoly over natural gas, strategic coastlines, deep sea ports, visas, etc. So it’s not the lack of knowledge. It’s self-interest and the pretence of not knowing that are in play.

Dr. Maung Zarni with his late great uncle Zeya Kyaw Htin Major Ant Kywe in November 2005.

The UN has not gone so far as calling it genocide. Your comments?

Legal scholars, genocide scholars and even practitioners of international law from Yale Law School and Queen Mary U Law, from the US Holocaust Memorial Museum to the Permanent People’s Tribunal on Myanmar, have all called it genocide.

Because there is no political will to use force to end the genocide, the UN, US and UK play what Austrian philosopher Wittgenstein called “language games”. But some of us including renowned genocide scholars such as Greg Stanton and Daniel Fierstein refuse to use the word “ethnic cleansing”: it is a euphemism that was originally released into mass media by Milosevic, the Serbian genocidal leader.

We now have a new doctrine called “Responsibility to Protect” or R2P, post-Rwanda and Srebrenica. And if a UN member state fails to protect people, not just citizens, who live within its territory, the neighbours and the entire UN system have a responsibility to go in and protect that community and to punish the perpetrating regime such as Myanmar. And that principle can be invoked if four crimes take place; one of them is ethnic cleansing which has no legal basis in international law. My Rwandan friends are outraged that UN is letting another genocide unfold.

So yes, the UN should call it genocide. But even if it is not prepared to call it genocide, ethnic cleansing is enough of an inhuman deed for the international community to intervene. NATO bombed Milosevic’s palace, and the genocidal bully was forced to accept a deal to stop the genocide.

How would you assess Bangladesh’s role in this crisis?

I want to separate Bangladesh’s role in two different ways. There is palpable and genuine compassion and outrage among the Bangladeshi people regarding the genocide next door. This is such a positive and welcome shift in public opinion. Previously, Rohingyas were seen as potential criminals, or exploitable cheap labourers.

The Bangladeshi government does not feel that resolving the Rohingya genocide in Myanmar is its main concern; its main concern is to make sure that the Rohingyas return to their country. Bangladesh is a very populous country. So understandably, Dhaka places its primary emphasis on repatriating the Rohingyas, who belong in Myanmar.

But there is a major problem with that. The Rohingyas did not come here voluntarily nor were they merely displaced across the border. They came as survivors of Myanmar’s genocide. These attacks need to be stopped and their safety in Myanmar established with armed UN protection. The solution lies in ending the genocide in Myanmar. Repatriation is just a temporary relief.

Sending the Rohingyas back while what I call “slow-burning genocide” is ongoing will not work and has not worked in 39 years. Dhaka needs to come to terms with the fact that the fate and wellbeing of the Rohingyas have become interlinked with its national interests and stability—they are not two separate issues. Bangladesh has played an exemplary humane role in the world’s opinion. This newfound prestige and moral influence should be fully capitalised on, not simply to repatriate the survivors, but also to end the genocide.

Dr Maung Zarni is co-author (with Natalie Brinham) of the pioneering genocide study “The Slow Burning Genocide of Myanmar’s Rohingyas” (Pacific Rim Law and Policy Journal, University of Washington School of Law, Spring 2014).

This story was originally published by The Daily Star, Bangladesh

Excerpt: