1. India's decision to divert water from the River Teesta by digging two more canals in West Bengal will seriously affect the life and livelihood of about 20 million people in Bangladesh's north.
2. India has put on hold the signing of an instrument on the sharing of the water of the River Teesta, and six other rivers, which both Delhi and Dhaka agreed on in 2010, in a 50:50 per cent sharing formula.
3. Dhaka needs to talk boldly with New Delhi about the Teesta water issue as this is an example of Indian high-handedness that is hardly a sign of growing friendly relations between both countries.
The article discusses India's decision to divert water from the River Teesta by digging two more canals in West Bengal, which will affect the life and livelihood of about 20 million people in Bangladesh's north. The author argues that this is an example of Indian high-handedness, manifest in withholding and diverting the water of the transboundary Teesta and putting off the singing of the Teesta water agreement.
While the article raises valid concerns about the impact of India's decision on Bangladesh's north, it presents a one-sided view without exploring counterarguments or presenting both sides equally. The author does not provide evidence for some claims made, such as how two new canals would deal a severe blow to the nature and environment of the region.
Moreover, there are potential biases in the article that need to be considered. For instance, it is unclear whether New Age BD has any political affiliations or interests that may influence its reporting. Additionally, while India's decision to divert water from Teesta may have negative consequences for Bangladesh, it is essential to consider India's perspective on this issue.
Furthermore, while discussing India's decision to withhold signing an instrument on sharing water from River Teesta and six other rivers with Bangladesh, the author fails to mention any reasons why India might have done so. This omission makes it difficult for readers to understand both sides' perspectives on this issue fully.
In conclusion, while highlighting important concerns about India's decision to divert water from River Teesta and its impact on Bangladesh's north, this article presents a one-sided view without exploring counterarguments or presenting both sides equally. It also lacks evidence for some claims made and omits crucial information that could help readers understand both sides' perspectives better.