Water has the potential of becoming a new ‘core issue' of even greater prominence than Kashmir, and calls for urgent attention.
The ‘water issue' between India and Pakistan, which has been relatively quiescent for a while, is becoming prominent once again. A year ago, one could have said that there is no water issue because water-sharing on the Indus stands settled by the Indus Treaty 1960, but that argument does not work now. Water has become an ‘issue' because Pakistan has made it one. This article will not speculate on why and how this has come about. The important point is that water has the potential of becoming a new ‘core issue' of even greater prominence than Kashmir, and calls for urgent attention.
The points that are repeatedly made in Pakistan are the following:
(1) India is storing or diverting waters to the detriment of Pakistan. (In stronger language this becomes: “India is stealing Pakistan's water”.)
(2) The water scarcity in Pakistan is caused (or partly caused) by Indian action.
(3) The flows in the western rivers have diminished over the years, and India, as the upper riparian, must bear the responsibility for this.
(4) India is misusing the provisions of the Indus Treaty. Every Indian project on the western rivers is a violation of the Indus Treaty.
(5) The Neutral Expert in the Baglihar case misinterpreted the Treaty and weakened the protection that Pakistan had under the Treaty.
(6) As if this were not enough, India deliberately caused harm to Pakistan in the initial filling of the Baglihar reservoir by the timing of the filling and by failing to maintain the prescribed minimum flow at Merala.
(7) Even if each project conforms to the provisions of the Treaty, the cumulative impact of the large number of projects that India proposes to construct will be huge and will cause great harm to Pakistan.
(8) Environmental concerns did not figure at all in the Indus Treaty but must now be taken into account.
(9) A wholly new development is climate change and the impact that it will have on water. This needs to be discussed between the two countries.
It is easy enough to dismiss most of the points listed above, barring the last two, as errors or misperceptions. However, that kind of summary dismissal of Pakistani concerns is not enough; something more needs to be said on those points.
(i) Storage/Diversion: So far as one knows, India has not built any storage, not even the 3.6 MAF permitted by the Treaty, nor does it intend to cause harm to Pakistan by diverting Indus waters. In any case, there is such a thing as the Permanent Indus Commission. How can India store or divert waters to the detriment of Pakistan under the watchful eyes of the Indus Commissioner for Pakistan?
(ii) Water scarcity in Pakistan: It is clear enough from (i) above that India has nothing to do with this.
(iii) Reduced flows in the western rivers: Assuming that this is the case, it does not follow that the responsibility for it can be laid on India. What needs to be done is to institute a joint study by Pakistani and Indian experts to establish that there is a declining trend in flows and to ascertain the factors responsible.
(iv) Violations of the provisions of the Indus Treaty by India; every Indian project a violation of the Treaty: This is simply not true. The Treaty envisages and permits Indian projects on the western rivers, and so the projects in themselves cannot be violations of the Treaty. They can be violations of the Treaty if they deviate from certain restrictive provisions, but that will be questioned by the Indus Commissioner for Pakistan. The questions may be resolved within the Commission, or become differences and get referred to a Neutral Expert (as happened in the Baglihar case), or may be in the nature of disputes to be referred to a Court of Arbitration (as has now happened in the Kishenganga case). Where then is the question of violation of the Treaty?
(v) Misuse of the Treaty: A recent article in the Pakistani media is headed ‘Misusing the Indus Treaty.' India might argue that it is only using and not misusing the Treaty, and that it is Pakistan that is misusing the Treaty to block every Indian project on the western rivers. Leaving that aside, the point is that Pakistan is fundamentally unreconciled to the permissive provisions of the Treaty that enable India to construct hydroelectric projects on the western rivers. However, the Treaty exists and both India and Pakistan are signatories to it. Pakistan has accepted the permissive provisions and India has accepted the restrictive provisions.
(vi) Baglihar; Neutral Expert blamed: The NE is accused of ‘re-interpreting' the Treaty and weakening the protection to Pakistan. When Pakistan talks about ‘reinterpretation' it has three things in mind. First, the NE took the view that the 1960 Treaty does not bind India to 1960 technology and that India could use state-of-the-art technology; it is difficult to see how that view can be questioned. Secondly, he gave importance to techno-economic soundness and satisfactory operation; again, it is difficult to see how this can be objected to, and moreover, the Treaty itself repeatedly qualifies its conditions by the proviso “consistent with sound and economical design and satisfactory construction and operation”; those words cannot be ignored. Thirdly, the NE stressed the importance of periodical flushing of the reservoir to get rid of sediment. This is what has caused the greatest anxiety to Pakistan because it seemed to weaken the protection against possible flooding. It is difficult to see how an expert engineer could have held that flushing was not necessary and that rapid silting-up must be accepted. However, there is no need to discuss this as the issue has been raised before the Court of Arbitration in the Kishenganga case.
(vii) Initial filling of the Baglihar reservoir: The myth that India deliberately filled the Baglihar reservoir in such a manner as to cause maximum harm to Pakistan refuses to die down despite repeated explanations. The filling was completed well within the prescribed period; there was no deviation in that respect. The shortfall with reference to the prescribed minimum flow at Merala (of which there are different estimates by India and Pakistan, and no jointly observed figure) was only for a few hours — less than a day — and could not possibly have caused serious harm. There was indeed a lapse but a minor one, and definitely not a planned one. However, this became a major issue, and even though it has been closed by the Indus Commissioners, it continues to figure in articles in the media.
(viii) Cumulative impact of many projects: Opinion is divided on the question whether the cumulative impact of a number of projects, each conforming to the provisions of the Treaty, could be greater than the sum of the impacts of individual projects. This is a concern that needs to be taken seriously and should be jointly studied.
(ix) Environmental concerns, Climate Change: These are post-Treaty developments and call for urgent inter-country consultations, not only at the governmental level but also at academic and expert levels.
The above analysis shows that while a number of misperceptions need to be dispelled, joint studies are needed on (a) the reported reduction of flows in the western rivers and the factors responsible, and (b) the cumulative impact of a large number of projects on the western rivers. Inter-country consultations and research are also called for on environmental concerns and on the impacts of climate change.
However, that is not enough. Right or wrong, certain misperceptions on water persist and are widespread in Pakistan. This has serious implications for India-Pakistan relations and for peace on the subcontinent. Persistent efforts are needed at both official and non-official levels to remove misperceptions and to reassure the people of Pakistan that their anxieties are uncalled for.
The public understanding in India regarding Water issues is low although worth appreciation, yet what every one in both countries needs to honestly understand is, the fact that water is life to humans. The wastage of water by Pakistan, despite loss of natural resource, is her own domestic issue and must not be referred to as a justification to building dams over the rivers awarded to Pakistan under Indus Water Basin Treaty 1960. Here is an alarming point of history that the World Bank along with international community had helped both countries to reach a water consensus in 1960 exclusively to avoid any prospective war between the two. This is further strengthened by the various reports put forward by the international NGOs that the water diputes could be the threshold of future wars. The transformation of geo-politics into hydropolitics in Soth Asia is not a positive political developmet since it benefits one at the cost of other.
The content mentioned in Article is very informative. It explains how pak is having a myth that india is trying to control Water. And all must be surprised to know that Water westage ratio is biggest in pakistan, survey tell 92% Pakistan water falls in Ocean. Ethically no one has right to waste natural resources like this. I would appreciate if India goes for making Big Dams and use water instead of westage. Overall I find this issue not between 2 countries, It's all about the Usage of natural resources.
The most mature and insightful comments are the ones by Ramo: Although I appreciate the effort to understand Pakistan's concern regarding water and the implementation of IRSA, I believe that interviewing an actual Pakistani expert on water issues rather than putting words in the mouth of the abstract Pakistani position would come off as less of a manipulation. Such articles only retrench old positions rather than deepen understanding because one side pretends to speak for both sides and then 'proves' the other side's argument invalid. If indeed the intention to negotiate with Pakistan fairly and maturely exists within the Indian intelligentsia, efforts must be made to actually listen to the other side.
Pakistan has been facing a huge education epidemic. More so, it has been in constant denial of the fact. Politicians and religious-terrorist leaders use this to unify and radicalise thought process in favour of their ideals just by portraying India as a problem. However they fail to realize that observing and noticing such events is a mere trifle. We have learned conviniently to ignore their rants and cries. What the Pakistanis fail to understand is that every time they fake a foul cry they reduce their chances to be heard, when there is actually a crisis.
water is a natural and essential resource for nay nation. with the burgeoning population, industrialization, its demand is increasing fast while resources are diminishing. A proper understanding between the two nations is necessary to solve the issue .
This was bound to happen! The natural resources like water are getting exhausted and failing to fulfill our needs because of population growth, environment change and poor management of available water. Who knows if this scenario continues, such disputes may become acute for even states of the same country bringing up a condition unresolvable by the central govt because it has to retain it's seats in both the states. Crying and blaming others for the split milk won't bring it back. The need of the hour is to develop cordial relations with every neighbor, for a country can never be self sufficient in every aspect.
Pakistan first needs to win the India's confidence with actions not just words. It takes two to tango and stop talking as if it is your right to everything in this world. Its high time, India takes strong decisions in matters related to Pakistan. We are still suffering from the unmanly and lenient decisions of our politicians during and after Independence. Pakistan is like a dogs tail it will never be straight. Now they are in problems so they will need India's help, once their internal issues are solved they will start Kashmir and others issues again.
Although I appreciate the effort to understand Pakistan's concern regarding water and the implementation of IRSA, I believe that interviewing an actual Pakistani expert on water issues rather than putting words in the mouth of the abstract Pakistani position would come off as less of a manipulation. Such articles only retrench old positions rather than deepen understanding because one side pretends to speak for both sides and then 'proves' the other side's argument invalid. If indeed the intention to negotiate with Pakistan fairly and maturely exists within the Indian intelligentsia, efforts must be made to actually listen to the other side.
Good article. But it has missed something very important. The treaty outlines for the western rivers that, "there will be unrestricted access for Pakistan from the western rivers (Jehlum including its tributaries like Neelum, Chenab and Indus)". It is very much with the same wording for eastern rivers where Unrestricted access is given to the India. The details should be taken in the light of that outline. If the the minor details take lead and destroy the aim of the treaty, it should be interpretted with the same spirit. If by any means, the access is restricted, then the reality needs to re-explored. The plains of Pak Punjab have faced the worst water crises due to the near 100% restrictions. The underground water and water quality has suffered too much, lets not talk of the surface water. I don't think there is any justice in restricting the waters of western rivers too. Restricting the nature and trying to control the blessings of Allah, stops many things. Water is only one.
A very well written and balanced article. I will try to share it with fellow country men to make them understand the 'mis-perceptions' about indian role in water related problems of pakistan. Thank you mr ramaswamy.
The Pakistani military/ISI need a pretext to hold on to the power reigns in Pakistan. Since Kashmir is now a lost cause for them, they are now trying to whip up passions regarding the water issue. Almost every other week, some Op-Ed in a Pakistani newspaper (including the likes of Dawn and Tribune) issue war threats justifying it with the argument that Pakistan will cease to exist if India continues to 'steal' their water. Last year's floods proved how good Pakistan has been managing its water for the last 60 years. In fact, the newspaper, The Nation blamed the floods on India!
Indeed it is such analytic articles that make Hindu the best newspaper in the country! Doodh ka doodh aur pani ka pani!
This article, inter alia, goes on to prove the paranoia with which Pakistan sees India. Every activity in India whether relevant or irrelevant for Pakistan is seen as scourge for Pakistan. People of Pakistan and more so, media have to play a significant role to bridge the crevices of trust created between India and Pakistan.
According to Plato, the demos (the general public) is too easily swayed by rhetoric. There are agencies on both sides of the border whose interest lies in keeping the enmity going between India and Pakistan and they have poisoned the mind of the demos in so far as they are incapable of placing rationality over patriotism. This one from a neutral demo.
It has been rightly said at the beginning of the article that water issues do have the potential to emerge as a issue of greater prominence than Kashmir given the way it is being played up by certain extremist leaders who seem to receive royal treatment by the government of Pakistan. In one of his anti-India propaganda campaigns Hafiz Saeed, the amir of the so-called aid organization Jama'at-ud-Da'wah, alleged that India was diverting river water in a clear violation of the existing agreement which he termed a conspiracy to turn Pakistan into a 'desert' while addressing a gathering in the PoK. This article is a point by point rebuttal to all these kinds of allegations.
Surely water will replace oil as the pivot of majority of the conflicts in this century. Due to unique geographical location India will have to co-ordinate with each of its neighbor for sharing the water of the Himalayan rivers. Recent agreements with Bangladesh are a step in the right direction, still there is lack of adequate mechanism in case of China. Irrespective of the number of controversies surrounding it The Indus Water Treaty has served its purpose and hopefully will continue to do so. India should proactively engage with its neighbors in formulating mechanisms to monitor and share info on river flows, this need has been highlighted due to the climate change.
this article address the 'Indus Treaty' in a detailed manner, simultaneously articulating the prominent issue raised by Pakistan in apt way. There is nothing new to clamourous claim which Pakistan has been continuously conspiring to attract the attension of international front, but all those claims are groundless.
In the listed accusations made by Pakistan, the 4th and 7th points are themselves contradicting each other. If it is believed that each of the projects individually abide by the Indus treaty, then how can every project be a misuse of the treaty ?
Scholars have correctly said that 'third world war will happen only due to water crisis'.Water crisis will engulf almost all the countries by 2025.Rightfully,the water crisis may become the prominent issue of dispute.The 80-20 treaty of the Indus in 1960 between India and Pakistan,may sow its seeds in the near future.However,proper negotiations may be helpful for both the countries. These rivers ,primarily of Himalayan origin must have water throughout the year.But recently, main rivers of himalayan origin have started declining.Global warming may finish them completely.India and Pakistan must come up jointly to solve this global issue which will surely promote friendly relations among them.
Very well written indeed. I see everyday something or the other being written in leading Pakistan papers that how India is stealing Pakistan's water. One so called expert went on to claim 'India used artillery tanks' to destoy Nepal's dams to secure its water supplies'! So India has to remain prepared for this before a Kashmir like hysteria is created by vested interests in Pakistan to further destroy little goodwill exists between two neigbhours.
Mr Iyer has not yet discovered that it is impossible to allay Pakistani concerns. It is India's fault when there are floods; it is also India's fault when their cricketers are caught in match fixing. India is behind every calamity and misfortune. Yes, a lot can be done if we work together. The water management can be improved. Weather data can be shared. But all this will have to wait until Pakistan stops treating every engagement with India as a battle and starts looking for solutions that are long term wins for both parties. There are far too many vested interests in Pakistan that benefit by maintaining this enmity. So, the mindset is not about to change.
Trust must be restored. Though it is too early to comment on India's partial role or no role in this, trust is the key. Pakistan needs to understand that just like it says 'non state actors' are responsible for terrorist acts (a statement of shame for any nation), India can easily get away with this water issue. When nation uses religion to its advantage (for Pakistan, it has been a disadvantage) and escapes responsibility, it will be an uphill task for Pakistan to restore confidence and trust of Indians and get Indians to answer this issue.
Please Email the Editor