“…but not a drop to drink”
The echoes of the possibility of India revoking the Indus Water Treaty in the backdrop of the rising tensions between the two countries have not come as a surprise for those who are savvy of Indian hostility towards Pakistan in regards to sharing of river water. It has been violating the provisions of the agreement by constructing a number of dams and barrages on the rivers allotted to Pakistan under the agreement, including Kishanganga which Pakistan felt was a serious violation of the treaty. The Permanent Indus Commission created under the treaty to monitor the implementation of the provisions of the Treaty and to deal with complaints and disputes pertaining to the implementation of the agreement, failed to resolve these issues and the matter had to be referred either to a ‘Neutral Expert’ or Permanent Court of Arbitration at Hague (PAC). The PAC while recognizing the Indians’ right to build the Dam did address Pakistan’s concerns about India maintaining level of reservoirs below the Dead Storage Level and also recognised the concept of environmental flows in rivers to ensure that the power generating projects are operated in an environmentally sustainable manner. The final award announced on Dec 20,2013 specified that 9m3/s of natural flow of water must be maintained in Kishanganga River at all times to maintain environment downstream.
But, as it turns out, the Indians are still persisting with more than specified depth of the spillways of the Dam in complete disregard to the Treaty and the decision of the PAC. India is also going ahead with the construction of 850 MW Ratle Hydropower Project in Jammu and Kashmir. Pakistan has serious concerns about it. According to reliable sources, Pakistani authorities have decided to go for international arbitration and accordingly a case has been prepared for the purpose. However it has not yet been decided whether to present it before the Neutral Experts to be selected through mutual consent or take it to the PAC. The protracted talks between the two sides on these projects have failed to produce any results. I think now is the appropriate time to raise the issue at the international forum without further delay and sensitise the world about the Indian designs.
Pakistan also has serious reservations on the designs of other projects including 1,000 MW Pakal Dul, 120 MW Miyar and 48 MW Lower Kalnai which India is building on River Chenab. The negotiations on these ventures have also reached nowhere and India remains adamant as ever to construct these facilities as per their original design. There is a permeating feeling among Pakistan authorities that looking through the past record there seems no possibility of India showing any flexibility in this regard and Pakistan ultimately might also have to seek international arbitration on these projects as well. It is believed that the construction of Kishanganga Dam in contravention of the Treaty and the decision of the PAC, apart from adverse impact on irrigation and energy producing schemes, would also profoundly affect biodiversity and ecosystems in the Neelum Valley. The volume of water in the part of the river on the Indian side is ten times than the water in the river on our side. The diversion of this water to Jhaleum basin would adversely affect environment of the valley as well. These concerns have repeatedly been agitated with the Indian negotiators without any positive response.
It is pertinent to point out that under the Indus Water Treaty 1960, the waters of the Eastern rivers Sutlej, Beas, and Ravi had been allocated to India and the Western rivers Indus, Jhelum and Chenab to Pakistan except for certain uses allowed to India including power generation without altering the water flows. Some sources believe that India is contemplating to launch more hydropower projects with a cumulative power generating capacity of 32,000 MW on the rivers allocated to Pakistan and consequently attain the capability of regulating the water flows to Pakistan, especially reducing water flow in the river Chenab which irrigates most of the land in Punjab.
There are 263 trans-boundary lake and river basins in the world covering nearly half of the land mass of the earth. While some basins are shared by two countries others are shared by five to eighteen nations (river Danube). The riparian nations either through bilateral arrangements or through multilateral agreements have been sharing these water resources in a manner that safeguards the interests of all the parties to the treaties. The UN Resolution on Law of Trans-boundary Aquifers and UN Convention on Law of non-navigational Use Of The International Water Courses also stipulate some key guiding principles in this respect which include equitable and reasonable utilization of international water courses, the application of appropriate measures to prevent harm to other states sharing an international water course and the principle of prior notification of planned measures.
Now the question arises, is it possible for India to unilaterally renege on the Indus Water Treaty? Notwithstanding the fears being expressed by many circles my considered view is that India is using it only as a threat to pressurize Pakistan. There are cogent reasons to believe that India will not resort to such an extreme action which will harm its own interests as well. In regards to Indian capacity to do so, the technical experts believe that India does not have enough storage facility to create supply problem for Pakistan immediately. To do so it will have to raise height of its dam structures that will take time. The other reason is that India in spite of its desire to divert water of rivers that flow from Kashmir valley cannot take the water out of Kashmir due to its geographical features. A unilateral withdrawal from the treaty will bring the World Bank into the dispute and it may also constitute breach of the UN Convention on Law of non-navigational Use of the International Water Courses which provides legal basis to agreements on water sharing. Unilateral revocation of the agreement will earn India a bad image in the global community. Another major reason which would keep India from adopting such a course is that India itself is a middle riparian country for two of the six rivers mentioned in the treaty. The Indus and Sutlej flow from Tibet and there is no treaty between China and India to manage the relationship. For the foregoing facts the Indus Water Treaty is surely destined to survive beyond the current conflict. Such treaties survive not just because of trust or goodwill but because they serve the interests of all the nations involved.
The decision by the government of Pakistan and the moot of the parliamentary leaders to treat the abrogation of the Water Treaty as an act of aggression and the resolve to take up the issue at the international level is also a timely and imaginative move that will put further pressure on India to desist from adopting such a disastrous course.
