Water a core issue of Pakistan than Kashmir

[keerthi sureshbabu]

Taken from a article by Ramaswamy R Iyer

Water issue between India and Pakistan is becoming prominent once again. A few years ago, one could have said there is no water issue because water sharing on the Indus stands settled by the Indus treaty 1960, but that does not work now. Pakistan has repeatedly made few points. They are
• India is storing or diverting waters to the detriment of Pakistan.
• The water scarcity is caused by Indian action.
• The flows in the western rivers have diminished over the years, and India, as the upper riparian, must bear the responsibility for this
• India is misusing the provisions of the Indus treaty. Every Indian project on the western rivers is a violation of the Indus treaty
• The neutral expert in the Baglihar case misinterpreted the treaty and weakened the protection that Pakistan had under treaty.
• 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.
• Environmental concern did not figure at Indus treaty.
• New development is climate change and the impact that it will have water.
Pakistani concerns are not enough; something more need to be said on the above points.
• Storage – so far India has not built any storage.
• Water scarcity in Pakistan, India has nothing to do with it.
• Reduced flow in western rivers.
• Violation of the provisions of the Indus treaty by India; every Indian project a violation of the treaty: this is not true. The treaty envisages and permits Indian projects on western rivers and so the project is they cannot be violation of the treaty.
• Misuse of the treaty: A recent article in Pakistan saying misusing the Indus treaty. India can argue that it is only using and not misusing the treaty and that Pakistan is misusing the treaty to block every Indian project on the western rivers. However Pakistan has accepted the permissive provisions and India ahs accepted the restrictive provisions.
• Baglihar ; Neutral expert blamed. When Pakistan talks about interpretation it has 3 things;
NE took the view that 1960 treaty do not bind India to 1960 technology
Importance to techno-economic soundness and satisfactory operation.
NE stressed the importance of periodical flushing of the reservoir to get rid of sediments.
• Initially filling of Baglihar reservoir. India deliberately filled the reservoir in such a manner to cause maximum harm to Pakistan refuses to die down despite repeated explanation. The filling was completed well within the prescribed period; with reference to prescribed minimum flow at Merala was only for few hours and could not possibly have caused serious harm.
• Cumulative impact of many projects: 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.
• Environmental concerns, climate change: these are post treaty developments and call for urgent inter-country consultation, not only the government level but also at academic and expert levels.
• Joint studies are needed on
1. Reduction of flow in western rivers and the factors responsible
2. Cumulative impact of a large number of projects on the western rivers
3. Inter country consultations and researches are also called for on environmental concerns and on the impacts of climate change.