COLUMNISTS
INDUS WATER TREATY NEEDS RELOOK
4
5
India should not allow Pakistan to sabotage its hydro-power
projects any further by using provisions of of a pact that have become fit for
the archives. New Delhi has, unfortunately, been too indulgent
With the final
verdict of the International Court of Arbitration on the Kishanganga
Project dispute expected within a month, Pakistan has unleashed a media blitz
through its official military magazine,Hilal, alleging India is violating
the provisions of the Indus Waters Treaty to strangulate Pakistan with
water shortage.
The CoA, in its interim
award (February 2013) had permitted India to proceed with KHP on 2 conditions :
(1) When operating it, India has to maintain a minimum flow in the river, and
(2) India should not operate the reservoir below the dead storage level even to
flush out the deposited silt.
India is happy that the
court made it accountable only for the total flows in the Jhelum river system
and not in an individual stream like the Kishanganga and upheld the right to
divert water within the basin. However, it is unhappy with the condition of
maintaining minimum flows which could affect the economics of project
operation, and the restriction on reservoir operations which could shorten the
life of the project by silting.
Pakistan is desperate.
Hence it has initiated the media war, blaming India for causing hardship
to its farmers, though it is aware that the scarcity happened solely due to
mismanagement of its water resources. It hopes that such an action would get
them the support of India-baiters who would jump into the fray to ignite
the incendiary hydropolitics and tarnish India's image using information,
misinformation and even information derived from questionable sources.
These detractors were ready
to oblige Pakistan as expected. They floated a concept of ‘manipulable storage’
of 1700 million cubic metres as the available reservoir capacity in the
Indian projects on the Chenab river. They warned that with this capacity India
could withhold 40 days of river flow during lean season and deprive the
lower riparian its much needed water. However, the assumptions used in
computing the estimate are found to be questionable and the result derived
therefrom are highly exaggerated. For example, the ‘manipulable storage’
estimated in the 390 MW Dulhasti project in the Chenab using the same logic is
95mcm, whereas the gross storage provided in the project is only about 9mcm —
one tenth of the computed value!
Also, in
projects like Baglihar, quoted by Hilal, there has, so far,
been no report of water shortage downstream. Further, the presumption that
India would first deplete all its storage to refill the reservoirs with the
lean season flows to spite Pakistan, ignoring the substantial revenue loss of
millions of dollars it would suffer by shutting down power generation during
this exercise, does not stand to reason.
This is not the first time
these critics have vilified India for ‘harassing’ Pakistan. Upset with the
decision of the ‘neutral expert’ on the Baglihar project, some of them had
accused India for filling Baglihar reservoir to cause water scarcity in
Pakistan. They were aware that India had to complete this task during the
permitted monsoon period for commissioning the project.
Also water downstream
was never in short supply then and even the One of Pakistan’s Ministers
had lamented about water wastage by local farmers. Nevertheless,
Islamabad made a hue and cry on India’s action then. Even now, it continues to
be afflicted by bouts of amnesia and suffers from an ideology-induced myopia
regarding the ground realities.
The final court verdict is
expected to uphold the principles enshrined in the treaty, ie, optimum
development and utilisation of the Indus waters and it is to be hoped that the
CoA would not to impose any restriction to affect the economic viability
of the projects planned. However, Pakistan is certain to continue to create
hassles for India over the latter’s projects.
Now, China has also staked
its rights on the Indus waters by constructing the Zada Gorge project in upper
Sutlej and Senge Ali project in the upper Indus, (western Tibet), a
situation not anticipated in the Indus Water Treaty of 1960. These
interventions would drastically reduce the river flows downstream, upsetting
the working of the treaty. However, China is not concerned with the treaty, as
it is not a party to it. If the river flows downstream get affected, Pakistan
and their sympathisers would still continue their vituperative attacks on
India.
The operation of the treaty
for the last five decades has revealed that it has only perpetuated the Indus
dispute. It could survive all these years because India willingly
acquiesced to the tantrums of its neighbour. With China entering the scene, it
is now time for India to insist on a review of the treaty. If Pakistan does not
cooperate, India should invoke Article 62 of the Vienna Convention on Law
of Treaties, 1969, which permits terminating or withdrawing from the treaty due
to fundamental change of circumstances. India should not allow Pakistan to
sabotage its projects any further by using provisions of a treaty that have
become fit for the archives.
(The writer is a former Member Secretary, Indian National
Committee on Irrigation and Drainage, Central Water Commission)
1
2
3
4
5
opyright © 2013
The Pioneer. All Rights Reserved.
·
No comments:
Post a Comment