Pakistan asks India to explain position: Indus Basin Treaty violation
By Khaleeq Kiani
ISLAMABAD, Feb 26: Pakistan has sought a report from India on an alleged construction of a gate-structure on the Chenab river for diversion of its water in violation of the Indus Basin Treaty, 1960.
This is for the first time since the inception of the treaty that a water-related issue other than Wullar Barrage is being taken up at the official diplomatic level instead of relevant agencies like the Permanent Indus Commission (Pic) or the Federal Flood Commission (FFC).
The Foreign Office has formally asked India to provide details about the gate-structure on the Chenab that is apparently meant for the construction of a 450-mw Baglihar Power Project in occupied Kashmir.
A senior government official told Dawn that the Foreign Office has officially expressed concern over the alleged violation of the Indus Basin Treaty with India and has asked for a report.
The Foreign Office was asked by the Ministry of Water and Power that India was not responding to the relevant channels of the Pic that had expressed concern over the reports that the decades-old treaty was being violated through a gate-structure.
A visit of the Pakistan commissioner on Pic scheduled for December 2001 was cancelled at the last moment following refusal by the Indian Pic commissioner to arrange his visit of the areas in the Kashmir region for the inspection of rivers, particularly the Chenab.
A senior official of the power ministry said India was quoting prevailing tense situation and military build-up at the Line of Control as an excuse to show its inability to facilitate the visit and subsequent inspection.
The two sides had agreed in May last year during annual meeting of the Pic in Islamabad that Pakistan commissioner would visit the river areas for verification and till then India would not proceed on the proposed project unless cleared by Pakistan. At least that commitment has not been honoured by the Indian side, said a power ministry official.
He said there was no official word available from India despite repeated requests on Baglihar project for quite some time but media reports obviously emanating from across the border suggest India had started proceeding on the hydel power project. We had asked the Foreign Office to use its offices and sources for a report on the Chenab waters diversion since we have not been able to have Indian response, the official said.
In May last year, Pakistan had formally registered its concern over the construction of Baglihar project with unequivocal stand that the existing project design was unacceptable to it.
The Chenab river belonged to Pakistan but India could construct run-of-the river power projects and the ones that did not divert or reduce the water flow. India had agreed to come up with a revised design and data for further discussion and facilitate the visit of Pakistani engineers to inspect the site.
On the question of the gate-structure, the treaty says: If the conditions at the site of a plant make a gated spillway necessary, the bottom level of the gates in normal closed position shall be located at the highest level consistent with sound and economical design and satisfactory construction and operation of the works.
Under the treaty, Pakistan has exclusive rights to use water of western rivers Indus, Jehlum and Chenab while eastern rivers Ravi, Sutlej and Beas have been assigned to India. Brokered by the World Bank, that is also a guarantor, the 1960 treaty had helped resolve a severe resource distribution problem in the aftermath of partition.
In early 1980s, too, India breached the treaty and tried to construct Wullar Barrage over Jehlum river. Though the Indian attempt was thwarted yet the issue continues to be on the bilateral agenda for monitors. Except this and some minor differences from time to time, the river-sharing arrangement has, so far, worked well and survived wars and periods of high tension.
Under Article VIII of the treaty: If either party plans to construct any engineering work which would cause interference with the waters of any of the Rivers and which, in its opinion, would affect the other party materially, it shall notify the other party of its plans and shall supply such date relating to the work as may be available and as would enable the other party to inform itself of the nature, magnitude and effect of the work.
