KARACHI, July 22: Eight political parties belonging to the anti-greater Thal canal platform, on Tuesday, termed the project a conspiracy against the foundations of the federation and demanded an immediate halt to work on the project.
This was the consensus view of the leaders of the platform, who addressed a news conference after completing first stage of their peaceful protest against the project throughout the province.
The eight-party platform include national liberal parties, religious parties and groups and nationalists of different shades. Those, who addressed the press conference included Nisar Khuhro, Rasool Bux Palejo, Salim Zia, Maulana Asadullah Bhutto, Maulana Abdul Karim Abid and Dr Abdul Qadir Magsi.
Speaking on the evolving inter-provincial dispute over water- sharing from the Indus, the leader of the opposition in Sindh Assembly, Mr Nisar Khuhro deplored the centre’s policy of ignoring unanimous resolutions adopted twice by the Sindh Assembly against the Thal canal project.
He said that the contempt shown to the collective will and wisdom of the elected representatives of the people of Sindh was evident from the fact that despite adoption of resolutions by the Sindh Assembly against the project, Rs1.5 billion were allocated for the project in the federal budget.
Referring to the controversial 1991 water accord, he said that there was no provision for the GTC in that accord. He pointed out that in that accord, water to tail enders was not guaranteed, which was having a telling effect on the environment and ecology of the province, where over 2.2 million acres of land had been turned into desert.
According to him, the greater Thal canal was not a flood canal, as professed by its exponents. His contention was that when there was not sufficient water to cater to the needs of the lower riparian, how could water be provided for the project that was being described as flood canal?
He said that the Kalabagh dam was also opposed by Sindh and the project had to be shelved. But, after the demise of democratic dispensation the establishment initiated another project in 2001, without the approval of PC-1, he added.
Mr Khuhro questioned the rationale of Rs35 billion project, with 10,000 cusecs discharge. “What is the rationale for a flood canal, when we don’t have the history of regular yearly floods. They are generally recorded in July and August, when no new crop is sowed,” he said.
Mr Khuhro claimed that at the time of the 1991 water accord there was no Thal canal project, which was being built without the approval of the constitutional body.
Mr Rasool Bux Palejo claimed that since 1858, Sindh had been deprived of its resources and rights. He was critical of not including representative of Sindh while deciding about the Indus Basin Treaty. He said that the problem had emerged because one province along with the centre had usurped the rights of the lower riparian state.
Mr Palejo said that adamant attitude of the centre and those who were pushing for the greater Thal canal tantamount to the “mass murder” of tail enders.
He asked other political parties to give up, what he considered, their double standards on the issue. In this context, the Muttahida Qaumi Movement’s stand in Sindh and in the National Assembly came under scrutiny. He warned that people of Sindh would not accept things lying down any longer.
He said that Sindh had been suffering water shortage ever since the Punjab started raising dams, barrages, etc. He also referred to the Indian irrigated commission’s recommendations where it was stressed that as long as the people of Sindh had objections, no dam should be constructed.
Mr Salim Zia of the PML(N) said that the greater Thal canal was a violation of the rights of the lower riparians and detrimental to the interests of Sindh.
Maulana Abdul Karim Abid also rejected the project and said it was “gift of the uniformed people”.
Maulana Asadullah Bhutto while supporting the movement accused the centre of creating new issues such as the question of downstream Kotri discharge, in a bid to get away with the controversial project.
Dr Qadir Magsi said the project was a matter of life and death for the people of Sindh and an open example of Punjab’s policy of denying other provinces of their due rights. He urged other political parties to join the platform, which had brought together liberal, religious and nationalist parties.
Regarding the MQM’s move to table a resolution against Thal canal in the National Assembly and Senate, Mr Khuhro said, “When the MQM had linked its support to Mr Jamali with the elimination of no go areas, it could have also informed the prime minister that its support would continue if the greater Thal canal project is stopped.”
