THE federal government could not have asked for more opportune and supportive circumstances for its plans to build water reservoirs than the start of rehabilitation and remodelling of Taunsa Barrage. It has coincided with General Musharraf’s crusade for the construction of water reservoirs.

Without a coercive campaign against segments that reject the Kalabagh dam project, or, as some people say, trying to build the dam at gun point, the Taunsa project provides convincing evidence of the direct positive bearing work in the water sector has on farmer’s income and their lives.

The rehabilitation and remodelling of the Taunsa Barrage, the first water sector project undertaken after independence, would ensure uninterrupted year round supply of water to farmers of three districts in the southern region, rid the canals receiving water from the barrage of the problem of sedimentation and provide water to tail end farmers on an equitable, consistent basis.

The flow of water would be translated into financial gains for the farmers by giving boost to the cotton crop that is the strength of agriculture of these areas.

Increase in cotton produce after completion of the work is estimated to be worth around $40 million or approximately Rs2.5 billion. The crop produce would improve by about 15 per cent or by two hundred thousand bales. If their price is worked out at 45 cents per kg, the total would come to earlier stated figure.

The lives of farmers of the districts of Rajanpur, DG Khan and Muzaffargarh would be transformed.

In comparison with multi- billion dollar projects like Kalabagh and Bhasha dams, Taunsa is actually insignificant. The cost is a mere Rs10 billion.

Many development undertakings give the impression of being custom made projects for throwing money down drain, individuals and groups lending political support to the government; they have built in devices for corruption. (In many cases, supporters may be former or even present resident of some political orphanages or another). In this context, Taunsa looks like boon to the people of the region of its location.

One hopes the project is completed in the three year period fixed for the purpose. It should not be another case of delayed completion because funds are available- main sources are foreign, and managers of the project wish to fulfil their task before time. The earlier that is done, the better it would be for the people of the region, for that matter, for the country.

This is one aspect of the project relevant for promotion of the case for water reservoirs. Another is the mechanism for conflict resolution followed for Taunsa. Sindh wanted its share of the water during the remodelling period. That was normal and in any case, a project for the development of one region should not be to the detriment of another. But the manner in which disagreements were initially taken up was painful bargaining that reflected distrust marking the attitude the province of Sindh has developed over the years. The resolution of the issues involved took some time but the settlement was amicable in the end.

It was agreed that Punjab would provide the water used by Sindh from this source. There was haggling over the quantity to be provided but in the end it was agreed that it should be the same as normally used by Sindh, 35,000 to 40,000 cusecs of water per day are normally required by Sindh between January 1 and February 28. This quantity could not be provided from Taunsa during while work was in progress. A plan for rerouting supplies was consequently formulated.

Half of the water was to be supplied from Taunsa while the remaining requirement would be underwritten from Chashma-Jhelum canal and Mangla dam. This is a longer route involving channel losses estimated to be around 2,000 cusecs per day. Punjab adjusted this loss in its account to ensure that all hurdles from the decks were removed before the Taunsa project was launched. Taunsa thus offers not only a view of how stakeholders benefit from a water development project but also suggests a way out for resolving differences.

The element of distrust can, however, still surface. What if Punjab fails to fulfil its commitments? There is no such possibility because IRSA, that presided over the resolution of differences that threatened to grow in to inter-provincial strife, possesses the needed authority to ensure that the agreement is implemented. It calls all the shots. It is in a position to ensure that whatever the situation, Sindh continues receiving its share of water.

We thus have three things to guide in inter-provincial water related differences: benefits for people, conflict resolution mechanism and authority for ensuring implementation of agreement. This should be sufficient ground and argument for convincing distrusting and uncertain federating units that institutions are in place and apprehensions not valid any more.

The government, in this case the President and COAS, General Pervez Musharraf, seem to have taken a circuitous path for pursuing the construction of water reservoirs. The one thing that should have been avoided at all costs seems to have been taken as the first and most important priority. The opposition and reservations of provinces, particularly those of Sindh, have been fanned to begin with; this has been done with a vengeance. The position of some segments in the province on water reservoirs was well known. That should have been kept in view. The reverse was done.

The government should also have known that no amount of assurances would satisfy groups that have developed distrust that goes back to many unhappy experiences spread over a long period of time. There is no fresh development to suggest that past was another period. Words have no value in any case and such words as are in contrast with realities which make the situation more complicated.

For instance, who would place his faith in constitutional guarantees when constitutions of Pakistan have been victims of military governments and the present government has distorted the constitution of 1973 that it uses as the source of its legitimacy beyond recognition.

The need is for presenting institutions as strong bodies capable of withstanding pressures and ensuring justice and equity. Such institutions can be trusted by the people and the federating units. They actually want such bodies in place; all units want to have faith in strength for survival in the federation because there in lies the survival of individuals, groups and units.

But fake guarantees in bodies that have been systematically and deliberately weakened to strengthen individuals would not just undermine the case of urgently needed water reservoirs but also of the federation of Pakistan.

One wonders if rulers in Islamabad comprehend the dangerous implications of the manner in which the issue of construction of water reservoirs is being pursued. The least the federal government can do is use the Taunsa for guidance.