After a recent inspection visit, officials believe India is working within the parameters set by the treaty. However, they have requested some more data to be sure
As Pakistan and India are heading towards finding a negotiated settlement of the ‘core’ and ‘central’ dispute over Kashmir, officials believe that the two countries will also be able to resolve differences over certain projects that Islamabad believes New Delhi is setting up in violation of the 1960 Indus Waters Treaty brokered by the World Bank.
Several rounds of talks held by the two sides have already yielded some positive results, and officials privy to the parleys think that the remaining differences will also be ironed out amicably.
Under Article III of the treaty, Pakistan was allowed unrestricted use of the Western rivers: the Indus, the Jhelum and the Chenab. India, under Article II of the treaty, was given similar rights over the Eastern rivers: the Sutlej, the Beas and the Ravi.
The treaty is comprehensive in all respects as it deals with all possible situations which may arise between the two sides. As a result, whenever there is a difference of opinion, the two countries sit together and settle the matter. Thus, the agreement serves as a trouble-shooter between what are generally known as argumentative neighbours.
Officials say that the treaty is being implemented successfully and it will also be able to cater to the likely situation after the settlement of the Kashmir dispute. Whatever the solution, the treaty will remain intact. Any change to the agreement, if necessitated by the situation, would be made with the consent of the two sides.
According to the officials concerned, there are three main disputes over the water uses. New Delhi started setting up Wullar Barrage on Jhelum back in 1985, to which Pakistan took serious exception, arguing that the project violated the treaty and must be scrapped.
The two sides held several rounds of talks on the controversial project, as a result of which its construction was suspended in 1987. The work still remains suspended — although the two sides are sticking to their respective points of view on the legality of the project.
When representatives of two sides would hold talks as a part of the composite dialogue in July this year, the fate of the Wullar Barrage would also be high on the agenda.
Pakistan says that if the project was set up, India would be in a position to control the downstream flow of water as a result of which India would be in a position to starve or flood Pakistan at will.
India’s point of view is that it wants to use the Wullar lake water for navigational purposes. This means the flow of water into Pakistan would remain unaffected, an argument Pakistan dismissed out of hand.
Islamabad’s representatives, who have been taking part in the talks, pointed out to their Indian counterparts that India had a very good communication system in the area around Wullar, and, therefore, it should adopt some alternative course to get the benefits it wanted to derive from the so-called navigational project.
Then there is a Jhelum tributary which Pakistan calls River Neelum, and India, Kishan Ganga. On the upper catchment area of this tributary, India wants to store water and set up a hydro-electric project. The water of this project will flow back into the Wullar Barrage, making 960MW Uri project viable, which otherwise will not be feasible because of insufficient water available in winter.
Pakistan argues that this project is violative of the Indus Waters Treaty as India can’t shift the water of one Jhelum tributary to the other. Pakistan is also opposing the Indian project because it has its own plan to set up Neelum-Jhelum Hydro-Electric project. In case New Delhi is allowed to go ahead with its Kishan Ganga project, Islamabad would not have enough water for this project, because of which it would not remain viable.
For Pakistan this project is quite important as on completion it will generate 1,000MW electricity. The government has already prepared tender documents of the project and cannot afford to roll it back.
Compared to this, India has not done much work on its project. Officials say that India is only setting up a colony while work on the actual project is yet to begin.
The two countries had also developed differences on the Salal hydro-project on the Chenab. Pakistan had raised objections against the design of the project, which was completed in 1987. The commissioners of the two countries, who are responsible for the implementation of the treaty, had failed to settle differences after which the matter was referred to the two governments, as provided in the treaty.
The latest project which is a matter of controversy between Pakistan and India is the Baglihar hydro-electric project. India is constructing a gated spillway which may give it the capability to store water, affecting Pakistan’s rights.
Pakistan says that the site is suitable for an ungated spillway — and that Islamabad would have no objection if New Delhi had such a spillway.
So far, the two sides have failed to resolve their differences over the design, because of which the matter is likely to be referred to a neutral expert in terms of Article IX (2)(a) of the treaty. This article deals with questions that may be referred to the neutral expert. It says: “ Subject to the provisions of paragraph 2, either Commissioner may, under the provisions of Article IX(2)(a), refer to a neutral expert any of the following questions:
1. Determination of the component of water available for the use of Pakistan (a) in the Ravi main, on account of deliveries by Pakistan under the provision of Article II (4), and (b) at various points on the Ravi or the Sutlej, on account of the deliveries by Pakistan under the provisions of Article III (3).
2. Determination of the boundary of drainage basin of the Indus or the Jhelum or the Chenab for the purposes of Article III(2).
3. Whether or not any use of water or storage in addition to that provided under Article III is involved in any of the schemes referred to in Article IV(2) or in Article IV(3)(b) and carried out by India on the Western Rivers.
4. Questions relating to (a) obligations with respect to construction or remodelling of, or pouring of waters into, any drainage or drain as provided in Article IV(3)(c) and Article IV (3)(d); and (b) maintenance of drainages specified in Article IV (4).
The article has several more provisions dealing with all possible situations. Part-2 of the article lays down the procedure for the appointment of a neutral expert. It says a neutral expert shall be a highly qualified engineer, and, on the receipt of a request made in accordance with paragraph 5, he shall be appointed, and the terms of his retainer shall be fixed (for which a procedure has been given).
The expert will be appointed by the governments of Pakistan and India. But in case they fail to reach an agreement, the matter will go to the World Bank, which will then make an appointment in consultation with the two countries. The verdict of the neutral expert will be binding on the two parties.
A Pakistani delegation, led by Commissioner Jamaat Ali Shah, recently paid a visit to India under Article VIII(4)(d) of the treaty. This was a special visit during which the delegation visited Salal hydro-electric plant. The purpose was to examine whether the provisions of the treaty were being adhered to.
Official sources told Dawn Magazine that the agreement was being followed by India. But for further satisfaction, the Indian government has been requested to furnish some more data. The delegation may have to pay another visit to India for the purpose.
The delegation also visited Ranbir and Pratab canals. These canals offtake from Chenab between Salal and Marala headworks. Under the treaty, India is allowed to take out a fixed quantity of water for these channels. In order to ascertain facts, the delegation visited the site. It concluded that some more facts would be required before forming an opinion.
The delegation also paid a visit to a hydro-electric project in Doda district in occupied Kashmir. This project is under construction and is likely to be completed in one year. It has been noted that this 390MW project will not harm Pakistan in any way.
Now an India delegation is expected to pay a week-long visit to Pakistan anytime soon. The visit will be general in nature and is in accordance with Article VIII (4)(c) of the treaty. To be led by D.K. Mehta, the Indian delegation will visit Warsak and Tarbela dams.
