Alert Sign Dear reader, online ads enable us to deliver the journalism you value. Please support us by taking a moment to turn off Adblock on

Alert Sign Dear reader, please upgrade to the latest version of IE to have a better reading experience


Sold down the river

Published Sep 08, 2013 04:20pm


Your Name:

Recipient Email:

Sukkur Barrage.
Sukkur Barrage.

The lower riparian is always the loser when there is a powerful player upstream. It’s worse when the two also happen to generally mistrust, and more than occasionally shoot at one another, as is the case with Indian and Pakistan.

While the historically strained relations are blamed on many causes; the trauma of partition, the Kashmir issue and so much more, for Pakistan perhaps the greatest bone of contention is the flow of water from Indian-controlled territory into Pakistan.

No wonder then, that Islamabad was compelled to take two cases for adjudication to a World Bank appointed neutral expert and the International Court of Arbitration over the construction of dams and diversion of the waters of Chenab and Jhelum by India. This was done after exhausting all the bilateral options, including the failure of composite dialogue at the political and institutional level.

Under the 1960 Indus Waters Treaty, India cannot change the flow of river Jhelum, even for power generation as it may affect Pakistan’s power projects. The treaty provides Pakistan exclusive rights to use the water of the western rivers — Indus, Jhelum and Chenab — except for allowing a nominal non-consumptive use to New Delhi while the eastern rivers — Ravi, Sutlej and Beas — have been assigned to India.

However, India is currently in different phases of operating, planning and implementing a total of at least 32 water storage and hydropower projects on these rivers. There are 17 on the Chenab, five on the Jhelum and 10 on the Indus, with a cumulative generation capacity of about 13,247mw. Amongst the planned projects, the Chenab’s Bursar dam alone would have a 2.5BCM (billion cubic metres) storage against the cumulative multi-purpose storage 0provision of 4.44BCM on all the western rivers.

According to Pakistan Institute of Legislative Development and Transparency (PILDAT), India is planning to implement a mega project for linking the water surplus basins with water deficit ones through a network of 30 link canals by interlinking 37 rivers, which may include western rivers as well. “India has also aggrieved its other transboundary water stakeholders such as Bangladesh, Bhutan and Nepal through multiple self-serving hydroelectric and irrigation projects and is now bent upon taking control of the western rivers of Pakistan as well,” says PILDAT

The claim is backed by Pakistan’s minister for water and power Khawaja Mohammad Asif, who says that “India has committed a number of violations of the Indus Waters Treaty since January 2000”. Of the five major violations since then, three are as follows:

(i) Not following the design criteria given in the treaty as in the case of Baglihar and Kishanganga, (ii) Starting construction without informing Pakistan as in the case of Chutak Hydroelectric and Nimoo Bazgo plants constructed on a tributary of the Indus river and (iii) Not following the operational provisions as in the case of filling of Baglihar dam in off-peak season and without informing Pakistan.

In all these cases, the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) were violated by India by not providing an opportunity to the affected people and Pakistan for environmental impact assessment as required under clause 37(b) and (c) of UNFCCC.

Before that, the 450mw Baglihar Hydroelectric and Storage power project on river Chenab was constructed by India despite four major objections raised by Pakistan over violations of the treaty to its disadvantage. India kept on delaying negotiations on resolution of these objections and simultaneously went ahead with construction work to a stage that a major violation — the height of the dam — was declared a fait accompli by the neutral expert appointed by the World Bank.

Disappointed with the outcome of the neutral expert’s decision, Pakistan had to belatedly take up another dispute over the construction of Kishanganga Hydropower project — envisaging the diversion of Neelum River waters to Wular Lake — to the International Court of Arbitration at The Hague set up by the United Nations. Pakistan claimed the project design adversely impacts the environment and hydropower generation in Pakistan in violation of the treaty.

Although in its partial judgement the ICA has found violations by India of the bilateral treaty, it has allowed storage and diversion as fait accompli because of delayed action by Islamabad.

India had almost completed the 22-km tunnel to divert Kishanganga (Neelum) waters to Wular Lake in violation of the Indus Waters Treaty and was working to complete the 330MW project by 2016.

When completed, the project would severely affect Pakistan’s rights over the river, completely dry out more than 60km of Neelum’s river bend upstream of Muzaffarabad, reduce the river’s flow into Pakistan and minimise the power generation capacity of the 969MW Neelum Jhelum Hydropower project by 20pc (100mw) near Muzaffarabad in Azad Kashmir with an annual loss of $141 million on account of less energy generation.

Located about 160km up-stead of Muzaffarabad, Kishanganga project involves diversion of the Kishanganga or Neelum to a tributary named Bunar Madhumati Nullah of the Jhelum through a 22-km tunnel. Its power house will be built near Bunkot and the water will be re-routed into the Jhelum River through Wular Lake, drying up a long stretch of the river on the Pakistani side.

According to Arshad H. Abbasi, a senior adviser at Sustainable Policy Development Institute (SDPI), India has never shared with Pakistan any transboundary environmental impact assessment (EIA) to assess hydrological and environmental changes on the downstream of its projects in Pakistan.

Abbasi also pointed out that India has allocated hundreds of thousands of acres of forest land to the Indian army after 1990 to fight against Kashmiri militants, and in the process cleared the thick conifer forest of Kashmir to build major infrastructure — roads, cantonments, etc. This has changed the ecology of Kashmir with a severe impact on water yield, frequency in fluctuation of water flows and extreme weather conditions — floods and droughts. “More than 193km of Neelum Valley has been dried out forever,” he added.

Comments (15) Closed

AJ Sep 08, 2013 04:42pm

Water is essential for survival, given the current shortage and the concurrent wastage of monsoon flood water taken into consideration. Why blame the neighbor when the Government is reactive, we have not even undertaken the 'Kalabagh' dam project which was the talk of the town for the last 20 years and now shelved for good, this alone goes on to show how serious we are even for our own survival while blaming others for what we should have done a long time ago.

Rohan Kumar Sep 08, 2013 04:56pm

Even though author thinks India culprit , he should have sound knowledge of the concepts of Hydroelectric projects in Himalayan region. Lack of technical knowledge may be the reason pakistan lost in international court. I will give you one example .... The river Ganga ( holy river, is worshiped in India) and its tributaries ( Bhagirathi, Alakhnanda, Mandakini, Vilangan, Yamuna ) is having more than 50 small to big hydroelectric projects functional in its upper reaches (in Himalayan terrain ........... absolutely same geographical condition as of Chenab, Jhelam, Indus etc. ). Not a single question raged from the people living in lower reaches of river. Because there is literally no impact.

sami Sep 08, 2013 04:55pm

Alas, we Pakistanis are sleeping........... No doubt we have the worst possible lot of politicians in our country.

Amajid Khan Sep 08, 2013 06:35pm

Might is right. You have to be strong and courageious to get your share. Sleeping in corrupt environment and then crying over spilt milk will not help. Majid

gprFix Sep 08, 2013 06:41pm

Pakistan's biggest problem has been the unchecked population growth. Given the amount of water available to Pakistan it's population should not be be more than 40 million ( 1951 population). Today the population is more than 5 times greater and thus there has been a 5 fold decrease in per capita water availability.

Pakistan like China should adopt 1 child policy and stick to it for at least 200 years to bring down its population to a more manageable level.

ak18 Sep 08, 2013 06:43pm

thats just great... soon we can have peace talks with indian officials in meeting rooms and hotels built on land where rivers flow today...

we will be thirsty and starving by the time the indian govt will ever consider giving our pathetic politicians the time of day.. in the meantime lets waste our time and become spectators to our own destruction at the hands of our greatest enemy, sorry i meant to say 'friend', and all to the joyful sound of the latest bollywood beats!

Anoop Sep 08, 2013 06:56pm

This article agrees that neutral experts have given their verdict in favour of India and yet there is a tone of accusation and victimisation.

Its not like India can block Pakistan to stop them from going to the WB administered neutral tribunal, Pakistan can go there tomorrow with solid evidence and arguments, listed in this article.

Plus, out of the 6 rivers, 3 larger rivers were gifted away to Pakistan and 3 smaller ones were kept with India. If Pakistan gets much more than 50% of the Indus water system.

If Pakistan ever wants to renegotiate the IWT India should be more than happy to oblige. In fact strict 50:50 basis should be ensured.

This is the reason many Pakistani experts thing IWT is the best deal for Pakistan, even when the deal was formulated.

I really hope IWT is renegotiated and 50-50 sharing is ensured.

Junaid Sep 08, 2013 08:28pm

@Rohan Kumar: Lack of understanding of international treaties may be the reason for your ignorance on this issue. Maybe you should read a summary of the Indus Water Treaty before talking. Making statements like "there is literally no impact" does not make an argument sound or convincing. Comparing two different rivers and their impact is a dodgy proposition to begin with. I am not even inclined to point of the flaw in that assertion.

Munir Varraich Sep 09, 2013 12:44am

The thing to understand by the leaders of the world is that "National Interest" has to be subordinated to "Mankind's Interests" in this Global Village environment. If policy makers, whether in India or in any other part of the world ignore this aspect of the "process of evolution" of the human consciousness, the damage will not be just one part of humanity but it will have Global impact.

MAV Sweden

Anand Sep 09, 2013 02:07am

Looks like winning a war without firing a bullet. Well done India.

Omer Sep 09, 2013 03:13am

Good job! An eye opener to our self-styled liberals who want "friendship" with India, without the sentiments being reciprocated from across the border in any meaningful manifestation. India is drying you up and you continue raising your slogans of Amn ki Asha!

mconfused Sep 09, 2013 05:26am

international neutral sold out. another conspiracy against Pakistan. India Didn't inform Pakistan about building Dams. Will Pakistan or had pakistan informed India when attacked? everything thing is fair '' when love is war ''. Oh I'm confused.

Khan Sep 09, 2013 05:43am

One can trust a snake but not Indians . Bagal mein Chori pe mein ram ram

typical Sep 09, 2013 08:00am

@Rohan Kumar: It is so typical of Indian people to make comments only out of their patriotism without understanding the problem.

Atif Sep 09, 2013 09:00am

The picture is of Ayoub/Lansdowne Bridge between Sukkur and Rohri, not the Sukkur Barrage I thought someone will proof read these things before Publishing.