Amid the continuing tussle between Sindh and Punjab over the sharing of water shortages the Indus River System Authority (Irsa) has decided once again to distribute irrigation water to the provinces on the basis of historic use instead of 1991 water accord during Kharif and upcoming Rabi season.

After this conflicting distribution Punjab is likely to get around 33.519 maf (million acre feet) during Kharif against its average annual use of 34 647 maf, Sindh is likely to get 27.294 maf against the average annual use of 28.79 MAF water. Therefore Sindh would get slightly over one maf less compared with the allocations made under the 1991 water accord. Balochistan and the NWFP, however, would remain unaffected and get their share of 2.848 MAF and 0.823 maf water respectively.

Sindh has been demanding since 1994 that water shortages should be shared among the provinces strictly in accordance with the provincial shares as defined in the 1991 water accord. Punjab however, insists that in case of shortages, the principle of historic use should prevail.

The provinces of Sindh and Punjab have been struggling for adequate water since long but the struggle has now transformed itself into a water war. Over the years water demand has been increasing due to the rise in the cultivated land area and change in cropping patterns. Changing pattern of global environment and weather is further likely to decrease the availability of fresh water.

Independent water experts have been continuously warning for years that the country’s provinces would come to a serious confrontation if the issue of dwindling water resources is not addressed properly and urgently but their apprehensions were never taken into account by the concerned authorities.

The federal government has been locked in a debate on distribution of water among the provinces for a long time and the Irsa has apparently failed to resolve the intra-provincial dispute over the sharing of irrigation water shortages equitably.

As an irrigation water allocation body manned by experts and bureaucrats representing all the four provinces and the federal government Irsa is expected to allocate water in an equitable manner to the satisfaction of all parties concerned. But this has not happened since 1991 when Irsa for the first and last time struck an agreed accord among the provinces.

Unfortunately, within three years of signing the 1991 accord serious conflicts had started to surface among the provinces over water sharing. In 1994 there was an exceptional decline in rainfall which created serious water shortages in the country. To meet this unusual situation the then federal minister for water and power, Ghulam Mustafa Khar, convened an inter-provincial ministerial meeting in which it was decided that the Punjab and Sindh would be entitled to use water in a proportion in which they used water during the 1977-82 period. Whereas the NWFP and Balochistan would continue to receive their stipulated share as envisaged in the 1991 water accord.

The record of official correspondence between Sindh, Irsa and the ministry of water and power after this inter provincial meeting suggests that Sindh was made to accept the 1994 arrangement under protest as its water supply was subsequently reduced by 18 per cent under the historical use formula while that of Punjab actually increased by 8 per cent.

This illogical distribution attracted strong opposition from Sindh. Therefore, Sindh has been demanding of the federal government that the four provinces should share water shortage on the basis of the 1991 water accord and not on the basis of the historical use. It had objected that why only two provinces which are also most productive should be made to suffer. It had demanded that the NWFP and Balochistan should also share the water shortages under the water accord of 1991. This logical demand of Sindh was never heard properly and each successive government tried to put a blanket over this issue.

After the ouster of the Nawaz government in October 1999 Sindh requested Irsa to seek the legal position of 1994 ministerial decision. To this the law ministry sent a report to General Pervez Musharraf on October 25 2000 saying that the 1994 decision had no legal status and its implementation was against the 1991 Accord and finally Irsa upheld the water distribution according to the accord agreed upon on March 21, 01.

Not only this the ministry of water and power also notified on June 28, 01 that the decision of the 1994 inter-provincial ministerial meeting stands annulled. Despite this clear-cut ruling of the law ministry and notification of the competent authority status quo has been maintained on this burning issue which practically favours Punjab

It is very surprising and shocking that even the directives of the then Chief Executive and now the President of Pakistan regarding distribution of water shortages equitably among all provinces could not be implemented after a lapse of three years. Consequently there seems to be no end to the bickering among the provinces over an agreed formula for sharing water shortages. As a matter of fact the conflict of water between Sindh and Punjab has not emerged now. It dates back prior to the creation of Pakistan as early as 1900.At that time it was due to development of irrigation infrastructure.

The recent row emanates from the irrigation works built under the Indus Water Treaty when Chashma-Jhelum Link Canal was built which was to serve as a non-perennial canal to off-take extra water from Indus to river Jhelum after the needs of Sindh had keen met. The friction intensified when this link canal was converted to a perennial canal even when the needs of Sindh had not been met.

The requirement of releasing some amount of water beyond the Kotri barrage is also a bone of contention with regard to water distribution among the provinces. In the current situation no water is being released beyond Kotri barrage due to which seawater has intruded the Indus river at least 50 miles upstream to ravage the whole coastal belt of Sindh.

The need to release some amount of water below Kotri barrage has keen recognized by all concerned due to its environmental consideration. Although a provisional amount of 7 per cent of the mean annual system inflow has been mentioned in the water apportionment accord to be discharged annually past the Kotri barrage but there has not been any such release during past many years.

Due to this reduced water flow nearly 40 per cent of arable land in Sindh has been lost to water logging and sea water intrusion This intrusion is due mainly to the weakening of river flows caused by drought conditions in view of these problems. Sindh’s demand for a bigger share in the river water resources seems justified

In our predominantly agricultural country water has become a crucially important and emotive issue. Further the entire question of water-sharing has become deeply politicized; making decision on a rational basis increasingly difficult.

The 1991 water accord was signed amongst the four provinces on March 16 1991 and was approved by the Council of Common Interests (CCI) on March 21, 1991 according to which 117.35 maf of water was allocated among four provinces season-wise

The flow of our three western rivers is highly erratic. The maximum flow of 186.79 maf was recorded in the year 1959-60. In contrast a minimum flow of 97.74 maf was recorded in the year 1974-75. Therefore, it was apparent at the time of signing of the 1991 water accord that there would be both shortages and surpluses in the actual water availability from year to year. Having recognized this position the accord provides a methodology for sharing the shortages and surpluses whenever they occur under para 14 (a) and (b) of the water accord.

Para 14 (a) of the accord states: “The system-wise allocation will be worked out separately on 10 daily basis and will be attached with this agreement as part and parcel of the agreement.”

Whereas Para 14 (b) says: “The record of actual average system uses for the period 1977-82 would form the guideline for developing a future regulation pattern. These 10 daily uses would be adjusted prorota to correspond to the indicated seasonal allocations of the different canal systems and would form the basis for sharing shortages and surpluses on all Pakistan basis”.

Both these clauses of the water accord are quite clear, specific and unambiguous. The record of actual average uses of the system during the period 1977-82 is only a guideline for developing the future regulation pattern. It does not in any way provide a key for water sharing and distribution. The only basis for sharing the shortages and surpluses are the “ten daily” statements.

These “ten daily” statements have already been prepared and approved by CCI in it’s meeting held on September 16 1991. There-fore there seems to be no ambiguity whatsoever in the “water accord 1991” about sharing the shortages and surpluses whenever they occur.

It is therefore required that instead of locking horns at the onset of every Kharif and Rabi season over water distribution this issue is resolved once for ever. The government is also willing to launch much awaited national water policy in the near future. Implementation of such policy will not be effective unless water distribution conflicts along provinces are resolved permanently and all adhoc arrangements like 1994 ministerial meeting are shelved forever.