LAHORE: Pakistan has pressed the visiting Indian Indus commissioner to change the design of the Kishanganga Hydro Plant in accordance with a partial award issued by the International Court of Arbitration.
A 10-member Indian delegation which left for home on Tuesday said they had referred the award to their seniors and were waiting for their response. They will be able to make changes after the higher authorities agree.
According to sources in the Pakistan Indus Commissionerate, the Indians have referred the award probably to their lawyers and are waiting for their clearance.
During talks with the Indians, the Pakistani officials also raised the Wullar Barrage issue and demanded a “tour of inspection” at the earliest to ascertain whether India was carrying out any construction or not.
Apart from the two projects, both sides also held their first meeting on three projects recently launched by India — Rattle, Miyar and Kalnai water and hydro projects on the western rivers in India-held Kashmir.
Pakistan had raised objection to the projects and the Indians had responded. In the current meeting, Pakistan substantiated its objections and the Indian delegation tried to defend the designs of the projects.
Both sides stuck to their positions but decided to continue talks.
According to Pakistan’s version, 48MW Kalnai Hydro Electric Project could allow India to utilise the flows of Lower Kalnai River, a tributary of the Chenab River, in Kistwar district of Jammu and Kashmir. The project envisages construction of a 49-metre-high dam with a 4.56km water conductor system.
The Indians have also planned 850MW Rattle plant. The project has been approved by the apex committee of the Indian ministry of environment.
According to Jamaat Ali Shah, former Indus commissioner of Pakistan, the Indus Water Basin Treaty has a grey area: it does not specifically stop India from construction (over shared rivers) even if objections are raised by Pakistan.
“With construction going on the spirit of the treaty gets defeated as ground realities are changed and the changes in turn are used to justify the project at later stages. Both sides need to hammer out a mechanism to stop constructions at least during the objection period.”
Both sides should seek to address objections within a particular timeframe, he proposed: “The Indians are in habit of delaying response to Pakistani objections and use that time for construction of the projects. This has been a pattern of Indian behaviour.
And this is done at the cost of Pakistan and the treaty,” he said.