The meeting was held to address Pakistan’s objections to the project design, which, in its present form, is likely to deprive Pakistan of some 7000 cusecs of water per day.
This would be the first time since the ratification of the treaty 43 years ago that a dispute on river Indus waters could not be resolved bilaterally. It is very likely that disadvantaged country, Pakistan, invokes article IX(2)(a) of the Indus Water Treaty (IWT) that provides for the appointment of a neutral expert under the aegis of the United Nations for the resolution of such issues. Pakistan can also, and it must, seek arbitration by the International Court of Justice to refrain India from robbing its legitimate share of water which will damage our agriculture-based economy.
Under the IWT, Pakistan has the right of unrestricted use of the western tributaries of the Indus river system, namely the Jhelum, the Chenab and the Indus, while India gets similar rights over the Beas,the Sutlej and the Ravi, the eastern tributaries. The treaty was signed under the good offices of the World Bank at Karachi by the late President Ayub Khan,the late Indian Prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru, and Mr. W.A.B. Illif of the World Bank on 19th September, 1960. The treaty, however, was effective from 1st April 1960.
The PIC was set up under the Indus Waters Treaty to study and report to the two governments on any conflict relating to the development of the rivers’ waters. Its purpose is to maintain co-operative arrangements for the implementation of the treaty and to promote co-operation between the parties in the development of the waters of the rivers and to settle promptly any question arising between the parties.
It is very surprising that India at one end is talking of cooperation through this commission and on the other hand trying to halt water of western rivers by setting aside the treaty. Under the Indus treaty, India is bound to supply the requisite data of its all hydel projects including small plants, run-of-river plants and storage work to Pakistan. Every month, the data with respect to the flows in, and utilization of, the waters of the rivers of the Indus Basin needs to be exchanged between the two countries every year before 30th November both countries also exchange data of irrigated area from the western rivers.
The controversy had begun in 1999, when India came up with the idea to construct a storage reservoir for its 450 MW Baglihar hydropower project on river Chenab. Under the IWT, India can use water of western rivers only for power generation by run-off river installation without diverting its flow or effecting any change in its size or direction.
Pakistan has been asking India for the last three years to arrange a visit of its technical experts to the Indian-held Kashmir to verify the structure of Baglihar power project that could dry Chenab river. Pakistan is of the opinion that since India’s planned Baglihar power project will store and utilize water of the Chenab river thus seen to be a breach of the Indus treaty.
Pakistan raised serious objections over the construction of this project,consequently India had promised in December 2001 to facilitate the visit of Pakistani experts to the project site but has not honoured the commitment as yet on one pretext or another.
Responding to Pakistan’s protest the Indians some time ago did present a revised design, but that design too was unsatisfactory, therefore Pakistan insisted to allow its technical experts to go and visit the site in order to verify the gate structure.
Since Pakistan has no reliable source of information except provided by the Indian Commissioner for Indus Waters to know how construction work progressed. It was therefore reasonable for Pakistan to expect that India would pave the way for his experts to go to the site of the controversial power project so as to be able to come up with first-hand information and evaluate the situation. Nevertheless, India never stopped the construction work on the gate-structure of the 450 MW controversial power project scheduled to be completed next year despite repeated warnings by Pakistan.
In fact, until recently the Indians had been saying that they would allow Pakistani experts to inspect the site sometime soon. The issue remained unresolved even at the recent Islamabad meeting and the Indian team has gone back home, refusing to allow the long-delayed visit of Pakistani experts.
It is not the first time that India acted in contravention to the treaty. India planned and executed work on Kishanganga hydroelectric power project on river Jhelum ignoring objections of Pakistan that the diversion of the flow from one tributary to another tributary of the river Jhelum was not provided under the provisions of the treaty. Not only this but in 1984 as well India undertook Tulbal Navigation Project, commonly known as Wular barrage, on the river Jhelum, below Wular lake having provision of a gated structure and a navigation lock. Pakistan had objected to this project, as in its opinion, it was a storage work and was accordingly not permitted under the Indus Treaty on the river Jhelum. Until now, Pakistan has acted very patiently and tried to convince India at his best to behave rationally keeping in view the sanctity ofthe Indus water treaty but instead of responding to Pakistan’s efforts with the same spirit India seems to take patience of Pakistan as a weakness. Therefore, Pakistan need to take a firm stance on this critical issue and must not compromise even on a drop of its western rivers’ water what to talk about a daily loss of 7000 cusecs.
Pakistan needs to finalize a strategy without wasting any time to seek the appointment of a neutral expert or approach the court of arbitration for resolution of the dispute over the construction of Baglihar hydroelectric project to resolve it immediately to protect its just right.
The Indian refusal seems to be part of a well-considered policy to buy some more time through delaying tactics in holding discussions and arranging visit of Pakistani experts to the project site for the completion of the project, scheduled for next year.
We cannot afford to waste further time in making requests to Indians for such inspection that are likely to remain unheeded in the days to come. It would be wrong if we still hope that India would keep in mind the original spirit of the treaty, which regard the sharing of Indus waters between the two countries as a technical and human issue and not a political one.
In such circumstances there is a dire need that we counter these Indian designs to put at stake the IWT. We can go on shouting at India over Kashmir issue for all time to come but an early settlement is essential to refrain India from taking measures in violation of the water treaty.