Neelo
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2023
- Messages
- 1,755
- Reaction score
- -1
- Country
- Location
Every few years we hear about India threatening to “scrap” the Indus Water Treaty. The news is plastered across Indian state media and its political commentators are given talking points. What shocks me is how easily Pakistani media soaks it all up, as if this is even possible.
The two countries are bound by this treaty. If any one country wants to unilaterally withdraw, they are free to do so, but it will come with a cost.
I’ll start by explaining the Indus Water Treaty itself, which many people don't understand, and then tie in to the current rising nationalist sentiment in East Punjab and the Saraswati River myth.
Attached is a video clip from the Punjabi documentary entitled “Final Assault”, which explains the issue of East Punjab’s rivers being illegally diverted to the “Hindi belt”.
PART 1: Indus Water Treaty Q&A
Q: What is the Indus Water Treaty?
A: The Indus Water Treaty is a river sharing agreement. To make this simple for everyone to understand, under the treaty, Pakistan receives exclusive use of waters from the River Indus and its westward flowing tributaries, the Rivers Jhelum and Chenab, while the Rivers Ravi, Beas, and Sutlej are allocated for the Republic of India’s use. The treaty was signed in 1960 through mediation by the World Bank and is considered one of the greatest success stories of water diplomacy. Both countries have managed to uphold the treaty, which provides mechanisms to resolve disputes over water-sharing.
Q: Why is India's PM Narinder Modi threatening to "scrap" the Indus Water Treaty?
A: Because it makes for good headlines. If you're familiar with Bharati nationalist sentiment, you'll understand that “blaming Pakistan” or “acting against Pakistan” is a way for Indian politicians to boost their own popularity when they are in trouble. There is an excellent article written by Koshur Mazloom entitled "Understanding India's Pakistanophobia", which explains in detail of this phenomenon. Threats to scrap the Indus Water Treaty has less to do with “teaching Pakistan a lesson” and more to do with the Republic of India's weird domestic politics and compulsions.
Q: Can The Indus Water Treaty Be Scrapped?
A: No – for a treaty to be scrapped, both parties would have to agree to its dissolution. Pakistan is not going to pull out of the treaty, so it won't be scrapped. However, the Republic of India is free to unilaterally pull out anytime it wishes. However, since 1960, it has not and for good reason:
#1. The Republic of India is a middle riparian country for two of the six rivers mentioned in the treaty. The Indus and the Sutlej flow from China (Tibet), and there is no treaty between China and the Republic of India to manage the relationship. China has indicated strongly that it would act to divert waters from India, if the Indian government decided to divert waters to Pakistan.
#2. The Republic of India does not have the storage capability to create a supply problem for Pakistan. It has to raise its dam structures, and that will take time and most importantly funds, which it has been struggling to collect.
#3. Even if the Republic of India wanted to, it cannot take the water out of the Kashmir Valley both because of political reasons as well as geographical constraints. So, the water of the three rivers (Indus, Jhelum and Chenab) will remain in their basin. Delhi could stop the supply for some time, but that would risk flooding the Kashmir Valley, since there is nowhere to store the water.
PART 2: Punjabi Nationalist Sentiment
fb.watch
Contrary to popular belief, East Punjab nationalist movement (Khalistan) did not begin after the 1984 attack on the Golden Temple (Harmandir Sahib) in Amritsar by the Indian military. Rather it had more to do with the control of Punjab’s rivers.
In 1966, East Punjab was divided into two new states – Haryana and Himachal Pradesh – alongside Punjab. When the new Punjab state was formed in 1966, the Indian government—against the provisions of the Indian constitution—introduced sections 78 to 80 in the Punjab Reorganization Act, 1966, under which the Indian government “assumed the powers of control, maintenance, distribution and development of the waters and the hydel power of the Punjab rivers”.
This was unprecedented, since control of rivers had always been a state right. In fact, the only rivers which the Government of India control are the rivers of Punjab. Following 1966, over 75% of Punjab’s river water began being diverted to non-riparian states of Haryana and Rajasthan through the Gandhi Canal and SYL Canal respectively. The state of Punjab perceived the Indian government’s violation of the Indian constitution as a measure to deliberately destroy Punjab economically, since the vast majority of the people of Punjab are dependent on agriculture.
According to the Institute of Sikh Studies, Chandigarh:
"An organisation of farmers had filed a petition in the High Court, Punjab and Haryana, regarding the unconstitutionality of the drain of the waters of the Punjab to the non-riparian states under the Reorganisation Act. The issue being of fundamental constitutional importance, the Chief Justice, S.S. Sandhawalia admitted the long pending petition and announced the constitution of a Full Bench, with himself as Chairman, for the hearing of the case on the following Monday, the 25th November, 1983. In the intervening two days before the hearing of the case could start, and these two days were holidays, two things happened. First, before Monday, the Chief Justice of the High Court was transferred to the High Court of Patna. Hence neither the Bench could sit, nor could the hearing of the case start. Second an oral application was given by the Attorney General in the Supreme Court requesting for the transfer of the writ petition from the file of the High Court to that of the Supreme Court on the ground that the issue involved was of great public importance. The request was granted; the case was transferred. And there this case of great public importance rests unheard for the last nearly twenty years."
According to the Earth Policy Institute, East Punjab’s water table is falling by one meter per year, which could lead to disastrous consequences for the state and its farmers in the long-term. This example demonstrates that the Indian constitution is used differently when deciding Sikh-Hindu conflicts and Hindu-Hindu conflicts.
In 1966, riots and mass demonstrations occurred in East Punjab, which was then followed by the Anandpur Sahib Resolution. This resolution was to raise specific political, economic and social issues of East Punjab. The major motivation behind the resolution was safeguarding of the Punjabi identity in a state structure that was decentralized with non-interference from the Indian government. The Indian state and the Indian media misrepresented the Anandpur Sahib Resolution as a “secessionist Sikh extremist document” in an attempt to malign the Punjabi nationalists. The Resolution outlines seven objectives:
1. The transfer of the federally administered city of Chandigarh to Punjab.
2. The transfer of Punjabi speaking and contiguous areas to Punjab.
3. Decentralization of states under the existing constitution, limiting the central government’s role.
4. The call for land reforms and industrialization of Punjab, along with safeguarding the rights of the weaker sections of the population.
5. The enactment of an all-India gurdwara (Sikh house of worship) act.
6. Protection for minorities residing outside Punjab, but within India.
7. Revision of government’s recruitment quota restricting the number of Sikhs in armed forces.
Along with these demands, the issue concerning the unconstitutional diversion of Punjab’s river waters to non-riparian states has been of fundamental importance. Writing about the nature of these demands the Wall Street Journal noted:
"The Akali Dal is in the hands of moderate and sensible leadership...but giving anyone a fair share of power is unthinkable politics of Mrs. Gandhi [the then Prime Minister of India]...Many Hindus in Punjab privately concede that there isn't much wrong with these demands. But every time the ball goes to the Congress court, it is kicked out one way or another because Mrs. Gandhi considers it a good electoral calculation."
PART 3: Saraswati River Myth
The Saraswati River is a mythical river which is mentioned in the Rig Veda – it is generally assumed that this river never actually existed. Despite the exact location of the river, or even an approximate one, not being provided in the Rig Veda, Hindutva nationalists continue to peddle myths that the Saraswati was a “tributary of the Indus”, and in some cases make ridiculous claims that the Saraswati was “bigger than the Indus”.
The controversy stems from geological remains of a river that was discovered in Haryana. Hindutva nationalists believe the abandoned water channels are that of the mythical Saraswati River. However, according to research carried out by scientists at London’s Imperial College, the abandoned channels are the older route taken by the Sutlej River.
Furthermore, if the Saraswati was supposed to be “bigger than the Indus” or a “tributary of the Indus”, what is the third river that was supposed to meet Ganges and Yamuna at Allahabad?
Despite numerous studies which prove that the Saraswati never existed, the state of Haryana is attempting to “recreate the Sarawati” by flooding the abandoned channels of the former Sutlej, which they still claim is the mythical Saraswati. Where will the water come from to recreate a mythical river? It will unfortunately come from East Punjab’s Beas and Sutlej Rivers and this will only put a heavier burden on East Punjab’s dwindling ground water supply.
PART 4: What All This Means For Pakistan
The Republic of India currently considers flooding the abandoned channels of the Sutlej (claimed Saraswati) as a major priority. However, an obstacle in this ridiculous endeavor is rising Punjabi nationalist sentiment. In order to flood the abandoned channels of the Sutlej, more of Punjab’s rivers (Beas and Sutlej) will have to be diverted, which will only agitate Punjabis further, since ground water levels in East Punjab are at its lowest since records began.
The Republic of India cannot build dams and divert East Punjab’s rivers under the pretext of “water scarcity in Rajasthan and Haryana” and certainly not under the pretext of flooding an abandoned water channel based off a Vedic myth. This would create outrage and only fuel Punjabi nationalism further.
However, those same dams and river diversions can occur under the pretext of “stopping water to Pakistan”. Since the Indus Water Treaty protects Pakistan, the potential use of “Pakistanophobia” to resolve the Republic of India’s domestic disputes has once again been sought.
The issue isn’t about Pakistan at all. Rather, this has more to do with the Republic of India’s domestic disputes and its clever way of using Pakistanophobia to get what it wants. This is why you commonly hear about "scrapping the Indus Water Treaty" from India's Prime Minister Narinder Modi.
Any opposition to the dams and diversions in East Punjab will now be viewed negatively, since the argument has been framed towards "punishing Pakistan" rather than recreating a mythical river and stealing more of East Punjab's water share.
What Pakistan needs to do is highlight this issue more aggressively - that any dams built on the Sutlej and Beas will cause problems for East Punjab, not for Pakistan at all and that this whole charade is being done under the pretext to flood an old river plain.
Final Assault documentary (Punjabi language)
The two countries are bound by this treaty. If any one country wants to unilaterally withdraw, they are free to do so, but it will come with a cost.
I’ll start by explaining the Indus Water Treaty itself, which many people don't understand, and then tie in to the current rising nationalist sentiment in East Punjab and the Saraswati River myth.
Attached is a video clip from the Punjabi documentary entitled “Final Assault”, which explains the issue of East Punjab’s rivers being illegally diverted to the “Hindi belt”.
PART 1: Indus Water Treaty Q&A
Q: What is the Indus Water Treaty?
A: The Indus Water Treaty is a river sharing agreement. To make this simple for everyone to understand, under the treaty, Pakistan receives exclusive use of waters from the River Indus and its westward flowing tributaries, the Rivers Jhelum and Chenab, while the Rivers Ravi, Beas, and Sutlej are allocated for the Republic of India’s use. The treaty was signed in 1960 through mediation by the World Bank and is considered one of the greatest success stories of water diplomacy. Both countries have managed to uphold the treaty, which provides mechanisms to resolve disputes over water-sharing.
Q: Why is India's PM Narinder Modi threatening to "scrap" the Indus Water Treaty?
A: Because it makes for good headlines. If you're familiar with Bharati nationalist sentiment, you'll understand that “blaming Pakistan” or “acting against Pakistan” is a way for Indian politicians to boost their own popularity when they are in trouble. There is an excellent article written by Koshur Mazloom entitled "Understanding India's Pakistanophobia", which explains in detail of this phenomenon. Threats to scrap the Indus Water Treaty has less to do with “teaching Pakistan a lesson” and more to do with the Republic of India's weird domestic politics and compulsions.
Q: Can The Indus Water Treaty Be Scrapped?
A: No – for a treaty to be scrapped, both parties would have to agree to its dissolution. Pakistan is not going to pull out of the treaty, so it won't be scrapped. However, the Republic of India is free to unilaterally pull out anytime it wishes. However, since 1960, it has not and for good reason:
#1. The Republic of India is a middle riparian country for two of the six rivers mentioned in the treaty. The Indus and the Sutlej flow from China (Tibet), and there is no treaty between China and the Republic of India to manage the relationship. China has indicated strongly that it would act to divert waters from India, if the Indian government decided to divert waters to Pakistan.
#2. The Republic of India does not have the storage capability to create a supply problem for Pakistan. It has to raise its dam structures, and that will take time and most importantly funds, which it has been struggling to collect.
#3. Even if the Republic of India wanted to, it cannot take the water out of the Kashmir Valley both because of political reasons as well as geographical constraints. So, the water of the three rivers (Indus, Jhelum and Chenab) will remain in their basin. Delhi could stop the supply for some time, but that would risk flooding the Kashmir Valley, since there is nowhere to store the water.
PART 2: Punjabi Nationalist Sentiment
Indus Water Treaty, Rising Punjabi Nationalism & Saraswati River Myth | Marya asked "What is the history of the Indus Water Treaty and why is it so controversial these days?" Another loaded question which unfortunately will... | By Ancient Pakistan |
Marya asked "What is the history of the Indus Water Treaty and why is it so controversial these days?" Another loaded question which unfortunately will...
fb.watch
Contrary to popular belief, East Punjab nationalist movement (Khalistan) did not begin after the 1984 attack on the Golden Temple (Harmandir Sahib) in Amritsar by the Indian military. Rather it had more to do with the control of Punjab’s rivers.
In 1966, East Punjab was divided into two new states – Haryana and Himachal Pradesh – alongside Punjab. When the new Punjab state was formed in 1966, the Indian government—against the provisions of the Indian constitution—introduced sections 78 to 80 in the Punjab Reorganization Act, 1966, under which the Indian government “assumed the powers of control, maintenance, distribution and development of the waters and the hydel power of the Punjab rivers”.
This was unprecedented, since control of rivers had always been a state right. In fact, the only rivers which the Government of India control are the rivers of Punjab. Following 1966, over 75% of Punjab’s river water began being diverted to non-riparian states of Haryana and Rajasthan through the Gandhi Canal and SYL Canal respectively. The state of Punjab perceived the Indian government’s violation of the Indian constitution as a measure to deliberately destroy Punjab economically, since the vast majority of the people of Punjab are dependent on agriculture.
According to the Institute of Sikh Studies, Chandigarh:
"An organisation of farmers had filed a petition in the High Court, Punjab and Haryana, regarding the unconstitutionality of the drain of the waters of the Punjab to the non-riparian states under the Reorganisation Act. The issue being of fundamental constitutional importance, the Chief Justice, S.S. Sandhawalia admitted the long pending petition and announced the constitution of a Full Bench, with himself as Chairman, for the hearing of the case on the following Monday, the 25th November, 1983. In the intervening two days before the hearing of the case could start, and these two days were holidays, two things happened. First, before Monday, the Chief Justice of the High Court was transferred to the High Court of Patna. Hence neither the Bench could sit, nor could the hearing of the case start. Second an oral application was given by the Attorney General in the Supreme Court requesting for the transfer of the writ petition from the file of the High Court to that of the Supreme Court on the ground that the issue involved was of great public importance. The request was granted; the case was transferred. And there this case of great public importance rests unheard for the last nearly twenty years."
According to the Earth Policy Institute, East Punjab’s water table is falling by one meter per year, which could lead to disastrous consequences for the state and its farmers in the long-term. This example demonstrates that the Indian constitution is used differently when deciding Sikh-Hindu conflicts and Hindu-Hindu conflicts.
In 1966, riots and mass demonstrations occurred in East Punjab, which was then followed by the Anandpur Sahib Resolution. This resolution was to raise specific political, economic and social issues of East Punjab. The major motivation behind the resolution was safeguarding of the Punjabi identity in a state structure that was decentralized with non-interference from the Indian government. The Indian state and the Indian media misrepresented the Anandpur Sahib Resolution as a “secessionist Sikh extremist document” in an attempt to malign the Punjabi nationalists. The Resolution outlines seven objectives:
1. The transfer of the federally administered city of Chandigarh to Punjab.
2. The transfer of Punjabi speaking and contiguous areas to Punjab.
3. Decentralization of states under the existing constitution, limiting the central government’s role.
4. The call for land reforms and industrialization of Punjab, along with safeguarding the rights of the weaker sections of the population.
5. The enactment of an all-India gurdwara (Sikh house of worship) act.
6. Protection for minorities residing outside Punjab, but within India.
7. Revision of government’s recruitment quota restricting the number of Sikhs in armed forces.
Along with these demands, the issue concerning the unconstitutional diversion of Punjab’s river waters to non-riparian states has been of fundamental importance. Writing about the nature of these demands the Wall Street Journal noted:
"The Akali Dal is in the hands of moderate and sensible leadership...but giving anyone a fair share of power is unthinkable politics of Mrs. Gandhi [the then Prime Minister of India]...Many Hindus in Punjab privately concede that there isn't much wrong with these demands. But every time the ball goes to the Congress court, it is kicked out one way or another because Mrs. Gandhi considers it a good electoral calculation."
PART 3: Saraswati River Myth
The Saraswati River is a mythical river which is mentioned in the Rig Veda – it is generally assumed that this river never actually existed. Despite the exact location of the river, or even an approximate one, not being provided in the Rig Veda, Hindutva nationalists continue to peddle myths that the Saraswati was a “tributary of the Indus”, and in some cases make ridiculous claims that the Saraswati was “bigger than the Indus”.
The controversy stems from geological remains of a river that was discovered in Haryana. Hindutva nationalists believe the abandoned water channels are that of the mythical Saraswati River. However, according to research carried out by scientists at London’s Imperial College, the abandoned channels are the older route taken by the Sutlej River.
Furthermore, if the Saraswati was supposed to be “bigger than the Indus” or a “tributary of the Indus”, what is the third river that was supposed to meet Ganges and Yamuna at Allahabad?
Despite numerous studies which prove that the Saraswati never existed, the state of Haryana is attempting to “recreate the Sarawati” by flooding the abandoned channels of the former Sutlej, which they still claim is the mythical Saraswati. Where will the water come from to recreate a mythical river? It will unfortunately come from East Punjab’s Beas and Sutlej Rivers and this will only put a heavier burden on East Punjab’s dwindling ground water supply.
PART 4: What All This Means For Pakistan
The Republic of India currently considers flooding the abandoned channels of the Sutlej (claimed Saraswati) as a major priority. However, an obstacle in this ridiculous endeavor is rising Punjabi nationalist sentiment. In order to flood the abandoned channels of the Sutlej, more of Punjab’s rivers (Beas and Sutlej) will have to be diverted, which will only agitate Punjabis further, since ground water levels in East Punjab are at its lowest since records began.
The Republic of India cannot build dams and divert East Punjab’s rivers under the pretext of “water scarcity in Rajasthan and Haryana” and certainly not under the pretext of flooding an abandoned water channel based off a Vedic myth. This would create outrage and only fuel Punjabi nationalism further.
However, those same dams and river diversions can occur under the pretext of “stopping water to Pakistan”. Since the Indus Water Treaty protects Pakistan, the potential use of “Pakistanophobia” to resolve the Republic of India’s domestic disputes has once again been sought.
The issue isn’t about Pakistan at all. Rather, this has more to do with the Republic of India’s domestic disputes and its clever way of using Pakistanophobia to get what it wants. This is why you commonly hear about "scrapping the Indus Water Treaty" from India's Prime Minister Narinder Modi.
Any opposition to the dams and diversions in East Punjab will now be viewed negatively, since the argument has been framed towards "punishing Pakistan" rather than recreating a mythical river and stealing more of East Punjab's water share.
What Pakistan needs to do is highlight this issue more aggressively - that any dams built on the Sutlej and Beas will cause problems for East Punjab, not for Pakistan at all and that this whole charade is being done under the pretext to flood an old river plain.
Final Assault documentary (Punjabi language)
Last edited:
