Pakistan And India-Water Disputes-News And Updates

[ajtr]

PIC Commissioners to meet

After threatening to move World Bank over Kishenganga project, Pakistan is set to rake up with India the issue of two more hydel power units being constructed in Jammu and Kashmir when Indus Water Commissioners of the two countries meet here on May 31.

“Pakistan has objections to construction of the Uri-II and Chutak hydel power projects and they will raise the issue during regular meeting of the Indus Water Commission,” a source told PTI today.

Pakistan alleges that these two projects violate the 1960 Indus Water Treaty that governs rights of the two countries on six common rivers.

India maintains that there is no violation of the treaty and is expected to demonstrate this at the upcoming meeting.

The 240 MW Uri-II hydel power project is being constructed on Jhelum river in Kashmir valley.

The 44 MW Chutak project is being constructed in Kargil district of Jammu and Kashmir’s Ladakh provice and would harness the hydropower potential of Suru river.

The barrage of the project is located near village Sarzhe and the power house is proposed on right bank of river Suru near village Chutak.

Pakistan claims that the construction of the Chutak project would block 35,000-feet per acre water.

According to Pakistan, India had given it certain time to respond to designs of these two projects but started construction work before the deadline for Pakistan’s response.

Annexure D, Part 3 of IWT states the following:

9. To enable Pakistan to satisfy itself that the design of a Plant conforms to the criteria mentioned in Paragraph 8, India shall, at least six months in advance of the beginning of construction of river works connected with the Plant, communicate to Pakistan, in writing, the information specified in Appendix II to this Annexure. If any such information is not available or is not pertinent to the design of the Plant or to conditions at the site, it will be so stated.
10. Within three months of the receipt by Pakistan of the information specified Paragraph 9, Pakistan shall communicate to India, in writing, any objection that it may have with regard to the proposed design on the ground that it does not conform to the criteria mentioned in Paragraph 8. If no objection is received by India from Pakistan within the specified period of three months, then Pakistan shall be deemed to have objection.

 

[ajtr]

Interview of Prof Robert G Wirsing with Dr Moeed Part 1 Professor Rober G Wirsing talks about Water Issues of South Asia esp India & Pakistan. " India can use Water to take advance of the kashmir

 

[ajtr]

Political Fuss Over The Indus

The Indus Water Treaty is a triumph and must be worked into the Indo-Pakistan peace process to ensure stability and insure against climate change.

By B G Verghese

The Tribune, 24, 25 May, 2005

Political Fuss Over Indus-I

The Indus Water Treaty must rank among the triumphs of the United Nations system since it was signed in 1960. However, with President Musharraf having taken a U-turn on the ideological (�unfinished business&#65533 aspect of the J&K question, does he want to demonstrate relentless pursuit of the �core� issue by charging India with threatening Pakistan�s lifeline by violating the Treaty and developing strategic capability to hurt it by drying up the Chenab and Jhelum or flooding them!

India�s rights on the three Western Rivers are clearly set out in the Treaty. All existing uses in J&K were protected. Over and beyond that, India was permitted to develop 1.34 m acres of additional irrigation in J&K, against which only 642,477 acres has been achieved. Further, India is allowed 3.60 MAF of storage, categorized sector-wise under the headings of general conservation, power and flood storage and by main and tributary rivers. India is well below the permissible limits in every sector and category of usage and has built practically no �storage� as opposed to run-of-the-river �pondage�.

The Treaty binds India to inform or consult Pakistan on planned withdrawals and works on the Western rivers and to ensure no harm or derogation of its water rights. There have been 27 occasions when such information has been passed or consultations organised and the record shows that Pakistan has raised objections in virtually every case, even with regard to micro-hydro plants. Though dressed up as design or engineering queries, the objective has been political and the motivation to delay if not deny progress that primarily benefits J&K.

India is entitled to almost the entire waters of the Sutlej, Beas and Ravi. Yet it releases over 3 MAF (mostly flood waters) down the Sutlej and Ravi to Pakistan on account of the Sutlej-Yamuna Link dispute and the fact that the Indira Gandhi (Rajasthan) Canal is yet to be completed.

Baglihar is a run-of-the-river peaking project on the Chenab, 110 km from the Pakistan border. It has an installed capacity of 450 MW and a gross storage of 396 million cubic metres of water of which the live pondage will be no more than 37.5 m cu m (or 46,570 acre-feet) which is to be returned to the river in strict accordance with Treaty stipulations. The balance is dead storage for trapping silt. Construction is well advanced and the first power unit should start generating by 2007. With the addition of more turbines and minimal additional works, Baglihar-II will subsequently generate another 450 MW during three or four monsoon months.

Pakistan was informed in 1992 that India planned to go ahead with Baglihar and work commenced in 2000. Objections were really pressed only recently and actually specified in January 2005. The six objections then listed variously related to pondage, gated spillways, under sluices and the level of the intake channel. But the punch line has been that the dam can store/release a sufficient quantum of water to dry up or flood the river in Pakistan for several days.

These fears are fanciful. The fallacy lies in adding dead storage to live pondage and assuming mala fide intent that would primarily, and first, adversely affect the Indian villages along the Chenab valley and the Salal Dam lower down. Indeed, any �flood waters� would dissipate before they reached the border. The argument that every dam can be used as a strategic weapon is perverse reasoning.

Pakistan insisted on resort to a Neutral Expert unless India agreed to suspend construction. However, the Treaty does not provide for a work-stoppage and India accordingly declined to do so, especially in view of the fact that it agreed to a temporary halt to construction of the Tulbul Project, which has since languished unresolved for 17 years.

The Jhelum was traditionally used for navigation and floating timber but the river has silted. The Tulbul Project was accordingly designed to retard the Jhelum flood within the banks of the Wulur Lake through which the river passes. Instead of emptying rapidly with the recession of the floods, a control structure at the Lake�s exit would retard depletion of a natural pondage of some 300,000 acre feet of water through October to May. This would reduce silt flows downstream to the benefit of both the Uri and Mangla projects in India and Pakistan and augment their power output. However, Pakistan argues that Tulbul would be a �storage dam� and is therefore barred by the Treaty.

Turn to Kishenganga/ Neelum, a tributary of the Jhelum. Rising near Gurez, the river flows through J&K and then crosses the LOC to enter *** as the Neelum before falling into the Jhelum near Muzaffarabad. The Indian Project envisages a 75 m high concrete dam at Gurez at about 8000 feet to store 140,000 MAF of water and divert some flows southwards through a 23 km tunnel into the Madmati Nala, which empties into the Wulur Lake through which the Jhelum flows. Given a head of about 600 m, an installed capacity of 330 MW is planned. The sizeable displacement and environmental impacts, however, raise sensitive issues that will have to be internally addressed.

India communicated its intention of going ahead with the Kishenganga project in June 1992 and Pakistan responded soon after, listing three objections. The first is that inter-tributary diversions are barred and that water drawn from a given tributary must be returned to that same river. The second is that existing Pakistani uses must be protected and India�s Kishenganga Project will deprive it of 27 per cent of the river�s natural flows, thereby doing injury to its existing 133,000 ha of irrigation in the Neelum Valley and a 900 MW Neelum-Jhelum hydro station on which construction is in progress at Nowshera. The third objection relates to certain design features.

The Indian response is that the Treaty unambiguously provides that �Where a plant is located on a tributary of the Jhelum on which Pakistan has an agricultural use or hydro-electric use, the water released below the plant may be delivered, if necessary, into another Tributary but only to the extent that the then existing agricultural use or hydro-electric use by Pakistan on the former Tributary would not be adversely affected�. This suggests that inter-tributary diversions in the Jhelum basin are permitted and that only �the then existing� agricultural and hydro-electric uses shall be protected.

Pakistan has to substantiate and not merely assert 133,000 ha of irrigation in the Neelum Valley. And how far has construction of the Nowshera hydro-electric plant proceeded and what are its specifications? Planned utilization would imply a future rather than an existing use. Would the same argument apply to a planned diversion by India on which work has recently commenced? In any event, the Neelum catchment below the Kishenganga dam river receives several influents that make the discharge at Nowshera many times larger than the mean flows at Gurez. The Indus Commissioners have decided on further meetings and site inspections. This will hopefully clarify issues.

Peace Promise of Indus-II

It has throughout been India�s position that it has scrupulously abided by the Indus Treaty and should any genuine problem be pointed out by Pakistan, it would be prepared to make suitable modifications. Yet India will need to build storages to utilise the irrigation potential permitted under the Treaty. J&K also has considerable hydro potential that should be exploited for the benefit of the State and the country as a whole. These will stimulate development and employment in J&K and help open up remote areas by providing connectivity.

The Indus Commission may undertake at the request of either Commissioner a tour of inspection of such works or sites as may be considered necessary for ascertaining relevant facts. This provision might appropriately be invoked as developments taking place or planned in the Northern Areas (NA) and *** require better understanding.

Bitter inter-provincial discords have come in the way of Pakistan building further Indus storages. The Kalabagh dam (gross storage of 7.9 MAF) has been stalled for years by NWFP and Sind. A run-of-the-river Ghazi Barotha hydro project came on stream in June 2004, but the Bhasha-Daimer storage dam on the Chitral-NA border has run into opposition at the feasibility stage.

The Mangla dam on the Jhelum had a gross storage of 4.5 MAF but heavy siltation has reduced its capacity. Pakistan accordingly contracted a Chinese firm in June 2004 to raise the height of the dam by 30 feet to store an additional 2.88 MAF of water. This will also yield 12 per cent more energy. The project will displace 44,000 persons and is due to be completed by September 2007.

Failure to pay adequate compensation and provide alternative connectivity for villagers displaced and divided by the Mangla lake in the 1960s led to a mass exodus of marginalized Mirpuris to the UK. Divided families on the Indian side must now hope that the resettlement and compensation package this time around does not lead to a further exodus.

What has triggered far greater anxiety is the investigation by Pakistan�s WAPDA of a giant dam on the Indus at Katzara, downstream of Skardu. According to the Jang newspaper and its English stable-mate, The News, the 35 MAF Skardu Dam is likely to submerge the entire Skardu bowl and Shigar Valley leading up to K2, displacing a population of around 300,000. Fatehullah Khan, former Chairman of the Indus River System Authority (IRSA), and the chair of WAPDA�s Technical Committee on Water Resources, reportedly believe that the Skardu project could be more than a substitute for the Kalabagh and Bhasha dams and an answer to Pakistan�s long term water requirements.

However, this will all but drown and obliterate the finest in Balti culture and heritage and displace possibly half the Balti population in the NA. This cannot be good news for the Indian Baltis in Kargil district. The Balwaristan nationalists are up in arms as are Pakistani conservationists and sections of the security community who fear the dam would submerge strategic roads, airfields and military supply lines in the region.

The Skardu Dam may never move beyond the drawing board. But India should want to know more about it � and other ***/NA projects - and could seek the necessary information and site visits if possible to ascertain the facts and assess the situation. Where would these 300,000 Baltis go? Such questions need to be asked and answered, whether through the Indus Treaty mechanism or otherwise. There has already been much demographic change in the politically closed Northern Areas to the detriment of the local Shia, Ismaili and Sufi communities.

There is another and more rational way for Pakistan to seek water security. It finds mention in the Indus Treaty itself. Article VII on Future Cooperation points to a �common interest in the optimum development of the Rivers� and calls upon both sides �to cooperate, by mutual consent, to the fullest possible extent �.in undertaking engineering works in the Rivers�. The 1960 Treaty has served its purpose but leaves behind a possibly large untapped potential in the upper catchments of the three Western Rivers that are allocated to Pakistan but are under Indian control.

This potential needs to be thoroughly surveyed and could thereafter be harnessed through joint investment, construction, management and control. Pakistan cannot continue to deny India its limited entitlement in the Western rivers and also freeze all further development if it wants to grasp what could be a far larger prize by way of additional storage, flood moderation and hydro-power which both could share. India too could benefit from cooperative drainage arrangements in the middle and lower Indus basins. Were this to happen, Pakistan would not have even to think of grotesque schemes such as the Skardu dam that spells doom to a proud civilization.

Article XII of the Treaty provides that its provisions �may from time to time be modified by a duly ratified Treaty concluded for that purpose between the two Governments�. Thus an Indus-II could be constructed on the foundations of Indus-I.

Equally pertinent is the fact that, with climate change, glaciers are in retreat both in the Karakoram, one of the most glaciated regions in the world that has the largest glaciers outside Antarctica, as well as on the Tibetan Plateau, which is where the Indus and Sutlej rise. The Plateau is underlain by �tjale� or permafrost that shows signs of thawing. This suggests that enhanced glacier melt and thawing permafrost could increase flows in the Indus basin for some decades before declining sharply over the ensuing decades as the body of ice shrinks. This may be accompanied by shifts in rainfall patterns with a possibility of episodic bursts of precipitation in some areas. The uncertainty underlines the need for maximizing conservation storage within the limits of prudence and sustainability. Climate change will not respect boundaries and both Pakistan and Northwest India, as wards of the Indus, therefore have a common interest in concerting action for the common good.

Indus-II needs to be fed into the current peace process as a means both of defusing current political strains over Indus-I and insuring against climate change? It could reinforce the basis for a lasting solution to the J&K question by helping transform relationships across the LOC and reinventing it as a bridge rather than merely as a boundary-in-the-making.

---------- Post added at 04:33 AM ---------- Previous post was at 04:32 AM ----------

Water Scenario: Past, Present and Future of Pakistan

Of all the major problems, water crisis is the one that lies at the heart of our survival and that of our planet. Experts project that the global water crisis will reach unprecedented levels in the years ahead in many parts of the developing world. The years ahead predict the threat of looming water

wars between countries. According to figures published by the United Nations & other international organizations, 1.1bn people are without a sufficient access to water, and 2.4bn people have to live without adequate sanitation. Under current trends, the prognosis is that about 3bn people of a population of 8.5bn will suffer from water shortage by 2025. 83% of them will live in developing countries, mostly in rural areas where even today sometimes only 20% of the populations have access to a sufficient water supply. Fresh drinking water is not only a need of human beings, but equally important for the animals and agriculture throughout the world. This acute water shortage will be responsible in spreading diseases as contaminated water is the sole cause of nearly 80% infectious diseases. Hence the world has to take serious and concrete measures in order to avoid the water crisis in the years to come.


Situation of Water in Paksitan:

Water plays an immensely important role in the economy of Pakistan which primarily depends on Agriculture accounting for 24 per cent of the national GDP, 48 per cent employment and 70 per cent of country's exports. Per capita availability of surface water in Pakistan is gradually dwindling from 5300 cubic meter in 1951 to 1000 cubic meters in 2005 and is projected to hit less than 1000 cubic meters making Pakistan a water short country as per the world standards. Pakistan has a total of 77 million acres of land suitable for agriculture out of which 54 million acres (71per cent) is already cultivated. The remaining 23 million acres (29 per cent) can become productive if water is made available for irrigation. Irrigation in Pakistan mainly depends upon Indus river which has an average annual flow of 138 to 145 MAF (Million Acre Feet). Some experts calculate this quantity as low as 123.5 MAF. Average water flow downstream Kotri since 1977 has been 35 MAF while Sindh's estimates indicate that roughly 10 MAF is required to flow to the sea. The Indus water quantity, after deducting 10 MAF required to flow downstream Kotri and 5 MAF for headwater uses comes to about 20 MAF which the Federal Government and some experts feel can be stored during floods and used during the lean period. The construction of reservoirs, is thus a badly needed and viable proposition especially in view of the fact that the existing major reservoirs (Chashma, Mangla and Tarbela) are silting up and have already lost 25 per cent of their total capacity.

Indus Water Treaty 1960:

After Independence, problems between the two countries arose over the distribution of water. Rivers flow into Pakistan territory from India. On April 1, 1948, India stopped the supply of water to Pakistan from every canal flowing from India to Pakistan. Pakistan protested and India finally agreed on an interim agreement on May 4, 1948. This agreement was not a permanent solution; therefore, Pakistan approached the World Bank in 1952 to help settle the problem permanently. It was finally in Ayub Khan's regime that an agreement was signed between India and Pakistan in September 1960. This agreement is known as the �Indus Water Treaty�. This treaty divided the use of rivers and canals between the two countries. Pakistan obtained exclusive rights for the three western rivers, namely Indus, Jehlum and Chenab. And India retained rights to the three eastern rivers, namely Ravi, Beas and Sutluj. The treaty also guaranteed ten years of uninterrupted water supply. During this period Pakistan was to build huge dams, financed partly by long-term World Bank loans and compensation money from India. Three multipurpose dams, Warsak, Mangla and Tarbela were built. A system of eight link canals was also built, and the remodeling of existing canals was carried out. Five barrages and a gated siphon were also constructed under this treaty. This treaty of 1960 was never beneficial to Pakistan as it clearly showed the Indian ascendancy. Even after this agreement, many water-related issues between the two countries have come to fore from time to time, especially with regard to the construction of some controversial dams by India such as Sallal Dam, Wullar Barrage, Baglihar Dam and now Kishanganga dam.

Indian Violations: Baglihar Hydroelectric Power Project and Kishanganga Dam

The Baglihar Hydroelectric Power Project on the Chenab River (Chenab was allocated to Pakistan according to the 1960 Treaty) in the southern Doda district of the Indian administered state of Jammu and Kashmir was conceived in 1992, approved in 1996 and its construction began in 1999 with an estimated cost of USD $1 billion. Instead of immediate questioning and pressurizing India to stop the construction of the controversial Baglihar dam Pakistani government reacted very late and clumsily. Pakistan started talks with India in 2002, in order to convince India to change the design of the dam but to no avail. The talks failed and Pakistan raised the issue of the illegal construction of baglihar with the World Bank in 2005. Pakistan raised 4 major concerns and reservations related to the construction of Baglihar dam, firstly its height, secondly its capacity of storing water, thirdly installing the gated control of spillway and fourthly that this project is in violation to the Indus Water Treaty of 1960. The World Bank nominated Professor Raymond Lafitte, a Swiss national, civil engineer and professor at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Lausanne, as a neutral expert to make a finding on a difference between the two governments concerning the construction of the Baglihar project. Mr. Lafitte declared his final verdict on February 12, 2007 in which he upheld some minor objections of Pakistan. The report acknowledged India's right to construct 'gated spillways' under Indus water treaty 1960.The report allowed pondage of 32.58 MCM as against India's demand for 38 MCM. The report also recommended to reduce the height of freeboard from 4.5 m to 3.0 m. However he rejected Pakistani objections on height and gated control of spillway declaring these were conforming to engineering norms of the day. Experts projected that this Baglihar Dam would decrease 8000 cusecs of water daily to Pakistan which in totality is about 29 lakh 20 thousands cusecs an year and will badly hit the agriculture sector of Punjab in particular.

The Kishanganga dam is located 160 km upstream from Muzaffarabad and involves the diversion of Kishanganga River (called the Neelum River in Pakistan) to a tributary named Bunar Madumati Nullah of Jhelum near Bunkot. Experts say that the Kishanganga project (to be build across the Jehlum river) could reduce Pakistan�s total water availability from an estimated 154 MAF to about 140 MAF per year. It would also leave significant portion of the Mangla Dam�s storage capacity unutilised. It is also feared that the diversion would result in an ecological disaster for the area. In water-related issues, Pakistan has always been on the losing end. By being engaged in negotiations with Pakistan, India secures sufficient time to continue the unnoticed construction of its controversial dams. For that reason India balks at the indulgence of third party in all water-related issues between both the countries and instead it insists on bilateral talks. India is constructing more than 50 dams on the Indus and Jehlum and 7 other dams other than Baglihar on the Chenab river. By constructing one after another controversial dams, India is causing trouble for Pakistan which is already confronting a severe water crisis.

Diamer-Bhasha dam: A step forward

The President of Pakistan during his national address on 17 January 2006 announced the decision of Government to construct 5 multi-purpose storages in the country during next 10 -12 years. Diamer Basha Dam Project will be undertaken in the first phase. Work on the project started after the ground-breaking ceremony by the President of Pakistan. The Executive Committee of the National Economic Council has approved the construction of Diamer-Bhasha dam. It is revealed that 4500 MW of electricity would be generated through the dam. The construction work will be completed in seven years with the cost of $12.6 billions, & will have the capacity to store 8.1 million acre feet water. The project is scheduled to be completed within the prescribed time frame in 2016.

Disharmony and reservations

It is lamentable that once Pakistan was among the top wheat producing countries of the world but today it has to import wheat to cater the needs of its people. Wheat crop needs plenty of water while in winter wheat crop is supplied water from dams. It is unfortunate, rather criminal negligence, that our successive governments have not been able to build any major dam after Mangla and Tarbela whose storage capacity is shrinking due to silt by each passing day. How ironic it is that our politicians are quick to solve the Kalabagh dam by putting off this project for indefinite period which is equivalent to abandoning the project. Our politicians are of the view that Kalabagh dam is detrimental to our federation. It is a bitter reality that by being lazy to find out a suitable substitute to Kalabagh Dam for many decades, we have reached a situation where not one or two but a series of dams can save our lands from turning into deserts. It is true that India is going ahead with controversial dams and is interfering with our waters, showing utter disregard to the provisions of the Indus Water Treaty. However, raising a great hue and cry over India�s unjust construction of dams can hardly persuade New Delhi to change its mind. Therefore, the need of the hour is to make the optimal use of our waters by making a number of dams on emergency basis. Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan once said that the scarcity of water will pose a greater threat than the nuclear capability of the enemy . Therefore drastic measures should be taken to conserve each and every drop of water available not only think of ourselves but also for our generations to come.

How to improve the situation?

Population of Pakistan today is around more than 160 million and it is expected to rise to 208 million by 2025. This growth in population will significantly increase the demand for food and fibre, with both land and water resources are declining day by day. Pakistan�s food import bill is rising on account of population and output is declining as a result of reduced water availability. However it is appreciable that the water sector had been given the highest priority in the budget allocation of 2007-08 with an allocation of Rs 70.91 billion, which was 24 percent higher than the preceding year budget allocation. Elected political leadership in Pakistan has been able to develop consensus on a number of extremely complex and altercated issues such as the 1973 Constitution and 1991 Water Accord. Therefore a serious and sincere effort by politicians can help resolving all water related disputes and remove the doubts & reservations put forward by provinces. Pakistan's political leadership needs to activate constitutional conflicts resolution mechanisms such as the Council of Common Interests (CCI). To overcome water shortage crisis, the solution lies in the proper water management at watershed, reservoirs, conveyance system i. e, at canals and distributaries level as well as watercourses and farm application levelling of open channels and use of pipes to transport water for reducing seepage losses. To prepare cemented water beds at the bottom of the base. Building of more dams in the country is also good solution to solve the problem of water shortage. Pakistanis need the will, dedication, strength and the unity in order to resolve the water crisis in Pakistan.

 

[ajtr]

Pakistan Flood Commissioner observed in a paper presentation in the 3rd International Conference on Water Resources and Arid Environments (2008) and the 1st Arab Water Forum

Of the 145 MAF of water that enters the Indus Basin annually 104 MAF is diverted for irrigation at the canal heads. It is estimated that about 35% of the water is lost in transit from canals to fields and 25% because of inefficient
irrigation techniques. With the continuing increase in population at the current
rate of 2.7 %, there is a need to optimize the water resources management:
irrigation efficiencies, optimization of consumptive uses, amending cropping
patterns compatible with agro-ecological zones, harnessing of hill ******** and
harvesting rain-fed areas. This is also essential to stop the per capita availability of water from falling below the minimum required threshold of 1000 cubic meter capita per annum which will lead to Pakistan falling into the category of water scarce countries. Hence availability of surface water is also an issue that poses a considerable threat to the resource base-the environment. The continued abstraction of groundwater particularly through over-pumping has led to the depletion of the water table in many areas. This problem has become more acute in recent years due to the continued and extended drought cycle being suffered by Pakistan.

SO Pakistan knows that they are wasting 60% due to inefficient utilisations. Then he laments that loss of water from eastern rivers aggravates the situation (since out of 29MAF only 8 MAF flows that too flood flows) . They need to energise their IBIS rather than asking India to stop using what is its due share.

Indus Basin water flows are seasonal and largely depends on glacial melts and monsoon. So efficient untilisation could only be the answer.
Flood Commissioner also says that water availability has suffered due to draughut like situation in Pakistan since 2001.Should he not blame weather god rather than India?

The water availability has not largely diminished in so far as water entering PK is concerned.As per data given by IN for Avg Annual Flow

Eastern Rivers 33MAF
Western Rivers 145MAF
Total 168MAF

At the time of partition eastern punjab irrigation sys was not so developed and almost all waters flowed to pakistan. That eastern waters could be used only after construction of B-N dams resulting in harit kranti.
India is entitled to use waters ( ICA in acres) but restricted till until India can
release water from the conservation storage as defined in Annexure E
Name of the river entitled Restricted
The Indus 70,000 70,000
The Jhelum 4,00,000 1,50,000
The Chenab 2,31,000 50,000
TOTAL 7,01,000 2,70,000



Also storage and power storage capacity that India can do is restricted (in MAF)
Storage Power storage Flood Storage

Indus 0.25 0.15 Nil
Jhelum 0.25 0.50 0.75
Jhelum Main nil nil As in Para 9 Ann E
chenab 0.50 0.60 nil
chenab main nil 0.60 nil

power storage capacity can be increased on chenab provided equal reduction is offered on jhelum and chenab main.
As one can see actual utilisation by India is much less than entitlement of waters on western rivers. Pakistan is still getting about 135-145 MAF out of western rivers.Seasonal variations on Indus system due to factors mentioned earlier is between 120MAF to 30MAF ( Pakistan Flood Commissioner). Pakistan has not permitted India to build storage capacity to regulate flow of water on western rivers esp. Indus. This could have helped Pakistan in ensuring adequate flow during lean season.But they have their own fears.


Now as of 1947 eastern parts of punjab could not use waters of indus river system due to underdeveloped canal system.And due to partition major headworks which fed water to IBIS in western punjab fell in India i.e. Madhopur on Ravi river and the other at Ferozepur on Sutlej river. After expiry of Standstill agreement India stopped release of water from these two headworks in 1948 and pk could do nothing. Thereafter IWT was entered into after protracted neogiation till 1960. India paid pound sterling 62060000 for replacement works of waters of eastern rivers. After transition period pk has no claim on eastern rivers.

See the IBIS in pakistan as per flood commissioner

According to initial estimates of available supplies both by India and Pakistan as submitted during treaty negotiations is 119MAF/118 MAF at the time of negotiations. The present available supplies that enters Pakistan below RIM in indus system is about 145 MAF. So clearly there is no reduction but general increase in availability of waters in Indus system flowing to Pakistan.This is accentuated by Pakistan by raising protracted objections on all projects. In fact it had raised objections on B-N dams also to which it has no rights as per IWT.

Of course , things have changed in recent years and India has developed or is in the process of developing several dams and it has financial muscle ( also armed forces muscle) to do this. Whereas Pakistan still does not have enough strength to utilise its share of water properly or efficiently. So it shows India as guilty party doing injustice to Pakistan. Let us not forget that being upper riparian state India could have laid claims to most of the waters of western rivers since canal works were not developed for eastern parts even though there was enough potential. In 1948 Pakistan was not in a position to enforce its WILL ( nor it has now) but India choose to be a benevolent big brother to keep ever elusive peace. Now also Pakistan is counterpoising water for terror solution. This is nothing but sheer blackmail and would not work. This also goes to show that IWT has given Pakistan more than enough and if Pakistan has to live with dignity it has to abide by IWT.

Now it would be clear that supplies available in western rivers is more than three time of that of eastern rivers and India is not able to draw enough waters for agriculture use from western rivers even today.Water availability for Pakistan has not decreased beyond seasonal variations (accounted for). The reduction is due to 60% water being wasted and due to proliferating populations. These factors are well known to them yet blame has to be laid at the door of India so that public do not realise follies of their rulers.

Pakistan can negotiate IWT at their own peril that is why they are using terms like energise or spirit, which means India should give alms to them. They are essentially begging for waters.However India should offer to build more storage capacity on western Indus system to manage flood waters.

 

[ajtr]

Liquid jihad: Water lies to boost dampened spirits

NEW DELHI: It is clearly terror on the minds of Pakistan-based jihadi leaders Hafiz Saeed and Syed Salahuddin each time they try to whip up

passions back home against India for “diverting the waters of Pakistani rivers.”

According to sources in the security establishment, the emotive issue of water-sharing may be exploited in the coming days to encourage more Pakistanis to infiltrate into Kashmir and join jihadi terror against India. It is against this light that the threat perception in 2010 is rated very high.

The assessment here is that with the water issue certain to touch a chord with every Pakistani, the terror outfits across the border are now using it as a potential motivation to draft more and more Pakistanis into jihad. The hidden subversive agenda is obvious, considering that Islamabad has never lodged any complaint at the official forum over being denied its share of waters.

As per the 200 joint inspections held since Independence, to which Islamabad is a signatory signed, Pakistan gets more than the share it is entitled to.

Agencies feel that as the water hysteria by Pakistan gains ground, any scarcity of the natural source this year — even due to unavoidable factors such as fluctuating patterns of snow-melting or rainfall — could be readily blamed on India’s “water terrorism.” This will then be exploited by terror outfits to radicalise Pakistani youth and influence them into joining jihad against India to avenge the “diversion of their rivers.”

Already, the government has intelligence inputs of terror outfits drumming up the Indus water sharing irritant — both Saeed and Hizbul chief Syed Salahuddin, in separate speeches recently, slammed India’s “water terrorism,” and even threatened war if this continued — to encourage more people to infiltrate into Kashmir. Some of these elements have already crossed over to Kashmir, and a few cadres have even moved out to other parts of India. They are under instructions from their Pakistani bosses to lie low until they are tasked with carrying out an attack.

The threat of stepped up attacks in 2010 is compounded by the knowledge that US terror suspect David Coleman Headley had carried out extensive reconnaissance of targets across India for “possible terror attacks in 2010 or 2011.” One of them was Pune, which saw a bomb blast on February 13 at the very spot that Headley had videographed for his LeT bosses.

Besides, the interrogation of the recently-arrested Indian Mujhaideen cadres including Ahmad Khwaja, Shahzad and Salman, has revealed the ISI-LeT’s plans to use local IM terrorists to launch attacks in Delhi, Bangalore and Mumbai. While the government has recently arrested many fugitive IM leaders and cadres from Bangladesh, Nepal, Sri Lanka and a west Asian nation, the security agencies fear that some modules may already be lying dormant across Indian cities, waiting to be activated for a future terror attack.

Even in Kerala, from where terror suspect T Nazir said several terror modules were recruited, fundamentalist political outfits such as PDP are said to be closely working with ISI and Lashkar-e-Toiba. Though leader Abdul Nasser Madani is not active, his aides are ensuring that new jihadis are recruited and logistics arranged for ISI-sponsored terror aimed against India.

---------- Post added at 04:51 AM ---------- Previous post was at 04:51 AM ----------

Its really hilarious..before it was india building 100 dams on chenab to steal water.now india is funding pakistani NGOs to stop hydel power works in pakistan.

'India funding NGOs to oppose hydel power plans'

LAHORE - Pakistan Muttahida Kisan Mahaz (PMKM) Chief Ayub Khan Mayo has alleged that India has distributed a sum of Rs 10 billion among those NGOs which are serving its agenda to oppose construction of hydel power projects in Pakistan.
Addressing a seminar regarding water issue at a local hotel here Sunday, Mayo said that India was funding some anti-State elements to put a halt to construction of reservoirs and other projects essential to the progress of Pakistan, as it considered it the best way to establish a network of its agents in Pakistan.
He stated that our politicians and rulers were also involved in this conspiracy of hindering work on dams on Indus and Jehlum rivers, which played vital part in agri and industrial production of the country.
He said that our traditional arch-rival wanted to boost its agri and industrial capacity by means of water aggression. “India wants to capture Pakistani market and destroy its economy,” Mayo maintained.
The US, Israel, European countries and IMF had been backing India for the purpose of dams’ construction on Pakistani water share, the PMKM Chief alleged, adding that they had given US$ 212 billion to India for this purpose. He said that a number of hydel projects of about 40241-megawatt, approved by the CDWP and ECNEC, had been delayed for nothing by the government. He further said that power shortfall had been declining further. While giving details of power projects and their capacity to produce electricity, he informed that Phandal Hydel Project had the capacity to produce 80MW electricity, Bhasho 28MW, Kohala Hydel 1100MW, Kalgh Hydel 548MW, Bhasha Hydel Project 2250MW, Nuclear Power Plant 1000MW, Buni Hydel Project 2333MW, Dasu Project 4320MW, Lower Spat Gah Hydel 496MW, Palas Valley Project 665MW, Akhori 600MW, Pattan Hydel 2800MW, Thakot Hydel 2800MW, Dudhnial 960MW, Yalbo Hydel Project 2800MW, Tungas 2200MW, Skardu 1600MW, Yugo 520MW, Keyal Khwar 122MW, Harpo 33MW, Lawi Hydel Power Project 70MW besides a number of nuclear power plants.
He held the rulers responsible for decrease in GDP of agriculture and said it had fallen to 20 per cent from 26 per cent only in the previous 15 years.
Ayub Mayo said that the government had raised power tariff 19 times only in two years. “This has caused a huge loss to the industry and agriculture sector of the country besides causing nuisance for the masses,” he maintained.
Dozens of people belonging to different walks of life including growers, engineers, students, lawyers and others attended the seminar. They pledged that they would participate in all the rallies and seminars for the sake their country and protection of its interests.

---------- Post added at 04:52 AM ---------- Previous post was at 04:51 AM ----------

Danger level

Tuesday, March 16, 2010
The water problem is becoming acute, and impacting across every part of the country. It is a problem made up of many facets: the management of water resources transnationally and specifically the Indus river system, inadequate storage and a failure to create new storage for a decade, poor maintenance and leakage and now a failure of seasonal rains to replenish stocks. It is this last that has contributed to the emergency we face today as the water levels in two of the principal dams hit 'dead' level. It is unusual for both of these dams to reach dead level simultaneously, and it underscores the fragility of our water infrastructure. Comparison with levels of a year ago tells us how different things are today. On March 13, 2009, the water level at Tarbela Dam was 1,385 feet against March 14's dead level of 1,378 feet – those seven feet being the difference between having a dam that is working for us and a dam that is not. Then, water storage at the dam was recorded at 0.37 million acre-feet, whereas on March 14 it was zero. Mangla Dam on the Jhelum River has been at dead level for over a week. Hydel power generation is reduced to a trickle, loadshedding is again widespread and prolonged, and irrigation of crops threatened with the prospect of food shortages later in the year very much a reality.

The coincidence of both dams reaching dead level together is unexpected. Typically, Tarbela is at dead level at the end of April, and Mangla in mid-March. But this year Mangla went to dead level at the beginning of March and when coupled with the current drought-like conditions this became the trigger for the perilous situation we now face. The failure of the winter rains and lower-than-expected snowfall in the Karakorams and Himalayas over the last winter mean that things are likely to get worse rather than better. The meteorologists have no good news for us either as they predict steadily rising temperatures and no sign of rain. Pressure on the power supply will increase as fans and air-conditioners are turned on and farmers will want to run their tube-well pumps. There is no 'slack' in the system – a built-in contingency reserve that can be deployed at times like this – apart from a tiny reserve stored at the Chashma Barrage. Water and its current and future management is key to our very existence, and a lack of it presents a far greater existential threat to the state than every terrorist group within our borders. Now is not the time for inter-provincial rivalries to play out across the water issue, and the choice, quite literally, may be to sink or swim.

 

[ajtr]

India is one country stealing water from each & every of its neighbor, this report about China is of 2009 where as India has been playing with Water Theft for a very long time

The Indus Water Treaty- Its Dynamics and Reverberations

By Dr. S. Chandrasekharan

As late as February 13 this year, many members of Pakistan National Assembly expressed great concern over the alleged violation of the Indus Water treaty by India in building dams across rivers meant for Pakistan and warned of a possible war between the two countries over this issue.

These threats of war are nothing new to India. Even before the treaty of 1960, late Suhrawardy as Prime Minister of Pakistan threatened that Pakistan will go to war on the sharing of waters of the Indus. These threats have been repeated periodically and so regularly by people at the political, military, bureaucratic and technical levels that these threats have lost their meaning now. At one point, one of the influential editors of the Urdu press Majeed Nizami of Pakistan went one step further and threatened that Pakistan will have to go for a nuclear war over the river waters issue.

It should be conceded that the Indus Water Treaty has survived despite wars, near wars, acts of terrorism and other conflicts that have bedevilled the relations between India and Pakistan. This has been, as much acknowledged by many of the saner voices from Pakistan too.

In April 2008, Pakistan�s Indus Water Commissioner, Jamaat Ali Shah in a frank interview conceded that the water projects undertaken by India do not contravene the provisions of the Indus water treaty of 1960. He said that �in compliance with IWT, India has not so far constructed any storage dam on the Indus, the Chenab and the Jhelum rivers ( rivers allotted to Pakistan for full use). The Hydro electric projects India is developing are the run of the river waters, projects which India is permitted to pursue according to the treaty.�

Yet many in Pakistan at very senior levels have been whipping up frenzy among the people of Pakistan that �India is stealing the waters of Pakistan�.

Since 2004-2005 when the opposition to Bagilhar Project came out into the open, there has been a continuous attempt on the part of Pakistan to push India to renegotiate the Indus Water treaty.

This would mean going back to sharing of waters during the lean season and other extraneous factors and also to ignore the enormous changes that have taken place on both sides of the border in the last fifty years. This would also mean rewarding Pakistan for its failure to manage its scarce and life giving waters to optimum use.

Unfortunately, some Indian scholars without understanding the past history of negotiations with Pakistan have supported the idea. One of the senior analysts of India is said to have opined that �in negotiating an Indus Water Treaty 2, would be a huge Confidence Building Measure as it would engage both countries in a regional economic integration process.� A pious hope but an unrealistic one.

The Indus Water Treaty is unique in one respect. Unlike many of the international agreements which are based on the equitable distribution of waters of the rivers along with other conditions, the Indus Water Treaty is based on the distribution of the rivers and not the waters.

This unique division of rivers rather than the waters has eliminated the very hassles and conflict that would have followed had equitable distribution of water been based on current usage, historical use, past and potential use etc. People who advocate a revision of the treaty including some influential ones in India should realise the trap that India will be getting into.

Briefly, the Indus Water treaty, having discarded the joint development plan for developing the Indus Basin as suggested by some international bodies, allotted the three western rivers of the Indus basin- the Indus, the Chenab and the Jhelum to Pakistan and the three eastern rivers Sutlej, Beas and Ravi to India. The Treaty in its Annexures acknowledged certain rights and privileges for agricultural use of Pakistan drawing water from eastern rivers and similarly India drawing water for similar reasons from the three western rivers.

The treaty permitted India to draw water from the western rivers for irrigation up to 642,000 acres that is in addition to another entitlement to irrigate 701,000 acres. India has so far not made full use of its rights to draw this quantity of water from the western rivers. These allocations were made based on the water flows and usage as existed on April 1960.

While India is not permitted to build dams for water storage purposes (for consumptive uses) on the western rivers passing through India, it is allowed to make limited use of waters including run of the river hydroelectric power projects. The Bagilhar project, the Kishenganga project as well as Tulbull (Wular) that come in this category are all being opposed by Pakistan on the narrow definition as to what it means by storage.

Pakistan disputed the Indian contention that Bagilhar project was a run of the river project and that the storage called pondage was necessary to meet the fluctuations in the discharge of the turbines and claimed that the water will ultimately go to Pakistan. Since talks over a long period remained unsuccessful, the World Bank intervened though it made it clear that it was not a guarantor of the treaty.

A neutral expert was appointed by the World Bank. The neutral expert Professor Lafitte of Switzerland while delivering the verdict, rejected most of Pakistan�s objections but did call for minor design changes including the reduction of the dam�s height by 1.5 metres. The expert did not object to the right of India to construct dams for storage purposes purely for technical reasons for the efficiency of the turbines and did not even call the project as a dispute between the two countries but as �differences.�

The Tulbul project similarly envisages a barrage to be built at the mouth of Wular lake to increase the flow of water in the Jhelum during the dry season to make it navigable. The other disputed project, is the dam across Kishenganga River to Wular lake for generation of hydro electric power. The contention of India has been that in both cases the waters will ultimately go to Pakistan.

In the case of Kishenganga Project, Pakistan also has objected to the storage of water on the Neelum river on the principle of �prior appropriation� though the project on the Pakistan side the Neelum- Jhelum power plant downstream had not then started.

In all the projects objected to, Pakistan has brought in a new dimension to the dispute on security and strategic considerations which are strictly outside the ambit of the Indus treaty. The reasoning goes thus- by regulating the waters of the Chenab and the Jhelum, India has the capability in times of war to regulate the flow of waters to its strategic advantage.

There is no doubt that Pakistan will be facing increasing water shortages in the days to come leading to prolonged drought in many of its regions. The reasons are many but some of these are Pakistan�s own doing. The availability of water even now has reached critical proportions.

Global warming over a period of time has depleted the flow of water in the Indus (the major supplier) which depends mostly on glacial runoffs.

As in other Himalayan regions like the Kosi in Nepal, the rivers carry very heavy sediments that result in silting the dams and barrages thus reducing the availability of water for cultivation. Proper and periodic maintenance have ben lacking.

The canals that feed the irrigated lands are not lined resulting in seepage and loss of water.

There is mismanagement in use of water by using antiquated techniques and heavy cropping of water intensive varieties of farm products. Optimum crop rotations have not been done extensively as it should have been done to save water.

No serious effort has been made to improve the storage for intensive seasons like Kharif.

Dwindling water flow has also been affecting power generation.

The discharge of fresh water into the Arabian sea has dwindled considerably ( less than 10 MAF) which has resulted in the sea water pushing further into the estuaries and beyond, making water in those areas unfit for cultivation.

Just as in India, there are many water disputes among the four provinces in Pakistan, but there, it is one- Punjab against the other three and Punjab happens to be the upper riparian.

There is a larger political dimension to the whole problem of the river water distribution between Pakistan and India. To Pakistan the Kashmir issue is irrevocably linked to the Indus water treaty as the headwaters of all the rivers of Pakistan and meant for Pakistan flow through Kashmir and India happens to be the upper riparian state. The fear exists that India could manipulate the waters to starve Pakistan.

From the Indian point of view, Pakistan need not fear if the Indus Water treaty is implemented both in letter and spirit. What is needed is a constructive approach from Pakistan and India should also respond constructively on a crisis that is reaching a very critical stage in Pakistan. Some analysts feel that the �waters issue� may take precedence over Kashmir.

If one were to interpret the spirit of the Indus Water treaty and not the letter, there has to be some give and take from both sides. It needs a conducive environment and mutual trust that are scarce commodities in the relations between India and Pakistan.

 

[ajtr]

Indus Water Treaty: Politicisation will only harm Pakistan

In the run up to the Foreign Secretary level talks in end February, many Pakistan news analysts went ballistic over the river waters issue relating the Indus Water Treaty of 1960.

The Pakistani Times of 27th February alleged that India is stealing twenty percent of water from Pakistani Rivers and that Chenab is the worst victim. It also said that India is building a hydro electric project on River Kabul using Pakistani waters!

Sajjad Shaukat of Pakistani Observer of 27th February accused India of practising "water terrorism" against Pakistan.

Amidst all this hysteria, the News International of Pakistan did point out that the political and military leadership as well as the conservative sections of the media raised enough hue and cry in trying to project water as the real bone of contention. It continued, that if indeed this trend continues, it will be no surprise that in due course Pakistan may push Kashmir into the background and project India�s water terrorism to counter India�s charges against Pakistan for supporting terrorism across the border as the primary issue.

The Special report of the News International had brought some sanity into the issue and had many valid points that have been lost in the rhetoric and irrational hysteria that have accompanied in analysing the Indus Water Treaty. The points made were

1. The Indus Water Treaty has worked both for Pakistan and India and has survived three wars and many incidents of terrorist violence and the hearty news was that the water commissioners of both countries of IWT met within six months of the most recent Mumbai attack.

2. As the agricultural and energy needs as well as population are on the rise and with water becoming scarce because of inefficient use, waste and climate change, a distinction was then drawn between the letter and spirit of the agreement

3. Whenever India started building a run of the river dam on one of the rivers meant for Pakistan and allowed under the treaty, Pakistan policy makers got "jittery"and feared that Indian control of Pakistan�s water would harm its economy.

4. Instead of building on the strength of the IWT and ensure net gains both sides have picked up water as a "dividing tool."

The points made are very valid. Instead of politicising the issue, there is a need to build up rather than seek a fresh agreement. Given the traditional and historic rivalries, the geographical position, greater dependence on irrigated agriculture, failure to make optimum use of a resource that is bound to progressively reduce and above all given the fact that despite wars India has stood by the Indus Water Treaty, there is an need for Pakistan to go for the spirit rather than the letter of the treaty. The more one politicises the issue in Pakistan the chances are that Pakistan will lose more in the bargain.

Some of the articles that followed in the News International show the concerns of Pakistan and right or wrong the concerns appear to be genuine I give below some of the concerns and my response.

1. Pakistan has never convincingly argued that not withstanding bilateral commitment under IWT, India has an obligation to preserve water in its catchment areas for the benefit of lower riparian usage under international laws.

The IWT follows the basic principle of equitable distribution of water between two users and it will be a different ball game if the IWT is to be ignored and other international agreements are to be followed. As said before, the IWT is a unique document that has stood the test of time. There is no doubt that there is a responsibility of the upper riparian to ensure the free flow of water from the catchment areas which means that the upper riparian is responsible for ensuring that there is no man made degradation of the catchment area. But if one were to improve and develop the catchment area for the benefit of the lower riparian, the costs will have to be borne by the lower riparian- here Pakistan.

2. So far Pakistan has put only the IWT on the table but it is necessary to put along the same table a stack of material. Legal references, conventions that place additional obligations of India so that the lower riparian is entitled to proper share of water.

It is true that proper study of the river water issues has not been made in Pakistan. It is good that other international agreements are studied in depth rather than complaining that "India is stealing the water." Only then will Pakistan understand the benefit that they are enjoying under the IWT. To me it looks that the IWT goes much beyond the conventional laws and regulations on trans boundary rivers. No where in the world, the entire river systems are allowed to flow freely into another country without using them for one�s own limited benefit.

3. In an interview the Indus Water Commissioner of Pakistan has made certain observations. He said that the Indus Water Treaty has to be implemented both in letter and spirit. India should provide all information on projects that are started on rivers that are allotted to Pakistan. The issue is technical in nature but the concerns have been raised by media, taken up by the parliament and thus ultimately becomes a political one.

There is no doubt that India has a responsibility to provide complete information on the projects that are being conceived and implemented on the rivers meant for Pakistan. But no where in the treaty is it mentioned that India should wait for consensus from Pakistan before starting a project. If one were to wait for consensus, it is very likely that no project can be started at all. Also there is a three-structured mechanism to resolve all differences even on projects objected to by either party. First is the regular meeting between the two Commissioners. Second is the use of a neutral expert as it happened in Bagilhar Project where India was allowed to continue the project with certain modifications suggested by the neutral expert and third is the arbitration.

　

4. In the same interview, the Indus Commissioner concedes that IWT allows the run of the river projects as well as the hydro electric projects, but there is no allowance for making power on Indus and selling it Mumbai.

This argument is very specious. So long as India is allowed under IWT to produce power on run of the river projects under the IWT, it should be of no concern to Pakistan, how and where the power is utilised. By the same argument India could question as to why all the power generated on the western rivers are used in Punjab and not any where else in Sind and Balochistan. Here again one sees the Politicisation of the issue!

5.Pakistan stands to lose much if the treaty is to be renegotiated. The agreement needs to be slightly altered rather than cancelled altogether. Also confronting the popular demand that India is stealing the water has been found to be incorrect because the waters have not been diverted. The issue that irks Pakistan government is the dams which must be set up according to certain designs that the waters continue to flow.

That Pakistan stands to lose much if the treaty of the sharing of Indus waters is to be renegotiated is also our position. More importantly it is unrealistic to expect both countries to look at the water development as a common project devoid of political issues as envisaged by the World Bank before the Indus Water Treaty was signed and re negotiate another treaty!

The Indus Water Treaty has worked well for both the countries. Differences and disputes will arise due to increasing needs on the waters on both sides of the border and the position will get critical sooner than later when the water resources are dwindling and not increasing and the demands are much more. As said in my earlier paper there has to be a give and take and this can happen only when it is implemented both in letter and spirit and to me it appears that Pakistan will gain if it looks at the spirit of the treaty rather than on the letter. There are already many saner counsels in Pakistan and it is hoped that the Indus Water Treaty is seen more as a unique experiment in international laws on non navigational waters that needs to be implemented for mutual benefit and not renegotiated as such.

( The writer is a former hydrologist and holds a PhD on International River Systems)

 

[ajtr]

Njam Sethi on Water and Kashmir

 

[ajtr]

Farmers protest against India at Wahga border

LAHORE: Thousands of farmers staged a protest against Indian water aggression at the Wahga border near Lahore and demanded of the government to raise the issue in the UN, a private TV channel reported on Sunday. The protesters, led by the Muttahida Kisan Mahaz, reached the zero line where they staged a protest against India for blocking the water of different Pakistani rivers. Activists of various non-governmental organisations (NGO) and political parties also participated in the protest to express solidarity with the farmers. The protesters also established protest camps against stoppage of water by India in violation of the 1960 Indus Water Treaty signed between India and Pakistan and also demanded the government to raise the issue in the UN. It is pertinent to mention here that the World Bank (then the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development) is also a signatory of the
treaty as a third party. daily times monitor

Water issue a serious problem, says Shahbaz

India not ready to hold result-oriented talks’

Sunday, March 21, 2010
By our correspondent

LAHORE: Punjab Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif has said a system, which can ensure equal rights to the people without any discrimination of colour, caste and creed and equitable distribution of resources, is needed.

Addressing a ceremony on Saturday, he said India was not ready to hold a result-oriented dialogue with Pakistan and that water issue had become a serious problem. In this situation, he said, they would have to forge unity and solidarity in their ranks to resolve such issues.

He said neither peace could be maintained nor investment promoted in the country without tackling the issue of terrorism.

He said poverty, unemployment, ignorance, injustice and inequitable distribution of national resources were the root causes of terrorism. He said cruelties and highhandedness perpetrated by the Musharraf regime also contributed to the growth of terrorism.

He expressed the fear that Quaid’s Pakistan would lose its real identity if dictation from abroad continued. He said if they did not rely on foreign aid, only then would they be able to talk to foreign countries boldly. He said the people of the NWFP were fighting a war of survival of the country and reshaping the history by rendering sacrifices and there was no service greater than that.

He said Pakistan was rich in resources and the nation was hardworking and imbued with the spirit of honesty and Pakistanis had achieved a commendable place abroad by dint of their hard work.

He said if complicated issues like the NFC Award could be resolved amicably, then inter-provincial disputes could also be resolved with the same sprit.

 

[ajtr]

IWT is a multilateral treaty (not bilateral) involving India, Pakistan and IBRD. It was signed by Pandit Nahru, on behalf of India, FM Ayub Khan, on behalf of Pakistan and W.A.B. Iliff on behalf of IBRD. However, IBRD restricts itself to purposes specified in Articles V and X and Annexures F, G and H. IBRD is still involved in resolution of differences, though not directly. See later as to why this is an important point.

Article XII, Final Provisions, of the IWT states as follows:

(3) The provisions of this Treaty may from time to time be modified by a duly ratified treaty concluded for that purpose between the two Governments.
(4) The provisions of this Treaty, or the provisions of this Treaty as modified under the provisions of Paragraph (3), shall continue in force until terminated by a duly ratified treaty concluded for that purpose between the two Governments.

So, IWT allows both the parties to modify the existing Treaty and can only be terminated by a newly 'ratified' Treaty. There is therefore no provision of any party withdrawing unilaterally from the Treaty. In other words, the IWT does not have a provision for self-termination.

Of course, Pakistan may cite 'breaches by India of IWT provisions' to withdraw from the Treaty. But, for that it will have to have solid evidences and be prepared to take the matter to appropriate international arbitration. As of now, Pakistan has no proof of India breaching the Treaty even once, leave alone being a habitual offender whcih alone, IMHO, can form sufficient ground for Pakistan to seek extra-Treaty avenues. It will not be possible to take the matter to ICJ, the usual Pakistani fetish, for two reasons: one, the IWT itself has ample provisions for settlement of disputes and without exhausting those avenues, the ICJ may not even register the case and two, the ICJ may not be interested to take up the case after its previous ruling involving the Atlantique dispute between both these countries.

Besides the above, India will strongly argue that the IWT, being a multilateral treaty, all the parties involved in the Treaty must also be parties to the case, a condition to which IBRD is not likely to subject itself to.

I do not therefore see any possibility of Pakistan taking the matter to any other arbitration. If Pakistan therefore withdraws from IWT, that should simply give India a free hand to go ahead with projects without referring them to Pakistan.

Pakistan must realize that a new and more favourable Treaty is impossible even from a India. The existing Treaty is the best it has got.

- if Pakistan will ask for a new water treaty.

It may not be a brand new Treaty, but a modified IWT to give more guarantees to Pakistan and place more restrictions on India. The Pakistani PIC has already revealed Pakistan's approach. Pakistan wants to modify the Treaty to ensure that India does not build too many hydroelectric projects and it uses generated power only within J&K (preferably Kashmir Valley). Besides, it may want to have a say in the management of catchment areas and glaciers that contribute waters to the 'western' rivers.

Of course, none of these can be agreed upon by India.
The only waters that India has not completely used are as follows:
Excess flood flows in the 'Eastern' rivers.
Entitlement for agricultural use on the 'Western' rivers, and
Entitlement for 'storage works' on the 'Western' rivers

 

[ajtr]

The coming water disaster

M. Zahur-ul-Haq
The Waterless Moon was a book written on Pakistan by Elizabeth Balne-aves in 1955 after her prolonged visit to the newborn country. The title of the book was itself scaring. Did it mean that the country was destined to run dry like the moon with the passage of time? Our leadership dismissed it as a revengeful prejudice of a foreigner. They boasted of the existence of five rivers and a canal network that was the largest in the whole world. In addition the existing water potential, they argued, was enough to keep the country green and surplus in food grains.
Her prophecy, however, did not take more than 47 years to come closer to the bitter truth. On June 14, 2002, the Indian Minister for Water and Power, Chakravarty, in a formal meeting of the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) Council held at Delhi shamefacedly declared: “When we abrogate IWT. Pakistan will be in a state of drought and Pakistanis will cry for drops of water.” Another significant statement came in 2003 from the Indian COAS who said: “The rejection of Kala-bagh Dam by some elements in Pakistan will enhance the insecurity of Pakistan.” So the government should have taken serious notice of India’s vicious intents and reacted violently with equally dreadful preem-ptive measures. They paid little heed to the damage that the abandonment of Kaiabagh Dam had in store for the future generations of Pakistan. Every successive government took shelter behind the “need for consensus of all the stakehol-ders” in respect of the dam. Pakistanis have already start-ed paying for the sins of our leaders, Rivers have run dry, existing dams have touched the dead levels, and the generation of electricity has dwindled.
With a major part of Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) occupied by India, the conclusion of the Indus Waters Treaty was a blunder of Himalayan magnitude. President Ayub ignored the Quaid’s caution that Kashmir was the jugular vein of Pakistan. Yet he surrendered rights of three eastern rivers i.e. Sutlej, Ravi and Bias to India, who lost no time in diverting their courses to turn them into rivers of sand for Pakistan.
The Treaty gave exclusive rights of, Jhelum, Chenab and Sindh to Pakistan but since their upper reaches lay in IHK, therefore in blatant violation of the provisions of the Treaty India started building dams on them denying the provision of their water to Pakistan. Thus, India won the head and made Pakistan to lose the tails, The Treaty could have been meaningful, to some extent, had it been concluded under the precondition of a fair settlement of the J&K dispute.
India is playing another dirty game in this regard. Taking advantage of it close relations with Afghanistan it is all-out to deny waters of river Kabul to Pakistan. River Kabul is one of the major tributaries of River Indus and India has convinced Afghanistan to build a reservoir on it. Perhaps, financial and technical help is also being offered.

There were times when it was said that there was a sea of underground water in the plains of Punjab and Sindh. While the low quality water could be pumped from depths of 100 to 150 ft, the high quality clean drinking was available at a depth of 250 to 300 ft. However, the rapidly reducing rainfalls and absence of water in the rivers have pushed the underground water to depths of 700 to 800 ft. Lowering of water table has been taking place at the rate of 3 ft per year. This is leading to the destruction of our tube well irrigation of lands and water supply systems of metropolitan cities.
It is now apparent that India’s devilish aim is to make Pakistan a veritable waterless moon. As a result of this monumental water aggression, Pakistan is fast becoming a country of dying rivers. If this trend is permitted to continue Pakistan will soon die of thirst and hunger.
India has so far built more than 60 dams and hydro-electric projects on three Pakistani rivers taking undue advantage of the Indus Waters Treaty signed on September 19, 1960. The shortage of irrigation water has already led to 4 percent reduction of food supply in Pakistan. India started building Baglihar Dam on river Chenab in 2005. It was also inclined to build Wuller Barrage which would have turned Mangla Dam into 110 sq miles into a sandy patch had its groundwork not been destroyed by the mujahideen on April 7, 1990.
The Baglihar and Kishan Ganga dams, in addition to 60 proposed water reservoirs by India would use about 80 percent water from Jhelum and Chenab that will create drought-like conditions in Pakistan. However, the most dangerous project undertaken by India is its theft of Indus water through a tunnel. Moreover, It has planned dozens of more such projects on Jehlum, Chenab and Indus. India is all-out to turn Pakistan into a desert without any befitting retaliation from our government. The responsible leadership is answerable to the nation for this negligence that amounts to blatant treachery. Therefore, before blaming our enemy, we should first blame our own leadership that consists of men of means, who opposed the construction of Kalabagh. The generals in particular had the power and authority to build the dam but failed to do so to parry threats to the perpetuation of their rule.
The historical evidence is there to show that many thriving civilisations, Mesopotemia is one example, have perished when their water potential dried up. The same fate is gradually unfolding in case of Pakistan. Why we are so anxious to commit national suicide? Why didn’t we build the dam?
The people in power should know that the common man has now come out of state of complacency. The government is least worried about the coming water disaster and keeps on begging Indian authorities for talks to settle the water crisis without any success. The nation now demands the elitists in power that either they relinquish the government or realise that the nation has to be saved from extinction. Instead of begging for lower level meaningless talks it should send a firm message to India that either it should talk about J&K at summit level after having arrived at an understanding of a just and fair solution of the dispute or otherwise be prepared to face the consequences. Pakistan should attach topmost priority to the settlement of the dispute which has become a matter of life and death for it. Don’t discuss water with India, discuss Kashmir.
The suggested policy should be of careful brinkmanship. Nevertheless, Pakistan should move hell and heaven as and when India proposes to construct a dam somewhere in J&K. Indus Waters Treaty is already in tatters due to innumerable Indian violations. Pakistan should claim the return of the three Eastern rivers and also demand the handing over of the Madhupur and Ferozpur Headwork’s from where Pakistani canals originate. The LOC in Kashmir should be declared null and void. The Radcliff Award that gave Muslim majority district of Gurdaspur to India should be revised and lines be redrawn on the map on the principle of partition of the subcontinent. It is time to correct the past blunders and injustices.
It will, undoubtedly be a gigantic task which can be taken up only by a brave, bold and farsighted leadership. It should be able to mobilise favours of influential Arab countries. China should be approached to help because it has critical stakes in the region due to the Gwadar Port constructed with its own financial support. Pakistan should make maximum use of its strategic position in the region in dealing with the USA. It should hold out veiled threats of following independent policies in dealing with Afghan situation. It should identify anti-India elements working against the interest of Pakistan in Afghanistan and do something to neutralise them.
The oft repeated fact may be reiterated that India has not reconciled to the existence of Pakistan even after the passage of so many decades. Therefore, it is time to act boldly with a measured and calculated caution.

 

[ajtr]

Pak-India water dispute be resolved bilaterally: Jamaat Ali Shah

India flouting Indus Basin Water Treaty�

Friday, March 26, 2010
By Shahid Husain

KARACHI: India is flouting Indus Basin Water Treaty by building big dams on the River Indus and the two South Asian neighbours should move fast to resolve their differences over the issue bilaterally to ensure peace in the region, a top Pakistani negotiator on water told The News on Thursday.

�India can irrigate 1.343 million acres of land and generate energy in the Occupied Jammu-Kashmir in accordance with the 1960 Indus Basin Water Treaty,� said Jaamat Ali Shah, Pakistan�s Indus Commissioner. �The treaty allows India to build dams, but with certain specifications ... unfortunately, these specifications are being flouted by India.

Pakistan and India are at loggerheads over the distribution of water as New Delhi has build dams on River Jhelum and Indus, which Islamabad says was in violation of the Treaty.

Pakistan says that it is no getting its allocated quota of water, which is badly hitting the country�s agriculture. Islamabad has already raised the issue with the World Bank, which was the guarantor of this Treaty.

Shah said India was supposed to inform Pakistan regarding the construction of Wuller Barrage on River Jhelum and Chutak Dam on River Indus within six months of the start of the project. But the commitment was never fulfilled and the information was provided late, he said.(already informed first in 1993)

There are fears in the international community that the dispute over water between the nuclear-armed South Asian neighbours could escalate and lead to conflict.

Ismael Seageldin, vice-president of the World Bank had predicted way back in 1995 that many of the wars of the 20th Century were about oil, but wars of the 21st Century would be over water. And South Asia, with its bulging population of around 1.5 billion, tops the region where water management and distribution remains a big issue.

The US Under-Secretary for Democracy and Global Affairs, Maria Otero, had said earlier this week that Washington plans to engage Pakistan and India to help improve their brewing tensions over water.

Shah said that the two countries should initiate efforts to resolve their water dispute bilaterally. �Ask the politicians about what Washington is saying. I am an engineer and can only say that the Indus Basin Water Treaty should be implemented in letter-and-spirit and our watershed should not be destroyed if India opts to generate hydro-power in Occupied Jammu and Kashmir.�

Arif N Pervaiz, an eminent environmentalist and an independent consultant, said Washington would not be of any help to Pakistan in resolving its water dispute with India. �No third country can solve a bilateral water dispute between India and Pakistan.�

However, chances of resolving the issue on bilaterally on fast track basis appear bleak, as New Delhi remains reluctant to resume composite dialogue with Pakistan despite Islamabad�s repeated offers.

Pervez said Washington or any other country can help Pakistan in water management as around 40 per cent of its irrigation water is being lost in seepage and theft.

Water management is a crucial issue in this region against the backdrop of fast depleting water resources and booming population in the region. Chinese Academy of Meteorological Sciences says that the Himalayan glaciers, which are a major source of water for India and Pakistan, are melting at an alarming pace due to the global warming. Glaciers have been melting at a rate of 7 percent annually since 2000, as warming trends have accelerated, it said.

If, as expected, the rate of melting continues at this high figure, glacial coverage of the Plateau will be reduced by 50 percent over the next ten years, Chinese scientists say

 

[ajtr]

Usage of water allocated to india under IWT on western rivers(ie indus,jhelum,chenab)

Indus Waters Treaty


1.1 At the time of independence, the boundary line between the two newly created independent countries i.e. Pakistan and India was drawn right across the Indus Basin, leaving Pakistan as the lower riparian. Moreover, two important irrigation head works, one at Madhopur on Ravi River and the other at Ferozepur on Sutlej River, on which the irrigation canal supplies in Punjab (Pakistan) had been completely dependent, were left in the Indian territory. A dispute thus arose between two countries regarding the utilization of irrigation water from existing facilities. Negotiations held under the good offices of International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (World Bank), culminated in the signing of Indus Waters Treaty in 1960. The Treaty was signed at Karachi by Field Marshal Mohammad Ayub Khan, the then President of Pakistan, Shri Jawaharlal Nehru, the then Indian Prime Minister and Mr. W.A.B. Ill if of the World Bank on 19th September, 1960. The Treaty however is effective from 1st April, 1960.
The Indus System of Rivers comprises three Eastern Rivers (the Sutlej, the Beas and the Ravi) and three Western Rivers (the Indus, the Jhelum and the Chenab).

The average annual flow of the Rivers of Indus System is as under:

Eastern Rivers
Western Rivers
Total
41 BCM ( 33 MAF)
166 BCM (135 MAF)
207 BCM (168 MAF)

Under the Treaty, the waters of the Eastern Rivers stand allocated to India and those of Western Rivers largely to Pakistan.

1.2 The Treaty
The Treaty fixed and delimited the rights and obligations of India and Pakistan in relation to each other, concerning the use of the waters of the Indus System of Rivers.

The Treaty comprises of a Preamble and following 12 Articles and 8 Annexures:

Article I
DEFINITIONS
Article II
PROVISIONS REGARDING EASTERN RIVERS
Article III
PROVISIONS REGARDING WESTERN RIVERS
Article IV
PROVISIONS REGARDING EASTERN RIVERS AND WESTERN RIVERS
Article V
FINANCIAL PROVISIONS
Article VI
EXCHANGE OF DATA
Article VII
FUTURE CO-OPERATION
Article VIII
PERMANENT INDUS COMMISSION
Article IX
SETTLEMENT OF DIFFERENCES AND DISPUTES
Article X
EMERGENCY PROVISIONS
Article XI
GENERAL PROVISIONS
Article XII
FINAL PROVISIONS


Annexure A
EXCHANGE OF NOTES BETWEEN GOVERNMENT OF INDIA AND GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN
Annexure B
AGRICULTURAL USE BY PAKISTAN FROM CERTAIN TRIBUTARIES OF THE RAVI
Annexure C
AGRICULTURAL USE BY INDIA FROM THE WESTERN RIVERS
Annexure D
GENERATION OF HYDRO-ELECTRIC POWER BY INDIA ON THE WESTERN RIVERS
Annexure E
STORAGE OF WATERS BY INDIA ON THE WESTERN RIVERS
Annexure F
NEUTRAL EXPERT
Annexure G
COURT OF ARBITRATION
Annexure H
TRANSITIONAL ARRANGEMENTS

Of the above, Article V relates to contributions to be made by India towards the cost of replacement works to be constructed by Pakistan for drawing water from the Western Rivers in lieu of water supplies for irrigation canals in Pakistan which on 15th August, 1947 were dependent on water supplies from the Eastern Rivers. Since India has already made its contribution amounting to Pounds Sterling 62,060,000 to the World Bank, this Article is no more valid. Similarly, Annexure H relating to Transitional Period during which Pakistan was supposed to complete its replacement works besides receiving the waters of the Eastern Rivers in accordance with the provisions of the Annexure H, is no more valid as Transition period was only upto 31st March, 1970 or if extended, upto 31st March, 1973 only.

1.3 Agriculture use permitted to India from Western Rivers

Over and above 6.42 lakh acres being irrigated by India from the Western Rivers on the effective date i.e. 1.4.1960 and the permissible withdrawals from the Ranbir and Pratap Canals, India is entitled to irrigate additional irrigated cropped area (ICA) as per details given below:-

Name of the river
The Indus
The Jhelum
The Chenab
TOTAL
ICA in acres
70,000
4,00,000
2,31,000
7,01,000

A restriction has however been put on India that until India can release water from the conservation storage as defined in Annexure E of the Treaty, the new areas developed by withdrawals from river flow shall not exceed the following:-

Name of the river
The Indus
The Jhelum
The Chenab
TOTAL
ICA in acres
70,000
1,50,000
50,000
2,70,000

1.4 Storage Permitted to India on Western Rivers
In accordance with the Indus Waters Treaty, the aggregate storage capacity of all single purpose and Multi-purpose reservoirs which may be constructed by India after Effective Date shall not exceed the following:-


River System
Conservation
Capacity

General Storage Capacity (M.A.F.)
Storage


Power Storage Capacity (M.A.F.)



Flood Storage Capacity (M.A.F.)
(a)
The Indus
0.25
0.15
Nil
(b)
The Jhelum (excluding the Jhelum Main)
0.50
0.25
0.75
(c)
The Jhelum Main
Nil
Nil
As provided in Paragraph 9 of Annexure E to the Treaty
(d)
The Chenab (excluding the Chenab Main)
0.50
0.60
Nil
(e)
The Chenab Main
Nil
0.60
Nil


Provided that
the storage specified in Column (3) above may be used for any purpose whatever, including the generation of electric energy;
the storage specified in Column (4) above may also be put to Non-Consumptive Use (other than flood protection or flood control) or to Domestic Use;
India shall have the option to increase the Power Storage Capacity specified against item (d) above by making a reduction by an equal amount in the Power Storage Capacity specified against items (b) or (e) above.

1.5 Permanent Indus Commission

Article VIII of the Indus Waters Treaty provides for constitution of Permanent Indus Commission. In accordance with the Treaty both India and Pakistan have each created a post of Commissioner for Indus Waters. The two Commissioners together constitute the Permanent Indus Commission whose purpose is to establish and maintain co-operative arrangements for the implementation of the Treaty, 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. Unless either Government decides to take up any particular question directly with the other Government, each Commissioner will be representative of his Government for all matters arising out of the Treaty and will serve as a regular channel of communication in all matters relating to implementation of the Treaty.
The Commission is also required to undertake periodical inspection of the River for ascertaining the facts connected with the various developments and works on the Rivers. 99 visits have so far been undertaken, the last being in March, 2000.

The Commission has also to meet regularly at least once a year, alternately in India and Pakistan and to submit to the Govt. of India and Govt. of Pakistan, before the first of June of every year, a report on its works for the year ended on the preceding 31st March, and may submit to the two Governments other reports at such times as may be considered necessary. So far, 86 meetings of the Permanent Indus Commission have been held. The last meeting was held in Pakistan during May/June, 2001.

1.6 Data being supplied to Pakistan

In fulfillment of the obligations of Indus Waters Treaty, India has supplied the requisite data of 27 Hydel Projects including Small Plants, Run-of-River Plants and a Storage Work to Pakistan. Every month, the data with respect to the flows in and utilization of the waters of the rivers of Indus Basin are being exchanged. Also every year before 30th November, India furnishes to Pakistan the data of Irrigated Cropped Area (ICA) from the Western Rivers.
As per the provisions of the Indus Waters Treaty, flood flows of rivers the Ravi, the Sutlej, the Beas, the Jammu Tawi, the Chenab and the Jhelum are being transmitted to Pakistan through telegram since 1962. Broadcasting of flood flows of rivers the Ravi, the Jammu Tawi and the Chenab are also being done since 1974. Subsequently on the request of Pakistan, an agreement has been signed between the Commissioners for Indus Waters of India and Pakistan in 1989 to communicate the flood flows of rivers the Ravi and the Sutlej to Pakistan on telephone during the period 1st July to 10th October every year. A control room is operated round the clock in the Indus Wing for the above purpose. No cost is being charged to Pakistan for communication of flood flow even though the Treaty provides for the same. This is purely a gesture of goodwill from our country towards Pakistan. The agreement is however reviewed every year. However, from the year 2001, Pakistan has been asked to reimburse the cost of transmission of flood data as per actual and the matter is still under correspondence.

1.7 Achievements

On Eastern Rivers

With the completion of Bhakra Nangal and Beas Project and Indira Gandhi Canal Project (partially completed), India has been utilizing on an average about 37 BCM (30 MAF) of the waters of the Eastern Rivers allocated to it. The remaining waters will also be completely harnessed after commissioning of Thein Dam on river Ravi, remaining portion of Indira Gandhi Canal Project and Sutlej-Yamuna Link Canal which are under construction. Also against 11,219 MW hydro electric potential at 60% load factor on the Eastern Rivers, projects having 3,945 MW installed capacity have already been completed and projects having 4,144 MW installed capacity are in different stages of construction.

On Western Rivers

Since India has not built any Conservation Storage on Western Rivers, India can develop irrigation by withdrawals from river flow only within the restricted area of 2,70,000 acres over and above the area as on effective date. India could irrigate an area of 8,05,745 acres against permissible of 9,12,477 acres during the year 1999-2000 as per details given below:

Basin
I.C.A. as on the effective date (Acre)
Additional ICA permissible(Acre)
Net ICA permissible (Acre)
Total I.C.A. achieved in 1999-2000 (Acre)
Indus
42,179
70,000
1,12,179
50,949
Jhelum
5,17,909
1,50,000
6,67,909
6,39,177
Chenab
82,389
50,000
1,32,389
1,15,619
Total
9,12,477
8,05,745

Also against expected 8,769 MW of power at 60% load factor from Western Rivers, projects having installed capacity of about 1,348 MW have already been completed and projects having installed capacity of about 1,300 MW are in different stages of construction.

** tables got mis aligned plz follow the link for tables

 

[ajtr]

Abridged Text of Indus Waters Treaty

The Indus Waters Treaty

Historical context


The partition of the Indian subcontinent created a conflict over the waters of the Indus basin. In 1951, David Lilienthal wrote an influential article in Colliers magazine suggesting that the World Bank use its good offices to bring India and Pakistan to an agreement over how to share and manage the river system. The President of the World Bank, Eugene R. Black, agreed to act as a conduit of agreement between the two states. Finally, in 1960, after several years of arduous negotiations did an agreement take form. Even today, the Indus Waters Treaty is the only agreement that has been faithfully implemented and upheld by both India and Pakistan. Following the terrorist attack on the Indian Parliament on December 13, 2001, several high profile commentators in India suggested that the treaty should be scrapped, though the Indian government made no intimations that it was considering such a move. [For further information...]

Abridged Text of Indus Waters Treaty
(Signed in Karachi on September 19, 1960)

The Government of India and the Government of Pakistan, being equally desirous of attaining the most complete and satisfactory utilisation of the waters of the Indus system of rivers and recognising the need, therefore, of fixing and delineating, in a spirit of goodwill and friendship, the rights and obligations of each in relation to the other concerning the use of these waters and of making provision for the settlement, in a cooperative spirit, of all such questions as may hereafter arise in regard to the interpretation or application of the provisions agreed upon herein, have resolved to conclude a Treaty in furtherance of these objectives, and for this purpose have named as their plenipotentiaries:

The Government of India: Shri Jawaharlal Nehru, Prime Minister of India, and The Government of Pakistan: Field Marshal Mohammad Ayub Khan, H.P., H.J., President of Pakistan, who, having communicated to each other their respective Full Powers and having found them in good and due form, have agreed upon the following Articles and An


Article II

Provisions Regarding Eastern Rivers

All the waters of the Eastern Rivers shall be available for the unrestricted use of Inida, except as otherwise expressly provided in this Article.

Except for Domestic Use and Non-Consumptive Use, Pakistan shall be under an obligation to let flow, and shall not permit any interference with, the waters of the Sutlej Main and the Ravi Main in the reaches where these rivers flow in Pakistan and have not yet finally crossed into Pakistan. The points of final crossing are the following: (a) near the new Hasta Bund upstream of Suleimanke in the case of the Sutlej Main, and (b) about one and a half miles upstream of the syphon for the B-D Link in the case of the Ravi Main.

Except for Domestic Use, Non-Consumptive Use and Agricultural Use, Pakistan shall be under an obligation to let flow, and shall not permit any interference with, the waters (while flowing in Pakistan) of any Tributary which in its natural course joins the Sutlej Main or the Ravi Main before these rivers have finally crossed into Pakistan.

All the waters, while flowing in Pakistan, of any Tributary which, in its natural course, joins the Sutlej Main or the Ravi Main after these rivers have finally crossed into Pakistan shall be available for the unrestricted use of Pakistan: Provided however that this provision shall not be construed as giving Pakistan any claim or right to any releases by India in any such Tributary.

There shall be a Transition Period during which India shall (i) limit its withdrawals for Agricultural Use, (ii) limit abstractions for storages, and (iii) make deliveries to Pakistan from the Eastern Rivers.

The Transition Period shall begin on 1st April 1960 and it shall end on 31st March 1970, or, if extended under the provisions of Part 8 of Annexure H, on the date up to which it has been extended. In any event, whether the Transition Period shall end not later than 31st March 1973.

During the Transition Period, Pakistan shall receive for unrestricted use the waters of the Eastern Rivers which are to be released by India in accordance with the provisions of Annexure H. After the end of the Transition Period, Pakistan shall have no claim or right to releases by India of any of the waters of the Eastern Rivers. In case there are any releases, Pakistan shall enjoy the unrestricted use of the waters so released after they have finally crossed into Pakistan: Provided that in the event that Pakistan makes any use of these waters, Pakistan shall not acquire any right whatsover, by prescription or otherwise, to a continuance of such releases or such use.


Article III

Provision Regarding Western Rivers

Pakistan shall receive for unrestricted use all those waters of the Western Rivers which India is under obligation to let flow under the provisions of Paragraph (2).

India shall be under an obligation to let flow all the waters of the Western Rivers, and shall not permit any interference with these waters, except for the following uses, restricted in the case of each of the rivers, The Indus, The Jhelum and The Chenab, to the drainage basin thereof: (a) Domestic Use; (b) Non-Consumptive Use; (c) Agricultural Use, as set out in Annexure C; and (d) Generation of hydro-electric power, as set out in Annexure D.

Pakistan shall have the unrestricted use of all waters originating from sources other than the Eastern Rivers which are delivered by Pakistan into The Ravi or The Sutlej, and India shall not make use of these waters.

Except as provided in Annexures D and E, India shall not store any water of, or construct any storage works on, the Western Rivers.


Article IV

Provisions Regarding Eastern Rivers and Western Rivers

Pakistan shall use its best endeavors to construct and bring into operation with due regard to expedition and economy, that part of a system of work which will accomplish the replacement, from the Western Rivers and other sources, of water supplies for irrigation canals in Pakistan which, on 15th August 1947, were dependent on water supplies from the Eastern Rivers.

Each Party agrees that any Non-Consumptive Use made by it shall be made as not to materially change, on account of such use, the flow in any channel to the prejudice of the uses on that channel by the other Party under the provisions of this Treaty.

Nothing in this Treaty shall be construed as having the effect of preventing either Party from undertaking schemes of drainage, river training, conservation of soil against erosion and dredging, or from removal of stones, gravel or sand from the beds of the Rivers: Provided that in executing any of the schemes mentioned above, each Party will avoid, as far as practicable, any material damage to the other Party.

Pakistan shall maintain in good order its portions of the drainages mentioned below with capacities not less than the capacities as on the Effective Date: (i) Hudiara Drain, (ii) Kasur Nala, (iii) Salimshah Drain, (iv) Fazilka Drain.

If Inida finds it necessary that any of the drainages mentioned in Paragraph (4) should be deepened or widened in Pakistan, Pakistan agrees to undertake to do so as a work of public interest, provided India agrees to pay the cost of the deepening or widening.

Each Party will use its best endeavors to maintain the natural channels of the Rivers, as on the Effective Date, in such condition as will avoid, as far as practicable, any obstruction to the flow in these channels likely to cause material damage to the other Party.

Neither Party will take any action which would have the effect of diverting the Ravi Main between Madhopur and Lahore, or the Sutlej Main between Harike and Suleimanke, from its natural channel between high banks.

The use of the natural channels of the Rivers for the discharge of flood or other excess waters shall be free and not subject to limitation by either Party, and neither Party shall have any claim against the other in respect of any damage caused by such use. Each Party agrees to communicate to the other Party, as far in advance as practicable, any information it may have in regard to such extraordinary discharges of water from reservoirs and flood flows as may affect the other Party.

Each Party declares its intention to operate its storage dams, barrages and irrigation canals in such manner, consistent with the normal operations of its hydraulic systems, as to avoid, as far as feasible, material damage to the other Party.

Each Party declares its intention to prevent, as far as practicable, undue pollution of the waters of the Rivers which might affect adversely uses similar in nature to those to which the waters were put on the Effective Date, and agrees to take all reasonable measures to ensure that, before any sewage or industrial waste is allowed to flow into the Rivers, it will be treated, where necessary, in such manner as not materially to affect those uses: Provided that the criterion of reasonableness shall be the customary practice in similar situations on the Rivers.

The Parties agree to adopt, as far as feasible, appropriate measures for recovery, and restoration to owners, of timber and other property floated or floating down the Rivers, subject to appropriate charges being paid by the owners.

Except as otherwise required by the express provisions of this Treaty, nothing in this Treaty shall be construed as affecting existing territorial rights over the waters of any of the Rivers or the beds or banks thereof, or as affecting existing property rights under municipal law over such waters or beds or banks.


Article V

Financial Provisions


In consideration of the fact that the purpose of part of the system of works referred to in Article IV (1) is the replacement, from the Western Rivers and other sources, of water supplies for irrigation canals in Pakistan which on 15th August 1947 were dependent on water supplies from the Eastern Rivers, India agrees to make a fixed contribution of Pounds Sterling 62,060,000 towards the costs of these works.

The sum of Pounds Sterling 62,060,000 shall be paid in ten equal installments on the 1st of November of each year.

Each of the instalments shall be paid to the Bank for the credit of the Indus Basin Development Fund to be established and administered by the Bank.

These financial provisions shall not be construed as conferring upon India any right to participate in the decisions as to the system of works which Pakistan constructs or as constituting an assumption of any responsibility by India or as an agreement by India in regard to such works.

Except for such payments as are specifically provided for in this Treaty, neither Party shall be entitled to claim any payment for observance of the provisions of this Treaty or to make any charge for water received from it by the other Party.


Article VI

Exchange of Data

The following data with respect to the flow in, and utilisation of the waters of, the Rivers shall be exchanged regularly between the Parties: (a) Daily guage and discharge data relating to flow of the Rivers at all observation sites. (b) Daily extractions for or releases from reservoirs. (c) Daily withdrawals at the heads of all canals operated by government or by a government agency, including link canals. (d) Daily escapages from all canals, including link canals. (e) Daily deliveries from link canals.



Article VII

Future Co-operation

The two Parties recognize that they have a common interest in the optimum development of the Rivers, and, to that end, they declare their intention to co-operate, by mutual agreement, to the fullest possible extent.


Article VIII

Permanent Indus Commission

India and Pakistan shall each create a permanent post of Commissioner for Indus Waters, and shall appoint to this post, as often as a vacancy occurs, a person who should ordinarily be a high-ranking engineer competent in the field of hydrology and water-use. Unless either Government should decide to take up any particular question directly with the other Government, each Commissioner will be the representative of his Government for all matters arising out of this Treaty, and will serve as the regular channel of communication on all matters relating to the implementation of the Treaty, and, in particular, with respect to (a) the furnishing or exchange of information or data provided for in the Treaty; and (b) the giving of any notice or response to any notice provided for in the Treaty.

The status of each Commissioner and his duties and responsibilities towards his Government will be determined by that Government.

The two Commissioners shall together form the Permanent Indus Commission.

The purpose and functions of the Commission shall be to establish and maintain co-operative arrangements for the implementation of this Treaty and to promote co-operation between the Parties in the development of the waters of the Rivers.

The Commission shall determine its own procedures.


Article IX

Settlement of Differences and Disputes

Any question which arises between the Parties concerning the interpretation or application of this Treaty or the existence of any fact which, if established, might constitute a breach of this Treaty shall first be examined by the Commission, which will endeavor to resolve the question by agreement.

If the Commission does not reach agreement on any of the questions mentioned in the Paragraph (1), then a difference will be deemed to have arisen, which shall be dealt with by a Neutral Expert. If the Neutral Expert has informed the Commission that, in his opinion, the difference should be treated as a dispute, then a dispute will be deemed to have arisen.

As soon as a dispute to be settled has arisen, the Commission shall, at the request of either Commissioner, report the fact to the two Governments, as early as practicable, stating in its report the points on which the Commisssion is in agreement and the issues in dispute, the views of each Commissioner on these issues and his reasons therefor.

Either Government may, following receipt of the report, or if it comes to the conclusion that this report is being unduly delayed in the Commission, invite the other Government to resolve the dispute by agreement.

A court of Arbitration shall be established to resolve the dispute.


Article X

Emergency Provisions

If, at any time prior to 31st March 1965, Pakistan should represent to the Bank that, because of the outbreak of large-scale international hostilities arising out of causes beyond the control of Pakistan, it is unable to obtain from abroad the materials and equipment necessary for the completion, by 31st March 1973, of that part of the system of works referred to in Article IV (1) which related to the replacement referred to therein, (hereinafter referred to as the replacement element) and if, after consideration of this representation in consultation with India, the Bank is of the opinion that (a) these hostilities are on a scale of which the consequence is that Pakistan is unable to obtain in time such materials and equipment as must be procured from abroad for the completion, by 31st March 1973, of the replacement element, and (b) since the Effective Date, Pakistan has taken all reasonable steps to obtain the said materials and equipment and has carried forward the construction of the replacement element with due dilligence and all reasonable expedition, the Bank shall immediately notify each of the Parties accordingly. The Parties undertake that in being so notified, they will forthwith consult together and enlist the good offices of the Bank in their consultation, with a view to reaching mutual agreement as to whether or not, in light of all circumstances prevailing, any modifications of the provisions of this Treaty are appropriate and advisable and, if so, the nature and the extent of the modifications.

Article XII

Final Provisions

This Treaty consists of the Preamble, the Articles hereof and Annexures A to H hereto, and may be cited as "The Indus Waters Treaty 1960."
This Treaty shall be ratified and the ratifications therof shall be exchanged in New Delhi. It shall enter into force upon the exchange of ratifications, and will then take effect retrospectively form the first of April 1960.

The provisions of this Treaty may from time to time be modified by a duly ratified treaty concluded for that purpose between the two Governments.

The provisions of this Treaty, or the provisions of this Treaty as modified under the provisions of Paragraph (3), shall continue in force until terminated by a duly ratified treaty concluded for that purpose between the two Governments.

In witness whereof the respective Plenipotentiaries have signed this Treaty and have hereunto affixed their seals.

Done in triplicate in English at Karachi on this Nineteenth day of September 1960.

[Signed:]
For the Government of India:
Jawaharlal Nehru

For the Government of Pakistan:
Mohammad Ayub Khan
Field Marshal, H.P., H.J.

For the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development:
W. A. B. Iliff

 

[ajtr]

Neelum-Jhelum Hydroelectric Project

Pakistan, India in race to complete dams in Kashmir; WAPDA to use tunnel boring machines for early completion

Saturday, March 27, 2010
By Mansoor Ahmad

LAHORE: To complete the Neelum-Jhelum Hydroelectric Project before Kishanganga Hydroelectric Project being built by India, the Water and Power Development Authority has decided use tunnel boring machine that will reduce the construction time by two years, official sources said.

“It is vital for Pakistan to complete the 969 MW Neelum-Jhelum Hydroelectric Project before India completes a similar project on the same rivers, so that Pakistan can claim its right to water use,” sources in WAPDA informed The News.

They said though India has usurped the right of Pakistan on Neelum water by planning to divert it for the run of river 348 MW Kishanganga Hydroelectric Project, its completion before the Neelum-Jhelum project would give India the right to use the water for electricity generation.

WAPDA officials said that the Kishanganaga project would reduce the hydroelectric potential of the Neelum Jhelum Hydro Project. Originally Kishanganga Hydroelectric Project located in the Indian Held Kashmir and Neelum-Jehlum Hydroelectric Project being built in Azad Jammu and Kashmir were to be completed in 2016, the issue of right to use water has pitched both the countries in a race for the river.

Excavation of tunnelling network through tunnel boring machine (TBM) will reduce implementation period of the Neelum-Jehlum Hydroelectric Project (NJHEP) by about two years, which would establish Pakistan’s right over Neelum water and India would not be able to divert it for use in Kishanganga project.

WAPDA sources said the completion of NJHEP earlier than the schedule is very vital for Pakistan not only to cope with the increasing demand of electricity in the country but also to establish priority rights of water uses over the river Neelum against India.

The use of TBM has remained limited in the past due fear of impact of drilling on weak geological formations. However, in the past decade tremendous improvements in tunnelling technology have been achieved, removing the fears associated with use of TBMs.

In the recent past the use of TBM has taken over the charge from the conventional method of tunnelling by drill and blast (D&B) method, NJHEP requires over 55 kilometre of tunnelling network.

In the engineering design made by the Norwegian Consultants in 1996, the excavation of tunnels was proposed through conventional drill and blast method, to be spread over a period of 90 months.

However, the use of TBM will significantly reduce this period by 24-28 months. Moreover, the use of TBM technology will also pave the way for execution of the upcoming hydropower projects in a lesser span of time, including the 1100-MW Kohala and 7100-MWBunji hydropower projects.

Sources said acquiring the TBM technology and equipment is in final stage as a technical delegation led by WAPDA Member (Water) Syed Raghib Abbas Shah, has already visited the manufacturing facilities and project in Germany and Switzerland.

The team, comprising WAPDA experts, the project consultants and a panel of independent experts unanimously concluded that the use of TBM would be beneficial for hydropower projects in Pakistan with special reference to NJHEP.On commissioning, NJHEP will generate 5.15 billion units of electricity annually, while benefits of the project have been estimated at Rs30 billion per annum.

Q1. Current Status
The project parameters were revised a few years back to prevent submergence of the Gurez valley. Accordingly, the height of the reservoir and consequently the live storage etc were considerably revised down without impacting the power generation capacity of the project. The following is the status early 2009

Infrastructure works are under progress.
Revised CCEA approval accorded in December, 2008.
Turnkey execution of the project awarded to M/s Kishanganga Consortium with HCC ld. As lead partner, M/s Halcow group ltd., UK as partner and M/s SELI SJZA Italy, M/s BHEL, M/s DSD NOELL GmbH Germany & M/s PES engineers Pvt. Ltd. As subcontractor on 22.01.2009.

Q2. What is the definition of 'work started'

The IWT states in Paragraph 2, Article VII, entitled "Future Cooperation", the following:

(2) If either Party plans to construct any engineering work which would cause interference with the waters of any of the Rivers and which, in its opinion, would affect the other Party materially, it shall notify the other Party of its plans and shall supply such data relating to the work as may be available and as would enable the other Party to inform itself of the nature, magnitude and effect of the work. If a work would cause interference with the waters of any of the Rivers but would not, in the opinion of the Party planning it, affect the other Party materially, nevertheless the Party planning the work shall, on request, supply the other Party with such data: regarding the nature, magnitude and effect, if any, of the work as may be available.

The above is very important. It is the intention to start the project as conveyed with whatever data is available at that time that is important, IMO. In the case of Kishenganga, it was conveyed in the 1990s to Pakistan. That was why Pakistan demanded that if it were to allow the Tulbul Navigation Lock project (aka Wullar barrage in Pakistan), India must not execute the Kishenganga project. That objection was raised by Pakistan in february 1992 after the Tulbul Navigation project was agreed upon by both governments in 1991. Soon after that, Pakistan decided to develop its Neelum-Jhelum project and expected to complete it during 1994-1997. Obviously, without the Kishenganga project, the Tulbul Navigation project is a non-starter. Anyway, it means that Pakistan was aware of the Kishenganga project a long time back. Besides, it has regularly brought up the issue of the project in every PIC meeting.

Item d of Paragraph 2 of Article III vests India with the rights to generate hydroelectric power according to Annexure D.

Item 3 of Paragraph 15 of Part 3 of Annexure D entitled 'New Run-of-River Plants' states

where a Plant is located on a Tributary of The Jhelum on which Pakistan has any Agricultural use or hydroelectric use, the water released below the Plant may be delivered, if necessary, into another Tributary but only to the extent existing Agricultural Use or hydroelectric use by Pakistan on the former Tributary would not be adversely affected.

Note that there is no *existing* hydroelectric use on this tributary. Pakistan may have an intent to build a plant in 2020, but that does not count according to the above. The *existing* agricultural use will be more than covered by the discharge from the plant anyway as such use is meagre according to the joint PIC survey already made. While completion of hydroelectric or agricultural projects is a must for Pakistan to claim relief according to IWT, it is not so for India. Otherwise it will be a contradiction of the IWT as Pakistan can simply stall any Indian project that India makes in good faith.

Q3. Funding issue

Pakistan will still implement its Neelum-Jhelum project but only thing would be reduced power generation and conseqently the price per unit to the customer would be on the higher side. Pakistan will have to then subsidize the consumers and incur a loss. It won't be a dead investment especially in a completely power-starved Pakistan. Besides, KSA's investment is meagre, USD 80 million only and we also don't know how much of it will come through eventually. Recently, KSA has not been giving cash directly to Pakistan (like the rest of the donors) and wants to fund only on project-basis and after a green signal from the IMF.

Annual review of work on kishanganga as of 2008-09

11. Kishanganga H.E. Project ( 330 MW), Jammu & Kashmir

� Project was cleared by CCEA in July 2007. CCEA clearance for revised Cost Estimate of Rs 3,642.04 crores with scheduled completion in 84 months (i.e. by January 2016) has been received vide letter dated 14.1.2009.
� The Project is proposed to be completed by January 2016.
� Letter of acceptance for award of the project has been issued on 22.1.2009 in favour of M/s Kishanganga Consortium (HCC-Halcrow) for turnkey execution.
� Mobilization and survey work has been started at site by contractor.
� 208m of Diversion tunnel stands excavated departmentally.