What's new

Pakistan And India-Water Disputes-News And Updates

OK, this is getting a little ridiculous with all these posts and some absurdly long articles.

Very few people are going to have the time to read most of this or any of this.

Please summarize your points and support them with relevant sections instead of continuing to just cut and paste here please. For the most part this thread is useless for most people now.
 
.
India not violating Indus Water Treaty: Nathan

LAHORE: Indian Indus Water Treaty Commissioner Aranga Nathan has said India is not at all violating Indus Water Treaty.

While talking to media at Lahore Airport after arriving from India Nathan said India is implementing the Treaty in letter and spirit.

He said his team has come to Pakistan with a five-point agenda to discuss the water issue.

Pakistan Indus Water Treaty Commissioner, Jamaat Ali Shah, on the occasion said that he will try to reach to some conclusion or at least narrow down differences between the two countries during this meeting.

Jamaat Ali Shah also informed that Pakistan has raised objections on India’s Chutak and Nimoo Bazgo water projects which are affecting water flow in River Indus.—DawnNews
 
.
OK, this is getting a little ridiculous with all these posts and some absurdly long articles.

Very few people are going to have the time to read most of this or any of this.

Please summarize your points and support them with relevant sections instead of continuing to just cut and paste here please. For the most part this thread is useless for most people now.
Important points i've been making in bold with in the articles.... summary is also been made along in the separate posts for example see the kisenganga summary along with its article 2-3 posts above.....and my summary is based on articles and annexxures of IWT which i ve already attaxched to this thread the very first post i posted in here.I've been mentioning along with summary the specific articles and annexures of the treaty on which they are based.unlike people who speak without knowledge of treaty.
 
Last edited:
.
Important points i've been making in bold with in the articles.... summary is also been made along in the separate posts for example see the kisenganga summary along with its article 2-3 posts above.....and my summary is based on articles and annexxures of IWT which i ve already attaxched to this thread the very first post i posted in here.I've been mentioning along with summary the specific articles and annexures of the treaty on which they are based.unlike people who speak without knowledge of treaty.
People still have to read the material to obtain context and understand it.

Please refrain from further cut and pastes and focus on the material already posted.
 
.
^^I've gone through the first 20+ page of this thread have taken extra care to avoid duplication of articles.

Now unless people read how come the know about the real issue.Btw i'm not indulging in any propaganda here...i'm just posting reality based thing on actual IWT signed but not on some hearsay(like 1st 20 pages of this thread)
 
.
It is quite instructive to read the Indus Water Treaty 1960 and all its annexures. Operational content of the treaty are put in Annexures
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


Disputes as per

Annexure F - Neutral Expert
Annexure G - Court of Arbitration


There are several restrictions on India as to the discharge of waters from various Headworks. Neither it can be decreased nor can it be increased arbitrarily by India.(Max-Min discharge) India has to Inform Pakistan whenever excessive discharge takes place except when it is not possible, such as sudden increase in inflow which could not be held up. As per Treaty no claims for damages would lie against India in such a situation. Further if water was available but Pakistan failed to make use of the water then it can not claim subsequent increase in allocation to the extent it did not use earlier available water. (No cumulative effect).

Storage capacities for different purposes allowed by India on western rivers are already pointed out in earlier posts here. Pakistan has raised so many objections that it is yet to utilise the full allocation. Since it has not built conservation storage to regulate the flow on western river esp Chenab and Indus It is restricted to develop areas under irrigation for only 270,000 acres(still not fully developed). As per IWT pk does not acquire rights for use of any water of eastern rivers on account of any releases to it by India. (clause 9 and Ann B para 4)

This has reduced the ability of IBIS in flood mitigation system since its RIM stations ( tarbela , mangla) receives full flood flows not designed to accommodate.

Rim station inflow of river indus and its western tributaries ( entering Pakistan)

1975-2000 Kharif Rabi Annual
Average MAF 118.99 25.92 144.91


Eastern Rivers Inflow at Rim Stations ( entering Pakistan but no rights could be claimed.)
1990-2000 Kharif Rabi Annual
Average MAF 7.446 1.69 9.136


Since above figures are only long term average , year to year this could vary on account of glacier melt ( excessive warm season or heavy monsoon) Indus river is primarily glacier fed where as Jhelum and chenab gets both glacier melt and monsoon.

Above data clearly shows that India is releasing full quantity of water as per IWT and approximately 145 MAF enters pk below RIM, a point made time and again in this thread and on international fora. This has not yet been disputed by Pakistan. Primarily because these are the data from their own water and power ministry and could not be repudiated by them.

RIM Stations near the border.

ibis1.jpg


Now let us take Pakistan data on seasonal variability of water availability in Indus system
tarbela1.jpg

indus1.jpg

mangala1.jpg


Reader would not help but notice that peak flow period is between July to Sept for Indus and Aug-Mid Oct for Jhelum. In fact IWT prescribes filling of reservoir for each river during peak flow period, point noted before as in case of Bagalihar dam ie in August 2008.

Filling of reservoir By India
On Indus 1st July to 20th Aug
On Jhelum 21st June to 20th Aug
On Chenab 21st June to 31st Aug keeping min flow in chenab main above Merala RIM station not less than 55000 cusecs ( baglihar is on chenab)


India can make withdrawal from any general storage on Jhelum and Chenab for irrigation purposes within the maximum permitted area to be irrigated from General storage only during above mentioned periods.

One might observe that IWT goes to a great length to protect a lower riparian state with history of disputes with upper riparian state from any mischief .


It is clear from above table for Indus River that it has a high variability with peak flow upto >120 MAF and lean flow of >30MAF and requires astute water management practices by Pakistan. However their own institutions claims that around 53-40% of water entering RIM is lost due to various reasons.

source=PMO, Irrigation and Power Department, Government of the Punjab, pakistan
Punjab covers about 60 percent of the Indus Basin
Irrigation System (IBIS), and has a complex river and link canal system. Despite of this, water allocation and management in various parts of the system is carried out using hand calculations, including estimation of demands and pattern of releases from the reservoirs. Also, there is no well established and integrated system of water accounting in various parts of the system i.e. at barrages, rivers, link canals, main/branch canals, and distributaries etc. Instrumentation used for measuring water, sediments, cross-sections of the river and canals are outdated and in many cases hand held staff gauges are used. Punjab needs to modernize its water allocation and management system and water accounting system with modern simulation and optimization models and decision support system.

source=Ahmed Kamal Federal Flood Commission, Ministry of Water and Power,Government of Pakisatan, Islamabad, Pakistan

Water and Environment Issues 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.

According to report from International Water Management Institute , Pakistan's requirement is increasing ( mainly due to population) and existing reservoir storage capacity is depleting (due to sedimentation) whereas water availability remains same. Loss of Water in storage and conveyance facilities , seepage through irrigation conveyance facilities cause major water losses. Report goes on to mention that excessive Ground water recharge results in water logging and consequent soil management problems. The estimated loss due to seepage is counter balanced by recharge of ground water as per that report and claims that such loss may not be a great cause of concern.

Water Shortage Calls for Second Look at Indus Treaty

Daniyal Hashmi, a civil engineer in Pakistan’s Water and Power Development Authority, noted that when the IWT was negotiated, the three western rivers had sufficient water to support the country’s irrigated agriculture. The cropping intensity then was about 70 percent, he told IPS.

"The Indus irrigation system was designed for this cropping intensity," he explained. "But over the years, cropping intensity increased to about 170 percent."


"Pakistan wastes twice the amount of water each year in watercourses than could be stored at Tarbela dam (on the Indus) when it was built (in 1974)," Qutub pointed out. "We grow sugarcane and low-value rice, called Irri, with our precious water resources, when we could import these items at lower cost to the consumers. Head-end farmers steal much of the water of their downstream neighbours."

"First," said Qutub, "we should correct these mistakes."

He also disagreed with those who saw dark war clouds looming over Pakistan and India because of water. "Nations generally cooperate, not go to war, over water."

Water specialist Mustafa added: "There is no harm in reviewing the treaty in the light of climate change, but it needs creative thinking." ( I will suggest one at the end of this writeup )

"In a climate-change future, those base flows are going to be all the more critical for the health of the ecological systems in downstream Pakistan," said Mustafa. "In return, Pakistan could allow equivalent of base flows in eastern rivers from its three western rivers for India to use." ( so they want waters of eastern rivers assured)

They are fully aware of their own shortcomings.

In essence what they want is for India to compensate for any additional water requirement due to their growing population and due to recharge of ground aquifers on account of seepage and consequently not available for irrigation. Certainly a weird concept. Pakistan's total water requirement from IBIS is claimed 185 BCM ( approximately 150 MAF, total water availability in Indus System plus Indian unused share from eastern rivers as well). Whereas if we take only 40% loss in IBIS that itself amounts to 60 MAF.
They want to ensure that unused waters of Eastern rivers be permanently allocated to them and India not to use waters on western rivers for any purposes. This would not be achieved under present IWT and hence they are raising the heat outside the IWT.

IWT treaty for India is not fair in the sense that it allocates only 20% of water (33 MAF from eastern rivers) for exclusive use of India whereas 80% water is allocated to Pakistan. Whatever use on western river is granted is fettered with numerous restrictions. In fact India has not been able to use eastern rivers. Once projects on Indian side ( SYL, BSL IGFC etc) is completed no water would be available to pakistan.

Clearly , if India was in non compliance of the IWT pakistan would have raised the matter in the forum available to it within IWT which is quite extensive and neutral. Neutral expert of arbitration procedures could be availed of. In fact, no pakistan or indian can be on Court of Arbitration. Both parties would nominate two arbitrators each and Secretary General of UN and president IBRD(world Bank) would select the Chairman.President of MIT, USA and Rector of ICST, London UK would select engineer member. Chief Justice of USA and UK would select legal member. (total of 7 members)

But so far Pakistan has not chosen to avail this opportunity. It fears that their logic has no legs to stand on as proved in case of decision of neutral expert on Baglihar.In fact the decision has set a precedence of allowing current technological practices to determine the design parameters of a reservoir( either storage or power generating). It is also the position in International court of Justice.

source=Salman M. A. Salman Lead Counsel, Legal Vice Presidency, The World Bank

the International Court of Justice in the Danube dispute between Hungary and Slovakia (the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros case)required that the current standards must be taken into consideration when evaluating the environmental risks of the project (International Court of Justice, 1997 p. 66). This manner of interpretation will most likely influence the future interpretation of the Treaty, as well as other international water treaties.

Several articles which are appearing at sickening frequency juxtapose the peace with India and water requirement of Pakistan in a sense that one is not possible if the other is not met. This is the same trick pakistan is playing with USA when they take aids of various kinds with assurance to stop jehadi export..India must emphasize the fact that it is in full compliance of IWT. It also provides data as per IWT to PaKistan despite the fact that they have not paid for it even when demand was raised in 2001 under IWT provisions. In fact matter still appears to be under correspondence.

Water resources can not be increased . unless pakistan look for better water management and usage with increasing the storage capacity
Briscoe's misplaced article would not stand scrutiny of IWT as that of the stand of Pakistan.If PaKistan feels it can abrogate the treaty unilaterally so be it.
 
.
.
If India thinks that they can name the freedom struggle of Kashmir and the 2 UN resolutions in terrorism then they are mistaken.

Indian is stealing water because it does not have enough water. We do not need a Indian lecture on water management. Lets look at the links below so to the water problems in India:

Drinking Water for India

Drinking Water Scarcity | India Environment Portal

Water Scarcity & Water Crisis in India

Indians please do not hide your lies behind the theft of water.


If pakistan have objection than they should go to world bank..............but nothing gonna come out..............judgement will be ....................india can build dams and store water:partay:
 
.
If pakistan have objection than they should go to world bank..............but nothing gonna come out..............judgement will be ....................india can build dams and store water:partay:

The Indian High Commissioner to Pakistan, H.E. Sharath Sabharwal, ripped apart the bogus Pakistani claims and accusations at the Karachi Chambers of Commerce speech(which i 've posted 2 pages back). Now, this letter from the First Secretary there. India is responding to every false claim & lie from Pakistan.

Indus water: India’s version

The writer states that Pakistan has “lost cases before neutral experts, whereas the fact is that neutral experts never had the legal competence to grant victory to Pakistan.”

In the 50 years of the treaty, only once an issue ( Baglihar)was referred to a neutral expert. Therefore, reference to ‘lost cases’ before ‘neutral experts’ does not square up with the reality.

Besides, Baglihar was not a legal issue. It was a technical issue. India was legally allowed to build BHEP. Pakistan challenged India on technical matters.

Paragraph 4 of Part-2 of Annexure F states clearly that "A Neutral Expert shall be a highly qualified engineer . . ."
 
.
This is getting ridiculous now. Its time GOI uses the full potential of the treaty for India's benefit. GOI should expedite the works in progress to prevent the 3 maf from flowing into pakistan. issues is not water stealing by india but its mismanagement by pakistan and now to divert public attention they blame it on india...just for example the their objection on Luhri project on sutlej...pakistan which has no locus standi on sutlej now going to world bank with its complain on dam on sutlej.Never mind that the Luhri run of the river project is located on an “Eastern River”, the Sutlej, which is exclusively allocated by the Indus River Water Treaty to India, there is scope to whip up a sense of national victimhood when the claim is slapped down by the World Bank.


Pakistan writes to World Bank on concerns over Sutlej power project
 
Last edited:
.
The desire for peace –Ikram Sehgal


There is now a dire and immediate need to change old mindsets and give way to a new and positive thinking. Both Pakistan and India need to avoid shortsighted policies for political point-scoring or short-term gains

Peace and good relations between Pakistan and India will remain a dream unless two core issues are sorted out. Kashmir has lingered for over 60 years for a resolution while the one now taking priority is the dispute over water. The water dispute directly threatens the very survival of Pakistan because of the continuing impasse over our access to water supplies from India. India effectively controls water flows into Pakistan that begin in Jammu and Kashmir and has commenced a string of ambitious water projects because of which disputes over water allocation have risen, adding further impediments to a resolution of the Kashmir dispute in the foreseeable future.

Pakistan has a 77 percent dependency on water, the highest amongst the major South Asian countries. In 1948, after India started controlling the flow of river water into Pakistan, the issue became internationalised and after years of negotiations, the World Bank brokered a deal between the two countries in 1960 that became known as the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT). The Treaty provided exclusive rights to India over the eastern rivers Ravi, Beas and Sutlej, whereas the use of western rivers Indus, Jehlum and Chenab were allowed to Pakistan. As per the agreement, the flow of these rivers into Pakistan can neither be stopped nor hindered. A few exceptions in the treaty do allow India to use the water for domestic use and generation of hydroelectric power, but precluding building of any storage thereon. However, India has commenced work on the Baglihar and two other controversial dams on River Chenab named Uri-1 and Uri-2. As far as River Jehlum is concerned, India has started construction work on the Kishanganga Hydropower Project. The resultant squeeze on these two rivers waters downstream will have grave and catastrophic consequences for the agriculture sector of Pakistan with the potential to drastically affect its economy. Moreover, should any dam malfunction or collapse, it will have grave consequences for Pakistan in the shape of massive floods in its areas. A greater perception is developing in the national print and electronic media to make our water rights a cornerstone of our foreign policy, water being the most vital issue for the national security of Pakistan.

The IWT is an excellent mechanism, an example that agreements are possible, provided its functional aspect is held paramount rather than the political. It was signed at a time when water was available in abundance and when climate change was not affecting water supplies. Instead of abandoning a treaty that has managed extremely well despite three wars between the two countries, perhaps it could be revamped keeping the interests of both parties in sight. Unfortunately, the functional aspect is being sacrificed at the altar of politics at present. This issue has been politicised to such an extent that the level of mistrust has soared to new heights, especially on the Pakistani side.

Perhaps new and innovative areas of cooperation can be envisaged outside the treaty. Islamabad has suggested joint watershed management and joint commissioning of environmental studies that would address the emerging concerns arising from reduced flows.

Gordon McKay, professor of Environmental Engineering at Harvard University, has written an excellent piece entitled ‘War or Peace on the Indus’ (The Daily Star, April 26, 2010), which gives honest and unbiased views from the perspective of one who is not a party to the dispute. He says, “Had Baglihar been the only dam being built by India on the Chenab and Jehlum, this would be a limited problem. But following Baglihar is a veritable caravan of Indian projects — Kishanganga, Sawalkot, Pakuldul, Bursar, Dal Huste, Gyspa...the cumulative live storage will be large, giving India an unquestioned capacity to have major impact on the timing of flows into Pakistan.

“This is a very uneven playing field. The regional hegemon is the upper riparian and has all the cards in its hands. This asymmetry means that it is India that is driving the train, and that change must start in India.” He then goes on to explain ways in which India needs to show a spirit of statesmanship to resolve this issue.

The Composite Dialogue process, initiated by Prime Minister Vajpayee and President Pervez Musharraf in January 2004, identified eight issues to be discussed bilaterally between the two countries. A rare opportunity was lost in October 2004 in not going ahead with Musharraf’s pragmatic and flexible ‘out of the box’ solution, which called for demilitarisation of the regions of Jammu and Kashmir, soft borders through travel and trade, granting of maximum autonomy to the five regions of Jammu and Kashmir and withdrawal of Indian and Pakistani forces.

Musharraf’s initiative was a very brave one. Interestingly, it came from a military person and broke new ground. Let us go a little further today and be more controversial in the search for peace. Why not constant and meaningful military-to-military contact, including slots in each other’s training schools and presence in military exercises as observers (and not just a hotline between the DGMOs), to tear down the walls of suspicion in the military mindset? After all, on UN Peacekeeping duties in many troubled areas of the world, the Pakistani and Indian soldiers seem to serve together well, even coming to each other’s help in times of need.

A satisfactory solution of the Kashmir dispute from Pakistan’s point of view is not within reach in the short-term because of the current massive power imbalance in favour of India. The time has come for the adoption of a long-term approach in contrast with our efforts in the past to find an immediate solution. Pakistan must work with India for improving the plight of the Kashmiris through protection of their human rights, starting the natural lateral trade and unrestricted movement across the LoC, reciprocal and substantial reduction in the military presence in the territory and mutually pulling them out of machine gun and mortar range, if not artillery range.

On April 29, 2010, Pakistan and India agreed to the resumption of a high-level dialogue, which had been unilaterally stopped by India since the Mumbai terror attacks. The two nuclear-armed neighbours must move forward for the sake of peace and stability in the region, particularly on the terrorism front. There is now a dire and immediate need to change old mindsets and give way to a new and positive thinking. Both Pakistan and India need to avoid shortsighted policies for political point-scoring or short-term gains, which have resulted in poisoning their relations in the past and diverting their attention from the gigantic task of eradicating poverty and raising the standard of living of the vast mass of their peoples living below the poverty line. Both countries face a social time bomb that is ticking away.
 
.
India finalises two new projects on Chenab




Thursday, May 27, 2010
By Munawar Hasan

LAHORE: India has given final shape to two new projects on the River Chenab with combined production capacity of about 2,000 MW, while one of them will have the ability to store water.

Karthai Dam is being developed in two phases on a tributary of Chenab. Besides, having storage component, it will generate 1,240 Megawatts, which is more than the capacity of Pakistan’s second biggest reservoir Mangla Dam that produces 1150 MW.

The first phase of Karthai Dam will have generation capacity of 240 MW. Most importantly, the Asian Development Bank is providing $800 million for development of this project being constructed on disputed territory under the Jammu and Kashmir Clean Power Development Investment Program. The category of the loan has been described as Energy/Large Hydropower.

The second project is 690 MW Ratle Hydropower Project. The Board of Directors meeting of Jammu and Kashmir Power Development Corporation held on May 20 in Srinagar was informed that all necessary steps and procedural formalities were completed to kickstart the ambitious Ratle power project.

The tariff bidding process also stands completed under which the State of Kashmir will be able to receive just 15 per cent free power and additional one percent cost will be spent on the development of Kishtwar area where the Ratle project is located.

Similarly, 55 per cent power will be provided to the state from the project at the rate of Rs 1.44 per unit. The Ratle Power Project has been proposed for implementation in independent power producers (IPPs) mode through tariff based competitive bidding. GVK Power and Infrastructure Ltd bagged 690 MW Ratle Hydroelectric Power Project on March 10, 2010.

Indian Rs 50 billion worth of project will be constructed on the River Chenab, after its confluence with Marusudar River, in the Drabshalla area of Kishtwar district, Jammu & Kashmir. The contract is based on build, own, operate and transfer (BOOT) basis under a 40-year concession period.

Speaking on the occasion, Held Kashmir Chief Minister Omer Abdullah stressed efficiency in the JKPDC so that the target of tapping 3,000 megawatts during the next four years may be achieved. The meeting was informed that JKPDC was fully geared up to execute all power projects on a fast track basis. The board also reviewed the ongoing construction work of 450 MW Baglihar-II power project.

The board was informed that work is in full progress and the JKPDC is determined to ensure completion of the project by 2012. The board also reviewed the progress of 93 MW Ganderbal Power Project.

Participants of the meeting include one Muslim bureaucrat, Economic Adviser to J&K Government, Jaleel Ahmad Khan, while all other officials including Chief Secretary J&K SS Kapoor, Principal Secretary PDD BR Sharma, Commissioner/ Secretary Planning BB Vyas, Director General Budget Ravi Mangotra, Director Finance JKPDC belong to minority in state.

The Indian government has eyed the Chenab valley, particularly Kishtwar district, for fully utilizing hydro and irrigation potential of Chenab River, which flows toward Pakistan. Meanwhile, when contacted, Pakistan Commissioner for Indus Waters Jamaat Ali Shah said his office was aware of the development about new projects being developed on Chenab River.

He said, as per Indus Waters Treaty, India was bound to provide the design of proposed project on western rivers to Pakistan at least six months before launching construction work. However, he admitted, in some cases, India failed to do so, terming it clear violation of treaty. “We are in touch with Indian Commission about execution of new water sector projects on the western rivers,” he said, adding he will definitely take up this issue with India vigorously.
 
.
Rhetoric grows heated in water dispute between India, Pakistan

LAHORE, PAKISTAN -- The latest standoff between India and Pakistan features familiar elements: perceived Indian injustices, calls to arms by Pakistani extremists. But this dispute centers on something different: water.

Militant organizations traditionally focused on liberating Indian-held Kashmir have adopted water as a rallying cry, accusing India of strangling upstream rivers to desiccate downstream farms in Pakistan's dry agricultural heartland. This spring, a religious leader suspected of links to the 2008 Mumbai attacks led a protest here of thousands of farmers driving tractors and carrying signs warning: "Water Flows or Blood." The cleric, Hafiz Sayeed, recently told worshipers that India was guilty of "water terrorism."

India and Pakistan have pledged to improve relations. But Sayeed's water rhetoric, echoed in shrill headlines on both sides of the border, encapsulates two issues that threaten those fragile peace efforts -- an Indian dam project on the shared Indus River and Pakistan's reluctance to crack down on Sayeed.

It also signals the expanding ambitions of Punjab-based militant groups such as the banned Lashkar-i-Taiba, founded by Sayeed, through an issue that touches millions who live off Pakistan's increasingly arid land.

Pakistan's water supply is dwindling because of climate change, outdated farming techniques and an exploding population. Now Pakistan says India is exacerbating its woes by violating the treaty that for 50 years has governed use of water originating in Kashmir.

India denies the charge, and its ambassador to Pakistan recently called the water theft allegations "preposterous." International water experts say that there is little evidence India is diverting water from Pakistan but that Pakistan is right to feel vulnerable because its water is downstream of India's.

Washington has pressured the two nations to settle their differences. India and Pakistan have fought three major wars, and the conflict has kept much of Pakistan's army focused eastward, not on Islamist insurgents. India wants Pakistan to target India-focused militants, and it is outraged that Sayeed -- whose sermons often call for jihad against India -- remains free. India blamed the Mumbai attacks on Lashkar-i-Taiba.

Yet even as the nations' civilian leaders were building bridges, Pakistan's military underscored the perceived Indian threat last month with large-scale military exercises near the border. With the Kashmir liberation struggle waning in Pakistan's public consciousness, some analysts say Sayeed's use of the water issue demonstrates his long-standing links to Pakistan's powerful security establishment, elements of which do not favor peacemaking.

"Hafiz Sayeed is trying to echo the establishment's line," said Rifaat Hussain, a professor of security studies at Qaid-i-Azam University in Islamabad. "The government is trying to shift the focus of Kashmir as part of a jihadist thing . . . to an existential issue."

Hydroelectric projects

Politics aside, experts say, Pakistan's water situation is reaching crisis proportions. As the population has grown over six decades, per-capita water availability has dropped by more than two-thirds. About 90 percent of the water is used for agriculture, making it an economic lifeline but leaving little for human consumption.

Inefficient irrigation and drainage techniques have degraded soil and worsened shortages, forcing many small farmers to pump for groundwater. A severe electricity crisis means most rely on diesel-powered pumps, but fuel prices are rising, said M. Ibrahim Mughal, head of Agri Forum, a farmers' advocacy group.

"You can't do agriculture without water," he said. "What will happen? Hunger."

The Indus Waters Treaty, which India and Pakistan signed in 1960, gave each country unfettered access to three rivers and limited rights to the other nation's rivers. A joint commission oversees the treaty, which water experts say has worked fairly well.

Cooperation has frayed as water has grown scarcer and India has stepped up new hydroelectric projects in Kashmir. Those plans have raised alarm in Pakistan, where newspapers and politicians regularly accuse India of secret designs to weaken its enemy by diverting water. Pakistan's Indus Water Commissioner, Jamaat Ali Shah, said his country believes that one proposed Indian dam on the Kishanganga, an Indus tributary, violates the treaty by making Pakistan's own plans for a hydroelectric project downstream unworkable.

"Candidness and transparency should be there. It is not," Shah said.

In a speech last month, India's ambassador to Pakistan, Sharat Sabharwal, said Pakistan has not detailed its complaints. Pakistan's water problems are attributable to factors including climatic conditions, he said, and blaming India was meant to "inflame public passions."

'Water declaration'

That is exactly what Sayeed is trying to do, according to Yahya Mujahid, a spokesman for the radical cleric's Islamic charity, Jamaat-ud-Dawa. The charity, which the United States and India call a front for Lashkar-i-Taiba, recently sponsored the farmer protest and released a "water declaration" alleging that India had "virtually declared war on Pakistan by unlawfully constructing dams and diverting Pakistani rivers."

Lashkar-i-Taiba has taken its fight against India beyond the disputed terrain of Kashmir to stage attacks in Afghanistan and work with militant organizations in Pakistan's northwest. But Sayeed has typically sought to uphold the group's Kashmir-focused reputation, making water a bit of a departure. Mujahid said Sayeed is helping desperate farmers pressure the government to solve their problems, not inciting jihad. But peace talks are unlikely to help, he said.

The dispute has hard-liners in both countries predicting war, alarming observers who say what should be a technical issue has veered into dangerous terrain.

John Briscoe, a Harvard professor and former World Bank water specialist in Pakistan and India, said allegations of India's "water robbery" are unfounded. But because India could influence river flows into Pakistan, he said, the wisest solution would be for India to initiate talks and perhaps call for a permanent neutral party to implement the treaty.

"On the Indian side, the last thing I would want to come into India-Pakistan relations is an issue as visceral as water," Briscoe said. But, he added, "it's all about politics and political will."

washingtonpost.com
 
.
Marxist said:
Rhetoric grows heated in water dispute between India, Pakistan

"Candidness and transparency should be there. It is not," Shah said.
Mr. Jamat ali shah is again caught lying through his teeth..if transparency is no there then how come pakistan is able to object specific designs in case of Bagalihar and kihanganga projects.If tranparency is not there then howcome pakistan is able to object the gated and ungated wullar lake design???
 
.
India rubbishes Pak charges on water theft

New Delhi, May 30 (PTI) Peeved at Pakistan's oft-repeated allegation that it is being deprived of its share of common waters, India on Sunday said such charges were aimed at diverting the attention of their people from their "own inefficient" use of the vital resource.

On the eve of the bilateral talks on water here, India asserted that it has never deprived Pakistan of its share of water, not even during wars and had no intention to do so ever.

"India has no intention of taking away water which may be rightfully theirs...We have demonstrated this even in the past. When relations were at nadir, when we were at war, we did not use water as a weapon to deprive them of their share," Water Resources Minister Pawan Kumar Bansal told PTI.

fullstory
 
.

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom