Pakistan And India-Water Disputes-News And Updates

[ajtr]

Come February every year so does the noise gets loud till the monsoon arrives in june then...6 months of peace.

 

[ajtr]

The Real Culprits​

By Ayesha Siddiqa

Anyone passing through lower Cholistan, especially if they happen to be participating in the famous Cholistan jeep rally, will not fail to notice the prominent Lashkar-e-Tayyaba (LeT) and Jamaat-ud-Dawa (JuD) wall-chalkings. One of the slogans decries India for being “a water thief.” Water is a sensitive issue for people who don’t have access to it. India’s decision to construct new dams is causing major concern in the area. But that is not the only cause for concern in the region.

Move on towards Sadiqabad and Rahimyar Khan in Bahawalpur and you will hear farmers complain about how the army is stealing their share of water. In the past few years, they have held public demonstrations against water theft, but to no avail. According to official estimates, 21,000 acres of land in these two districts are affected due to water theft from the Abbasia link canal. Out of the canal’s capacity of 4,500 cusecs of water, nearly 350-400 cusecs are being stolen. This canal became operational in 2002 and the army units have made 20 illegal outlets (104-109 RD and 213-228 RD) at Chak Wahni and Qasimwala. Officially, the army is only allowed one outlet to feed its troops while they exercise in the area. Irrigation officials claim that even the legal outlet has been expanded illegally to draw more water. Driving along the canal, one can spot huge excavating machines and dumpers meant to dig the land and make outlets. Taking their cue from the army, others have also joined in the fray. The irrigation officials named some local politicians and professionals such as Asmatullah Niazi (district president, PML-Q), Iqbal Moghul (naib nazim, Liaquatpur), Iqbal Channar (MPA, PML-N), Professors Rafiq Minhas and Nazeer Khan, relatives of a local PPP politician, Col (retd) Naveed, and Brig (retd) S.M. Tiwana as some of those who steal water. But these officials contend that the army steals a larger share and poses a bigger problem. And unless they don’t stop this illegal practice, the civilians will continue to follow in their footsteps. In fact, civilian water thieves argue that they won’t stop until the army does the same. This makes it almost impossible for irrigation officials to stop anyone else.

Irrigation officials have tried their level best to put an end to this practice, but they lack the resources and the authority to contest the army’s involvement. The staff responsible for stopping such illegal practices comprises a sub-divisional officer (SDO), a mate and four baildars (agricultural labour). And they have no legal authority to arrest the offenders or take any action against them. The police, on the other hand, are reluctant to act because of fear and for administrative reasons. Since the area in question falls between two districts – Bahawalpur and Rahimyar Khan – it is usually not clear which DPO has jurisdiction to carry out the anti-theft operations. In any case, such administrative excuses are often used to hide the fact that no one wants to take on the Pakistan army. A couple of years back, when an irrigation department officer tried to close one of the army’s illegal outlets, he was manhandled and kept in custody for 24 hours. Interestingly, the army has also forcibly taken over two irrigation rest houses at Maitla and Qasimwala. The provincial administration and the chief minister Punjab knows of the matter and was updated about the situation during his visit to the area in June/July 2008. Despite all the information, he simply evaded the issue. The officials seemed especially unhappy with an army officer in charge of these operations.

Filing complaints against such high-handedness is a tough job because these matters do not come under the jurisdiction of the Bahawalpur Corps. Oddly enough such issues fall under the administrative control of the Pannu Aqil Corps, which operates through an office at Bahadur Chowk, Rahimyar Khan. The area was abuzz with complaints about the high handedness of the major representing the Pannu Aqil Corps.

Water theft, however, is only part of a bigger scam involving the army’s illegal occupation and use of state land. According to official records, the army has allegedly occupied 99,865 acres of Cholistan land and 5,000 acres belonging to the forest department. Moreover, it has 207,992 acres legally leased to it by the provincial government for operational purposes, such as for building firing ranges. A large chunk of the legally leased land was given to the army in 1978. In the larger Bahawalpur division (Cholistan is part of Bahawalpur), the army only has ownership of about 8,700 acres that were sold to it out of which 8,500 acres were purchased by the army to build a new cantonment in Bahawalpur city. However, the illegal acquisition of land and, moreover, its illegal subletting started mainly after 1999. These activities coincided with the tenure of three army officers who were put in charge of the Cholistan Development Authority (CDA) and had the power to allocate land.

The first one was a serving major general, S. Zaidi who served for a year. He was followed by a retired major general and later a retired brigadier who also acquired a personal stake in the illegal subletting of the illegally occupied land. The brigadier is now a cultivator of hundreds of acres. The tenure of the three officers spanned nearly a decade (1999-2008).

A lot of the illegally occupied land is used for commercial purposes. According to official records, the army has illegally leased out 17,063 acres of the illegally occupied land and 3,000 acres of its legally leased land. The land is sublet to big local landowners and businessmen of the area, or non-locals. In a lot of cases, land is leased out in the name of some senior army personnel, who then sublets it to others. The illegal water outlets are meant to provide uninterrupted supply of water to these lands. It is a very clever scheme because the cultivators don’t have to pay any water rates or agricultural and other taxes levied by the provincial government.

The land tends to be more productive than others because it is virgin land and has ample supply of water. The going rate in the area is Rs 35,000 per acre (this rate is common information for the local cultivators). Allegedly, there is no standard rate as far as the army is concerned. Depending on their level of acquaintanceship with the army, some may pay lower rent. In any case, there is no transparency in this business, and it is common knowledge that the actual rental income, deposited in the Corps Commander’s special fund with the intention of being spent on soldier’s welfare, is often less than the going rate. There is little transparency with regards to the special fund that was established during Zia’s reign as an amount of money placed at the Corps Commander’s discretion for use in secret or special operations, or for the welfare of soldiers. When a local revenue officer raised questions about the subletting rentals, he was politely told to mind his own business as a lot of ‘big fish’ had stakes in the property.

So the business continues, no questions asked. Poor Cholistanis are being deprived of their land and the farmers are being deprived of water, creating deep resentment among the locals against a state institution and the state itself.

 

[hembo]

Avoiding water warsNews & Views

Mohammad Jamil


The US Senate report released the other day warned that the Indus Water Treaty may fail to avert water wars between India and Pakistan, acknowledging that dams India is building in occupied Kashmir will limit supply of water to Pakistan at crucial moments. “This report highlights how water security is vital in achieving our foreign policy and national security goals and provides recommendations to foster regional cooperation and long-term stability,” said Senator John Kerry, chairman of the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee, while releasing the report. India is constructing 33 dams that are at various stages of completions, and cumulative effect of storing water would limit the supply to Pakistan at crucial moments in the growing season, the report added. Currently, the most controversial dam project is the proposed 330-megawatt dam on the Kishenganga River, a tributary of the Indus. The US Senate Foreign Relations Committee should have come out with the solution to the problem instead of giving an impression that Indus Water Treaty has become redundant. In fact, it is the responsibility of the international community to urge India to honour its commitment under the treaty. And this is the only way to avoid war.

With the climate change and as a consequence shrinking water availability across the Middle East, Asia and sub-Saharan Africa, violent conflict between states is increasingly likely. This matter was on the agenda of annul World Water Week forum in Stockholm held in 2006, but it could not answer the question raised in the meeting whether we are heading for an era of “hydrological warfare” in which rivers, lakes and aquifers become national security assets to be fought over, or controlled through proxy armies and client states? Or can water act as a force for peace and cooperation? It has been estimated by the experts that by 2025, more than two billion people are expected to live in countries that find it difficult or impossible to mobilize the water resources needed to meet the needs of agriculture, industry and households. Population growth, urbanization and the rapid development of manufacturing industries are relentlessly increasing demand for finite water resources. Symptoms of the resulting water stress are increasingly visible. In northern China, rivers now run dry in their lower reaches for much of the year. In parts of Pakistan and India, groundwater levels are falling so rapidly that from 10 percent to 20 percent of agricultural production is under threat.

In the past, there have been wars between the countries over religions, usurpation of territories and control of resources including oil, but in view of acute shortages of water in Africa, Middle East, Asia and elsewhere, the future wars could be fought over water.

In addition to Kashmir dispute, the Indus River Basin has been an area of conflict between India and Pakistan for about four decades. Spanning 1,800 miles, the river and its tributaries together make up one of the largest irrigation canals in the world. Dams and canals built in order to provide hydropower and irrigation have dried up stretches of the Indus River. The division of the river basin water has created friction among the countries of South Asia, and among their states and provinces. Accusations of overdrawing of share of water made by each province have resulted in the lack of water supplies to coastal regions of Pakistan. India and Bangladesh have also dispute over Ganges River water and India is resorting to water theft there as well. Nepal and Bangladesh are also victims of India’s water thievery. India had dispute with Bangladesh over Farrakha Barrage, with Nepal over Mahakali River and with Pakistan over 1960 Indus Water Treaty.

India is busy building dams on all rivers flowing into Pakistan from occupied Kashmir to regain control of water of western rivers in violation of Indus Water Treaty. This is being done under well thought-out strategy to render Pakistan’s link-canal system redundant, destroy agriculture of Pakistan which is its mainstay, and turn Pakistan into a desert. India has plans to construct 62 dams/hydro-electric units on Rivers Chenab and Jhelum; thus enabling it to render these rivers dry by 2014. Using its clout in Afghanistan, India has succeeded in convincing Karzai regime to build a dam on River Kabul and set up Kama Hydroelectric Project using 0.5MAF of Pakistan water. It has offered technical assistance for the proposed project, which will have serious repercussions on the water flow in River Indus. Pakistan, indeed, needs large reservoirs to meet the growing food requirements of ever-increasing population. Today, agricultural sector contributes 24 per cent to the Gross Domestic Product (GDP); two-third of population living in rural areas depends on it; absorbs more than 50 per cent of the labour force and provides the base for 75 per cent of exports in the form of raw materials and value-added products.

There is realization in all the provinces that water shortages can lead to food shortages and also rifts between the provinces. But the issue had been politicized for the last thirty years and genuine efforts were not made by the governments and leaders to resolve the contradictions by showing sense of accommodation and understanding of one another’s problems. However, consensus has been reached on Bhasha Dam, though belatedly; and now every effort should be made to expedite construction of this project. One does not have to be an agricultural scientist to know that water is indispensable to agriculture. It is a critical input into agriculture of a country especially when it is situated in an arid or semi-arid zone. Loss of storage capacity due to sedimentation in Tarbela and Mangla Dams is causing serious drop even for existing agricultural production. Food shortages and energy shortfall has already blighted Pakistan with the result that industry in all the provinces has also been adversely impacted. The present government and opposition parties seem to be too preoccupied with their power-sharing or power-grabbing plans, and do not have time to effectively pursue the matter with India or take up the matter of India’s violations of IWT with International Court of Justice.

Pakistan is facing acute shortage of water due to India’s river water diversion plan, which has adversely impacted the farmers and made it difficult for them to keep their body and soul together. Last year, Pakistan Muttahida Kisan Mahaz (MKM) has criticised the government’s silence over Chenab River water ‘piracy’ by India. The Mahaz president said: “Under the Indus Water Basin Treaty, India is required to release 16,000 cusec Chenab water to Pakistan whereas water flow at Head Marala has been reduced to only 5,000 cusec as a result of construction of Baglihar Dam Occupied Kashmir. Drastic fall in Chenab water flow had resulted in closure of Marala Ravi Link, Upper Chenab and BRB canals which met 75 per cent canal water requirement of Punjab”. The closure of three canals had created an acute shortage of water for Rabi crop, and wheat production had shown a decline last year in Punjab. According to the treaty, India could not use Chenab water, as it could affect the quantity or flow of the river. And it goes without saying that by making the reservoir, the flow of water will definitely be affected. Let the US Foreign Relations Committee hold another session to address the concerns of riparian states like Pakistan.

—The writer is Lahore-based senior journalist.

 

[hembo]

Threat of water war

THE India-Pakistan water dispute has mercifully been a low-key affair despite its potential lethality, and the two sides have had the good sense in the past to seek international mediation as provided for in the 1960 Indus Waters Treaty. Pakistan`s legitimate concerns over Indian dam-building activity in held Kashmir now seem to be evoking international sympathy. As the Foreign Office spokesman said on Thursday, the US Senate`s Foreign Relations Committee`s warning on “water wars” in the future substantiated Pakistan`s position on the issue. Released on Tuesday, the report notes with concern that the new dam and irrigation works in India-held Kashmir could give New Delhi the ability to deny Pakistan its share of Indus waters “at crucial moments in the growing season”. Seen against the history of India-Pakistan ties since independence and the three wars the two countries have fought, the water dispute could — as the Senate report said — add to the mistrust between the neighbours and lead to regional instability.

There is no doubt the Indus Waters Treaty served to remove a major source of conflict in South Asia by allotting the exclusive use of given rivers to both. But the treaty is more than five decades old, and because of the rapidly increasingly populations in the two countries and the need for increased water supplies, the two governments need to work together to avert a future conflict. Unlike India, Pakistan`s agriculture is entirely dependent on irrigation, and this makes Pakistan vulnerable to changes resulting as much from climatic disorders and melting glaciers as from what India calls “non-consumptive irrigation works”. This is not such a simple matter. The inflexibility which the Senate report finds in the Indus treaty can be overcome if Islamabad and New Delhi themselves decide to show flexibility. In 2007, the judgment on Baglihar dam was accepted by the two sides gracefully, though that has by no means served to resolve the long-term threat from the non-resolution of the water dispute. One hopes the two sides will consider the “serious ramifications” which the Senate report speaks of when they finally resume their suspended dialogue.

 

[Secret Service]

oye bharatiyon Susral ke ghar ka Pani nai petay.....!

 

[majesticpankaj]

good job by india...

 

[Hutchroy]

Moratorium on Kishanganga project urged

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan should make efforts to secure a moratorium on the construction by India of the controversial Kishanganga hydropower project on Jhelum River, a government official said on Friday, adding that without such relief Pakistan would be losing precious time while preparing its case for submission to the International Court of Arbitration (COA) that could result in a fait accompli against Islamabad’s water rights.

Talking to Dawn, the official said that during the first meeting of the COA held in January in the Netherlands, the parties to the dispute only agreed to a schedule of proceedings that would be apparently going against Pakistan’s interests.

Under the schedule, Islamabad is required to submit its case memorial before the COA by the middle of April which would be responded to by India in six months, said the official, who holds a senior post in the Water and Power Ministry.

He said the Pakistani team should have pleaded for stopping India from going ahead with the project because New Delhi would have achieved more progress by the end of September, the time when it is required to submit its counter-case memorial.

“As of now there is no restriction on India to stop the construction work,” said an official engaged with the Pakistani team. “We will try our best to seek a moratorium on the construction when we present our case next month.”

A member of the Pakistani team confirmed that the case memorial would be submitted to the international court in the second week of April.

“So far we have not submitted the case memorial,” the official said, explaining that Pakistan had initially filed a ‘request for arbitration’ which had been taken up by UN-constituted court.

The next step is to file a formal case memorial, identifying objections over Kishanganga’s design and its impact on Pakistan’s interests.

In the first meeting, the sources said, Pakistan had objected to some information leaked by Indian authorities to the media.

The COA took a strong note of the leaks and issued a warning to India over making the court’s proceedings and procedures public before it reached any conclusion.

 

[habiba]

china is that friend who informed pakistan about indian's army intrusion in 1961 war. she is not a so called friend but a true friend. oh im sorry, what does india know about true frindship when all her neighbours are tired of her opporunitism and backstabbing.

 

[habiba]

are all the indians so pessimists?

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

Intelligence agencies seize record of two ministries | Newspaper | DAWN.COM

SLAMABAD: Intelligence agencies seized on Friday the record of at least two federal ministries to investigate an alleged institutional lapse in raising objections over Indian aggression on the country’s water rights and securing international carbon credits on hydropower projects disputed by Pakistan.

According to sources, the agencies came into action after receiving reports that the ministries of water and power and environment had absolved themselves of negligence in the matter. They said arrests of some officials could not be ruled out.

While inter-ministerial correspondence over the lapse continued for over nine months, the crucial objections over adverse environmental impact of the projects nearing completion on the Indian side had not yet been officially taken up with New Delhi, the sources said.

They said the ministry of water and power had said it was not responsible for the lapse because it was the job of the Pakistan Environmental Protection Agency to conduct an environmental impact assessment.

The ministry said it had no role in ratification of trans-boundary impact assessments, whose documents had not been shared with it.

On the other hand, the environment ministry washed its hand of the matter, too.

It said that since the Indian projects were of a strategic nature, it could not have intervened unless its attention had been drawn to the issue and professional advice sought.

The sources said the intelligence agencies had also taken away the record of the ‘Manual of responsibilities — Indus Water Treaty 1960’ issued by the office of the commissioner for Permanent Indus Commission in 1971.

The 72-page manual defines the responsibilities of the ministries of defence, interior and Kashmir affairs, industries and natural resources, the Met department, provincial governments, the railways and the Water and Power Development Authority. The names of several ministries have since been changed and some new institutions created.

Following a Dawn report in July last year, the prime minister’s office asked the ministries of water and power, foreign affairs and environment how India had secured carbon credits from the United Nations for the Chutak and Nimoo-Bazgo hydropower projects being built in violation of the treaty.

These ministries were taken by surprise over India’s success in getting carbon credits without clearance by Pakistan of cross-border environmental impact assessment reports of the projects despite Islamabad’s representative heading a forum of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) that approved such credits.

The National Assembly’s climate change committee also got briefings from officials of the ministries of water and power and foreign affairs and urged the prime minister to ascertain “how this criminal negligence took place”.

Water and Power Secretary Javed Iqbal ordered an inquiry, led by a joint secretary, to establish how officials of the ministry and Pakistan’s permanent Indus water commissioner had delayed pursuing technical objections over not only these two projects but also over a number of others being built by India. These projects include the Kishanganga hydropower plan, which has now been taken up with the international court of arbitration.

Under the UNFCCC mechanism, carbon credit cannot be granted for a project having a cross-boundary environmental impact unless cleared by the countries concerned.

Officials said the main concern was that how India secured the credits in disregard of Pakistan’s objections over the projects at the Permanent Indus Water Commission and whether some officials had knowingly or unknowingly allowed trans-boundary EIAs.

They said the lapse might have already compromised the country’s opposition to the projects.

The under-construction 42-metre high Chutak hydroelectric project is located on the Suru River, a tributary of the Indus, in the Kargil district of Indian-held Kashmir. The 57-metre high Nimoo-Bazgo project is being developed in the Leh district on the Indus. Both projects were launched in 2005 and are nearing completion.

Under Clause 37(b) of the UNFCCC, it was mandatory for India to get approval from Pakistan before getting carbon credits, but it has been earning the credits on the projects for two years under a ‘clean development mechanism project’.

The projects were approved by the UNFCCC in August 2008 and India had applied in March 2006.

It was mandatory for India to get ratified from Pakistan the environmental assessment reports of both projects to earn carbon credits, but their ‘project design documents’ were approved by CDM’s executive board of the UNFCCC.

India claimed in its validation report that trans-boundary environmental impacts had been considered in accordance with procedures laid down in Clause 37(c) of CDM modalities and procedure.

 

[indiatester]

The Hindu : Opinion / Lead : Pakistan: water on the boil again

Pakistan: water on the boil again
Water has the potential of becoming a new ‘core issue' of even greater prominence than Kashmir, and calls for urgent attention.

The ‘water issue' between India and Pakistan, which has been relatively quiescent for a while, is becoming prominent once again. A year ago, one could have said that there is no water issue because water-sharing on the Indus stands settled by the Indus Treaty 1960, but that argument does not work now. Water has become an ‘issue' because Pakistan has made it one. This article will not speculate on why and how this has come about. The important point is that water has the potential of becoming a new ‘core issue' of even greater prominence than Kashmir, and calls for urgent attention.

The points that are repeatedly made in Pakistan are the following:

(1) India is storing or diverting waters to the detriment of Pakistan. (In stronger language this becomes: “India is stealing Pakistan's water”.)

(2) The water scarcity in Pakistan is caused (or partly caused) by Indian action.

(3) The flows in the western rivers have diminished over the years, and India, as the upper riparian, must bear the responsibility for this.

(4) India is misusing the provisions of the Indus Treaty. Every Indian project on the western rivers is a violation of the Indus Treaty.

(5) The Neutral Expert in the Baglihar case misinterpreted the Treaty and weakened the protection that Pakistan had under the Treaty.

(6) As if this were not enough, India deliberately caused harm to Pakistan in the initial filling of the Baglihar reservoir by the timing of the filling and by failing to maintain the prescribed minimum flow at Merala.

(7) Even if each project conforms to the provisions of the Treaty, the cumulative impact of the large number of projects that India proposes to construct will be huge and will cause great harm to Pakistan.

(8) Environmental concerns did not figure at all in the Indus Treaty but must now be taken into account.

(9) A wholly new development is climate change and the impact that it will have on water. This needs to be discussed between the two countries.

It is easy enough to dismiss most of the points listed above, barring the last two, as errors or misperceptions. However, that kind of summary dismissal of Pakistani concerns is not enough; something more needs to be said on those points.

(i) Storage/Diversion: So far as one knows, India has not built any storage, not even the 3.6 MAF permitted by the Treaty, nor does it intend to cause harm to Pakistan by diverting Indus waters. In any case, there is such a thing as the Permanent Indus Commission. How can India store or divert waters to the detriment of Pakistan under the watchful eyes of the Indus Commissioner for Pakistan?

(ii) Water scarcity in Pakistan: It is clear enough from (i) above that India has nothing to do with this.

(iii) Reduced flows in the western rivers: Assuming that this is the case, it does not follow that the responsibility for it can be laid on India. What needs to be done is to institute a joint study by Pakistani and Indian experts to establish that there is a declining trend in flows and to ascertain the factors responsible.

(iv) Violations of the provisions of the Indus Treaty by India; every Indian project a violation of the Treaty: This is simply not true. The Treaty envisages and permits Indian projects on the western rivers, and so the projects in themselves cannot be violations of the Treaty. They can be violations of the Treaty if they deviate from certain restrictive provisions, but that will be questioned by the Indus Commissioner for Pakistan. The questions may be resolved within the Commission, or become differences and get referred to a Neutral Expert (as happened in the Baglihar case), or may be in the nature of disputes to be referred to a Court of Arbitration (as has now happened in the Kishenganga case). Where then is the question of violation of the Treaty?

(v) Misuse of the Treaty: A recent article in the Pakistani media is headed ‘Misusing the Indus Treaty.' India might argue that it is only using and not misusing the Treaty, and that it is Pakistan that is misusing the Treaty to block every Indian project on the western rivers. Leaving that aside, the point is that Pakistan is fundamentally unreconciled to the permissive provisions of the Treaty that enable India to construct hydroelectric projects on the western rivers. However, the Treaty exists and both India and Pakistan are signatories to it. Pakistan has accepted the permissive provisions and India has accepted the restrictive provisions.

(vi) Baglihar; Neutral Expert blamed: The NE is accused of ‘re-interpreting' the Treaty and weakening the protection to Pakistan. When Pakistan talks about ‘reinterpretation' it has three things in mind. First, the NE took the view that the 1960 Treaty does not bind India to 1960 technology and that India could use state-of-the-art technology; it is difficult to see how that view can be questioned. Secondly, he gave importance to techno-economic soundness and satisfactory operation; again, it is difficult to see how this can be objected to, and moreover, the Treaty itself repeatedly qualifies its conditions by the proviso “consistent with sound and economical design and satisfactory construction and operation”; those words cannot be ignored. Thirdly, the NE stressed the importance of periodical flushing of the reservoir to get rid of sediment. This is what has caused the greatest anxiety to Pakistan because it seemed to weaken the protection against possible flooding. It is difficult to see how an expert engineer could have held that flushing was not necessary and that rapid silting-up must be accepted. However, there is no need to discuss this as the issue has been raised before the Court of Arbitration in the Kishenganga case.

(vii) Initial filling of the Baglihar reservoir: The myth that India deliberately filled the Baglihar reservoir in such a manner as to cause maximum harm to Pakistan refuses to die down despite repeated explanations. The filling was completed well within the prescribed period; there was no deviation in that respect. The shortfall with reference to the prescribed minimum flow at Merala (of which there are different estimates by India and Pakistan, and no jointly observed figure) was only for a few hours — less than a day — and could not possibly have caused serious harm. There was indeed a lapse but a minor one, and definitely not a planned one. However, this became a major issue, and even though it has been closed by the Indus Commissioners, it continues to figure in articles in the media.

(viii) Cumulative impact of many projects: Opinion is divided on the question whether the cumulative impact of a number of projects, each conforming to the provisions of the Treaty, could be greater than the sum of the impacts of individual projects. This is a concern that needs to be taken seriously and should be jointly studied.

(ix) Environmental concerns, Climate Change: These are post-Treaty developments and call for urgent inter-country consultations, not only at the governmental level but also at academic and expert levels.

The above analysis shows that while a number of misperceptions need to be dispelled, joint studies are needed on (a) the reported reduction of flows in the western rivers and the factors responsible, and (b) the cumulative impact of a large number of projects on the western rivers. Inter-country consultations and research are also called for on environmental concerns and on the impacts of climate change.

However, that is not enough. Right or wrong, certain misperceptions on water persist and are widespread in Pakistan. This has serious implications for India-Pakistan relations and for peace on the subcontinent. Persistent efforts are needed at both official and non-official levels to remove misperceptions and to reassure the people of Pakistan that their anxieties are uncalled for.

An Indian perspective on the ongoing water issue.

 

[IND151]

'India didn't block water even during war'
TNN Apr 6, 2010, 03.57am IST
Tags:
Pakistan|India
NEW DELHI: As Pakistan drums up officially-sponsored hysteria on the "water dispute" with India, the government believes Islamabad is giving political overtones to "technical" issues.

On Saturday, Sharat Sabharwal, Indian envoy to Pakistan, described Islamabad's attempts to paint a picture of India as a water thief as "preposterous and completely unwarranted".

Even though Pakistan submitted a "non-paper" to India during the foreign secretary talks in February, Pakistani foreign minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi was quoted as telling TV interviewers on Friday that it wasn't India stealing Pakistan's water but Pakistan was wasting its water.


"The total average canal supplies of Pakistan are 104 million acres/ft. And the water available at the farm gate is about 70 million acre/ft. Where does the 34 million acre/ft go? It's not being stolen in India. It's being wasted in Pakistan," Qureshi is reported to have said in an interview.

In fact, in an interview on March 16, Pakistan PM Yousuf Raza Gilani contradicted his own government's contention that India's "water theft" was adversely affecting its crops. "When I took over as prime minister, there was shortage of wheat, Now there is a surplus. There is so much surplus that we had to construct new storage for our strategic reserves," he said.

Sabharwal quoted Pakistan's own documents to say that it lets 38 million acre feet (MAF) of water flow into the sea, and that too, during the kharif crop season. Pakistan has, in its internal strategies, bemoaned the lack of its own storage capabilities and the lack of hydropower generation capabilities.

According to World Bank, Pakistan has only 150 cubic metres water storage capacity as against 5,000 cubic metres in US and Australia and 2,200 cubic metres in China. With the appalling lack of storage capacities in Pakistan, World Bank estimated that its water shortfall would increase by about 12% in the next decade. Sabharwal noted that this had nothing to do with India but was a more fundamental question of mismanagement of scarce resources by Pakistan.

"Water productivity in Pakistan remains low... crop yields are much lower than international benchmarks. India has nothing to do with these issues of water management that are internal to Pakistan. Only Pakistan can seek solutions to these matters," Sabharwal said.

"We have never hindered water flows to which Pakistan is entitled, not even during the wars of 1965 and 1971... those who allege that India is acquiring the capacity to withhold Pakistan's share of water completely ignore the fact that this would require storage and canal network on a large scale. Such a network simply does not exist," he added.

'India didn't block water even during war' - Times Of India

 

[IND151]

hey guys visit this thread

 

[Omar1984]

India’s water terrorism


India continues its sinister designs and water terrorism by making dams and reservoirs on Pakistani rivers in violation of Indus Water Treaty. India has recently released 80000 to 100000 causecs of water after its dams were filled and could no longer accommodate additional water. On 16th August 2011, India spilled more than 70,000 cusecs of additional water into River Sutlej without prior information to Pakistani authorities, inundating dozens of villages in Ganda Singhwala area of Kasur district, which has caused billions of rupees loss to the farmers of the area. Water experts say that New Delhi, in sheer violation of the Indus Water Treaty, released more than 70,000 cusecs of water into River Sutlej at Pakistani side, which mounted its level to an alarming extent and washed away dozens of villages in Kasur after creating an emergency flood situation in the entire area. Agriculturists have suffered as the floods have destroyed the standing crops on a vast land comprising hundreds of hectares.

Officials said that thousands of stranded people are lying under the open sky in most parts of Kasur district while they are yet to receive any emergency aid from the authorities concerned. Over 170 villages along the Ravi are also evacuated every year while the local administration is put on high alert in Narowal and Sialkot districts to cope with any emergency, official sources said. “The local administration is working with the villagers to get over one hundred villages evacuated in Narowal district in the wake of possible deluge in the locality as India has started diverting floodwaters to Pakistan,” sources added. It is worth mentioning that during the Pak-India parleys held in March and May 2010, India had agreed to install telemetry system on the rivers in its territory to check real-time water flow. But later, New Delhi has backtracked from its promises vis-à-vis issues raised by Islamabad.

In such an eventuality, the question remains, how insidiously India is violating the Indus Water Teary (IWT-1960) by diverting the river courses. In the second week of August 2011, the experts said: “We have credible reports that India during this season is going to release about 200,000-cusec additional water in the River Ravi, Sutlej, Jhelum and Chenab”. Meanwhile, this high flow of water has washed away thousands of villages in Punjab province. Experts say that on one hand India is stealing Pakistani water by building dams on rivers flowing into Pakistan from Occupied Kashmir, whereas on the other hand New Delhi deflects river-courses during monsoon season to release floodwater towards Pakistani side. According to reports, India is constructing many dams on River Jhelum, out of which 4 big and 16 small dams have started functioning. India is constructing the third largest dam of the world in Kargil on River Indus, which will block 45 % flow of water to Pakistan.

This is being done under well thought-out strategy to render Pakistan’s link-canal system redundant, destroy agriculture of Pakistan, which is its mainstay, and turn Pakistan into a desert. India has plans to construct 62 dams/hydro-electric units on Rivers Chenab and Jhelum; thus enabling it to render these rivers dry by 2014. Using its clout in Afghanistan, India has succeeded in convincing Karzai regime to build a dam on River Kabul and set up Kama Hydroelectric Project using 0.5MAF of Pakistan water. It has offered technical assistance for the proposed project, which will have serious repercussions on the water flow in River Indus. Apart from India’s river diversion plan, Pakistanis leadership also failed to construct large reservoirs during the last thirty years to meet the growing food requirements of ever-increasing population, which exacerbated the situation. It has to be mentioned that conscientious leaders in other countries plan 50 to 100 years ahead to construct such projects.

Today, agricultural sector in Pakistan contributes 24 per cent to the Gross Domestic Product (GDP); two-third of population living in rural areas depends on it; absorbs more than 50 per cent of the labour force and provides the base for 75 per cent of exports in the form of raw materials and value-added products. India’s think-tanks have been working on river diversion plans with a view to creating acute water shortage in Pakistan, which could lead to shortage of wheat and other crops and also stoke inter-provincial conflicts over distribution of water. Last year, US Senate had released a report, which warned that the Indus Water Treaty may fail to avert water wars between India and Pakistan, acknowledging that dams India is building in occupied Kashmir will limit supply of water to Pakistan at crucial moments. Currently, the most controversial dam project is the proposed 330-megawatt dam on the Kishenganga River, a tributary of the Indus. Though the World Bank is a mediator in case differences emerge on Indus Water Treaty, but it does not play its role effectively.

In the past, there have been wars between many countries of the world over religions, usurpation of territories and control of resources including oil, but in view of acute shortages of water in Africa, Middle East, Asia and elsewhere, the future wars could be fought over water. In addition to Kashmir dispute, the Indus River Basin has been an area of conflict between India and Pakistan for about four decades. Spanning 1,800 miles, the river and its tributaries together make up one of the largest irrigation canals in the world. Dams and canals built in order to provide hydropower and irrigation have dried up stretches of the Indus River. In fact, it is the responsibility of the international community to urge India to honour its commitment under the treaty. And this is the only way to avoid war. With the climate change and as a consequence shrinking water availability across the Middle East, Asia and sub-Saharan Africa, violent conflict between states is increasingly likely.

It has been estimated by the experts that by 2025, more than two billion people are expected to live in countries that find it difficult or impossible to mobilize the water resources needed to meet the needs of agriculture, industry and households. Population growth, urbanization and the rapid development of manufacturing industries are relentlessly increasing demand for finite water resources. Symptoms of the resulting water stress are increasingly visible. In northern China, rivers now run dry in their lower reaches for much of the year. In parts of Pakistan and India, groundwater levels are falling so rapidly that from 10 percent to 20 percent of agricultural production is under threat. Shortage of power has also adversely impacted our economy, as electricity is not available to make up the shortfall of water through the use of tube wells especially when underground water table has receded. Pakistan must expedite the construction of Bhasha-Daimler project to overcome water and electricity shortages to keep the wheels of its industry running.

—The writer is Lahore-based senior journalist.






India’s water terrorism

 

[Subramanian]

Nothing can be done about this.People on the upstream will continue to build dams,thats the reality of geography.