jha
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2009
- Messages
- 10,962
- Reaction score
- -8
- Country
- Location
As if you need a reason to start a war and we all know what happens in the end ..
Infrastructural development in J&K should also be given top priority...
Pakistan And India-Water Disputes-News And Updates
- Thread starter fawwaxs
- Start date
As if you need a reason to start a war and we all know what happens in the end ..
Infrastructural development in J&K should also be given top priority...
Perceptron
BANNED
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2010
- Messages
- 834
- Reaction score
- 0
Pak's delay in taking up Nimoo-Bazgo Hydropower Project issue may benefit India
Islamabad, Thu, 26 Jan 2012 ANI
Islamabad, Jan 26(ANI): The delay by Pakistan's Indus Water Commission in approaching the International Court of Arbitration (ICA) over the construction of 45-megawatt Nimoo-Bazgo Hydropower Project may benefit India.
A senior Pakistani official told the Daily Times that the case would be taken up next month due to a delay in preparing the documents.
India has said that it would complete the controversial project by June 2013, but Pakistani authorities are continuously delaying the decision to challenge construction of the project.
A source said the commission had decided to maintain silence on the issue following an inquiry initiated against former Pakistan's water commissioner Jamaat Ali Shah for his alleged involvement in facilitating Indian authorities in the construction of the project.
The 57-metre-high Nimoo-Bazgo Hydroelectric Project is being developed in the Leh district on the Indus River and the 42-metre-high Chuttak Hydroelectric Project is also being completed on the Suru River in Kargil district, he added.
The said projects will reduce the flow of the Indus River, which is a lifeline of Pakistan.
A Pakistani delegation, which had earlier visited the site of the project had claimed that the concerned project negates the provisions of Indus Waters Treaty.
India has, however, rejected those objections. (ANI)
Islamabad, Thu, 26 Jan 2012 ANI
Islamabad, Jan 26(ANI): The delay by Pakistan's Indus Water Commission in approaching the International Court of Arbitration (ICA) over the construction of 45-megawatt Nimoo-Bazgo Hydropower Project may benefit India.
A senior Pakistani official told the Daily Times that the case would be taken up next month due to a delay in preparing the documents.
India has said that it would complete the controversial project by June 2013, but Pakistani authorities are continuously delaying the decision to challenge construction of the project.
A source said the commission had decided to maintain silence on the issue following an inquiry initiated against former Pakistan's water commissioner Jamaat Ali Shah for his alleged involvement in facilitating Indian authorities in the construction of the project.
The 57-metre-high Nimoo-Bazgo Hydroelectric Project is being developed in the Leh district on the Indus River and the 42-metre-high Chuttak Hydroelectric Project is also being completed on the Suru River in Kargil district, he added.
The said projects will reduce the flow of the Indus River, which is a lifeline of Pakistan.
A Pakistani delegation, which had earlier visited the site of the project had claimed that the concerned project negates the provisions of Indus Waters Treaty.
India has, however, rejected those objections. (ANI)
Marxist
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2009
- Messages
- 2,894
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Dealing with Pakistan's fears on water
Lower riparian anxiety
The general lower-riparian anxiety vis-à-vis the upper riparian is accentuated in this case by the antagonistic political relationship between Pakistan and India. In the context of such a relationship, it is easy for the people to be persuaded that the upper riparian has malign intentions and might either stop the flows or store and release the waters in a flood to the detriment of the lower riparian. There is no need to discuss these fears further, as they were fully taken note of and covered by special provisions in the Indus Waters Treaty 1960 (IWT) to safeguard Pakistan against these dangers. If a ‘visceral lower riparian anxiety' tends to persist despite the IWT, there can be no institutional answer to it.
The only circumstance which will ensure a total absence of anxiety on Pakistan's part would be a total absence of Indian structures on the western rivers, but that is not what the IWT says. It permits Indian projects on the western rivers, but stipulates restrictions and conditions that safeguard Pakistan's interests. The best reassurance that Pakistan can have is full Indian compliance with those Treaty provisions, and this is zealously watched by the Indus Commissioner for Pakistan in the Permanent Indus Commission.
Water scarcity and reduced flows
There is, in Pakistan as in India, a growing perception of water scarcity and of a crisis looming on the horizon. Given the mutual hostility between the two countries, it is not surprising that there is a tendency in Pakistan to believe that the scarcity it is experiencing or fearing is partly attributable to upper riparian actions. While popular perceptions in this regard may not be based on proper information and understanding, they seem to receive unwitting corroboration in reported findings by Pakistani scholars of a trend of reduction in the flows in the western rivers. A ready inference would be that there must be diversions in the upstream country. Denials by the upper riparian are apt to be received with scepticism. The only answer to this is to institute a joint study by experts of both countries to determine whether in fact there is a trend of reduced flows in the western rivers and, if so, to identify the factors responsible.
Baglihar arbitration
Without going into the details of the points referred to by the Neutral Expert (NE) in the Baglihar case and his findings on them, we must take note of two of the NE's observations which have caused much anxiety in Pakistan. The first was that the 1960 Treaty does not bind the project planners to the 1960 technology, and that the state-of-the-art technology can be used; and the second was that the proper maintenance of a reservoir required periodical flushing to get rid of silt, and that while the dead storage could not be used for operational purposes, it could be used for the purpose of maintenance. (The above is a rough summary of the relevant observations and not a reproduction of the exact words of the NE.) The first observation seems self-evident; no one can seriously argue that a dam in 2007 should have been built to the 1960 technology. The second, however, worries Pakistan because the possibility of periodical flushing of the reservoir might hold the potential of compromising the protection given to Pakistan against flooding. Pakistan has now included this point in its reference to the Court of Arbitration in the Kishenganga case. We shall have to await the decision of the Court.
Initial filling at Baglihar
Incidentally, the myth that there was a serious and deliberate violation of the Treaty by India during the initial filling of the Baglihar reservoir is now an established belief in Pakistan. This writer has dealt with this elsewhere and will not go into the details here. Assuming that the flow at Merala during the filling period fell below the prescribed minimum level (this itself is debatable because there is no joint observation), the important point is that the lapse, if any, was a minor one and lasted only for a short period — less than a day — and could not possibly have caused serious damage.
Why was this minor matter blown up into a huge controversy by Pakistan? The answer is perhaps that Pakistan was deeply disappointed over the Baglihar arbitration and was ready to take advantage of an opportunity to put India on the mat for an alleged deviation from the Treaty. The Indus Commission has now closed this issue.
Is the Treaty being stretched?
The Treaty prescribes stringent restrictions on the features and operations of Indian projects on the western rivers, but does not lay down any limits on the total number of projects that can be built, the height of the dams, the total power-generation capacity, etc. Pakistanis wonder whether the Treaty really intended to give India freedom to build any number of projects of any size whatsoever on the rivers allocated to Pakistan. In Track II meetings, some Pakistani participants express their concern at the fact that the provisions evidently intended (as they see it) to grant minor concessions to India seem to be opening the doors to major control over the western rivers. They also worry about the cumulative impact of a large number of projects, each of which may be in compliance with the Treaty.
It is difficult to deal with such apprehensions. Once a Treaty comes into being after prolonged negotiations, one must thereafter go by what it says, and not import into it conditions and restrictions not explicitly stated. However, the point about ‘cumulative impact' needs to be considered. Such a question has been raised even in relation to rivers in India, and the cumulative impact of a large number of dams planned on the Ganga is currently under study. Such a concern, expressed in relation to the Indus system, is equally worthy of attention. Here again, a joint study by experts of both countries seems desirable.
Flows in the eastern rivers
One new question that is now being raised in Track II talks is that of a certain reasonable flow being maintained in the eastern rivers. The eastern rivers are allocated exclusively to India, and the Treaty does not say anything about flows to Pakistan, but (in the opinion of Pakistani participants in Track II talks) it does not follow that India is at liberty to dry up those rivers altogether and send no flows at all or drastically reduced flows to Pakistan. They argue that if current thinking can be invoked for the design of spillway gates (as the NE argued in the Baglihar case), then current thinking on ‘minimum flows' or ‘ecological flows' must also be heeded. This may not be a Treaty requirement, but to this writer it seems a point that needs consideration.
Ideas of cooperation
Pleas are also made for holistic, integrated management of the entire system, joint watershed management, etc. These are unexceptionable ideas, but it was because this kind of approach was not found possible that the system was partitioned into two in 1960. Even today, it cannot be said that the relationship between the two countries has dramatically and durably changed for the better. For the present, what one can ask for is the operation of the existing Treaty in a constructive, cooperative spirit.
Climate change
However, climate change and its impact on water are matters of vital concern, and the two countries must begin immediately to work together on these. There is already a measure of cooperation between them in the international negotiations, but this must go beyond the limited issue of emission reductions. This cannot be brought within the ambit of the Treaty but must be a separate exercise. In fact, this must involve other South Asian countries as well.
The Hindu : Opinion / Lead : Dealing with Pakistan's fears on water
Lower riparian anxiety
The general lower-riparian anxiety vis-à-vis the upper riparian is accentuated in this case by the antagonistic political relationship between Pakistan and India. In the context of such a relationship, it is easy for the people to be persuaded that the upper riparian has malign intentions and might either stop the flows or store and release the waters in a flood to the detriment of the lower riparian. There is no need to discuss these fears further, as they were fully taken note of and covered by special provisions in the Indus Waters Treaty 1960 (IWT) to safeguard Pakistan against these dangers. If a ‘visceral lower riparian anxiety' tends to persist despite the IWT, there can be no institutional answer to it.
The only circumstance which will ensure a total absence of anxiety on Pakistan's part would be a total absence of Indian structures on the western rivers, but that is not what the IWT says. It permits Indian projects on the western rivers, but stipulates restrictions and conditions that safeguard Pakistan's interests. The best reassurance that Pakistan can have is full Indian compliance with those Treaty provisions, and this is zealously watched by the Indus Commissioner for Pakistan in the Permanent Indus Commission.
Water scarcity and reduced flows
There is, in Pakistan as in India, a growing perception of water scarcity and of a crisis looming on the horizon. Given the mutual hostility between the two countries, it is not surprising that there is a tendency in Pakistan to believe that the scarcity it is experiencing or fearing is partly attributable to upper riparian actions. While popular perceptions in this regard may not be based on proper information and understanding, they seem to receive unwitting corroboration in reported findings by Pakistani scholars of a trend of reduction in the flows in the western rivers. A ready inference would be that there must be diversions in the upstream country. Denials by the upper riparian are apt to be received with scepticism. The only answer to this is to institute a joint study by experts of both countries to determine whether in fact there is a trend of reduced flows in the western rivers and, if so, to identify the factors responsible.
Baglihar arbitration
Without going into the details of the points referred to by the Neutral Expert (NE) in the Baglihar case and his findings on them, we must take note of two of the NE's observations which have caused much anxiety in Pakistan. The first was that the 1960 Treaty does not bind the project planners to the 1960 technology, and that the state-of-the-art technology can be used; and the second was that the proper maintenance of a reservoir required periodical flushing to get rid of silt, and that while the dead storage could not be used for operational purposes, it could be used for the purpose of maintenance. (The above is a rough summary of the relevant observations and not a reproduction of the exact words of the NE.) The first observation seems self-evident; no one can seriously argue that a dam in 2007 should have been built to the 1960 technology. The second, however, worries Pakistan because the possibility of periodical flushing of the reservoir might hold the potential of compromising the protection given to Pakistan against flooding. Pakistan has now included this point in its reference to the Court of Arbitration in the Kishenganga case. We shall have to await the decision of the Court.
Initial filling at Baglihar
Incidentally, the myth that there was a serious and deliberate violation of the Treaty by India during the initial filling of the Baglihar reservoir is now an established belief in Pakistan. This writer has dealt with this elsewhere and will not go into the details here. Assuming that the flow at Merala during the filling period fell below the prescribed minimum level (this itself is debatable because there is no joint observation), the important point is that the lapse, if any, was a minor one and lasted only for a short period — less than a day — and could not possibly have caused serious damage.
Why was this minor matter blown up into a huge controversy by Pakistan? The answer is perhaps that Pakistan was deeply disappointed over the Baglihar arbitration and was ready to take advantage of an opportunity to put India on the mat for an alleged deviation from the Treaty. The Indus Commission has now closed this issue.
Is the Treaty being stretched?
The Treaty prescribes stringent restrictions on the features and operations of Indian projects on the western rivers, but does not lay down any limits on the total number of projects that can be built, the height of the dams, the total power-generation capacity, etc. Pakistanis wonder whether the Treaty really intended to give India freedom to build any number of projects of any size whatsoever on the rivers allocated to Pakistan. In Track II meetings, some Pakistani participants express their concern at the fact that the provisions evidently intended (as they see it) to grant minor concessions to India seem to be opening the doors to major control over the western rivers. They also worry about the cumulative impact of a large number of projects, each of which may be in compliance with the Treaty.
It is difficult to deal with such apprehensions. Once a Treaty comes into being after prolonged negotiations, one must thereafter go by what it says, and not import into it conditions and restrictions not explicitly stated. However, the point about ‘cumulative impact' needs to be considered. Such a question has been raised even in relation to rivers in India, and the cumulative impact of a large number of dams planned on the Ganga is currently under study. Such a concern, expressed in relation to the Indus system, is equally worthy of attention. Here again, a joint study by experts of both countries seems desirable.
Flows in the eastern rivers
One new question that is now being raised in Track II talks is that of a certain reasonable flow being maintained in the eastern rivers. The eastern rivers are allocated exclusively to India, and the Treaty does not say anything about flows to Pakistan, but (in the opinion of Pakistani participants in Track II talks) it does not follow that India is at liberty to dry up those rivers altogether and send no flows at all or drastically reduced flows to Pakistan. They argue that if current thinking can be invoked for the design of spillway gates (as the NE argued in the Baglihar case), then current thinking on ‘minimum flows' or ‘ecological flows' must also be heeded. This may not be a Treaty requirement, but to this writer it seems a point that needs consideration.
Ideas of cooperation
Pleas are also made for holistic, integrated management of the entire system, joint watershed management, etc. These are unexceptionable ideas, but it was because this kind of approach was not found possible that the system was partitioned into two in 1960. Even today, it cannot be said that the relationship between the two countries has dramatically and durably changed for the better. For the present, what one can ask for is the operation of the existing Treaty in a constructive, cooperative spirit.
Climate change
However, climate change and its impact on water are matters of vital concern, and the two countries must begin immediately to work together on these. There is already a measure of cooperation between them in the international negotiations, but this must go beyond the limited issue of emission reductions. This cannot be brought within the ambit of the Treaty but must be a separate exercise. In fact, this must involve other South Asian countries as well.
The Hindu : Opinion / Lead : Dealing with Pakistan's fears on water
Edevelop
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2007
- Messages
- 14,735
- Reaction score
- 23
- Country
- Location
Pakistan might lose more water to India
* Water commission lazy over Nimoo-Bazgo project
By Zeeshan Javaid
ISLAMABAD: Despite getting approval by Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani to approach the International Court of Arbitration (ICA) over the construction of controversial 45-megawatt Nimoo-Bazgo Hydropower Project in Indian-held Kashmir (IHK), the Indus Water Commission (IWC) once again seems to be lazy for resolution of the issue after losing the cases of Baglihar and Kishanganga hydropower projects.
A senior official of the IWC said that the commission had gotten approval by the PM, but the case would be taken up next month due to delay in preparation of documentation of the Nimoo-Bazgo case.
Interestingly, Indian authorities claim they would complete the Nimoo-Bazgo Hydropower Project by June 2013, but Pakistani authorities keep on delaying the decision to challenge construction of the 45MW project.
If Pakistan continues to delay approaching the ICA over the said issue, the case would go in favour of India and Pakistani authorities will lose yet another such case, as they have already lost the cases of Baglihar and Kishanganga hydropower projects.
When the scribe tried to contact Indus Water Commissioner Sheraz Memon, his personal assistant (PA) said Memon was not in a position to talk to the media, especially after the case of alleged involvement of former water commissioner Jamaat Ali Shah in facilitating Indian authorities.
The PA further said that Memon was not interested in sharing any information regarding trans-boundary issues, especially those involving Indian authorities.
On the other hand, well-placed sources in the water commission revealed that the commission is yet to arrange technical and legal supportive documentation regarding the controversial Nimoo-Bazgo Hydroelectric Project.
A source said after the inquiries established against former water commissioner Jamaat Ali Shah for his alleged involvement in facilitating Indian authorities in the construction of Nimoo-Bazgo project, the entire commission had decided to tighten their lips over any controversial trans-boundary issue.
The official said the 57-metre-high Nimoo-Bazgo Hydroelectric Project is being developed in the Leh district on the Indus River.
Additionally, 42-metre-high Chuttak Hydroelectric Project is also being completed on the Suru River, a tributary of Indus in the Kargil district of Indian-held Kashmir.
The said projects will reduce the flows of Indus River, the lifeline of Pakistan. These dams can store up to 120 million cubic metres of water.
A Pakistani delegation visited the site of Nimoo-Bazgo Hydroelectric Project in October 2011 and raised five objections, mainly related to the height of spillways and depth of the dam. However the Indian authorities rejected those objections. Pakistan is of the view that the construction of Nimoo-Bazgo project negates the provisions of Indus Waters Treaty.
The two countries have previously met in similar circumstances on the international forum twice - once over the construction of Baglihar Dam in Indian-held Kashmir and the second time over construction of Kishanganga Dam on the Neelum River at Gurez, also in Kashmir.
Baglihar Dam was constructed by India with a 450MW power generation capacity on the Chenab River.
Pakistan had challenged the construction of Baglihar Dam before neutral experts, but the decision went against it. The ICA barred India from permanent constructions on the Kishanganga Hydroelectric Project in a short-term order, but the final decision is yet to come.
Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan
* Water commission lazy over Nimoo-Bazgo project
By Zeeshan Javaid
ISLAMABAD: Despite getting approval by Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani to approach the International Court of Arbitration (ICA) over the construction of controversial 45-megawatt Nimoo-Bazgo Hydropower Project in Indian-held Kashmir (IHK), the Indus Water Commission (IWC) once again seems to be lazy for resolution of the issue after losing the cases of Baglihar and Kishanganga hydropower projects.
A senior official of the IWC said that the commission had gotten approval by the PM, but the case would be taken up next month due to delay in preparation of documentation of the Nimoo-Bazgo case.
Interestingly, Indian authorities claim they would complete the Nimoo-Bazgo Hydropower Project by June 2013, but Pakistani authorities keep on delaying the decision to challenge construction of the 45MW project.
If Pakistan continues to delay approaching the ICA over the said issue, the case would go in favour of India and Pakistani authorities will lose yet another such case, as they have already lost the cases of Baglihar and Kishanganga hydropower projects.
When the scribe tried to contact Indus Water Commissioner Sheraz Memon, his personal assistant (PA) said Memon was not in a position to talk to the media, especially after the case of alleged involvement of former water commissioner Jamaat Ali Shah in facilitating Indian authorities.
The PA further said that Memon was not interested in sharing any information regarding trans-boundary issues, especially those involving Indian authorities.
On the other hand, well-placed sources in the water commission revealed that the commission is yet to arrange technical and legal supportive documentation regarding the controversial Nimoo-Bazgo Hydroelectric Project.
A source said after the inquiries established against former water commissioner Jamaat Ali Shah for his alleged involvement in facilitating Indian authorities in the construction of Nimoo-Bazgo project, the entire commission had decided to tighten their lips over any controversial trans-boundary issue.
The official said the 57-metre-high Nimoo-Bazgo Hydroelectric Project is being developed in the Leh district on the Indus River.
Additionally, 42-metre-high Chuttak Hydroelectric Project is also being completed on the Suru River, a tributary of Indus in the Kargil district of Indian-held Kashmir.
The said projects will reduce the flows of Indus River, the lifeline of Pakistan. These dams can store up to 120 million cubic metres of water.
A Pakistani delegation visited the site of Nimoo-Bazgo Hydroelectric Project in October 2011 and raised five objections, mainly related to the height of spillways and depth of the dam. However the Indian authorities rejected those objections. Pakistan is of the view that the construction of Nimoo-Bazgo project negates the provisions of Indus Waters Treaty.
The two countries have previously met in similar circumstances on the international forum twice - once over the construction of Baglihar Dam in Indian-held Kashmir and the second time over construction of Kishanganga Dam on the Neelum River at Gurez, also in Kashmir.
Baglihar Dam was constructed by India with a 450MW power generation capacity on the Chenab River.
Pakistan had challenged the construction of Baglihar Dam before neutral experts, but the decision went against it. The ICA barred India from permanent constructions on the Kishanganga Hydroelectric Project in a short-term order, but the final decision is yet to come.
Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan
nalandapride
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2011
- Messages
- 1,581
- Reaction score
- 0
^^^^
Pakistanis please respect Indus Water Treaty and don't argue about our right to produce electricity, you Ayub Khan regime only agreed that India has all right to build run-of-the-river Dams to produce hydroelectricity.
Pakistanis please respect Indus Water Treaty and don't argue about our right to produce electricity, you Ayub Khan regime only agreed that India has all right to build run-of-the-river Dams to produce hydroelectricity.
(To All indian's) and Mr.Karan
It seems that you are more Concern about Pakistan then india,
In India 20 Million people go hungry to bed every night,
40 % of population lives under poverty that is 500 Millions
2 times the population of Pakistan,
And our leaders are filling their Swiss bank accounts,
And they kept us busy with hindu-muslim and
Mandir-masjid game, and the latest is terrorism,
For your knowledge every year 5 million infants
Die due to corrupt government health service
Money is being spent and taxes are also collected
Promptly,
Let me tell you our enemy is not China / Pakistan
Our enemy is greedy political leaders and
Government authorities,
Terrorist mange to kill 1000 people since 10 years
And most of them home grown terror groups like Maoist and Gujarat, Bombay riot victims
But corruption killed at least 100 million people in India,
And we have introduced anti terror law but not ready to
Pass anti corruption bill,
Think of it that who is more effective in destroying our nation,
Pakistan,China, terrorist or .?
Why don't we support Anna Hazari and let that revolution succeed,
Insted of wasting our time here ?
It seems that you are more Concern about Pakistan then india,
In India 20 Million people go hungry to bed every night,
40 % of population lives under poverty that is 500 Millions
2 times the population of Pakistan,
And our leaders are filling their Swiss bank accounts,
And they kept us busy with hindu-muslim and
Mandir-masjid game, and the latest is terrorism,
For your knowledge every year 5 million infants
Die due to corrupt government health service
Money is being spent and taxes are also collected
Promptly,
Let me tell you our enemy is not China / Pakistan
Our enemy is greedy political leaders and
Government authorities,
Terrorist mange to kill 1000 people since 10 years
And most of them home grown terror groups like Maoist and Gujarat, Bombay riot victims
But corruption killed at least 100 million people in India,
And we have introduced anti terror law but not ready to
Pass anti corruption bill,
Think of it that who is more effective in destroying our nation,
Pakistan,China, terrorist or .?
Why don't we support Anna Hazari and let that revolution succeed,
Insted of wasting our time here ?
Israr_Ahmad
FULL MEMBER
New Recruit
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2012
- Messages
- 1
- Reaction score
- 0
China has built just one so called dam on Indus. But India has built 6 dams only on river Jhelum in J&k.
Wet Shirt Contest
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2012
- Messages
- 634
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Hi,
There is Nothing illegal in building damn's (we need electricity)
Indus Waters Treaty - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
@Topic
We Should Build More Dams
Thankx,
PeaceGen
BANNED
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2012
- Messages
- 3,889
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Why not create your own fresh water by evaporation on sunlight?
You'd pump water from the sea into a desert where it is evaporated in a field of thick black plastic cones. You can even stack the cones above eachother for increased efficiency..
It's really simple tech to develop I think.
There is no doubt that Pakistans economy is based on agriculture which is dependent on regular flow of water in all major rivers. But with an objective to convert cultivable land into desert, New Delhi has embarked on a mission to build a series of dams against the provisions of the Indus Water Treaty. On Chenab, it has built 11 dams while 24 similar facilities are in various stages of completion.
kurup
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2012
- Messages
- 10,563
- Reaction score
- -2
- Country
- Location
Good work by India ....
We should build more dams and this along with National River Linking Project will reduce water shortage in western and southern India while mitigating the impacts of floods in Northern India .......
Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan
Pakistan decides not to move ICA against Nimo Bazgo project
* India presented No Objection Certificate by Pakistan during recent secretary-level talks
ISLAMABAD: The federal government had decided not to file a lawsuit in the Permanent Court of Arbitration-International Court of Arbitration (PCA-ICA) in Hague regarding its concerns and grievances over the controversial 45MW Nimoo Bazgo hydroelectric power project, sources in the water sector informed Daily Times on Tuesday.
Regarding the 45MW controversial Nimoo Bazgo project on River Indus, Pakistani authorities were likely to lose the case before filing a lawsuit in the PCA-ICA to address the issue.
This development became mature after the recent secretary-level talks, which were held in Delhi, when Indian authorities took a strong position to defend their stance on certain hydropower projects, however Pakistani authorities couldnt clearly present their point of view.
It was further revealed that Indian authorities had completed the 45MW Nimoo Bazgo hydropower project and power generation from the project had started.
Sources further revealed that Indian authorities had also laid a document before Pakistani authorities, which reportedly allowed India to construct the controversial Nimoo Bazgo run-of-the-river project with a no-objection certificate inked by the former environment secretary.
The sources further maintained that the former environment secretary had played an important role in acquiring a Carbon Credit Certificate for India for Nimoo Bazgo project, which later on became a reason of early completion of the controversial project by Indian authorities.
Reliable officials in the Water and Power Ministry said on condition of anonymity that Prime Ministers Special Assistant on Water Resources Kamal Majeedullah had already hinted at malafide intentions of some officials involved in the matter.
Sources said the Water and Power Ministry and its subordinate institutions had completed the paper work for filing a lawsuit in the PCA-ICA, but after the recent development, the federal government had in principle taken a decision to step back from its stance. Former water and power minister Naveed Qamar who had expressed concerns over the inquiry report of a commission which he had himself established under the chairmanship of Water and Power Development Authority (WAPDA) Secretary Muhammad Imtiaz Tajawar to probe the alleged misconduct of former Indus water commissioner Jamat Ali Shah had formed a special committee to investigate the matter.
However, the special committee is yet to show any noticeable progress and apparently the file of the probe has been closed.
The inquiry conducted by WAPDA secretary had maintained that the former Indus water commissioner, Shah, had not played his due role and had remained silent about the Nimoo Bazgo project (built by India during 2002-2009), and had not raised any objections during the Pakistan-India meetings at the level of Permanent Indus Waters Commission. The 57-metre-high controversial Nimoo Bazgo hydroelectric power project is being developed in the Leh district on the River Indus. Additionally, the 42-metre-high Chuttak hydroelectric project is also being completed on the River Suru, a tributary of the Indus in the Kargil district of Indian-held Kashmir.
The controversial Nimoo Bazgo power project is a run-of-the-river project on the river Indus, situated at village Alchi, 70 kilometres from Leh in the state of Jammu and Kashmir.
The project was conceived on July 1, 2001, approved on June 8, 2005, and construction began on June 9, 2005.
Pakistan decides not to move ICA against Nimo Bazgo project
* India presented No Objection Certificate by Pakistan during recent secretary-level talks
ISLAMABAD: The federal government had decided not to file a lawsuit in the Permanent Court of Arbitration-International Court of Arbitration (PCA-ICA) in Hague regarding its concerns and grievances over the controversial 45MW Nimoo Bazgo hydroelectric power project, sources in the water sector informed Daily Times on Tuesday.
Regarding the 45MW controversial Nimoo Bazgo project on River Indus, Pakistani authorities were likely to lose the case before filing a lawsuit in the PCA-ICA to address the issue.
This development became mature after the recent secretary-level talks, which were held in Delhi, when Indian authorities took a strong position to defend their stance on certain hydropower projects, however Pakistani authorities couldnt clearly present their point of view.
It was further revealed that Indian authorities had completed the 45MW Nimoo Bazgo hydropower project and power generation from the project had started.
Sources further revealed that Indian authorities had also laid a document before Pakistani authorities, which reportedly allowed India to construct the controversial Nimoo Bazgo run-of-the-river project with a no-objection certificate inked by the former environment secretary.
The sources further maintained that the former environment secretary had played an important role in acquiring a Carbon Credit Certificate for India for Nimoo Bazgo project, which later on became a reason of early completion of the controversial project by Indian authorities.
Reliable officials in the Water and Power Ministry said on condition of anonymity that Prime Ministers Special Assistant on Water Resources Kamal Majeedullah had already hinted at malafide intentions of some officials involved in the matter.
Sources said the Water and Power Ministry and its subordinate institutions had completed the paper work for filing a lawsuit in the PCA-ICA, but after the recent development, the federal government had in principle taken a decision to step back from its stance. Former water and power minister Naveed Qamar who had expressed concerns over the inquiry report of a commission which he had himself established under the chairmanship of Water and Power Development Authority (WAPDA) Secretary Muhammad Imtiaz Tajawar to probe the alleged misconduct of former Indus water commissioner Jamat Ali Shah had formed a special committee to investigate the matter.
However, the special committee is yet to show any noticeable progress and apparently the file of the probe has been closed.
The inquiry conducted by WAPDA secretary had maintained that the former Indus water commissioner, Shah, had not played his due role and had remained silent about the Nimoo Bazgo project (built by India during 2002-2009), and had not raised any objections during the Pakistan-India meetings at the level of Permanent Indus Waters Commission. The 57-metre-high controversial Nimoo Bazgo hydroelectric power project is being developed in the Leh district on the River Indus. Additionally, the 42-metre-high Chuttak hydroelectric project is also being completed on the River Suru, a tributary of the Indus in the Kargil district of Indian-held Kashmir.
The controversial Nimoo Bazgo power project is a run-of-the-river project on the river Indus, situated at village Alchi, 70 kilometres from Leh in the state of Jammu and Kashmir.
The project was conceived on July 1, 2001, approved on June 8, 2005, and construction began on June 9, 2005.
IND151
BANNED
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2010
- Messages
- 10,170
- Reaction score
- 3
- Country
- Location
thanks for information
IND151
BANNED
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2010
- Messages
- 10,170
- Reaction score
- 3
- Country
- Location
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.
http://www.google.co.in/url?sa=t&rc...2_DLBg&usg=AFQjCNFYXBDxaH3q0fQFluQJOfpYlDoXaw
"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.
http://www.google.co.in/url?sa=t&rc...2_DLBg&usg=AFQjCNFYXBDxaH3q0fQFluQJOfpYlDoXaw
Similar threads
