What's new

Pakistan And India-Water Disputes-News And Updates

China has not entered into any treaty for sharing river waters with any country

SO why should we care ; And after all Terrorism is an International war crime



With whom did they sign

Did I say it was water sharing, it's to do with hydro electric power and it's a confidence building measure. I put up the link from your own media.
Fine don't care, let's see what can happen. You seem to be one jumping down most for this.
 
.
The problem is that you may be finished right at the starting point, I don't see the advantage there.



The South China Sea, do you think they are bothered by the Indian "market". Your own analysts are writing about a nasty Chinese response, your media says the same thing. Why haven't they picked up on this?
I'm with you, no one should play with water in the region, especially one with so much interdependence.

You know the credibility of these 'analysts'. They are dime a dozen. I can bet China will stay neutral. China will certainly not sacrifice its well being for Pakistan. They have their self interests to look after, they will not want overt hostilities with India that can put off their plans and economic growth.
 
.
Let us agree to disagree.

My logic is faultless, and you are banking on 'hope'.

China is far too smart to fall for this trick and get involved. I have ZERO doubt that they will stay away except for making a few comments and publish a few articles in global times.

You have no logic. Think, you're going to punish Pakistan, when you're a lower riparian state yourself. Fine logic.
Your analysts think China will get involved, so does your media, and so do others my dear chap.
Yes, let's disagree.

You know the credibility of these 'analysts'. They are dime a dozen. I can bet China will stay neutral. China will certainly not sacrifice its well being for Pakistan. They have their self interests to look after, they will not want overt hostilities with India that can put off their plans and economic growth.

They're not just a dime a dozen, many of them are quite respected, but anyway let's not character assassinate, their reasoning is sound. China will step in if you are destabilising the region. They won't sit by, and that's why many of your strategists think as well. As for growth, I already mentioned the South China Sea. Their interests are Pakistan.....
 
. .
You have no logic. Think, you're going to punish Pakistan, when you're a lower riparian state yourself. Fine logic.
Your analysts think China will get involved, so does your media, and so do other my dear chap.
Yes, let's disagree.

Its a win for India IF China gets involved AND IF China DOES NOT get involved. Either way India stands to gain.

Its silly to see it as an attempt to 'punish' pakistan. pakistan is not a kid that needs to be 'punished'.

The right metaphor is to see pakistan as a ruthless sociopath that needs to be arm twisted into a straight jacket. IWT seems to be the best bet with the lowest cost.

The Bonus is if we can lure China into this trap and use this opportunity to sign a water treaty with them too.

But one thing is for sure, once the treaty is opened up for renegotiation, pakistan share of the water is only going to Decrease.
 
.
Its a win for India IF China gets involved AND IF China DOES NOT get involved.

Its silly to see it as an attempt to 'punish' pakistan. pakistan is not a kid that needs to be 'punished'.

The right metaphor is to see pakistan as a ruthless psychopath that needs to be arm twisted into a straight jacket. IWT seems to be the best bet with the lowest cost.

The Bonus is if we can lure China into this trap and use this opportunity to sign a water treaty with them too.

But one thing is for sure, once the treaty is opened up for renegotiation, pakistan share of the water is only going to Decrease.

The only arm twisting, or in your case arm broken being a more apt term, will be yours if you embark on the water issue. Luring China into a trap? Oh, I've always wanted to create a section where we can post fan fiction threads, your "trapping" of China will make for a fine start.
If Pakistan's share will decrease, so will India's.
 
.
You have no logic. Think, you're going to punish Pakistan, when you're a lower riparian state yourself. Fine logic.
Your analysts think China will get involved, so does your media, and so do others my dear chap.
Yes, let's disagree.



They're not just a dime a dozen, many of them are quite respected, but anyway let's not character assassinate, their reasoning is sound. China will step in if you are destabilising the region. They won't sit by, and that's why many of your strategists think as well. As for growth, I already mentioned the South China Sea. Their interests are Pakistan.....


Two simple points here.China diverting the course of the Brahmaputra certainly affects India but it would be catastrophic for Bangladesh .After all , the Brahmaputra flows through Aunachal Pradesh & Assam where the population doesn't exceed 40 million combined.

As far as the iIndus & other rivers flowing into Pakistan through India goes, if they begin damming it , the IWT would be rendered defunct .
 
.
You have no logic. Think, you're going to punish Pakistan, when you're a lower riparian state yourself. Fine logic.
Your analysts think China will get involved, so does your media, and so do others my dear chap.
Yes, let's disagree.



They're not just a dime a dozen, many of them are quite respected, but anyway let's not character assassinate, their reasoning is sound. China will step in if you are destabilising the region. They won't sit by, and that's why many of your strategists think as well. As for growth, I already mentioned the South China Sea. Their interests are Pakistan.....

Anyway I respect your opinion, but I defer. China will do a strategic blunder if its makes India an overt enemy . And I say Chinese interests is China and not Pakistan. Pakistan is valuable to China because China has it own issues with India, and see it as a challenger to its primacy in Asia. But again Chinese and Indian interests are intertwined in economic sphere, with Chinese companies investing billions of dollars in India, the relation between India and China is very complex than what you are suggesting.
 
.
The only arm twisting, or in your case arm broken being a more apt term, will be yours if you embark on the water issue. Luring China into a trap? Oh, I've always wanted to create a section where we can post fan fiction threads, your "trapping" of China will make for a fine start.
If Pakistan's share will decrease, so will India's.

Either way Modi govt. has put the IWT on the table and its already being discussed in the cabinet. I am pretty sure whatever I can think off, the GoI can do better.

China is already trapped by its own action that have pushed India toward the US and China knows it. As one chinese had admitted to me, China is its own worst enemy.
 
.
The only arm twisting, or in your case arm broken being a more apt term, will be yours if you embark on the water issue. Luring China into a trap? Oh, I've always wanted to create a section where we can post fan fiction threads, your "trapping" of China will make for a fine start.
If Pakistan's share will decrease, so will India's.
What is to Embark On the water Sir We Will Divert our Share Right Now.We Shared 83 % water With Pakistan When Treaty say Share Will be equal 50:50

We Will only get back our share which constitutes 33 % Mentioned Its Neither violate Any treaty but we need What is ours ? since 56 Years
 
.
Turning off Indus tap easier said than done

It is an idea that keeps returning to the table — but India probably can’t consider it without risks, including those of flooding its own cities and provoking even bigger waves of terror.

Written by Amitabh Sinha | New Delhi | Updated: September 23, 2016 5:46 am
The Treaty has survived wars and innumerable phases of frosty relations. It is held up as an example of a global model of cooperation between countries.

Amid the clamour for avenging the Uri attack, a non-military option being suggested — including by Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s External Affairs Minister Yashwant Sinha (The Indian Express, September 22) — is the abrogation of the 56-year-old Indus Waters Treaty that defines the water-sharing arrangement for six rivers of the Indus basin that flow through both India and Pakistan. The argument is that India, being upstream, can stop the flow of waters to Pakistan and bring it to its knees.

Pakistan’s dependence on the Indus system cannot be overstated.

About 65% of its geographical area, including the entire Punjab province, is part of the Indus basin. The country has the world’s largest canal irrigation system, thanks to its development of the basin, which accounts for more than 90% of its irrigated area. Its three biggest dams, and several smaller ones, are located here. These are sources for hydroelectricity, irrigation and drinking water for millions of Pakistanis. If the tap could indeed be turned off from the Indian side, Pakistan’s capitulation is expected to be swift.

Indus Waters Treaty

In stark contrast to their dealings in other matters, India and Pakistan have managed their shared river waters quite amicably, thanks to the Indus Waters Treaty of 1960. The Treaty has survived wars and innumerable phases of frosty relations. So much so, it is cited as the global model for cooperation on the use of trans-boundary river waters. The success of the Treaty also lends weight to the theory that when it comes to water, nations tend to cooperate rather than get into a conflict.
The Treaty, which came after a decade of World Bank-brokered negotiations, classified the six rivers of the Indus system into ‘eastern’ and ‘western’ rivers. Sutlej, Beas and Ravi were eastern; Jhelum, Chenab and Indus itself were western. The categorisation was relative — the western rivers flow almost parallely to the west of the eastern ones. Indus, the largest river, originates in China, so does the Sutlej. The other four rise in India; all enter Pakistan from India.

The Treaty gave India full rights over the waters of the eastern rivers, while it had to let the western rivers flow “unrestricted” to Pakistan. India could use the waters of western rivers as well, but only in a “non-consumptive” manner. It could use it for domestic purposes, and even for irrigation and hydropower production, but only in the manner specified in the Treaty. With the eastern rivers, India could do as it pleased.

A Permanent Indus Commission was established to implement the Treaty. Each country has an Indus Commissioner, and they meet regularly — every six months these days — to exchange information and data, and to settle minor disputes. Meetings of the Indus Commissioners have never been suspended — more than 110 rounds of meetings, held alternately in India and Pakistan, have taken place so far.

Armtwisting through Indus

The idea that India can armtwist Pakistan through the Indus Waters Treaty is not new. It has been floated every time relations have soured between the two countries. It is seen as the easiest and most effective option, and the one with practically no collateral damage. But there is no evidence to suggest it has been given any serious thought, even during the Kargil war or Operation Parakram, the two most serious standoffs in the last couple of decades.

That is because not everyone believes it would help India in achieving its desired objective — that of forcing Islamabad to act on cross-border terrorism.

“It would be detrimental to India’s interests in the long run. There is already strong discomfort in Pakistan with the fact that India controls its rivers. This despite the fact that India has always complied with the provisions of the Treaty. In fact, the eagerness in a section of Pakistani society to wrest Kashmir originates in the desire to take control of its rivers. Any tinkering with the Treaty is likely to see an intensification of Pak-backed activities in J&K,” said Shakil Ahmad Romshoo, head of the Earth Sciences Department at Kashmir University in Srinagar.

Romshoo pointed out that river waters cannot be stopped or released at the turn of a switch. “Waters cannot be immediately stopped from flowing to Pakistan unless we are ready to inundate our own cities. Srinagar, Jammu and every other city in the state and in Punjab would get flooded if we somehow were able to prevent the waters from flowing into Pakistan,” he said.

Uttam Sinha of the Institute of Defence Studies and Analyses said Pakistan could be pressured even without stopping the waters or violating any other provisions of the Indus Treaty.

“We have never used our rights on the western rivers. Under the Treaty, we can make use of the waters of the western rivers for irrigation, storage, and even for producing electricity, in the manner specified. If we just do what we are entitled to under the Treaty, it would be enough to send jitters through Pakistan. It would be a strong signal without doing anything drastic,” Sinha said.

Indeed, the Treaty allows India to construct storage up to 3.6 million acre feet on the western rivers. But India has developed no storage capacities; nor has it utilised the water it is entitled to for irrigation.
Sinha also argued for India’s greater engagement with Afghanistan on the development of the Kabul river that flows into Pakistan through the Indus basin. “This again can make Pakistan extremely nervous. It is in our strategic interest in any case to enhance our engagement on developmental issues with Afghanistan,” he said.

Stopping the waters of the Indus rivers, on the other hand, can be counterproductive, Sinha said. “We have water-sharing arrangements with other neighbours as well. Not honouring the Indus Treaty would make them uneasy and distrustful. And we would lose our voice if China, decides to do something similar.”

http://indianexpress.com/article/ex...elation-indus-water-treaty-terrorism-3044967/
 
.
Turning off Indus tap easier said than done


Armtwisting through Indus

The idea that India can armtwist Pakistan through the Indus Waters Treaty is not new. It has been floated every time relations have soured between the two countries. It is seen as the easiest and most effective option, and the one with practically no collateral damage. But there is no evidence to suggest it has been given any serious thought, even during the Kargil war or Operation Parakram, the two most serious standoffs in the last couple of decades.

That is because not everyone believes it would help India in achieving its desired objective — that of forcing Islamabad to act on cross-border terrorism.

“It would be detrimental to India’s interests in the long run. There is already strong discomfort in Pakistan with the fact that India controls its rivers. This despite the fact that India has always complied with the provisions of the Treaty. In fact, the eagerness in a section of Pakistani society to wrest Kashmir originates in the desire to take control of its rivers. Any tinkering with the Treaty is likely to see an intensification of Pak-backed activities in J&K,” said Shakil Ahmad Romshoo, head of the Earth Sciences Department at Kashmir University in Srinagar.

Romshoo pointed out that river waters cannot be stopped or released at the turn of a switch. “Waters cannot be immediately stopped from flowing to Pakistan unless we are ready to inundate our own cities. Srinagar, Jammu and every other city in the state and in Punjab would get flooded if we somehow were able to prevent the waters from flowing into Pakistan,” he said.

Uttam Sinha of the Institute of Defence Studies and Analyses said Pakistan could be pressured even without stopping the waters or violating any other provisions of the Indus Treaty.

We have never used our rights on the western rivers. Under the Treaty, we can make use of the waters of the western rivers for irrigation, storage, and even for producing electricity, in the manner specified. If we just do what we are entitled to under the Treaty, it would be enough to send jitters through Pakistan. It would be a strong signal without doing anything drastic,” Sinha said.

Indeed, the Treaty allows India to construct storage up to 3.6 million acre feet on the western rivers. But India has developed no storage capacities; nor has it utilised the water it is entitled to for irrigation.
Sinha also argued for India’s greater engagement with Afghanistan on the development of the Kabul river that flows into Pakistan through the Indus basin. “
This again can make Pakistan extremely nervous. It is in our strategic interest in any case to enhance our engagement on developmental issues with Afghanistan,” he said.

Stopping the waters of the Indus rivers, on the other hand, can be counterproductive, Sinha said. “We have water-sharing arrangements with other neighbours as well. Not honouring the Indus Treaty would make them uneasy and distrustful. And we would lose our voice if China, decides to do something similar.”

http://indianexpress.com/article/ex...elation-indus-water-treaty-terrorism-3044967/



Please refer to the highlighted part within the article.
 
.
Two simple points here.China diverting the course of the Brahmaputra certainly affects India but it would be catastrophic for Bangladesh .After all , the Brahmaputra flows through Aunachal Pradesh & Assam where the population doesn't exceed 40 million combined.

As far as the iIndus & other rivers flowing into Pakistan through India goes, if they begin damming it , the IWT would be rendered defunct .

The simple point here, which you haven't mentioned is that it's not just about the Brahmaputra. But let me tackle this first. If it effects Bangladesh, that's a cause for concern, but they'll blame you for starting it, not China. China reacts after you embark on your little water war. 40 million is still a great deal of people. Now imagine them migrating, you already have quite a high population per density, the knock-on effects will be tragic.
China will also stop the Sutlej river, which feeds millions, and reduce the flow of the Ghaghara, a major tributary of the Ganga, which will prove catastrophic.
The Indus starts in China, you can't do squat about that.

Either way Modi govt. has put the IWT on the table and its already being discussed in the cabinet. I am pretty sure whatever I can think off, the GoI can do better.

China is already trapped by its own action that have pushed India toward the US and China knows it. As one chinese had admitted to me, China is its own worst enemy.

Modi will not deliver anything on the IWT, other things he might. As for the whole US thing, you live next door to China and Pakistan. I also highly doubt any Chinese said that to you.

Anyway I respect your opinion, but I defer. China will do a strategic blunder if its makes India an overt enemy . And I say Chinese interests is China and not Pakistan. Pakistan is valuable to China because China has it own issues with India, and see it as a challenger to its primacy in Asia. But again Chinese and Indian interests are intertwined in economic sphere, with Chinese companies investing billions of dollars in India, the relation between India and China is very complex than what you are suggesting.

No problem, I respect yours, that's why we converse here a great deal.
Back to the point, you would be going beyond the whole "overt" enemy thing with Pakistan, and be looking to hurt the country. China won't play nice after that, and it doesn't care about making India an enemy if you play hardball with water. The economic stuff means little, when Chinese interests are at stake, one of which is not to let it's most closest ally be starved of water, even if it is by a little.

What is to Embark On the water Sir We Will Divert our Share Right Now.We Shared 83 % water With Pakistan When Treaty say Share Will be equal 50:50

We Will only get back our share which constitutes 33 % Mentioned Its Neither violate Any treaty but we need What is ours ? since 56 Years

That's fair, I can't say anything about that and it does say that in the treaty.
 
.
Modi will not deliver anything on the IWT, other things he might. As for the whole US thing, you live next door to China and Pakistan. I also highly doubt any Chinese said that to you.

Chinese-dragon said that to me right here in pdf. :P

As for Modi acting on the IWT, he has no choice in the matter. There is enough public pressure on him to act and act he must and he will. Only thing is will be declare it before acting or will he act first and then declare it sometime in the future, only time will tell.
 
.
The simple point here, which you haven't mentioned is that it's not just about the Brahmaputra. But let me tackle this first. If it effects Bangladesh, that's a cause for concern, but they'll blame you for starting it, not China. China reacts after you embark on your little water war. 40 million is still a great deal of people. Now imagine them migrating, you already have quite a high population per density, the knock-on effects will be tragic.
China will also stop the Sutlej river, which feeds millions, and reduce the flow of the Ghaghara, a major tributary of the Ganga, which will prove catastrophic.
The Indus starts in China, you can't do squat about that.



Modi will not deliver anything on the IWT, other things he might. As for the whole US thing, you live next door to China and Pakistan. I also highly doubt any Chinese said that to you.


BD may well blame India for starting it , but they would know who controls the levers for it.As far as the Sutlej & Ghaggra goes , you're assuming China would do it to spite India. they won't.They would do it only if they can derive any economic or social benefit from damming either rivers.besides the Ghaggar has to cross Nepal too before it enters India which brings me to another point .Both these rivers gain most of their waters once they enter India & Nepal as far as the Sutlej & Ghaggra is concerned .

Coming back to the 30-40 million people , the waters from the now reduced Brahmaputra would suffice for the 30-40 million in India not for the entire population of the lower Brahmaputra Meghna basin.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom