Pakistan's Water Crisis and Mismanagement

[ajtr]

Hillary’s iron fist in a velvet glove​

Water dispute

The secretary of state, curtly rejecting Pakistan’s request for help in solving its water disputes with India, asked it to first manage its own resources before seeking external mediation.

“Pakistan has to get control of the water you currently have, because if you go to a mediation body and say water is being diverted, the first response will be you are not efficiently using the water you have,” she said.

In the Strategic Dialogue document prepared by Pakistan, Islamabad had placed the water crisis with India as the foremost issue of concern.

Pakistan has the world’s most extensive system for irrigation and transportation of water, but it has “been neglected and fallen into disuse” and steps need to be taken to address the situation, she said during her interaction with television anchors

 

[ajtr]

water mismanagement by Pakistan is nothing new for India. What is surprising is that they are unable to adhere to their own inter-provincial water sharing accord. To resolve the accusation of water theft between provinces, Pakistan has installed advanced satellite based telemetry system at a cost of over $350 Mn and it has failed to work.

The same system is insisted Pakistan to be installed by India to provide reliable RT data to Paa'stan for verifying adherence by India to IWT.

Once India accedes to this proposal, Pakistan would come up with non maintenance of system, accusation of fudging of data etc saying it has more experience in fudging telemetry system and so it would know for sure India is manipulating . Besides Pakistan would not have money to fund installation of such a system under IWT .

Faulty telemetry system leads to dispute over water​

The official said that even important aspects of feasibility studies were ignored during installation of the system but no one was ever held responsible. As result, about 66,000 cusec of water was being reported as lost or stolen between Taunsa and Guddu and about 35,000 cusec between Taunsa and Sukkur barrage

ISLAMABAD: The non-functioning of the Rs350-million telemetry system that was installed in 2004 to ensure real-time verification of water flow for inter-provincial harmony has led to the current dispute between Sindh and Punjab over opening of Chashma-Jhelum Link canal.

Senior government officials said the ongoing controversy among the provinces over water could have a negative effect on Pakistan’s dispute with India over the Kishanganga hydropower project because New Delhi had been attributing Islamabad’s water problems to domestic mismanagement.

In background discussions, a government official said that besides the usual scepticism over the use of Chashma-Jhelum as a regular canal, Sindh province had been opposing its opening because of heavy water losses between Trimmu and Panjnad headworks, with no dependable monitoring mechanism.

The province has been saying that system losses in the transfer of water from Jhelum Zone to Indus Zone exceeded 70 per cent.

The officials said the major cause of inter-provincial mistrust was absence of a verifiable mechanism to record water flows for which the telemetry system had been installed but which was not functioning.

They said a meeting of parliamentarians from Sindh and Punjab had decided on June 16 to send a team of Irsa engineers to monitor the telemetry system but this had not been done so far. They said an influential group of field engineers in almost all the provinces were intentionally creating hindrances in the smooth functioning of the telemetry system because of their vested interests.

A senior Irsa official said the 1991 water accord was a perfect document but its implementation did not achieve the desired result of removing inter-provincial misunderstanding. To resolve this issue an advanced satellite-based telemetry was installed at a cost of Rs350 million in 2004.

The objective of the system was to achieve equitable distribution of water, ascertain system losses, and ensure efficient use of water through remote measurement of water quantity in real-time and report information on water flows and diversions at all barrages, dams and canal-head regulators from 23 sites to all the stakeholders at eight monitoring positions at federal and provincial government headquarters.

These sites were Tarbela and Nowshera in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Kalabagh, Chashma, Taunsa, Mangla, Rasul, Marala, Khanki, Qadirabad, Trimmu, Panjnad, Sidhnai, Balloki, Suleimanki and Islam in Punjab. In Sindh, the sites were at Guddu, Sukkur and Kotri barrage while in Balochistan the sites were at Garang Regulator at Kirthar, Patfeeder, Uch and Manuthy.

The officials said the Irsa rejected the telemetry system when the project failed to meet its objective of providing reliable and continuous data because of frequent breakdowns despite the fact that the project was required to be “capable of withstanding all stresses under most severe electrical, mechanical and atmospheric conditions”.

An internal government inquiry suggested the design parameters were, however, not according to the ground realities. More than ten sites immediately went out of order due to burning of circuits and communication equipment.

A senior official said the system could have been made operational through provision of suitable voltage stabilisers and protective devices, back-up power supply lines, standby batteries and generators and protection against overheating of distribution panels but that was never taken in hand. As a result, even a minor defect in communications resulted in disconnection.

The official said that even important aspects of feasibility studies were ignored during installation of the system but no one was ever held responsible. As result, about 66,000 cusec of water was being reported as lost or stolen between Taunsa and Guddu and about 35,000 cusec between Taunsa and Sukkur barrage.

 

[ajtr]

Water shortage: the real culprit​

ON Jan 15, 2006, the Karachi Port Trust (KPT) inaugurated its new fountain — the Rs320m lighted harbour structure that spews seawater hundreds of feet into the air.

Also on this day — as on most others in Karachi — several million gallons of the city’s water supply were lost to leakage, some hundred million gallons of raw sewage oozed into the sea, and scores of Karachiites failed to secure clean water.

Over the next few years, the fountain jet would produce a powerful and relentless stream of water high above Karachi. Meanwhile, down below, tens of thousands of the city’s masses would die from unsafe water.

After several fountain parts were stolen in 2008, the KPT quickly made the necessary repairs and re-launched what it deems “an extravaganza of light and water”.

In an era of rampant resource shortages, boasting about such extravagance demonstrates questionable judgment. So, too, does the willingness to lavish millions of rupees on a giant water fountain, and then to repair it fast and furiously — while across Karachi and the nation as a whole, drinking water and sanitation projects are heavily underfunded and water infrastructure stagnates in disrepair.

And so, too, does Pakistan’s insistence — expressed vociferously in media editorials railing against ‘water theft’ and in politicians’ warnings about water wars — that India is to blame for Pakistan’s water woes. The story of the KPT fountain illustrates how Pakistan’s water crisis rages not because of the machinations of its upper riparian neighbour, but because of Pakistan’s own misplaced priorities and poor governance.

To be sure, India may well divert flows from the Indus Basin’s western rivers, which the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) allocates to Pakistan, and India does itself few favours by refusing to be transparent about such matters. (In this regard its agreeing to allow Pakistan to inspect two under-construction hydropower plants in Indian-held Kashmir is welcome.) Yet keep in mind that the IWT gives India the right to use some of the western rivers for agriculture, and the country has yet to exploit much of the cropland set aside for this purpose.

Additionally, the IWT apportions 135 million acre feet (MAF) of the western rivers to Pakistan, yet only 33 MAF of the eastern rivers to India. So even when India draws from the western rivers, Pakistan’s IWT share remains considerable. At any rate, such talk is immaterial. What Pakistan needs most is not more water, but better water governance. The country’s existing dams, reservoirs and canals are falling apart.

According to water expert Simi Kamal, simply repairing and maintaining Pakistan’s leaky canal system would free up nearly 10 times more water than the quantity projected to be generated by the Diamer-Bhasha dam. Islamabad prefers, instead, to construct inefficient and expensive new structures. The Water and Power Development Authority’s Vision 2025 calls for several dozen new large water projects (including five dams and three ‘mega-canals&#8217 within the next decade and a half.

Another governance problem is grossly unequal access to water in the countryside, where two-thirds of the nation’s population is based. Simply stated, Pakistan’s rural rich, who control most of the land, get water, while the rural poor, most of whom are landless or lack access to land, are denied water. The rules of warabandi, a rotational system meant to ensure equitable allocations of irrigation water among farmers, are undermined and exploited by large landowners — many of them politically connected.

Then there are the bad policies: underinvestment in urban wastewater treatment, repeated use of water-wasting irrigation, cultivation of the most water-guzzling crops, and the eagerness to lease out vast tracts of water-rich farmland to foreign investors.

None of this has anything to do with India. Indeed, while one could rightly deposit blame at the doorstep of misguided policymakers or feudal landlords in Pakistan, fingering India unnecessarily externalises an internal problem. In fact, the only genuine external culprit of Pakistan’s water crisis is global warming — and the effects of climate change on Pakistan’s water shortfalls could be mitigated if the country managed its existing resources more judiciously.

Still, in deference to those who insist Pakistan’s water crisis is India’s fault, suppose that India is indeed violating the IWT and diverting Pakistan-bound river flows. Now, imagine that India abruptly ceases all such behaviour.

What would happen next? According to the Blame India narrative, the floodgates to the lower riparian would burst open, and water would pour forth into Pakistan. Parched land and dry mouths would be satiated. Puddles would once again become ponds. Agricultural productivity would increase, water-dependent livelihoods would be saved and food security would make a triumphant return. Wrong. None of this would happen.

Instead, existing inefficiencies would be amplified, and current problems would be exacerbated. More water would accrue to large landowners, further depriving the rural and landless poor; more water would be lost to leaky canals and pipes; and more water would be wasted in irrigation, showered on water-intensive crops and contaminated by urban waste. In essence, if nothing is done to improve water governance, allowing more water to gush into Pakistan would simply intensify the country’s water crisis.

Resolving Pakistan’s domestically rooted water crisis will require domestically rooted correctives. Admittedly, some of them (more crop diversification) will be easier than others (more equitable land distribution) to implement successfully. Yet with groundwater tables plummeting throughout the country and 250,000 Pakistani children dying every year from waterborne disease, the stakes could not be higher.

As for India? It should follow suit, look inward, and address the factors driving its own domestically based water crisis (lest one forget, more than a third of New Delhi’s freshwater resources are lost to leakage).

If both nations can lessen their water stress, India would have less incentive to dip into western river flows and Pakistan would have fewer grounds on which to levy its water theft charges. Such an outcome would constitute a victory for Pakistan-India relations, and a defeat for the purveyors of the Blame India narrative. And perhaps the KPT fountain would no longer be the sole repository of water extravagance in Pakistan.

The writer is programme associate for South Asia at the Woodrow Wilson International Centre for Scholars in Washington, DC.

 

[ajtr]

Sindh Water Resources Development and Management Investment Programme​

Wasteful use of water is observed and overuse in irrigation is a major problem.This is evident from low irrigation delivery and application efficiency of 35% from canal head to crop root zone and water logging and salinity problems............... Canal deliveries generally bear little relationship with crop water requirements

Many DO farmers who draw water directly from main and branch canals , outside any rotation system , have abundent water a zero marginal cos so make decisions which are inconsistent with national policies and interests but aimed at maximising financial returns to land rather than economic returns to water.

Large transfer of water from ordinary farmers to influential landowners with DO is not only inequitable but also economical damaging as water is transferred from uses with returns over PR 6.0/m^3 to uses with returns with PR 2.2/m^3 to PR 3.7^3.

 

[ajtr]

RUNNING ON EMPTY
Pakistan’s Water Crisis​

The average (for the years 1975-2000) rim station inflow (that is, the inflow measurement established at the rim of the river tributaries) of the Indus River and its tributaries is calculated to be approximately 154 million acre feet (MAF) per year, of which 144.9 MAF is available to Pakistan.9 Another source puts this availability at 140 MAF.10 However, the inflow of water varies drastically from year to year. The Water Accord of 1991 (an agreement reached between Pakistan’s four provinces on how to share the waters of the Indus River) is basedon 114.35 MAF per year (plus a 3 MAF estimate for ungauged civil canals, making a total of about 117 MAF). Punjab gets the bulk at 55.94 MAF, while Sindh gets 48.76 MAF.11 Any supplies over and above this amount are to be distributed on the basis of a predefined formula among the four provinces, with Sindh and Punjab getting equal shares at 37 percent. The remaining water from the average rim station flow (154 MAF-114.35 MAF) is estimated at nearly 40 MAF and often designated as “outflow to sea below Kotri,”12 but actually includes ungauged canals as well as withdrawals through other smallscale
dams and schemes and river losses. The matter of environmental flows (which refer to the amount of water needed in a watercourse to maintain a healthy, natural ecosystem) for the downstream and delta of the Indus is mentioned in the Water Accord at 10 MAF as a demand of Sindh,13 but these flows have not yet been finalized or included. In recent years, the annual supply of 114.35 MAF as designated by the Accord has not materialized, and is in fact usually lower.

Super floods occur approximately once every five years, which has raised the average flow to 140 million acre feet (MAF) over the past 30 years. In the remaining four years, average water availability has been 135.60 MAF

Now from Eastern Rivers India uses about 22 MAF that means 10-11 MAF still flows to Pakistan to which it is not entitled and It has to make irrigation facilities for diverting waters from Western Rivers to irrigation canals which were fed by Eastern rivers. Pakistan can not feel entitled to use the extra unutilised waters flowing to them. Reduction in water from eastern rivers would certainly put pressure to Pakistani Agriculture.

One fact which is somewhat nearer to truth is that Pakistanis have proliferated like anything , having one of the highest decadal growth rates. It has grown five times. So naturally per capita availability would come down. Apart from this they are wasting 40% water , which means they are wasting not less than 54 MAF due to various factors. Besides overuse/misuse is rampant. These are well chronicled here.

In Indus River System water availability would continue to vary and any supposed reductions ( eventually due to environmental factors) would be visible after decades of observations.Impact of seasonal variations coupled with long term decline in general availability in the system would be visible in immediate future. But it does not make a case for India forgoing whatever water is made available to us. It does make a case for Pakistan to invest in better water management practices/infrastructure and more in family planning methods. Who knows increasing population would force Pakistan to devise similar arguments for getting more land from India since it got less land due to British and Yindoo tactics at the time of partition.

The point to ponder here in all such articles , justifying probability of water war by Pakistan due to reduction in supplies, that Has Kashmir lost its significance for Pakistan, Having take half of Kashmir valley and that it was Kashmir's water and not Kashmir's interest which was at the heart of these war. Chenab Formula discussed in this thread is a pointer t o Pakistani thinking.

If future war would be on Water that would make things clear to Population of Kashmir.

Poor management and distribution of irrigation water also means that only 45 percent of cultivable land is under cultivation at any given time. Pakistan’s crop productivity per unit of water is very low at 0.13 kilograms per cubic meter. What this means is that Pakistan is using 97 percent of its allocated water resources to support one of the lowest productivities in the world per unit of water. This reality does not seem to have sunk in and does not feature in the water discourse of the country.

Scarcity can occur at different levels of supply, depending upon demand and other circumstances—such as growing crops in agriculture- based countries or diversion to giant metropolitan areas. Scarcity in Pakistan may have its roots in water shortage, but it is also a social construct—a result of inefficiency, entitlements for the few (and the power that comes from this) and low access for the many. Water scarcity may be controlled by altering water-use behavior, modulating expectations, and introducing regulations. There are, therefore, remedies and options that can be considered and exercised.

It is important to understand the factors other than population growth that are driving Pakistan toward water scarcity. Reductions in the ice and snow areas of the Himalayas mean a lower quantum of annual snowmelts and, therefore, reduced water in the Indus River system. The decline in freshwater additions to surface water bodies has rendered them too saline and polluted for drinking and agricultural purposes. Reduced holding capacity and more rapid runoff (when normal rains and snowfall return) lead to floods and lower reserves of water for drinking and agriculture. The drying up of the Indus Delta has led to losses in the coastal ecosystem and sea intrusion is up to 225 kilometers.

While the realities of water availability, water regime, climate, and delta conditions have changed, the ways of using water have not. This has resulted in large- scale degradation of the resource base. Thirtyeight percent of Pakistan’s irrigated lands are waterlogged and 14 percent are saline; there is now saline water intrusion into mined aquifers.There has been a denudation of rangelands and watersheds, a depletion of forest cover and vegetation, a decline in the water table in Baluchistan to alarming levels, and a drastic reduction of sweetwater (fresh drinking water) pockets in the Lower Indus Basin. It is now accepted among many water sector practitioners and professionals in Pakistan that the Indus Basin irrigation system is vulnerable, that greater flexibility is required in the way water systems are envisaged and used, and that there is an urgent need for trust- building among water users and the institutions that control water.

////

Most importantly, a shift is needed from management of water supply to management of water demand. The entire edifice of the argument for more irrigation infrastructure is based on an uncritical capitulation to the demand for more irrigation water for agriculture. There is a need to unpack this demand—who exactly is making this demand, and why should this demand be considered when agriculture already absorbs 97 percent of the total mobilized surface water, and almost all the groundwater, for supporting one of the lowest agricultural productivities in the world per unit of water and land? Can this demand for more water for agriculture be reduced by producing more with less water? The answer is yes. During the drought of 1999-2000, when water availability was drastically reduced, one would have expected lower production. Instead, there was a bumper wheat crop, proving that higher yields are possible with less water.

Pakistanis would do far better to listen to saner voices emanating from within their own community and among water experts who seem to be far more candid in admiting flaws in the system. First step towards solving a problem is to recognise the problem. Now Army and others in Power are the major misuers of water and hence the war mongering on water resources , since India is the most visible enemy to Pakistan.

The author of this article in the report is Simi Kamal is chair of the Hisaar Foundation in Karachi and a member of the
Global Water Partnership, a Stockholm-based think tank.

 

[ajtr]

Appendix: Annual Western River* Inflows by Seasons: 1923 - 2008 (Million Acre Feet)

Years,Kharif,Rabi,Total

1922-23,121.47,25.23,146.7
1923-24,130.47,23.55,153.02
1924-25,109.56,20.13,129.69
1925-26,100.5,18.15,118.65
1926-27,99.16,18.15,117.31
1927-28,90.44,20.41,110.85
1928-29,108.21,22.09,130.3
1929-30,97.2,26.96,124.16
1930-31,117.14,19.72,36.86
1931-32,101.28,22.31,123.59
1932-33,107.63,17.63,125.26
1933-34,125.68,18.76,144.44
1934-35,108.19,18.66,126.85
1935-36,116.81,22.29,139.1
1936-37,124.92,20.92,145.84
1937-38,110.1,21.35,131.45
1938-39,125.37,22.59,147.96
1939-40,127.25,17.55,144.8
1940-41,107.48,15.82,123.3
1941-42,106.61,25.61,132.3
1942-43,145.96,23.4,169.36
1943-44,130.54,19.61,150.15
1944-45,119.42,20.37,139.79
1945-46,131.64,19.1,150.74
1946-47,112.01,18.42,130.43
1947-48,101.36,23.31,124.67
1948-49,132.15,23.75,155.72
1949-50,132.29,23.71,156
1950-51,151.27,20.38,171.65
1951-52,93.6,20.21,113.81
1952-53,112.33,17.97,130.3
1953-54,116.31,26.77,143.08
1954-55,119.98,20.27,140.25
1955-56,107.51,25.02,132.53
1956-57,131.92,25.46,157.38
1957-58,123,28.1,151.1
1958-59,124.47,34.09,158.56
1959-60,154.74,32.05,186.79
1960-61,NA,NA,NA
1961-62,119.58,20.93,140.51
1962-63,89.96,19.85,109.81
1963-64,113.4,21.66,135.06
1964-65,116.11,22.39,138.43
1965-66,117.81,21.09,138.9
1966-67,116.64,23.83,140.47
1967-68,120.42,25.76,146.18
1968-69,115.63,23.21,138.84
1969-70,114.49,19.76,134.25
1970-71,90.2,15.9,106.1
1971-72,88.27,15.74,104.01
1972-73,101.62,24.45,126.07
1973-74,145.2,19.77,164.97
1974-75,80.64,19.67,100.31
1975-76,116.3,23.22,139.52
1976-77,116.85,18.43,135.28
1977-78,104.36,23.1,127.46
1978-79,NA,NA,NA
1979-80,108.84,23.12,131.96
1980-81,109.81,26.59,136.4
1981-82,117.68,22.93,140.61
1982-83,97.11,25.27,122.38
1983-84,128.29,21.67,149.96
1984-85,115.99,18.93,134.92
1985-86,91.66,26.02,117.68
1986-87,116.38,30.27,146.65
1987-88,117.77,29.28,141.05
1988-89,136.56,24.84,101.42
1989-90,102.01,29.31,131.32
1990-91,130.97,35.14,166.11
1991-92,141.53,30.57,172.1
1992-93,138.62,31.06,169.68
1993-94,104.68,22.8,127.48
1994-95,138.02,27.79,165.81
1995-96,129.7,28.93,158.63
1996-97,137.49,23.76,161.25
1997-98,110.1,32.22,142.32
1998-99,124.93,24.68,149.61
1999-00,107.45,22.12,129.57
2000-01,86.33,16.56,102.89
2001-02,79.85,17.28,97.13
2002-03,94.94,23.06,117.99
2003-04,115.61,22.14,137.76
2004-05,82.14,30.56,112.7
2005-06,121.22,23.95,145.17
2006-07,121.85,30.84,152.69
2007-08,105.87,19.99,125.86

* Includes three western rivers: Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab.
Rabi = Winter crop season; Kharif = Summer crop season
NA = Not available
Source: Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Water and Power.

 

[Hutchroy]

Pak loses Rs240 bln worth of water due to lack of dams

Pak loses Rs240 bln worth of water due to lack of dams

KARACHI: Pakistan lost water worth Rs240 billion due to lack of dams and water reservoirs in the country.

Chairman Fauji Fertilizer Company talking to media men said a quantity of water needed for irrigating 40 million acres land has been wasted. He said Rs6 billion worth of water is required for irrigating 1 million acres land.

According to economic experts, due to absence of political harmony the country not only faced worst ever floods but also failed to store water worth Rs240 billion.

 

[Hutchroy]

The Associated Press: Pakistan floods just one of its water woes

Pakistan floods just one of its water woes

By TIM SULLIVAN (AP) – 1 hour ago

SHIKARPUR, Pakistan — Thousands of farmers have crowded this once-quiet Pakistani town. They live on the hospital's lawn, they camp on overpasses. Their fields are destroyed, covered by billions of gallons of brown soupy floodwater.

But ask those farmers about their water troubles and they'll tell you flooding is just the most recent chapter.

"There is not enough water. We don't have enough for the crops," said Zubair Ahmed, a tenant farmer who came here after floods swept through his village and destroyed his fields. "Except for this year," he added, without any irony. "This year it is different."

This country, with its network of rivers that flow into the mighty Indus, struggles daily with water issues — too little, too much, in the wrong place — and rain is important to more than just farmers.

Around here, rainfall has long been reflected in economics, politics, diplomacy and social stability — and even Pakistan admits it wasn't as prepared as it could have been for the flooding.

"We are the victims of both extremes," said Shams ul Mulk, the former head of Pakistan's Ministry of Water and Power. "We are the victims of scarcity and we are the victims of surpluses."

A month into the worst floods in the country's history, there was no respite Saturday.

The swollen Indus River smashed another break early Saturday in the levees that protect the southern city of Thatta and numerous nearby villages. That sent thousands more people fleeing for high ground, crowding the roads and leaving the city of 175,000 nearly empty.

Thousands of flood victims sought shelter on the high ground of a sprawling centuries-old cemetery outside Thatta. Many were furious at the shortage of help, and how aid came in the form of bags of food being tossed from trucks.

"The people who come here to give us food treat us like beggars. They just throw the food. It is humiliating," said 80-year-old Karima, who uses only one name, and who was living in the graveyard with more than two dozen relatives.

Almost 17.2 million people have been significantly affected by the floods and about 1.2 million homes have been destroyed or badly damaged, the U.N. has said. About 1,500 people have died. At one point, an area the size of Italy was believed to be underwater, much of it farmland.

The scale of the crisis quickly overwhelmed authorities, with the government's painfully slow response leading to fears of unrest. While there has been no widespread violence, flood victims have repeatedly blocked roads through the flooded regions demanding more help.

The country's finances, though, will take a major blow: Farming is a pillar of the Pakistani economy, making up some 23 percent of the gross domestic product and supporting millions of families. Officials expect the agricultural costs from the floods to reach into the billions of dollars.

The floods' effects also will go far beyond the time when the waters recede.

Even Islamabad acknowledges it needs massive repairs to its enormous water irrigation network, which stretches across thousands of miles (kilometers). About 80 percent of the country's farmers are dependent on irrigation to nourish their crops.

Experts say only about one-third of the water that flows through the country's irrigation system actually reaches the crops.

"It's just dirt ditches most of the time," said Dr. Daanish Mustafa, a geographer at King's College, London who has studied Pakistan's water use and said simply lining the irrigation channels to decrease leakage could result in enormous water savings.

"It doesn't need billions of dollars, it doesn't need armies of laborers," said Mustafa.

He noted Pakistan also faces a special challenge with the Indus River, the heart of its water network. With 80 percent of precipitation coming in just two months during the annual monsoons, and a heavy silt content, the river can quickly overrun its banks.

"Pakistan's misfortune is they are dealing with a freak of a river," he said.

For years, foreign donors have been trying to help Pakistan tame that freak.

The United States has said improving the country's water management will be a key plank of its $7.5 billion assistance package to the country over the next five years. Before the floods, it was planning a raft of projects to improve irrigation.

Those plans are even more relevant now, said Rajiv Shah, administrator of the U.S. Agency for International Development. "They need a system that can manage" both flooding and low rainfall, he said.

The floods also raised worries in Pakistan that India — this country's chief rival — could worsen the problem by draining its rain-swollen rivers into Pakistan.

Normally, the situation is reversed, with Pakistan complaining that India is withholding water.

Under a 1960 agreement, the two countries are supposed to share the use of the six rivers that irrigate the Pakistani agricultural heartland. India, though, controls the source of those rivers, leading to regular cross-border accusations, as Islamabad charges that New Delhi is taking more than its share, and New Delhi alleging Pakistan's poor infrastructure leads to massive water waste.

Associated Press writer Nahal Toosi in Islamabad contributed to this report.