Intro: Pakistan’s former Foreign Minister in an interview in April 2010 admitted: The total average canal supplies of Pakistan are 104MAF and the water available at the farm gate is about 70MAF. Where does the 34MAF go? It is not being stolen in India. It is being wasted in Pakistan. ?
Imagine two nations, one large and one small, at loggerheads with each other at the United Nation. The smaller nation has grabbed, through stealth and cunningness, a portion of the larger nation. Then, both go on to have a water-sharing Treaty for a river system that is lifeline of both and which goes from the larger to the smaller nation. The smaller nation is given 80% while the larger one rests content with 20%. Then the larger one gives £62 million to the smaller nation to put its canal system in order. More than 50 years have passed and the larger nation calmly bears the disadvantage even as its own states fight over every cusec of water. But the smaller nation keeps whining, litigating and even threatening over the provisions of the Treaty, has initiated three wars and bleeds the larger nation through sponsored terrorism.
This is the story of India, Pakistan and the Indus Water Treaty of 1960. Four of the six rivers of the Indus system viz. Jhelum, Chenab, Ravi and Beas originate in India. The other two, Indus and Satluj, originate in Tibet and flow for considerable distance in India before entering Pakistan. Most of the flow in these six rivers comes from the watershed in India. Yet, Pakistan was given 125 MAF against 33 MAF to India. The three eastern rivers, Indus, Chenab and Jhelum were exclusively given to Pakistan barring some minor local use and non-consumptive use for generation of power.
Chenab runs through Himachal Pradesh before traversing the entire length of Kashmir. When I travel along Chandra and Bhaga and then along Chenab (formed by the confluence of the two in Lahaul), I look wistfully at the huge torrent hurtling down the mountains. It all belongs to Pakistan under the Treaty. I am sure the people of Himachal Pradesh look upon these waters equally wistfully if not more. The rainfall and snowmelt is in India, the soil erosion and floods are in India; but the water belongs to Pakistan.
There was one gain for India, though. By entering into a Treaty with India for rivers, which either originate in Kashmir like Chenab and Jhelum, or pass through that state and by agreeing to provisions for some small local usage and non-consumptive use in Kashmir, Pakistan accepted, wittingly or otherwise, India’s sovereignty over Kashmir. Though there are general provisions in the Treaty that it shall not constitute a waiver of the claims of either party, the very act of entering into a Treaty with a sovereign with regard to a territory is tacit admission of the sovereignty with regard to that territory.
The unequal nature of the Treaty and its being loaded against India has not prevented Pakistan from claiming that it is a victim of the Treaty. The dams at Baglihar and on Kishenganga had to traverse a long legal recourse before the position of India was more or less vindicated. Now, terrorist groups in Pakistan have jumped into the fray with the 26/11 mastermind Hafiz Saeed claiming that India was exporting “water terrorism” to Pakistan.
Kashmir is almost perennially short of power. 20,000 MW of power can be generated through hydro-potential if obstacles are not created by Pakistan abusing the provisions of the Treaty. Massive potential exists on the Chenab for power generation in Himachal Pradesh as well as in Jammu and Kashmir (J&K). India is foregoing all this advantage to placate Pakistan and is getting blamed in return.
Another factor in the water conundrum, China, is becoming increasingly important. China is acutely short of water in the north and eastern regions where most of the urbanisation is taking place. Most of the water is in Tibet in the south. A gigantic $62 billion project called South-to-North Water Transfer is under implementation and three Tibet rivers, Yangtze, Tsangpo or Brahmaputra, as it is called in India, and Satluj are on the radar. Through amazing feats of engineering involving very large tunnels, waters of Yangtze had already reached Beijing by the time of Olympics. Projects, stated to be non-consumptive in nature, are under construction on the Tsangpo. The time may not be far when things start happening in Tibet on Satluj also.
While Brahmaputra is important for the East, Satluj is vital for the food security of India in addition to being the major source of drinking water for Punjab, Haryana, Rajasthan and even Delhi. Both Punjab and Haryana are dependent on Satluj water through Bhakra system for their fields. These two states contribute the bulk of food grains to the central pool. If Satluj waters are diverted in Tibet, India shall face serious food shortages. The clamour in Pakistan is that Kashmir is the jugular vein of that country because of its dependence on water coming through Kashmir. An editorial in Nawa-i-Waqt of April 4, 2011 thundered:
“India has captured the jugular veins of Pakistan for the last 63 years in order to inflict destruction upon Pakistan but Pakistani leaders are not concerned about the seriousness of this issue. Pakistan should convey to India that a war is possible on the issue and this time war will be nuclear one.”
Interestingly, because of its diplomatic proximity to Pakistan, China does not plan any action on Indus over which Pakistan has exclusive rights under the Treaty. Pakistan is therefore, not worried about actions of China in Tibet. But these actions could make Tibet the jugular vein of India jeopardising our food security.
Having secured the lion’s share of waters under the Treaty, Pakistan became complacent and did not use the large amount it received from India for creating and improving its water infrastructure. Pakistan’s irrigation infrastructure is considered the most inefficient in the world.
Fateh Gandapur, former Chairman of the Indus River System Authority in Pakistan estimates that 6.6 MAF capacities have been lost out of 18.61MAF in Mangla, Tarbela and Chashma reservoirs in Pakistan. The least that common sense would demand is that India should be free to use that much water of the eastern rivers as is flowing to the sea. Moreover, Pakistan should not obstruct Dams in India as these would reduce siltation in downstream structures in Pakistan.
After all these losses, the irrigation efficiency at the farms in Pakistan, which is barely 36%, further results in wasteful use. To compound the problem, Pakistan leans towards cotton for earning foreign exchange. The other preferred crop is equally water-thirsty sugarcane. Heavy rainfall areas of the north are not developed agriculturally while the politically powerful dry areas are the focus of agriculture. Such policies are the natural outcome of a situation when you get more than your share of a scarce resource. India is not very efficient in water use but still the productivity per unit of water in India is three times that in Pakistan. Further, Pakistan has been considering leasing out large tracts of land to certain West Asian countries for corporate farming for export. Did we give them a larger share of water for this purpose when our important agriculture states are fighting over every drop?
With all its hype about the rights of people of Kashmir, in Pakistan the Kashmiris have always been shortchanged. The allocation of river water for the Occupied Kashmir is so minimal that even the Mangla dam has not been filled till today. Occupied Kashmir has irrigation only for 13% of cultivable area while for Pakistan the figure is 80%. Perhaps Pakistan wants Kashmir only as a source of water and it has no interest in the people of Kashmir.
Should India be a silent spectator to this unjust scenario and just wait and watch as Pakistan ratchets up the clamour against India internally and internationally? John Briscoe, who dealt with the appointment of the Neutral Expert for the Baglihar complaint brought by Pakistan and later became the lead consultant for the Water Sector Task Force of the Friends of Democratic Pakistan, is the leading voice against Indian storage projects and gets huge space in Pakistani press. It is time India stops letting things happen by default.
While working as Principal Secretary, Irrigation for the State of Haryana, I was Member of the Bhakra-Beas Management Board (BBMB). I initiated a resolution that was passed unanimously that Pakistan should be put on notice that if at any time, China affects the flow of Satluj, the equity of Indus Water Treaty would be lost. In that situation, the Treaty would not bind India. This resolution was sent by BBMB to Government of India and Haryana Government also sent a letter to this effect. Unfortunately, the Government of India, as has been the practice in the past, developed cold feet and buried the issue.
It is time we become proactive on issues vitally affecting our national interest.
R N Prasher ?(The writer is a retired IAS officer of 1975 batch and subsequently worked as Chairman, Haryana Electricity Regulatory Commission)
?
