Cover Story/Cauvery Dispute: The Fishy Water

Published by
Archive Manager


The Cauvery Water Dispute is not new, nor is the
Award declared by the Tribunal. What has erupted in Tamil Nadu and Karnataka over water distribution is
intriguing. It has been mainly concentrated in urban centres, linguistic jingoism overshadowing the water concerns and lack of matured leadership and absence of localised dialogue allowing vested interests to manipulate the situation

A Jayaram from Bengaluru & T S Venkatesan from Chennai
Though sporadic inter-State disputes are not new to us, the violence in Karnataka and Tamil Nadu in the name of Cauvery water dispute, erupted after a Supreme Court verdict, fuelled by fringes, raises fresh and grave concerns in many minds. The ASSOCHAM estimate of the losses ranging from 22-25 thousand crores and fire brigade departments saying 2.7 lakh water utilised to flames under control are itself shocking enough to doubt the intentions behind the violence. The 125-year-old Cauvery issue over the inter-State water sharing has been kept pending like a boiling cauldron by politicians to suit to their whims and fancies and particularly to keep their vote bank politics alive and to indulge in blame game rather than acting in  the interest of the State or the stakeholders involved. The irony is it happens in Bharat where the federal structure is given due importance. Slew of arguments and emotions have flown than the Cauvery water herself due to the number of Tribunals, committees set up for finding solution to this much debated issue has far exceeded the number of dams constructed or  water conservation measures taken in Tamil Nadu and Karnataka. After the SC directive recently, the series of violence and protest erupted in both the States.

Timeline of Century-old conflict

1892: Madras Presidency and the princely state of Mysore sign an agreement to share Cauvery water
1924: Deal inked to resolve dispute over water-sharing
May 1990: Supreme Court directs Centre to constitute Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal
Feb 5, 2007: Tribunal announces final award
Feb 12: Karnatka protests against ‘biased’ award
March 2013: Tamil Nadu moves to the SC seeking directions to the water ministry for the constitution of Cauvery Management Board
May 2013: Tamil Nadu moves to the SC,
seeking Rs 2, 480 crore in damages from Karnataka for not following the orders of the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal
July 2013: Clashes erupt between Karnataka and Tamil Nadu during the meeting of the Cauvery Supervisory Committee
June 2014: Karnataka opposes Tamil Nadu’s demand for a Cauvery Board, as appeals by all riparian states against the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal award were pending in the Supreme Court
April 2015: Tamil Nadu raises concerns over construction of a dam by Karnataka near Mekedatu, about 100 km from Bengaluru
September 2015: The Centre advises Karnataka and Tamil Nadu governments to co-operate with each other
August 2016: Tamil Nadu files a petition in the SC, seeking direction to Karnataka to release water to Tamil Nadu
September 2016: The SC directs Karnataka to release 15,000 cusecs a day till 15 September. Protests break out in Karnataka
September 6, 2016:  Karnataka releases 10,000 cusecs of water from the Krishna Raja Sagara dam to Tamil Nadu
September 12, 2016: SC modifies its order and directed Karnatka to release 12,000 cusecs a day till September 20 instead of the earlier 15,000 cusecs per day till September 16

The Dispute: Origin and Evolution
Before dwelling into the issue, we can have a quick recap of the origin of the issue in a nutshell. The Cauvery river takes birth at Talakaveri in Coorg District of Karnataka. It is one of the holy rivers and the lifeline of Tamil Nadu. The 802 km long river is regarded as the Ganges of South India. It runs 320 km in Karnataka and 423 km in Tamil Nadu before reaching the Bay of Bengal at Poompuhar. Parts of three Indian states—Tamil Nadu, Kerala, and Karnataka—and the Union Territory of Pondicherry (now Puducherry) lie in the Cauvery basin. It is the main grid irrigation for the farmers of both states. Cauvery forms the rice bowls of both states. People in both states have an emotional and spiritual connect with River Cauvery.

“You would agree that any escalation of animosity between the two states would be to the collective detriment of both the states. I would request you to kindly take all steps to ensure that during the bandh called by certain organisations in Tamil Nadu on 16.09.2016, no untoward incident takes place and the lives and properties of Kannada speaking people in Tamil Nadu are protected —Karnataka CM Siddaramaiah in a letter to TN Chief Minister Jayalalithaa”

Historically the dispute over sharing Cauvery waters dates back to the British era. The Cauvery basin covers a large expanse of land including major chunks in Karnataka and Tamil Nadu and also smaller areas in Kerala and Puducherry. Initially, the dispute was between Karnataka and Tamil Nadu but later Kerala and Puducherry also entered the fray.  The warring Mysore Presidency and the Princely State of Mysore entered into an agreement in 1924.  Mysore was allowed to construct a dam Krishna Raja Sagar at Kannambadi Village to trap 44.8 thousand million cubic feet of water. It was valid for a period of 50 years and a review thereafter was part of the pact. And by 1934, the Mettur Dam in Tamil Nadu was built with a capacity of 90 tmc.

“Groups of protesters from Karnataka are regularly assembling at the Tamil Nadu-Karnataka border near Hosur and threatening vehicles and commuters from Tamil Nadu. Hotels and properties belonging to Tamils in Karnataka are being attacked and damaged. This is an alarming situation and is causing considerable anxiety -TN Chief Minister Jayalalithaa in a letter to Karnataka CM Siddaramaiah”

After Independence both states moved Supreme Court on several occasions but the issue could not be solved.  A Fact Finding Committee set-up in 1970, submitted its report in 1972 and further studies were done by expert committee and the states reached an agreement in 1976. However, after a new government came to power in Tamil Nadu, it refused to give consent to terms of the agreement paving way for further dispute. As both sides stuck to their stand firmly, the Centre set up the Cauvery Water Tribunal in 1990. After hearing both sides for 16 years, said both agreements of 1892 and 1942 were valid.  It gave its final award in 2007 allowing 419 tmc ft for Tamil Nadu, 270 tmc ft for Karnataka, 30 tmc ft for Kerala and 7tmc ft for Puducherry. Unsatisfied with the order, both Tamil Nadu and Karnataka moved  to SC. The conflict catches up when the monsoon fails or in the years of distress as there is lesser water to share.  

PM appeals for calm

The attacks on Tamilians in Karnataka and Kannadigas in Tamilians had pained the entire nation and PM Modi too echoed his unhappiness over the issue. PM Modi said, “The situation that has emerged in Karnataka and Tamil Nadu, as a fallout of the issue of distribution of the waters of the Cauvery River, is distressful. I am personally pained at the developments. Violence cannot provide a solution to any problem. In a democracy, solutions are found through restraint and mutual dialogue. This dispute can only be solved within the legal ambit. Breaking the law is not a viable alternative. The violence and arson seen in the last two days is only causing loss to the poor, and to our nation’s property. Whenever the country has faced adverse circumstances, the people of Karnataka and Tamil Nadu, just like people across the country, have always handled the situation with sensitivity. I appeal to the people of the two States, to display sensitivity, and also keep in mind their civic responsibilities. I trust you will keep national interest and nation building above all else, and give priority to restraint, harmony, and finding a solution, eschewing violence, destruction and arson.”

Karnataka wanted the pact be redrawn keeping in view with the population, acreage, a clear cut process in the event of a distress and contended  that the award was in favour of Tamil Nadu. Whenever they were called for talks, each time Tamil Nadu CM or Karnakata CM and representatives took turns to skip or stage walk outs delaying and deferring any sane debates the conflict an eternal trouble. It has become less about water and more about vote bank politics cashing on emotional, linguistic and ethnic rubbing. In a federal form, the tribunal or court verdict on river water sharing is binding on all parties to the dispute.

Why blame Modi?
 Karnataka in general and Bengaluru have been seething in anger for the last few days over Cauvery issue. Instead of pressing the panic button to protect the interest of Bengalureans in general and Tamil minority in particular, Chief Minister Siddaramaiah was at his best of playing the political card. He blamed the Prime Minister Narendra Modi for non-cooperation and failing to help his state. Sources close to Siddaramaiah said that by blaming Modi, Siddaramaiah tried to score brownie points with the Congress High command and at the same time targeted the local BJP, which was becoming stronger by day. In his every press conference, Siddaramaiah said that despite writing eight letters to PM Modi over Cauvery issue, he never got response.
Now, one wonders why would Siddaramaiah blame Modi when he himself is non-committal on healthy Centre-State relationship. For example, Siddaramaiah had made similar allegations against Modi over Karnataka-Goa dispute in Mahadayi (Mandovi) water issue. But, the fact is that When PM Modi called CM of all three states to discuss Mahadayi issue, Siddaramaiah had conveniently skipped the crucial meet.  
 In fact, PM Modi had personally invited CM Siddaramaiah to join him for a Chinese official trip where Karnataka's interest would have been boosted in the neighbouring country. However, Siddaramaiah laughed at the proposal and rejected it and all he did this was because he did not wanted to go with a BJP Prime Minister. In fact, PM had requested CM Siddaramaiah to lead Swachh Bharath initiative and the Karnataka CM had rejected it despite knowing very well that there was no politics in Swachh Bharat initiative. Sources in the BJP said that when Siddaramaiah's government had admitted in the Supreme Court for releasing 10,000 cusecs of Cauvery water voluntarily, how can PM intervene in the matter that are sub-judice     — R Guruprasad

The Immediate Cause
The current round of litigation and lawlessness has been triggered after the Tamil Nadu Government approached the Supreme Court praying for adherence to the letter of the final award of the Cauvery Tribunal given on February 5, 2007. The Tribunal headed by former Supreme Court Judge NP Singh had allotted 419 thousand million cubic feet of Cauvery water to Tamil Nadu, 270 tmc.ft to Karnataka, 30 tmc.ft to Kerala and seven tmc.ft to Puducherry. It had determined the total availability of water in the Cauvery basin at 740 tmc.ft in a normal year.  The Tribunal has laid down that the quantum of water to be released by Karnataka at the Biligundulu (gauging station) on the border with Tamil Nadu should be 192 feet. Karnataka was unhappy with that award and has sought a review of the final award in the SCand is awaiting its verdict. The Tribunal has laid down the monthly releases of water to Tamil Nadu in a normal year from June to November.

Need A National  Perspective on Water Management

Dr Madhav A Chitale is an eminent scientist and engineer associated with planning, investigation and construction of river valley projects. He was secretary to Government of Maharashtra (1981-1983), before moving over to the Central Government in 1984, as commissioner, River Basins. He also served as chairman, Central Water Commission, an apex body of India’s water sector and  as secretary, Ministry of Water Resources from 1989. After retirement, he became secretary-general of International Commission on Irrigation and Drainage during 1993-1997. One of the originators of the Ganga Action Plan, Dr. Chitale has played a major role in getting India’s decision-makers and strategic planners to think of water as a resource whose quality and availability need to be safeguarded. . Prafulla Ketkar, Editor Organiser spoke to him on sidelines of India-EU Water Partnership Workshop on River Basin Management held at New Delhi on current water dispute between Tamil Nadu and Karnataka. Excerpt:
You have been working on water management related issues for a long time. How do you perceive the ongoing tussle over water distribution between Karnataka and Tamil Nadu?
See, if such scale of violence is taking place, then there are many forces working in the background to trigger the situation.
As far as the Constitution of India is concerned the provisions are very clear. The river basin management is a Union subject. Historically there was a perception among the people of erstwhile Mysore princely state that the Cauvery water distribution was imposed by the Madras province governed by the British. Now, that has been rectified with Cauvery Water Distribution Tribunal (CWDT) coming into existence and finalising the award. The award is very clear and categorical. It has distributed to the water share judiciously and taking all aspects into consideration. The volume of releasing water is not expected on daily basis in the award but on the basis of seasons, spreading over the period of 10 months. The present situation has occurred because the water flow of Cauvery is depleting. This year Cauvery Basin has witnessed a lesser waterfall, now such issues cannot be addressed merely through legal instruments. Unfortunately, instead of showing maturity like a family from national perspective, when politics takes place on such critical issues, situation goes out of control.
What are the reasons for such depleting water resource?
These protests are taking place mainly in urban centres not only because it makes an impact on decision makers but because the water needs of urban and metropolitan areas are increasing. We have not made adequate planning for the same. Merely water is are not depleting, we have not changed our patterns of water usage with the time. In Karnataka, copping patter is still concentrating on banana and sugarcane while in Tamil Nadu it is still rice after rice. After Independence, farmers with large land hoarding were dominating the decision making process, with the time the things have changed. Now how to balance between the agricultural and industrial needs is a big question. Though the pollution in Cauvery is not as high as other major rivers, still it is one of the reasons we will have to address. All these factors are contributing to water depletion and water crisis.   
What are the measures to avoid such conflicts in the future?
First of all, a strict action should be taken against the people who are fuelling the regional sentiments in the name of water. We have to strive hard to develop a national perspective on water management. An order on water distribution is given by the Supreme Court as per the agreed position before the CWDT, so no reason for playing politics over it. Yes there can be annual or seasonal issues but that are to be sorted out by the respective states with mutual consultation. Another important aspect is of communication. Most of these orders and awards are in English, their local versions and interpretations should be communicated to the people before implementation so that there is no confusion or manipulation. There are agencies like Institute of Engineers or Indian Water Works Association who can facilitate the dialogue process. Most importantly, initiating the local level dialogue process with participation of stakeholders is the key. Ultimately, they are the ones who are directly affected by decisions so formation of forums like Friends of Cauvery as we tried to evolve in Maharashtra in the name of Cooperation for Irrigation to deal with inter-district issues. Center can facilitate this but ultimately State and local governments have to handle this situation on ground with a national perspective and localised execution.       

On the question of releases in a distress year as the current one, the Tribunal has said “In case the yield of Cauvery basin is less in a distress year, the allocated shares shall be proportionately reduced among the States of Kerala, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu and the union territory of Puducherry”. The distress sharing clause has been criticised as a vulnerable aspect of the final award leading to flare ups in the two States in years of failed rains. From all accounts 2016 is a distress year. Both the states received below normal rain during the monsoon. Karnataka refused to give Cauvery water forcing Tamil Nadu to tap the doors of the SC. With the SC directive to Karnataka to release 15,000 cusecs daily till September 15 provoked pro- Kannada outfits to embark on large scale violence targeting Tamil Nadu based vehicles and properties owned by Tamilians. Karnataka’s contention is that there is no enough drinking water for their people and to release water for Tamil Nadu for a third summer crop is unacceptable.

State flag of Karnataka?

It might come as a surprise or shock to many people outside Karnataka that the protesters in Karnataka has been featured waving a ‘red and yellow flag’ (commonly known as Kannada flag) vigorously while shouting slogans against the Supreme Court Judgment. Does the Karnataka have an official State flag other than our national tri-colour? Not really.
The flag was first conceived by Ma Ramamurthy, a Bangalore-based writer, journalist and social activist, often considered as a commander of Kannada movement in 1960s which was used as a party flag by “Kannada Paksha” founded by him in 1965. Though the political party is inactive, the flag has been consistently used all over Karnataka to represent the State, Kannada language and culture. This flag is prominently hoisted on the occasion of Karnataka Rajyotsava celebrated on November 1 as the State’s Formation Day. Over the past few years, several fringe groups have been using it to spread their tentacles in Bengaluru for igniting Kannadiga pride. Many of them are known to run protection services, like mafia gangs, dividing  Ironically, the ‘red and yellow flag’ today is used by shopkeepers not as a symbol of pride in being a Kannadiga but more to ward off troublemakers.
The Karnataka High Court had asked Union and State governments to clarify their position on whether any other flag other than national flag could be hoisted and saluted by the State during official functions. Recently, the State government has informed the Karnataka High Court that it had withdrawn the circular directing authorities concerned to hoist the ‘red and yellow flag’ in all government offices, schools and college in the State on November 1 every year.

In a way the September 12 order of the Supreme Court was in Karnataka’s favour, but the lumpen elements who indulged in violence could not understand what the Court stated. In the revised decision, Karnataka has now been told to release a reduced quantum of 12,000 cusecs a day till September 20.
Interestingly it was not the farmers who resorted to violence as they are the ones most affected by any reduced flow of Cauvery waters through the canals. But fringe groups in Bangaluru which never seem to have wielded the plough or entered a slushy wet land. In fact violence erupted even before the Supreme Court announced its order indicating that it was not really related to the Cauvery issue. Over a century old linguistic prejudices and jingoism among Kannadigas and Tamilians, much before the dispute over sharing of Cauvery water arose, people of the erstwhile Princely State of Mysore had resented the domination of Tamilians in the administration. In later decades it related to large scale influx of Tamilians to Bangalore and other places denying the local people of their jobs, openings in trade and industry and so on.
Tamil Nadu Version
Tamil Nadu says, Karnataka has built several dams in its territory despite objection from Tamil Nadu and violating the agreements. Also its spread of land for cultivation has increased manifold whereas in Tamil Nadu it has been shrinking. For Tamil Nadu, Cauvery is the main river, whereas in Karnataka it has Krishna, Tungabadra, Ghataprabha and Bhima.
Thanjavur, the erstwhile capital of Chola Kingdom, is called the rice bowl of the State. Tamil Nadu claims its irrigation dates back to AD 200 when the Grant Anaicut (a marvel even today) was built across river Cauvery by Chola King Karikaalan.  Thanjavur, Tiruvarur, Nagpattinam, Trichy and Cuddalore are the delta districts wherein agriculture is the predominant occupation. With the vagaries of monsoon and recalcitrant attitude of Karnataka has badly affected the livelihood of many. It is a systematic failure on the part of politicians and bureaucracy of Tamil Nadu and Karnataka and has been conveniently coloured with linguistic emotions and ethnic divides. They have no real will to settle the issue or to mitigate farmer’s plight. As experts suggests, it is totally unacceptable, unethical to block or deny water a downstream. To avoid repeat of violence, bandhs that jeopardises livelihood of people, affect the economy, damage to public property, parties to the dispute should engage in meaningful dialogue. This year too, in Tamil Nadu the short term Kuruvai crop and long term Samba crop could not be cultivated as no water was released from Mettur dam for irrigation purposes. Tamil Nadu also witnessed untoward incidents like stone throwing on a hotel owned by Kannadigas, hurling petrol bombs, attacks on vehicles bearing Karnataka registration.
A group of farmers’ association,  under the umbrella of All Farmers and Farm Labourers Associations has called for a picketing agitation in Delta districts on September 20. They also urged the Centre to immediately set up Cauvery Management Board and the Cauvery Water Regulatory Authority and also ensure release of Tamil Nadu’s due share of water by Karnataka as per the final award of the Tribunal. Trader outfits too jumped into the fray.
Karnataka’s Concerns
The saturnalia of violence in Bengaluru in particular on September 12 against the Supreme Court order rejecting Karnataka’s appeal to freeze an earlier order to release Cauvery water to Tamil Nadu, has diverted attention from the main issue.
One cannot miss the fact that the intransigence of the Tamil Nadu Government and particularly on the part of the Chief Minister J Jayalalithaa over the Cauvery issue has queered the pitch. Tamil Nadu has been demanding its share of the river waters “Shylock like” although 2016 is a distress year for Karnataka. When the Government and the people of Karnataka are crying that there will be severe shortage of drinking water in Bengaluru and other places, those in Tamil Nadu are worried over the Samba Crop. Karnataka has already advised its Cauvery Basin farmers to go grow less water intensive crops and not sugarcane and paddy in view of the low storage in the Cauvery reservoirs. But Tamil Nadu has not exhibited any such magnanimity to ease the pressure on Karnataka.
There is also a personal angle of pique on the part of Ms Jayalalithaa  exacerbating the river water dispute.  She bears a grouse against the Karnataka Government for its appeal in the Supreme Court in the disproportionate assets case against her questioning the acquittal ordered by the High Court of Karnataka. She is also eager to disown her Karnataka or Mysore city roots.  Despite her family roots connecting to the Mysore region, she claims that she is a “pedigree Dravidian”  if there is any such race at all!
Hooligans on street
The September 12 mayhem in Bengaluru was the handiwork of hoodlums some of whom belong to various pro-Kannada organisations.  They have been thriving on anti-Tamil sentiments though they happily do business with the people who belong to other parts of the country. The most despicable incident was the burning down of 35 luxury buses belonging to a fleet owner from Tamil Nadu. No wonder the Americans have issued an advisory to its citizens to avoid visiting Bengaluru and other areas where the protests took place. It has shamed the Karnataka capital which in recent years is being called the IT Capital of the country.  Once called a Garden City, Bengaluru is these days acquired the dubious description as a Garbage City. The political leaders in the State have made use of the leaders of the Kannada groups to further their ends. Though the Bengaluru Police have arrested over 500 persons for the violence, the ring leaders of the stone throwing and arson have been treated with velvet gloves and not touched.  The police should have been on alert as the State had witnessed a bandh only three days earlier on September 9.  The violence is reminiscent of the anti-Tamil riots in Bengaluru and in southern Karnataka in December 1991 when the Bangarappa government had sponsored a Statewide Bandh to protest against the publication of the interim award of the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal in the Government of India Gazette. Another parallel was when the Devaraj Urs government allowed a free hand to goons in December 1978 after Indira Gandhi was expelled from the Lok Sabha.
Game of Thrones
Both the States need to think of the larger interest of the Cauvery family keeping aside their politician ambitions is a right and only way to end the conflict and let the flow of water freely as ever. Politicians indulge in doublespeak lack political unity is main lacunae in the Tamil Nadu, in not only Cauvery issue but also in other conflicts. The then CM and AIADMK founder MGR had adopted the lunch diplomacy to win over the iron hearts to get water. The present CM Jayalalithaa has the history of taking credit for solo in all matters. In this issue too, she adamantly refused to convene all party meet to discuss the issue.
Recounting the long litigious history of Cauvery dispute, right from setting up of the Cauvery Waters Disputes Tribunal and its interim order, Jayalalithaa claimed that it was due to “efforts of her party”. Unlike other State leaders, Union Minister Pon Radhakrishnan rose above the situation and condemned the attacks on the Kannada speaking people in Tamil Nadu. He said the onus on protecting the linguistic minorities in the State was on the CMs both states.
Looking back it can be said that Karnataka’s case with regard to the Cauvery has gone by default as it had in the past lagged far behind Tamil Nadu in irrigation development. But for some bold moves by Devaraj Urs when he was the Chief Minister and HD Deve Gowda when he was the Public Works Minister in the Janata government, Karnataka had not beyond building the KRS dam. On the other hand, Tamil Nadu   went on increasing its irrigated areas under the Cauvery based on legal concepts like natural flow, prescriptive rights and prior appropriation.  That was how Tamil Nadu got favourable verdicts from the Tribunal.  The lethargy of the past is now telling on Karnataka. An example is the construction of the Varuna or the Right Bank Canal of the KRS Dam built in 1979, over five decades after the main dam was built. Also is the fact that the canal system was completed and Mandya district was irrigated only in 1931 when Sir Mirza Ismail was the Dewan.
Everyone in Karnataka is praying for the sky to open up and bring copious rains in the catchment areas of the Cauvery as an interim solution to the 120 odd years dispute with Tamil Nadu, besides rendering the arsonists and stone pelters unemployed. Nature’s bounty had come to the aid of the two States at least once in the recent past.  
No doubt the popular perception and slogan in Karnataka which is the upper riparian State is that Cauvery water is our waters and we will part with only that much of  it we can spare after meeting our needs. It is based on what is called the Harmon doctrine of territorial sovereignty under which a riparian state can do what it pleases with its waters without regard to the needs of the states downstream. It is named after a 19th century American attorney general who took that stand with regard to the Rio Grande River dispute between the US and Mexico.
(With R Guruprasad from Bengaluru)

Share
Leave a Comment