Both India, Pak will gain from recast of Indus Waters Treaty

THE Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) is reviewed from time to time, with hardly any worthwhile progress, except for Pakistan raising uncalled-for objections. This treaty recently came up for review, where the Indian team was headed by Deputy National Security Adviser Vikram Misri.

The treaty has a clause under which it can be reviewed, but reviews so far have merely been objections by Pakistan against projects being undertaken by India, which by and large have been within the ambit of the treaty. For instance, the treaty allocates waters of three western rivers to irrigate 1.3 million acres of Indian land (in J&K), but Pakistan has objected to its implementation. Hence, vast tracts of virgin land in the Ladakh region can’t be irrigated.

In 1960, the treaty outlined how India and Pakistan would divide water from the Indus river system’s six rivers. The three western rivers the Indus, Chenab and Jhelum were given to Pakistan for unrestricted use, whereas the three eastern rivers the Ravi, Beas and Sutlej were given to India. This means that Pakistan received 80 per cent of the water, whereas India received 20 per cent of the water.

Even if we overlook India’s rights as the upper riparian country, based on the Indus river basin areas of the two countries, the division should have allocated 65 per cent water to Pakistan and 35 per cent to India.

What appears to have been decided was that Pakistan would take the water of the three western rivers, while India would take those of the three eastern rivers. Simple Nehruvian logic!

That being not enough, some of the canals which originated from headworks in India and watered fields in Pakistan were allowed to flow to Pakistan for the next 10 years, and by that time Pakistan was expected to create a new canal system. Besides, India provided funds to Pakistan for these new canals. In addition, Pakistan got waters from four Indian nullahs (Jammu area) that join Ravi in that country.

Apparently, all this was a win-win situation for Pakistan. To take undue advantage, Pakistan inserted some clauses in the details of the treaty, which it thought would work in its favour and against Indian interest.

One clause in the treaty which stipulated that dams on the three western rivers could only be of the run-of-the-river configuration that Pakistan thought would be in its favour, didn’t actually help it. This restriction on the type of dams was, perhaps, due to the fear of India flooding Pakistan at some point in the event of a conflict. Further, even in the construction of various run-of-the-river dams, such as Salal, Uri, Dulhasti and Baglihar, Pakistan along with the World Bank has been creating impediments. In the case of Salal dam on the Chenab, which was originally built as a storage dam, it had to be converted into run-of-the-river configuration, due to Pakistan’s and World Bank insistence. Thus, many of the turbines installed there could not be put to use during dry season.

These run-of-the-river dams have worked to the great disadvantage of both countries, more so in the case of Pakistan. For India, hydel power projects based on such dams cannot fully exploit the flow of water, because during rainy season, the flow of water is more but much less in dry season, resulting in less number of turbines operating during the dry period. So, in economic terms, such dams are not cost-effective. Moreover, there is the problem of silting due to collection of sediments at these dams.

For Pakistan, the disadvantages accruing from these dams are far greater as it cannot store excess waters of these rivers during the rainy season and consequently it just flows into the Arabian Sea. Thus, the water availability during dry season is inadequate. Besides, fertile contents and nutrients which waters from storage dams carry downstream are arrested in these run-of-the-river dams and, thus, fertility of agricultural land in Pakistan is affected.

On its part, India has failed to fully utilise the waters of the three eastern rivers due to the decision to reduce storage capacity of existing canal headworks by 10 per cent and poor condition of sluice gates, which results in water leaking through these and flowing downstream into Pakistan.

Further, delay in constructing the Shahpur Kandi barrage on the Ravi has compounded the problem.

Climate change and global warming are the new factors that are all set to adversely impact the IWT. These will lead to droughts in some parts and floods in others. This is due to excessive rain in many regions and melting of glaciers; essentially, the latter impacts the western rivers. Floods will inundate large stretches of land and populated areas in Pakistan.

Last year, one-third of Pakistan was under water and over 1,100 people died and millions had to be evacuated. Unfortunately, there is no immediate solution at hand to deal with this ever-increasing problem.

It is, therefore, in Pakistan’s interest to substantially review the IWT, wherein India be allowed to build storage dams for its hydropower projects on the three western rivers, use waters of the western rivers to irrigate 1.3 million acres in Ladakh region as well as allow some of the surplus waters of the Chenab to be diverted to the Beas in Himachal Pradesh. Besides, let India use waters of four nullahs in the Jammu region.

Even if these amendments to the IWT are incorporated, it will take a few years for India to bring about these changes. Only Salal dam, which can be reconverted into a storage dam in a much shorter timeframe, can offer some relief to Pakistan against floods due to climate change.

Hydroelectric projects based on storage dams on the three western rivers will lead to production of abundant electricity, which Pakistan can get at concessional rates.

At the same time, every effort must be made to combat climate change. India’s efforts at combating climate change are somewhat tardy.

The IWT has withstood three India-Pakistan wars (1965, 1971 and Kargil conflict) and, thus, Pakistan need not harbour misgivings about India violating the terms of this treaty in the event of any future conflict. In any case, amendments to the IWT will lead to a better understanding between the two countries.