Ever since the shelving of Kalabagh Dam due to lack of national consensus, the PPP-led Government has planned to construct a mushroom of small & medium size water-storage dams in all the provinces to bring more area under cultivation.
The looming controversy triggered by Kalabagh Dam, provided an opportunity to plan more than 60 dams on two Pakistani rivers allotted Pakistan vide Indus Water Treaty – 1960, i.e., Chenab & Jhelum. Among the significant new projects in Indian Occupied Kashmir (IOK), the National Hydroelectric Power Corporation (NHPC) of India has signed an MoU with IOK State Power Development Corporation to develop hydroelectric projects in Chenab basin with an aggregate capacity of 2100 Megawatt through a joint venture. The company has also signed an MoU with IOK State Power Development Corporation for operation and maintenance of Baglihar Power Station in I0K. The 330 Megawatt Kishanganga project, which has got a clearance of' the Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs (CCEA), is expected-to be commissioned by 2016
Ever since the creation of India and Pakistan, the relations between both countries have remained tense and fragile over the distribution of water as a resource. This is because the sources of all the five tributaries of the Indus - Jhelum, Chenab, Ravi, Beas and Sutlej remained in India. According to Indus Water Treaty of 1960, India has got the exclusive control over the waters of the Ravi, the Beas and the Sutlej, whereas Pakistan controls the waters of the Indus, the Jhelum and the Chenab. As the demand for water increased by leaps and bounds, India is seeking maximum control over the sources of the supply of water, and thereby increasing the tension with Pakistan that share the claims over water. The Treaty places restrictions on the design and the operation of hydroelectric plants, storage works etc., to be constructed by India on the Western Rivers and also provides a procedure for the settlement of differences and disputes through a Commission. If it fails to resolve the issue, then either Commissioner can initiate action through Neutral Expert/Court of Arbitration. Pakistan maintains that India, under the treaty, can store water but it cannot divert it to any other side. Thus, any diversion would violate the provisions of the treaty. Pakistan believes Wullar barrage can be used as: (1) a geo-strategic weapon, (2) potential to disrupt the triple canal project of Pakistan, (3) badly affecting the Neelum-Jehlum hydro-power project, (4) agriculture in Azad Kashmir (5) drying of 5.6 million acres of lands of Punjab province.
Kishanganga, Baglihar and Wullar Projects are the projects that affect the flow of water to Pakistan. Let us take the issue one by one:
(a) Kishanganga Project. The proposed Kishanganga (or River Neelum, as known in Pakistan) Hydroelectric Project is located in the Indian Occupied Kashmir on river Neelum. The project envisages that the water is to be diverted through a 21 KM long tunnel to produce 330 MW Power. The water, after production of power, will join the Wullar Lake. Pakistan raised objections to the diversion of flow and design of the project. The objections essentially pertain to the design of the project and related issues. India maintains that it has followed the design criteria mentioned in the Treaty. The issues were discussed in meetings of the Permanent Indus Water Commission from May 2003 to November 2005. Since no agreement could be reached, Pakistan Commissioner, initiated proceedings for reference of the case to a Court of Arbitration in accordance with articles of the Treaty. However, in April 2006, the Indian Commissioner informed us that India had reconfigured the Project from a Storage Work to Run-of-the-River Plant. Accordingly, the dam height was reduced by 40 meters while retaining the feature of diversion of waters to Wullar Lake. Pakistan's objections under the provisions of Indus Water Treaty, which were forwarded to India in August 2006, were discussed during the Annual (99th) Meeting of the Commission on 30 May - 4 June 2007 at New Delhi. It was agreed that a final and conclusive meeting of the Commission to examine Pakistan's objections will be held in the 3rd week of July 2008. The meeting was held from 24 to 28 July 2008 in New Delhi. Pakistan Commissioner stated in the meeting that Pakistan will intimate India of its future course of action under Article IX of the Treaty. An Inter-ministerial meeting chaired by the Minister for Water and Power on 26 January 2009 decided to seek the appointment of a Neutral Expert and a Court of Arbitration, to resolve the dispute over Kishanganga hydroelectric project if bilateral efforts at secretary-level, fail to settle the matter. The construction of Neelum-Jhelum Hydroelectric Project in AJK, is considered to be a counter Project of Kishanganga Hydroelectric Project. The President of Pakistan formally inaugurated the Project on 9 February 2008. In view of the changed status of Indian project, it is felt imperative that Pakistan should endeavour to complete Neelum Jhelum' project at the earnest. WAPDA has already awarded the contract for construction of the project which was signed on 19 December 2007.
(b) Baglihar Dam. The Baglihar Hydroelectric Plant is a Run-of-River Project constructed by India on River Chenab. India provided information about the plant in May 1992 under the relevant provision of the Indus Waters Treaty. Pakistan raised objections to the design of the plant and the higher water seal etc. Since the Indus Commission could not resolve the differences, Pakistan referred the dispute to the World Bank under the relevant provisions of the Treaty. Consequently, the World Bank appointed a Neutral Expert in May 2005. The Neutral Expert called both the Parties to Paris in June 2005, and formulated modalities in the form of a Protocol. The Neutral Expert gave his Final Determination on 12 February 2007. The decision of the Neutral Expert upheld Pakistan's contention that the design by India is not in conformity with the treaty. While rendering the proposal that India may deplete the reservoir below Dead Storage Level for flushing of silt load, the Neutral Expert surpassed his mandate. Pakistan intends to take-up the matter further for third party arbitration.
(c) Wullar Barrage. In February 1985, Pakistan learnt that India is planning to construct a Barrage, namely 'Tulbul Navigation Project', at Wullar Lake on River Jhelum. In March 1985, Pakistan conveyed its concerns to India and sought details. The Indian position is that it is a navigational structure, rather than a storage facility. It also believes that Pakistan's downstream uses are not prejudiced by the project, and may even be beneficial •to Pakistan. Our point of view is that the structure is essentially a barrage which will convert the natural Wullar Lake into a man-made storage. The matter was taken up by the Permanent Indus Commission for resolution under the Treaty but, the Commission failed to resolve the issue. Later, on the request of the Government of India, bilateral negotiations started at the level of the Water Secretaries. However, the issue remains unresolved. So far, 13 rounds of talks have been held. At present, the project is suspended and the issue is under the ambit of the Composite Dialogue process.
The initial filling of Baglihar resulted in reduction in the flow of water to Pakistan last summer (2008). For commissioning of the plant, India filled the reservoir for its dead storage in August 2008 and flouted the specific provisions of the Treaty to ensure the flow of 55,000 cusecs at Marala Headworks in Pakistan. This resulted in reduction in the flow of water to Pakistan. In spite of repeated requests by Pakistan Commissioner, India did not provide details of schedule for initial filling of Baglihar reservoir or testing/commissioning of the plant. Our Water Commissioner Jamaat Ali Shah lodged a protest with his Indian counterpart on reduction of flow in August last year (2008). A site inspection and a meeting of the Permanent Indus Commission was arranged by India from 18-25 October 2008. After the inspection, Pakistan Commissioner sought compensation in kind for the lost water. The Indian side continues to deny that Pakistan was deprived of any loss of water due to Indian actions. The Indian argument is that flow of water was naturally low during the period. It adopted the same position again in the 103rd Meeting of the Commission held in New Delhi. Pakistan Commissioner declared in the meeting of the Commission that in order to resolve the matter he will "proceed further" in the light of the mechanism given under the Treaty. Given the gravity- of the situation we must continue to raise the Water issue in all our bilateral meetings with India. Last year, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh had repeatedly stated that India would abide by the lndus Water Treaty "in letter and spirit" following our interventions. Pakistan should not leave any stone unturned to ensure compliance to the treaty by India. India should avoid building water dams cum hydroelectric projects where water is availed as a “collective resource”. Any major upstream alteration in a river system should be negotiated, not imposed as in case of Kishanganga, Baglihar and Wullar Projects on its lower riparian users. The Governments of India and Pakistan should look beyond national borders to basin-wide cooperation, and address water disputes between the two countries where water is used as a collective resource.
The looming controversy triggered by Kalabagh Dam, provided an opportunity to plan more than 60 dams on two Pakistani rivers allotted Pakistan vide Indus Water Treaty – 1960, i.e., Chenab & Jhelum. Among the significant new projects in Indian Occupied Kashmir (IOK), the National Hydroelectric Power Corporation (NHPC) of India has signed an MoU with IOK State Power Development Corporation to develop hydroelectric projects in Chenab basin with an aggregate capacity of 2100 Megawatt through a joint venture. The company has also signed an MoU with IOK State Power Development Corporation for operation and maintenance of Baglihar Power Station in I0K. The 330 Megawatt Kishanganga project, which has got a clearance of' the Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs (CCEA), is expected-to be commissioned by 2016
Ever since the creation of India and Pakistan, the relations between both countries have remained tense and fragile over the distribution of water as a resource. This is because the sources of all the five tributaries of the Indus - Jhelum, Chenab, Ravi, Beas and Sutlej remained in India. According to Indus Water Treaty of 1960, India has got the exclusive control over the waters of the Ravi, the Beas and the Sutlej, whereas Pakistan controls the waters of the Indus, the Jhelum and the Chenab. As the demand for water increased by leaps and bounds, India is seeking maximum control over the sources of the supply of water, and thereby increasing the tension with Pakistan that share the claims over water. The Treaty places restrictions on the design and the operation of hydroelectric plants, storage works etc., to be constructed by India on the Western Rivers and also provides a procedure for the settlement of differences and disputes through a Commission. If it fails to resolve the issue, then either Commissioner can initiate action through Neutral Expert/Court of Arbitration. Pakistan maintains that India, under the treaty, can store water but it cannot divert it to any other side. Thus, any diversion would violate the provisions of the treaty. Pakistan believes Wullar barrage can be used as: (1) a geo-strategic weapon, (2) potential to disrupt the triple canal project of Pakistan, (3) badly affecting the Neelum-Jehlum hydro-power project, (4) agriculture in Azad Kashmir (5) drying of 5.6 million acres of lands of Punjab province.
Kishanganga, Baglihar and Wullar Projects are the projects that affect the flow of water to Pakistan. Let us take the issue one by one:
(a) Kishanganga Project. The proposed Kishanganga (or River Neelum, as known in Pakistan) Hydroelectric Project is located in the Indian Occupied Kashmir on river Neelum. The project envisages that the water is to be diverted through a 21 KM long tunnel to produce 330 MW Power. The water, after production of power, will join the Wullar Lake. Pakistan raised objections to the diversion of flow and design of the project. The objections essentially pertain to the design of the project and related issues. India maintains that it has followed the design criteria mentioned in the Treaty. The issues were discussed in meetings of the Permanent Indus Water Commission from May 2003 to November 2005. Since no agreement could be reached, Pakistan Commissioner, initiated proceedings for reference of the case to a Court of Arbitration in accordance with articles of the Treaty. However, in April 2006, the Indian Commissioner informed us that India had reconfigured the Project from a Storage Work to Run-of-the-River Plant. Accordingly, the dam height was reduced by 40 meters while retaining the feature of diversion of waters to Wullar Lake. Pakistan's objections under the provisions of Indus Water Treaty, which were forwarded to India in August 2006, were discussed during the Annual (99th) Meeting of the Commission on 30 May - 4 June 2007 at New Delhi. It was agreed that a final and conclusive meeting of the Commission to examine Pakistan's objections will be held in the 3rd week of July 2008. The meeting was held from 24 to 28 July 2008 in New Delhi. Pakistan Commissioner stated in the meeting that Pakistan will intimate India of its future course of action under Article IX of the Treaty. An Inter-ministerial meeting chaired by the Minister for Water and Power on 26 January 2009 decided to seek the appointment of a Neutral Expert and a Court of Arbitration, to resolve the dispute over Kishanganga hydroelectric project if bilateral efforts at secretary-level, fail to settle the matter. The construction of Neelum-Jhelum Hydroelectric Project in AJK, is considered to be a counter Project of Kishanganga Hydroelectric Project. The President of Pakistan formally inaugurated the Project on 9 February 2008. In view of the changed status of Indian project, it is felt imperative that Pakistan should endeavour to complete Neelum Jhelum' project at the earnest. WAPDA has already awarded the contract for construction of the project which was signed on 19 December 2007.
(b) Baglihar Dam. The Baglihar Hydroelectric Plant is a Run-of-River Project constructed by India on River Chenab. India provided information about the plant in May 1992 under the relevant provision of the Indus Waters Treaty. Pakistan raised objections to the design of the plant and the higher water seal etc. Since the Indus Commission could not resolve the differences, Pakistan referred the dispute to the World Bank under the relevant provisions of the Treaty. Consequently, the World Bank appointed a Neutral Expert in May 2005. The Neutral Expert called both the Parties to Paris in June 2005, and formulated modalities in the form of a Protocol. The Neutral Expert gave his Final Determination on 12 February 2007. The decision of the Neutral Expert upheld Pakistan's contention that the design by India is not in conformity with the treaty. While rendering the proposal that India may deplete the reservoir below Dead Storage Level for flushing of silt load, the Neutral Expert surpassed his mandate. Pakistan intends to take-up the matter further for third party arbitration.
(c) Wullar Barrage. In February 1985, Pakistan learnt that India is planning to construct a Barrage, namely 'Tulbul Navigation Project', at Wullar Lake on River Jhelum. In March 1985, Pakistan conveyed its concerns to India and sought details. The Indian position is that it is a navigational structure, rather than a storage facility. It also believes that Pakistan's downstream uses are not prejudiced by the project, and may even be beneficial •to Pakistan. Our point of view is that the structure is essentially a barrage which will convert the natural Wullar Lake into a man-made storage. The matter was taken up by the Permanent Indus Commission for resolution under the Treaty but, the Commission failed to resolve the issue. Later, on the request of the Government of India, bilateral negotiations started at the level of the Water Secretaries. However, the issue remains unresolved. So far, 13 rounds of talks have been held. At present, the project is suspended and the issue is under the ambit of the Composite Dialogue process.
The initial filling of Baglihar resulted in reduction in the flow of water to Pakistan last summer (2008). For commissioning of the plant, India filled the reservoir for its dead storage in August 2008 and flouted the specific provisions of the Treaty to ensure the flow of 55,000 cusecs at Marala Headworks in Pakistan. This resulted in reduction in the flow of water to Pakistan. In spite of repeated requests by Pakistan Commissioner, India did not provide details of schedule for initial filling of Baglihar reservoir or testing/commissioning of the plant. Our Water Commissioner Jamaat Ali Shah lodged a protest with his Indian counterpart on reduction of flow in August last year (2008). A site inspection and a meeting of the Permanent Indus Commission was arranged by India from 18-25 October 2008. After the inspection, Pakistan Commissioner sought compensation in kind for the lost water. The Indian side continues to deny that Pakistan was deprived of any loss of water due to Indian actions. The Indian argument is that flow of water was naturally low during the period. It adopted the same position again in the 103rd Meeting of the Commission held in New Delhi. Pakistan Commissioner declared in the meeting of the Commission that in order to resolve the matter he will "proceed further" in the light of the mechanism given under the Treaty. Given the gravity- of the situation we must continue to raise the Water issue in all our bilateral meetings with India. Last year, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh had repeatedly stated that India would abide by the lndus Water Treaty "in letter and spirit" following our interventions. Pakistan should not leave any stone unturned to ensure compliance to the treaty by India. India should avoid building water dams cum hydroelectric projects where water is availed as a “collective resource”. Any major upstream alteration in a river system should be negotiated, not imposed as in case of Kishanganga, Baglihar and Wullar Projects on its lower riparian users. The Governments of India and Pakistan should look beyond national borders to basin-wide cooperation, and address water disputes between the two countries where water is used as a collective resource.
Comments
Post a Comment