Reflecting Chenab water issue
I A Khanzada
Just after the partition of sub-continent in 1947, the relations between
two newly independent countries i.e., India and Pakistan became very
tense over the distribution of water as a “resource”. India threatened
to stop the three eastern rivers irrigating mainland of Punjab from
waters of the Ravi, Beas and Sutlej. This meant strangulating Pakistan
who solely depended for its survival on agro-based economy. India could
do that because the root-sources of all the five tributaries of the
Indus - Jhelum, Chenab, Ravi, Beas and Sutlej remained in Indian
Occupied Kashmir (IOK). Over decades of deliberations, teams from
Pakistan and India worked together with a team from the World Bank to
tailor a solution which would be durable and acceptable to both sides.
There were great difficulties and many dead ends, however, a treaty was
brokered into the famous Indus Water Treaty-1960 (IWT) - so frequently
quoted in resolving trans-boundary water issues. According to the
agreement, India 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. The Treaty came under heavy fire in
India, as Pakistan was given 75% of the water of Indus Water Basin
System. Pakistan’s reaction was that the treaty allowed only 75% of the
water when it had 90% of the irrigated land. This divergence of stance
is now resulting in contentious issues such as Baglihar, Salal dam and
Neelum-Jhelum Hydropower Projects of India.
The Chenab issue is getting critical ever since India has built the
controversial Baglihar dam on part of the river which flows on her
lands, saying that the dam has been built on run-of-the-water and as
such the amount of water to Pakistan would not reduce. Baglihar hydro
electric power project was built 150 km north of Jammu in Indian
Occupied Kashmir (IOK) on October 10, 2008. This project would have an
installed capacity of 900-MW, with a price tag of over US$ 1 billion.
There were many impediments and controversies. Some of the objections
were: (1) Indian manipulation of IWT (which allowed India under
carefully specified conditions to tap the hydropower potential of the
three western rivers) that dam was built on “run-of-the-river”. (2)
Design parameters were too lax to provide India with excessive ability
to accelerate, decelerate or block flow of river. (3) It gave India a
strategic leverage in times of tension or war with Pakistan. (4)
Frequent landslides while constructing diversion tunnels, proved the
unsuitability of the dam. (5) It was built on extremely sensitive
seismic zone. (6) It would dry some 5.6 million acres of land in
Sialkot, Gujranwala, Jhang, Faisalabad and Sheikhupura.
The current situation is reminiscent of the water crisis Pakistan faced
before the signing if IWT in 1960. India being the upper-riparian
country stopped Chenab river and filled Baglihar dam leading to
intensification of food scarcity in already deficient Pakistan and
contravening the Indus Water Basin Treaty of 1960. The Pakistani
position on the Chenab water issue has been clear: a minimum of 55,000
cusecs of water should flow into Pakistan at the Marala headworks near
Sialkot in peak season; however, a flow of only 22,000 cusecs was
recorded this year, affecting the output of the kharif crops. Pakistan
Indus water commissioner Mr Jamaat Ali Shah simply demanded compensation
for the water from Indian water commissioner, Mr. G. Arangnathan. India
denied to compensate for the loss of 23,000 cusecs of water that
Pakistan claims it suffered while the Baglihar dam was being filled.
With the national economy seeking a loan of $ 7.6 billion from IFIs to
avert trade deficit, coupled with the growing food and energy
shortfalls, the shortage of water will be disastrous for the farmers.
Pakistan cannot afford the loss of any more water. Throughout history,
rivers have been our foremost source of fresh water for both agriculture
and individual consumption, but now economists say that by 2025 water
scarcity will cut future food production. Pakistan is confronted with
some of the challenges that impose serious water management problems.
These are: (1) Pakistan is already one of the most water stressed
countries in the world with per capita availability of water declined
from was 5,650 m3 in 1960 to 1,200m3 in 2006. (2) Pakistan has no
additional source of water to inject more water into the system with
more than 21 million acres of land is still lying virgin. (3) The Indus
Waters Treaty has left no option for Pakistan but to depend on single
river system which creates a high risk water environment for Pakistan in
case of faulty water/sediment/salt system. (4) As a result of Indus
Waters Treaty, Pakistan has to construct a massive network of large
water infrastructure. (5) Salinity remains the major problem including
15 million tons of salt which are accumulating in the Indus Basin every
year. (6) The climate change can affect 90% of the flow of Indus river
system coming from glacier melt and monsoon rains. Pakistan has tackled
these challenges in the best professional manner. The country has to
look into the potential it has and have its future water management
strategy on the hopeful facts and management tools that exist on ground.
A highly respected and internationally acclaimed science writer, Fred
Pearce in his book, entitled “When the Rivers Run Dry:
Journeys into the Heart of the World’s Water Crisis”, addresses the
water issue that many scientists contend will be the cause of future
world conflicts – the world is running out of water. Pearce contends
that an average American might use about 40 gallons of water a day for
drinking, washing and cleaning. However that is a tiny fraction of the
water we actually consume because it takes 250-650 gallons of water to
grow a pound of rice, 130 gallons to grow a pound of wheat, 65 gallons
to grow a pound of potatoes, and 500-1,000 gallons to create a quart of
milk, 25 bathtubs of water to grow the 9 ounces of cotton to create one
T-shirt. So, when we use foreign or Pakistan products, we are
influencing the hydrology of those regions. The area irrigated by the
eastern rivers has been supplied water from the western rivers through
effective link-canals system, requiring massive hydraulic structures.
This unnatural transfer of water has altered the natural flow regime of
rivers. This diversion of water has devastated the whole aquatic
ecosystem and culture of Pakistan, turning the water unfit for human
consumption as well as unusable for agricultural purposes.
While the war of words over the violation of IWT-1960 between Pakistan
and India is intensifying day by day, it is marring the window of hope
that was opened through Confidence Building Measures (CBMs) started many
years ago. What should be done to get compensation from India? Any one
of the following option may be practicable: demand for compensation of
water should be stressed on political forums or UN should interfere and
devise some regional policy of using the natural resources or
re-negotiating of IWT-1960. While renegotiating IWT, following factors
should be considered: (1) Construction of the post-treaty dams and
barrages. (2) Flooding in the Sutlej valley, (3) Drying up of Chenab.
(4) Devastation caused by water shortages in the Indus delta. Upholding
the thesis of “collective use of Hydrology”, India should release water
from its own share to save the Indus delta so vital for keeping the
regional ecological system robust. Pakistan has a remarkable history of
successfully confronting major water challenges. The stopping of water
in Chenab can be successfully tackled by renegotiating the IWT and
sharing the water as a “collective resource”. Since India and Pakistan
are hopeful about a breakthrough on Sir Creek issue, it is possible to
strike a new treaty for the collective good of the countries where
rivers flow through them.
|
