Suspension of IWT by India : Some reality checks
- Indus Water Treaty -

L Ibotombi Singh *

In 1990, a Pakistan Army Brigadier listed three reasons for his country's enduring conflict with India: Hatred, Kashmir and Water. The hatred was visceral, he noted in his thesis during Royal College of Defence Studies in London. The second and third reasons were linked. Pakistan, he reasoned, needed to control Jammu & Kashmir not just for territory but because of the country's water that flowed through it. The officer was none other than Gen Pervez Musharraf.

History and Background : During partition, the irrigation canals of the Sutlej valley & the Bari Doab were split, with the canals lying primarily in Pakistan and the headwork dams in India disrupting supply in some parts of Pakistan. On April 1st, 1948 with India and Pakistan battling for control of Jammu & Kashmir, engineers in Indian Punjab shut off water supply from the Ferozepur Head Works to the Depalpur Canal and Lahore.

Around 28 per cent of the total cultivable land area in Pakistan was impacted during the critical kharif sowing season. The city of Lahore was deprived of the main sources of municipal water and the supply of electricity from the Mandi hydroelectric scheme was also cut off Water rationing was introduced in Pakistan's second largest city.

Pakistan protested, and India finally agreed on an interim agreement on 4th of May 1948 to release sufficient waters to Pakistan in return for annual payments. When India had its foot on Pakistan's parched throat, a little more pressure would have forced Islamabad to behave, India made a blunder by relaxing India's chokehold on Pakistan.

During this time, the then Indian premier, Jawaharlal Nehru said "What India did with India's waters was India's affair". In response, Pakistan's Father of the Nation, Mohammed Ali Jinnah said, "I would rather have deserts in Pakistan than fertile fields watered by the courtesy of Hindus." Subsequently negotiations on water sharing reached a stalemate. Pakistan wanted to take the matter to the International Court of Justice, but India refused.

World Bank Involvement : In 1948, David Lilienthal, former Chairman of the US Atomic Energy Commission, visited the region and wrote a series of articles, to quote "One way to reduce hostility . . . would be to concentrate on other imp issues where coop was possible and to promote a sense of community which might, in time, lead to a Kashmir settlement. Accordingly, I proposed that India and Pakistan work out a program jointly to develop and operationalise the Indus Basin River system, upon which both Nations were dependent for irrigation water."

The US State Department felt that Lilienthal could help bridge the gap between India and Pakistan and also gauge hostilities on the subcontinent. Lilienthal's idea was well received by officials at the World Bank, and, subsequently, by the Indian and Pakistan Governments. India's objections to third party were remedied by the Bank's insistence that it would not adjudicate the conflict but rather work as a conduit for agreement.

While Pakistan insisted on its historical right to waters of all the Indus tributaries, India's stand was that the previous distribution of waters should not set future allocation. Instead, India proposed a new basis of distribution, with the waters of the Western tributaries going to Pakistan and the Eastern tributaries to India The negotiation started in early 1954 and finally, an agreement was signed between India and Pakistan in 1960, known as the Indus Water Treaty (IWT).

The Treaty : The Treaty was signed on September 19th, 1960 by the then India's Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru and the then President of Pakistan, Ayub Khan. Article 5.1 of the Treaty envisages the sharing of waters of the rivers of the Ravi, Beas, Sutlej, Jhelum, Chenab which join the Indus River on its left bank (Eastern Side) in Pakistan. Ravi, Sutlej, Beas (Eastern rivers ) allocated for exclusive use by India before they enter Pakistan.

A transition period of ID years was permitted in which India was bound to supply water to Pakistan, until Pakistan was able to build the canal systems for utilisation of water. During this period Pakistan built Warsak, Mangla and Tarbela dams, eight link canals & re-modelling of existing canals. Five barrages and a gated siphon were also constructed under this treaty.

Pakistan has exclusive use of Jhelum, Chenab & Indus (Western rivers) After March 31st, 1970, post 10 years moratorium, India secured full rights for use of waters of 3 rivers allocated to it. As per provisions of the treaty, India could use only 20% of the total water carried by Indus. MI the waters of the Eastern rivers shall be available for unrestricted use in India.

Except for domestic and non-consumptive uses, agriculture uses, and generation of hydroelectric power, Pakistan shall be under an obligation to let flow and shall not permit any interference with the waters of Sutlej, Ravi main in the reaches where these rivers flow in Pakistan and have not yet finally crossed into Pakistan.

Analysis of Indus Water Treaty : The IWT is based on distribution of the rivers and not the waters. Its uniqueness is, it is the only international treaty co-signed by a 3rd party ie the World Bank. India's share of 33-million-acre feet (MAF) ie 20% from Eastern Rivers, whereas Pakistan got 125 MAC from Western Rivers (80%) despite being the lower riparian State, an amount not hitherto seen before.

Only water pact compelling an upper riparian State to defer to the interests of a downstream State. India can use the Western River waters for irrigation up to 701,000 acres with new water storage capacity not exceeding 1.25 MAF and use the rivers for run of river hydro power generation with storage not exceeding 1.6 MAF and nominal flood storage capacity of 0.75 MAF.

These allocations are meagre to meet irrigation requirements, thus Jammu and Kashmir loses hundreds of millions of dollars because of the treaty. The treaty acknowledged certain rights and privileges for agriculture use of India drawing water from Western Rivers and similarly Pakistan drawing water for similar reasons from the three Eastem Rivers.

Despite allowing India to draw water from the Western Rivers for irrigation up to 642,000 acres, in addition to another entitlement to irrigate 701,000 acres, India has so far not made its full use. The treaty has not considered Gujarat State in India as part of the Indus River basin. The Indus River is entering the Great Rann of Kutch area and feeding in to Kori Creek during floods. In 1960, the Great Rann of Kutch area was disputed territory between the two Nations which was later settled in the year 1968 by sharing total disputed area in 9:1 ratio between India and Pakistan.

Key Disputes : Some of the ongoing key disputes to IWT are :

(a) Tulbul Navigation Project : Proposed at the mouth of Wullar lake in Baramulla to increase the flow of water in Jhelum, essentially for navigation from Anantanag to Baramulla. Pakistan objected that it violated the provisions of the treaty as it would adversely affect the triple canal project viz. Upper Chenab Canal, Upper Jhelum Canal & Lower Bari Doab Canal, beside Mangle Dam during winters.

In 1986 Pakistan referred the project dispute to Indus Water Commission (IWC), but after 1 year the commission recorded failure to resolve it subsequently India stopped the construction. From 1986-91, 13 rounds of talks were held but dispute remained unresolved-Dispute dominated Indo-Pakistan talks, the Agra summit of 2001, Secretary level talks of 2016, but not much development have been achieved yet.

(b) The Kishanganga (KG) Project : Located on River Kishanganga, a tributary of River Jhelum, in Bandipore. The project involves transfer of water of Kishanganga River in Gurez valley to Boner nullah near Bandipore by construction of a 37 meter high concrete faced rockfill dam & underground powerhouse to generate 330 MW. Year of construction was 2007 and was to be completed by 2016.

Again, Pakistan protested that diversion will reduce the flow of water to the Neelum valley as they constructed Neelum-Jhelum hydropower plant down-stream of the KG. India's stand is that project will only divert 10 perc®t of the river's flow while other estimates stand as high as 33 percent. The International Court of Arbitration gave its "final award" on Dec 20th, 2013 which specifies that Nine m3/Sec of natural flow of water must be maintained in Kishanganga River.

(c) The Baglihar Project Dispute : The dispute emerged in 1999, when Pakistan challenged the design of the project as it saw as violation of the treaty. As per Pakistan the project gives India a strategic leverage to manipulate the flow of river during any critical situation. A neutral expert Prof Raymond Lafitte of Switzerland instructed India to make some changes in the structure of project but Pakistan was not satisfied with the verdict as he did not consider much of Pakistan's objection.

Indo-Pak relation became hostile when water was to be filled in the Baglihar dam as Pakistan demanded compensation for its loss. Finally, the differences were resolved in 2010 by Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA). From these disputes, it would be seen that in all the projects objected to, Pakistan has brought in a new dimension to the dispute on security and strategic considerations which are strictly outside the ambit of the Indus Treaty.

Reality Checks on Suspension of IWT by India : Pakistan is one of the most water-stressed countries in the world, with per capita annual fresh water availability of 1, 200 m3 in comparison to world average of 2,500 - 15,000 m3. Its largest economical sector, agriculture, consumes 90 percent of the country's water resources. In some areas of Pakistan like Sindh province, Indus River is the sole source of water for irrigation and human consumption, contributing about 64% of water supply, with Jhelum giving 17% and Chenab 19%.

In total, 21.5 million hectares of farmland (80%) of Pakistan is irrigated from this river and the canals it built. Preventing this water from flowing to Pakistan will unleash havoc in Pakistan (specially in Punjab and Sindh province). Preamble to IWT says, the treaty is based on goodwill, thus; 'trust' should be there for treaties to work and cannot be one-sided.

Article 62 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties enables treaties to be dissolved, in case circumstances change fundamentally. India can back out of the treaty citing how Pakistan is sponsoring terrorists for anti-India activities, the latest being Pakistan sponsored Pahalgam terrorist attack against innocent civilians, and it is a viable reason.

Lastly, Articles 9-12 of the IWT clearly provide for settlement of differences and disputes by both the countries. Theoretically if India annuls the IWT, the consequences will be humanitarian devastation in one of the world's most water-starved countries. Using water as a weapon could inflict more damage on Pakistan than some forms of warfare.

Revoking the IWT will control Pakistan, if enough storage space is created, but may take many years and also likelihood of flooding Punjab and J and K However, there is likely to be global pressure and condemnation. As World Bank is co-signatory it is likely to support Pakistan, if India decides to withdraw from the treaty permanently and may score a major propaganda victory within Pakistan.

China may retaliate as she doesn't have a water sharing treaty with India and in such scenario, India could lose as much as 36 per cent of the Indus River water. Notwithstanding the above pros and cons, annulling WIT is feasible for following reasons.

a) The treaty though facilitated by the World Bank, the latter is not a guarantor to the treaty.
b) Diversion or reduction of waters on Western Rivers may be possible once channels are ready.

Being totally dependent on glacial waters, the availability of water from the Western Rivers in Pakistan is already reaching critical proportions. Any further reduction will mostly affect the tower riparian States. An inter-ministerial task force was set up in 2017 to devise plans as to how India can "max the benefits" from the three Western rivers, however, the plan of actions have not been made in the public domain.

Recommendations

"No armies with bombs and shellfire could devastate a land so thoroughly as Pakistan could be devastated by the simple expedient of India's permanently shutting off the source of waters that keep the fields and people of Pakistan green - David Lilienthal, former chief of the Tennessee Valley Authority, US."

There is no doubt that Pakistan will be facing increasing water shortages in the days to come leading to prolonged drought in many of its regions. The reasons are many but some of these are Pakistan's own doing. The availability of water even now has reached critical proportions. India must consider exhausting all other options within the treaty itself.

Given the disadvantages, go for all actions legally tenable, to pressure Islamabad : build more dams on the Western Rivers. The IWT permits this, even though these water bodies are allocated to Pakistan, so long as storage is kept to a minimum to allow water to keep flowing downstream. Utilise full potential of Eastern Rivers.

A minor reduction in the supply of water to Pakistan would have catastrophic effects on the agriculture-dependent country. Reduce outflow during crop sowing season, simultaneously during monsoons, when snow melts, release excessive water spurts to flood areas of Pakistan as the country has not done much for water storage. Tulbul project can be re-started.

Expedite constructions of the Pakistan ul Dul dam, Sawalkot dam, Bursar dam, Retie dam all in LOC on the River Chenab in Himachal Pradesh. Do not accept PCA's ruling as the final one. Finally, India can call for a mutual review of treaty on the pretext that the treaty is heavily tilted in the favour of Pakistan and people of Kashmir require water of Western rivers to fulfil their development needs.

If Pakistan refuses to review the treaty, then it will adversely affect the credibility of Pakistan as well-wisher of people Kashmir. Thus, either way India stands to gain from such a call of review. As the upper riparian State, India can control the flow of the six rivers that flow into the Indus Basin. The 'Aqua Bomb' is truly India's most powerful weapon against Pakistan.

"Blood and water can't flow simultaneously." Narendra Modi, Prime Minister of India, 26th September 2016.

For India, Indus Water can be made a Brahmastra against Pakistan.