India and Pakistan shouldn't mess with Indus Water Treaty

Discussion in 'Foreign Relations' started by Singh, Dec 9, 2011.

  1. Singh

    Singh Phat Cat Administrator

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2009
    Messages:
    20,305
    Likes Received:
    8,270
    Location:
    011
    Don’t Tinker With The Treaty


    Although considerable attention has been given in mainstream media to Pakistan’s water crisis, narratives vary greatly in India and Pakistan. In the context of these varying accounts, Gitanjali Bakshi and Sahiba Trivedi’s paper “The Indus Equation” is a commendable work that provides perspective on water dynamics in the subcontinent and highlights the scope, extent and causes of Pakistan’s water crisis. However, while some enhancements to the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) can be envisaged, a large-scale reshaping of the IWT itself is not entirely desirable for India at this time. While it could be argued that the Treaty is less than optimal today, it has come further than any India-Pakistan agreement and has stood the test of time by providing a framework for sharing IWT waters and amicably resolving issues of contention. Introducing substantial changes to the IWT could conceivably damage the agreement itself.

    Anxiety over water scarcity and cognizance of Pakistan’s vulnerability as a lower riparian led General Ayub Khan to seek a treaty with India over the sharing of the waters of the Indus River system. The treaty, brokered by the World Bank, was signed in September 1960 in Karachi by Ayub Khan and Nehru. The IWT gives exclusive use of the Western rivers of the Indus River system — the Indus, Chenab and Jhelum — to Pakistan, and the Eastern rivers — the Sutlej, Ravi and Beas — to India. The IWT also established a Permanent Indus Commission, with representation from both India and Pakistan, to cooperate on matters related to the Treaty.

    Today, the IWT is crucial to the survival and sustainability of agriculture in Pakistan’s Indus Basin. Pakistan’s economy is largely agrarian, accounting for 25 percent of GDP, and employing 50 percent of Pakistan’s work force. As a water intensive sector, agriculture in Pakistan consumes about 95 percent of available water annually according to the Asian Development Bank, while the rest are allocated for rural, urban and industrial use.

    Unfortunately, the undeniable benefits of the treaty to Pakistan have been obscured by misplaced apprehension and aggression. Ayub Khan’s fears of Pakistan’s water insecurity did not prevent him from waging war against India in 1965. Since then, Pakistan has imposed war on India twice and provoked India through insurgencies and terror. Yet, India continues to respect the IWT in letter and spirit, not denying Pakistan its share of water even during times of war. Indeed, India itself, as a lower riparian to China, does not have the luxury of a treaty over the use of the Brahmaputra. Nor do Pakistan and Afghanistan have an equivalent treaty over the use of the Kabul River.

    However, overwhelmingly popular themes in Pakistan on IWT accuse India of using water as a means to further its strategic objectives. Pakistan’s far right Urdu newspaper Nawa-i-waqt accuses India of “water terrorism” and has opined that Pakistan must use its nuclear weapons to resolve its problems with India. Former chief of ISI, Lt Gen Hamid Gul urged Pakistan to be determined in the face of India’s “aggression,” adding that “if necessary, India’s dams will be blown up.” The view that India’s calculated construction of dams obstructs the flow of the western rivers in Pakistan is so popular, and the pressure on the government to “resolve” this so great, that Islamabad has attempted to make the “issue” of water a component of potential “composite dialogues” with India. This, despite there already being a mechanism to resolve water-related differences and disputes between India and Pakistan via the Neutral Expert and the Court of Arbitration, per the IWT.

    Although it is true that Pakistan suffers from water shortages, India’s imagined role in contributing to these shortages is minimal, at best. Pakistan’s water problems are due to a historic mismanagement of resources by Pakistan and lack of any credible strategy to address either current or future water requirements. Pakistan suffers from a lack of adequate water storage capacity, and by some estimates, can only store about 15 percent of annual river flow. Despite projections of acute future water shortages, Pakistan has not invested in developing adequate storage capacity since the building of the Tarbela dam, over 35 years ago. Worse, sedimentation has significantly affected overall storage capacity of its dams. According to a report published by Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, sedimentation has resulted in a reduction of Tarbela’s capacity by 28 per cent.

    Pakistan’s poor construction and maintenance of canals has caused a significant amount of water loss in the Indus Basin. By some estimates, water losses from unlined canals ranged from 64-68 percent. Indeed, water loss even in lined canals in Pakistan, which are old and poorly maintained, was estimated at 35 to 52 percent, according to a paper published by the University of Agriculture, Faisalabad. Further, the use of saline groundwater for irrigation has significantly impacted agricultural yield in areas where river water is inaccessible.

    Other factors such as climate change and population growth will continue to pose considerable challenges to Pakistan’s water security. Himalayan glaciers that form a primary water source for the Indus, are rapidly melting and will negatively affect water availability in Pakistan in the long term. Further, Pakistan’s population growth rate of 1.56 percent (the fastest in the subcontinent), and the lack of any concrete plans to address already existing water shortages will mean that Pakistan will very soon make the transition from a “water-stressed” country to a “water-scarce” country, according to a report published by the World Bank.

    Certainly, transnational water sharing is a complicated subject. In our own region, the sharing of water between states and provinces has been an emotive issue, as evidenced by the disputes over the Kalabagh dam between the Pakistani provinces of Punjab and Sindh, and the Kaveri dispute between Tamil Nadu and Karnataka. There is no denying that Pakistan’s water challenges are real, notwithstanding the dubious causes suggested. And it behooves India, as a neighbour, to help Pakistan address some of these challenges, where possible.

    However, one must recognise that Pakistan’s water problems are its own and that to a great extent, the solutions to these problems lie in Pakistan. India cannot be expected to display magnanimity towards Pakistan when Pakistan itself has not demonstrated a basic desire to tackle structural and governance issues in water management. While forums such as the Pakistan-U.S. Dialogue on Water are encouraging steps, Pakistan needs to do much more to convince its people and neighbours that it accepts responsibility and is endeavouring to address these issues.

    In India, a national debate is necessary before committing to any significant changes to the IWT, and whether these changes would be in India’s national interests. Any potential Indian magnanimity runs the risk of being perceived from across the border as either a sign of weakness or accepted with a sense of entitlement. India must consider whether, and to what extent, any changes or compromise will enhance its own national interests. Certainly, Islamabad’s own inflexibility and insensitivity towards addressing India’s core issues, including Pakistan’s continued use of terrorism as an instrument of state policy, may make any possible Indian accommodation on Pakistan’s water problems remote.

    Don’t tinker with the treaty
     
  2.  
  3. agentperry

    agentperry Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2010
    Messages:
    3,022
    Likes Received:
    678
    Location:
    delhi
    i still hold prithviraj for this debacle.
     
    Tshering22 likes this.
  4. Dovah

    Dovah Untermensch Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2011
    Messages:
    4,754
    Likes Received:
    3,273
    Location:
    Modindia
    If necessary their water will be poisoned so that the next seven generations in Pakistan are mutants.
     
    ganesh177 likes this.
  5. Galaxy

    Galaxy Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2011
    Messages:
    7,093
    Likes Received:
    3,895
    Location:
    Delhi
    Water flowing from India to Pakistan is Brahmastra for us.

    Also, Pakistan is interested in Kashmir due to fear that we might divert the river. [Not Muslim brotherhood I suppose]

    We should make it clear, Terrorism is J&K is inversely proportional to volume of water coming to Pakistan.
     
  6. trackwhack

    trackwhack Tihar Jail Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2011
    Messages:
    3,757
    Likes Received:
    2,573


    Turn the taps off. Lets see if they have have the steel to do what they say.
     
  7. Galaxy

    Galaxy Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2011
    Messages:
    7,093
    Likes Received:
    3,895
    Location:
    Delhi
    Barking dogs Seldom bite!!

    After every bomb blast in India which has linked with ISI/Pakistan, We should cut the water supply by 50% for next few weeks.

    Even China don't follow such treaty then why we are following it ??

    We should start using water as a bargaining point. Also, We need more water for various dams.

    [​IMG]
     
  8. Tshering22

    Tshering22 Sikkimese Saber Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2010
    Messages:
    4,404
    Likes Received:
    2,783
    Location:
    Gangtok, Sikkim, India
    Man you're still after kin Prithviraj's neck aren't you? :laugh: You should blame that "father" of Nation and his pet pooch who created this. Had they been serious about India, most of these wastrels who separated our country would have been packed to Islamic countries in Africa today where they could have mingled with their "brothers" and let the Indians stay in peace as well as that extra bit of land where our population would have spread, no Taliban would have come into existence and we'd have been much more resource-rich.

    Infact, I think we should use IWT as a weapon. If only we had a legitimate government with rational dedication to the nation...
     
  9. agentperry

    agentperry Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2010
    Messages:
    3,022
    Likes Received:
    678
    Location:
    delhi
    India would have collapsed if not broken
     
    KS likes this.
  10. Tshering22

    Tshering22 Sikkimese Saber Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2010
    Messages:
    4,404
    Likes Received:
    2,783
    Location:
    Gangtok, Sikkim, India
    This Gul guy really hates his country doesn't he? Almost all the dams that are in J&K face towards the western side for release. If this clown wants to blow the gates up, he will only make our job much much easier. :pound:
     
  11. Tshering22

    Tshering22 Sikkimese Saber Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2010
    Messages:
    4,404
    Likes Received:
    2,783
    Location:
    Gangtok, Sikkim, India
    On what grounds? The aggressive government would have simply kicked out these "descendants of Mughals" to Arabia or Northern Africa with force instead of giving them away the land. I never said to let htem stay here. In fact, what I was saying is that if we could keep the land and force these unwanted variety out of the sub-continent.
     
  12. agentperry

    agentperry Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2010
    Messages:
    3,022
    Likes Received:
    678
    Location:
    delhi
    India was too diverse for holding anything together. pakistan creation gave nation a reason to unite and also a direction
     
    KS and Param like this.
  13. Dovah

    Dovah Untermensch Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2011
    Messages:
    4,754
    Likes Received:
    3,273
    Location:
    Modindia
    So where did Pakistan secede from, again?
     
  14. agentperry

    agentperry Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2010
    Messages:
    3,022
    Likes Received:
    678
    Location:
    delhi
    the reason presented to jinnah during 1920 ML session was this only, that free india wont b able to hold for longer and will collapse. so they decided to take away as much as they can which can be holded as one entity- pakistan, holded together by islam. they did some miscalculation and east and west pak debacle we know. but they were right that india could no longer be contained as one nation- now we have 3
     
  15. KS

    KS Bye bye DFI Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2010
    Messages:
    8,008
    Likes Received:
    5,718
    Location:
    irrelevant
    It (Partition) just removed the toxins from the body - the malignant tumour that had been afflicting the nation for centuries.

    Partition of India was one of the best thing to have happened to India since a long long time, granted it could have been handles much better and to the last letter and spirit of it.

    BTW what is with Prithviraj ? Are you mentioning Prithviraj Chauhan ?
     
    Last edited: Dec 10, 2011
    mayfair likes this.
  16. agentperry

    agentperry Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2010
    Messages:
    3,022
    Likes Received:
    678
    Location:
    delhi

    if he had sent the invader from arabia 6 ft under the land, sub continent would have been a better place because then we would be having the muslims, who are actually human being and not programmed troll and destroyer of peace mankind and anything to ponder over. he is biggest fool ever walked on earth because he repeated mistake not once twice but 17 times
     
  17. KS

    KS Bye bye DFI Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2010
    Messages:
    8,008
    Likes Received:
    5,718
    Location:
    irrelevant
    You are confusing many things into one. When MBQ came Prithviraj Chauhan was not there. And that 17 times was Mahmud of Ghazni.

    Pritvi was the king in 12th century when he was defeated by the superior tactics of Mohammed Ghori.

    Even fate was not on our side. It intervened twice - first when a spear thrown by Rana Sanga missed the head of babur barely by a whisker and second when a stray arrow hit Hemchandra Vikramaditya and paved way for Mughla rule once again.

    Also we were so disunited - one thing I do not like about Maharaja Ranjit Singh is his refusal to help the Marathas in the Third Battle of Panipat against the Afghans.
     
    Last edited: Dec 10, 2011
  18. agentperry

    agentperry Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2010
    Messages:
    3,022
    Likes Received:
    678
    Location:
    delhi
    ghazi bought wave of continued muslim rule based on islamization of south asia with only gory and not liberals on top
     
  19. KS

    KS Bye bye DFI Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2010
    Messages:
    8,008
    Likes Received:
    5,718
    Location:
    irrelevant
    Are baba I don't understand you.

    I'm only saying Prithviraj did what he could do to the maximum.

    Luck & Unity were not on our side. No use blaming anyone.

    Just thank god that the sludge that came was filtered away in 1947.
     
  20. agentperry

    agentperry Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2010
    Messages:
    3,022
    Likes Received:
    678
    Location:
    delhi
    whatever the scene may be. partition is a good thing that could have happened. to India.
     
  21. KS

    KS Bye bye DFI Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2010
    Messages:
    8,008
    Likes Received:
    5,718
    Location:
    irrelevant
    We agree on something :cheers:
     

Share This Page