The Hindu : Opinion / Editorials : A MANAGEABLE CONTROVERSY

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Saturday, Jan 22, 2005

Opinion

Opinion - Editorials

A MANAGEABLE CONTROVERSY

PAKISTAN'S DECISION TO refer the Baglihar dam issue to the World Bank is regrettable since it stands in stark contrast to the positive engagement with India that has unfolded over the past many months. While the talks held between the Water Resources Secretaries of the two countries earlier in January were inconclusive, there was apparently enough scope for further discussion. India believes that a breakthrough on technical aspects was achieved during the talks. It has also asked Pakistan to suggest alternative design calculations or fact sheets that could be examined on a "two-way" basis. Either party to the Indus Water Treaty can seek the appointment of a neutral expert and the World Bank does have a role to play in this regard. However, the Treaty does not preclude a joint request by the two countries or their representatives on the Permanent Indus Commission if they are not able to sort out their differences bilaterally. In forgoing this option Pakistan appears to have created a needless controversy that can only widen the trust deficit that the two sides are trying to overcome. However, too much need not be made of this issue at this juncture. The neutral expert, whose appointment must be approved by both countries, can at most make a determination that the differences are so irreconcilable as to constitute a dispute. Even if the expert does make such a determination, the two governments can try to resolve the dispute bilaterally before a reference is made to a Court of Arbitration.

The Treaty permits India to make very limited use of the three western rivers — Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab. The waters of these rivers can be utilised for domestic, agricultural, and non-consumptive purposes and for the generation of hydro-electric power subject to rigid conditions. However, the natural flow of these rivers must not be impeded. Pakistan has taken the position that the Baglihar dam on the Chenab with a height of 470 feet and a gated spillway creates a storage capacity that interferes with the flow. Underlying these objections is the longstanding concern that India could cut off the supply of water to West Punjab if it has the installed capacity to do so. New Delhi believes there is no basis for concern — even the technical adjustments needed to stop the flow will take so long to implement that there can be no question of a party being able to get away with a breach of the Treaty. India's position hardened after its bitter experience with the Tulbul navigation project. Work on this project has stalled for the past 17 years because the discussions on this issue have made no headway.

The disagreements over the western rivers are unfortunate particularly because of the detrimental effect they have on the people of Jammu and Kashmir. Legislators claim the State has lost a hefty Rs.6000 crore every year and forfeited 15,000 megawatts of power owing to the restrictions imposed by the Treaty. While their demand for an abrogation of the Treaty cannot be countenanced, the two Governments do have an obligation speedily to reconcile the differences over the western rivers that have a direct impact on the welfare of the people. The Treaty, which was welcomed by the people of the two countries when it was signed in 1960, has stood the test of time. The systems set in place under its terms have been particularly useful when downstream users need to be warned of impending floods. This history of cooperation in water use can provide a basis for sorting out the differences over technical issues.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Opinion

News Update

Stories in this Section

A TOUCH OF UNCERTAINTY

A MANAGEABLE CONTROVERSY

Mumbai's demolition marathon

Parties in U.S., despair elsewhere