Posted at 11.15.2018
One reason behind dissatisfaction with the IWT is that, as presently built, it includes very thin support to the included or joint development of the Indus River Basin. After all of the treaty's success, in the face of huge distrust and animosity between the two signatory, acquired largely regarding its abandonment of customary international norms regulating internationally shared rivers. Specifically, it discarded the norms protecting the downstream country's traditional uses of rivers wtare, instead of which it offered geo-physical partition of the river system itself. This formula was conceivable only in the unique geographic and politics circumstances of the Indus Basin As has been presented in the previous chapter the complete abrogation of the IWT is not possible therefore there's a need to generate various options that can be exercised to solve the issue of interest between Pakistan and Kashmir over normal water resources. Pakistan's response to the problem is based on complete control over the status of Jammu & Kashmir which would place the watershed areas in its control and solve its problem of being truly a lower riparian state. This is not a useful solution. India's way to the issues envisages steady erosion of the provision of the treaty by constructions of dams in Jammu and Kashmir which would enable it to exploit the sources of the three North rivers while remain on the fringes of the treaty. These different methods by both the countries might not provide us with a remedy which would be acceptable to the people of India, Pakistan and the status of Jammu and Kashmir. Why don't we examine a few of the solutions that contain been proposed by various personalities as also see the feasibility of employing them.
Pakistan has directly or indirectly emphasised the Chenab Solution as the utmost preferred option. This section would be predicated on the move of the Chenab, but it would to some extent coincide with religious demography. How come then Pakistan considering the Chenab formulation that includes elements of Jammu? With a tiny twist to this proposal, consider the hypothetical situation, as recommended by many experts, of only Kashmir being truly a part of Pakistan, and complete Jammu province and Ladakh under India. One visible outcome of this arrangement is the dissolving of the Indus Waters Treaty, as the politics position of Kashmir would change. The circulation of normal water resources would be improved. Pakistan would then have complete control over only the Indus, Jhelum, and some of these tributaries. The Chenab, Ravi, Beas and Sutlej streams would are categorized as India's jurisdiction.
This layout would be harmful to Pakistan, as it would lose a major water source the Chenab. The incumbent major water resources for Pakistan Indus and Jhelum have been exploited to the maximum in Pakistani Punjab itself where over half their normal water moves is diverted for irrigation. The Chenab also is a major way to obtain normal water to Punjab. In addition, the Chenab-Jhelum incorporate is the sole tributary of the Indus that improves the latter's movement downstream Punjab. Losing Chenab to India would mean drastic reduction in water products to Sindh, which is already on the brink of the water crisis. It really is imperative to please note here that the spot that the eastern tributaries combine to become listed on the Indus River reaches a point before entering Sindh. Moreover, Sindh receives normal water only from the Indus River. Burning off Chenab would also warrant a significant rearrangement of the irrigation network in Punjab. This evidently talks about Pakistan's insistence on making Chenab the foundation of the international border and including parts of Jammu rather than just the Kashmir valley, under its jurisdiction. Moreover, it provides strategic depth for the Mangla Dam.
Thus, the Chenab Formula would be the preferred solution for Pakistan but will have grave implications for India. Apart from losing from the talk about of Jammu and Kashmir that may lead many other complications, this solution will also see India shedding out on its normal water resources emanating from Jammu and Kashmir. Whatever flexibility that India has credited its limited rights over three Northern Streams will be forsaken for no noticeable benefits. Therefore, if hostility reach a qualification where Pakistan formally proposes the Chenab Formula, and not merely as an indicator in track-two diplomacy, India's response should be in the negative and belligerent.
Since Chenab Solution and the resultant department of Jammu portends battle, consider an alternate solution, put forward by some experts, of handing within the Valley of Kashmir to Pakistan. Pakistan's ISI operates on the belief that it can conquer the Valley of Kashmir by low depth insurgency. If we were to consider a future scenario where Pakistan with the aid of terrorist categories have managed to catch to the Valley of Kashmir which includes always been its motive than the consequences of this action for Pakistan would indeed be grave. Aside from other military and monetary action which India would be bound to carry out the natural place of the Indus drinking water system will place Pakistan in great discomfort.
India's response would be to block the flow of the Chenab River into Pakistan thereby depriving Pakistan of major tributary for the Indus. Theoretically you'll be able to divert this of the Chenab River and join it with the Ravi, thus keeping Chenab for India's exclusive use. Under such circumstances, Pakistan would head for disaster, most important because the moves in the Indus River would greatly reduce, as the Jhelum would be the only main tributary. The Indus River could dry out even before reaching the Arabian Sea. This might have serious repercussions on Pakistan's current economic climate. The extreme outcome of the circumstance of getting rid of Chenab to India, and the Valley of Kashmir becoming the bottom for redrawing the map, would be the whole reworking of the canal and irrigation system in Pakistan.
It is therefore very clear that even taking the Kashmir valley won't solve Pakistan's problem. Actually this action is only going to increase Pakistan vulnerability credited to water scarcity. The preceding paragraphs also have brought out the immense need for the corridor through which Chenab flows into Pakistan and same may also be examined in light of repeated Pakistani's attempts to capture this area in the past.
The other point that sticks out is the fact India reaches an edge vis -a-vis Pakistan due the geographical located area of the Indus drinking water Rivers. How can India take good thing about this? One area of immediate concern for India will be to meet its drinking water requirement for the near future. The water potential of the Beas, Satluj and Ravi has already been exploited by India. Therefore this means that the only option remaining is the exploitation of the Northern Rivers. What are the repercussions of such an action? As long as India uses these Northern Rivers within the provision of the IWT there would be no major objections from Pakistan but a breach of the treaty will surely ask conflagration of hostilities from our neighbours. Additionally if India needs to project itself as a sensible country eager to shoulder better responsibility consistent with its growing financial status than such an action will have harmful results. An unpredictable neighbourhood as it is will deny India of any benefit so it accrues fro abrogation of the treaty.
The above quarrels elucidates that India does not have many options. As is the situation with Pakistan belligerence over drinking water is not going to solve any problem in fact it'll create more. The tool available is meant for use of both the countries and has been done throughout record and therefore there is absolutely no reasons why both countries cannot shoot for a integrated development procedure of the Indus basin and division of water resources is performed not based on geographical partition of rivers but based on actual needs and appropriate sharing.
A sustainable solution can be done only if it is based on a win-win method. Currently, the main of the condition lies in having less harmony between your interests of Pakistan and India and Jammu & Kashmir. Pakistan needs Jammu & Kashmir to build dams to divert drinking water flows to Punjab and Sindh wheras India is frustrated at seeing precious resource flowing unabated into Pakistan. . On the other hand, Jammu & Kashmir must emerge from the Indus Waters Treaty to boost its own irrigation, hydro-electricity and work potential clients. The irony is the fact deeper the issue increases between Punjab and Sindh in Pakistan, the higher would be the desperation of Pakistan's military to annex Kashmir, leading to upsurge in terrorism in Jammu & Kashmir and around India. More the tensions install, greater are stresses on New Delhi to take a hard brand against Pakistan.
It is critical for both India and Pakistan to envisage complete development and planning in the River Basin. A alternative approach to normal water resources recognizing the connections and financial linkages between water, land, the users, the environment and infrastructure is necessary to evade the impending normal water turmoil in the subcontinent. The introduction of such an idea would require great amount of financial and complex resources. It should be possible to mobilise such resources from across the world, perhaps with the entire world Bank agencies playing the lead role. The built in development strategy is Utopian. It is only possible with a paradigm transfer in way of thinking and complete end to hostilities, both physical and psychological. The prerequisite of such an approach is the following:-
Benefit showing is extensively touted as the answer to water conflicts throughout the world, although operationalizing the concept is tricky. Advantage sharing is pleasing since it shifts away from a volume motivated approach to a more ecological strategy that specifies and stocks the benefit produced from this particular source. For countries to participate in a cooperative framework, benefit posting must offer rewards higher than those of unilateral action. Many would dispute that given the amount of animosity between the two countries such an procedure is impractical. One must ponder if it's, in simple fact, a viable option. Should it not prove to be an acceptable alternative than the near future seems bleak for India Pakistan relationships? A careful approach to the condition will divulge that this approach is really the only functional way of solving future water problems.
For an equitable and lasting management of shared water resources, flexible, holistic strategy of integrated drinking water resource management is required, which can cater to hydrological variations with time and space and changes in socio-economic needs along with the societal beliefs. Given the commonality of normal water resources, the commonality of these usage, and the commonality of the emergent issues, there exists clearly a strong case for significant interaction between the scientific establishments and water management agencies over the region. This would include information writing, collaborative studies, capacity building, and technology exchange. Rather than expending huge amount of profit building up offensive potential integration of interest will go a long way in building tranquility and harmony in your community. There is a need to establish a suitable regulatory construction that aims at integrated water management rather that just physical division of normal water resources. With a proper regulatory framework, cross border ventures in volving water services is actually a significant way to obtain employment, economic growth and livelihood security.