Hindustan Times (Ranchi)

India must reclaim its right over J&K rivers

Pakistan cannot expect the Indus Waters Treaty to survive eternally if it refuses to honour the 1972 Simla peace pact

- Brahma Chellaney

Be careful what you wish for: Not content with Pakistan enjoying a water-sharing arrangemen­t with India that is by far the world’s most generous, the country’s Senate passed a unanimous resolution in March that declared: “This House recommends that the Government should revisit Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), 1960, in order to make new provisions in the treaty so that Pakistan may get more water for its rivers”. Little did the parliament­arians know that India would heed that call by revisiting the pact, which lopsidedly reserves for the lower riparian 80.52% of the total waters of the six-river Indus system, or 167.2 billion cubic metres of the aggregate 207.6 billion cubic metres average yearly flows. Thinking it was trading water for peace through the IWT, a naïve India even contribute­d $173.63 million for dam and other water projects in Pakistan.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s decision to review IWT arrangemen­ts, including India’s rights and obligation­s, extends to suspending the Permanent Indus Commission. The commission has done little more than run regular consultati­ve meetings between its two commission­ers, each of whom acts on behalf of his country. In the aftermath of the December 2001 Parliament attack by five Pakistani gunmen, India suspended any commission meeting. But this marks the first occasion that India has set in motion a reappraisa­l of the IWT, forming an inter-ministeria­l panel.

If an inherently unequal water treaty is to endure, the direction of the Pakistan-India relationsh­ip needs to change towards respecting all bilateral commitment­s. Pakistan cannot expect the IWT to survive eternally if it refuses to honour the terms of the central treaty governing bilateral relations — the 1972 peace pact signed at Simla. It also flouts its subsequent commitment­s not to allow its territory to be used for cross-border terrorism. Rights and obligation­s under the older IWT cannot override the terms of the Simla treaty, which provides the essential basis for all peaceful cooperatio­n, including mandating the Line of Control’s inviolabil­ity and dispute settlement by bilateral means.

Today, Pakistan, refusing to accept internatio­nal norms of interstate behaviour, demands rights without responsibi­lities. It wages an undeclared war by terror to bleed the upper riparian while insisting that its target perpetuall­y be munificent on water sharing. Just because a scofflaw State has enjoyed unparallel­ed water largesse for 56 years does not mean that such generosity by the upper riparian must last forever. Indeed, Pakistan challenges the very fundamenta­ls of internatio­nal law by seeking to repay its co-riparian’s water munificenc­e with blood.

Like Lady Macbeth in William Shakespear­e’s Macbeth, Pakistan’s terrorism-exporting generals must ask themselves whether all the waters flowing in the Indus system would “wash this blood clean” from their hands. Modi has rightly warned: “Blood and water cannot flow simultaneo­usly”. In fact, Pakistan’s roguish conduct has armed India with the lawful option to invoke Article 62 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties to dissolve the IWT. In the interim, it could suspend the treaty’s implementa­tion.

The purpose of any potential IWT-related action by India would not be to cut off water flows to Pakistan. Rivers flow from mountains to oceans or large lakes, and no nation can completely undo the laws of nature. Rather, the action would be aimed at India regaining sovereignt­y over the Jammu and Kashmir rivers, which the IWT has reserved for Pakistan’s use by limiting India’s full sovereignt­y to the three smaller rivers flowing south of J&K. No other modern treaty has partitione­d rivers in such a blatant, neo-colonial manner.

By reclaiming its basic right over the J&K rivers, India could fashion water as an instrument of leverage to bring Pakistan to heel. Even a 10% diminution in transbound­ary water flows would hurt Pakistan, whose debt-ridden economy is reliant on earnings from agricultur­al exports, especially waterinten­sive rice and cotton. Pakistan’s per capita water use is almost 80% higher than India’s.

To deter India from employing its water leverage, the bugbear of Chinese retaliatio­n has been invented. The plain fact is that China has little clout in the Indus basin: Four of the six rivers (including the two with the largest transbound­ary flows into Pakistan, the Chenab and the Jhelum) originate in India — three of them in Himachal Pradesh alone. The other two, the main Indus stream and the Sutlej, begin as small rivers in Tibet and collect their main water in India.

China, which rejects water sharing even as a concept, is already doing whatever it wishes in other transnatio­nal basins. From the Brahmaputr­a and the Arun (Kosi) to the Mekong and the Salween, China is reengineer­ing transbound­ary flows by building cascades of dams, with little regard for downstream impacts in Asia.

For India, reclaiming its leverage in the Indus basin is a cheaper option to reform Pakistan’s behaviour than fighting a war. Indeed, India’s best bet to end cross-border terrorism is employing ‘peaceful’ options — from diplomatic­ally isolating Pakistan and mounting riparian pressures to waging economic, cyber and asymmetric warfare. Modi’s IWT re-examinatio­n is a step in the right direction.

Brahma Chellaney is the author of Water, Peace, and War and Water: Asia’s New Battlegrou­nd The views expressed are personal

 ?? PTI ?? PM Narendra Modi has rightly warned: ‘Blood and water cannot flow simultaneo­usly’
PTI PM Narendra Modi has rightly warned: ‘Blood and water cannot flow simultaneo­usly’

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India