Mubarak Baloch
Ever since the partition; disputes arose between Pakistan and India leading to more mistrust and heightened hostility between the two. Like forcible annexation of princely ruled states by India, division of the assets, including proportionate share in the military hardware and sharing of the water of rivers of which India being the upper riparian were the outstanding issues. Since the Indus river and its tributaries are originating from Indian side hence New Delhi had fiddled with the water flow in order to multiply the problems for fledgling new state Pakistan. Thus in 1951, David Lilienthal, associated with Colliers Magazine in one of his articles suggested that there should be some rapprochement between the two countries over the use of water of rivers. In his article he suggested that World Bank (WB) should intervene and bring both India and Pakistan to an agreement over how to share and manage the river system. Thus Eugene R. Black, then president of the World Bank, did as a intermediary. W. A. B. Iliff on behalf of WB witnessed/ put his signature on the agreement reached between two countries. Jawahar Lal Nehru, the Indian PM and Muhammad Ayub Khan, the president of Pakistan are the signatories of the treaty took place on 19 september 1960 in Karachi. As per the Indus Water Treaty (IWT) India was given exclusive right to use water of rivers Ravi, Beas and Sutlej whereas Pakistan was given rivers Indus, Jhelum and Chenab. Besides, Permanent Indus Commission (PIC) with representation from both the countries was formed to address disputes if any arising between two countries. Commission is required to meet on regular intervals to look into irritants if any between the two countries. Both the countries are bound to share the data related to new engineering works if carried out on river system. In case of possible impasse the PIC provides option of arbitration between the two countries.
There had been some problems between Pakistan and India when the India started building Baghliar Dam, run-of-the-river project on Chennab River and Kishanganga Dam, again run-of-the-river project on Jheleum River basin. Pakistan raised objections over the design of the projects from the platform of IWT but the same could be addressed through arbitration. IWT has in fact survived three wars and other irritations between Pakistan and India but this time it is said that Indian PM Modi being advised by some hawks in his cabinet to scrap the treaty and divert rivers flow to starve Pakistan by creating economic collapse for its adversary. Though the treaty is inviolable and its scrapping by India would create problems for India itself when Pakistan would take the issue to World Bank (WB), the third party being signatory is part of treaty. As a generally acceptable norm upper riparian has to release water for the lower riparian and rivers flow in the world around are mainly managed under this norm.
There will be multiple problems for India in case it scrapes the treaty. Its international standing on moral grounds would be weak. Being middle riparian of two of six rivers as Indus and Sutlej actually originate from Tibet under the control of China India may face problem if China decides to divert both rivers’ flow. And there is no treaty or any other water sharing mechanism existing between China and India. Such a blockade would further complicate the situation for India as well. India does not have sufficient water storage facility to divert and store waters of three rivers namely Indus, Sutlej, and Chennab. In fact it cannot divert water of these rivers for geographical reasons though it can temporarily stop the supply for some time.
Pakistan would seek the redress of it grievances from WB or other international fora to mount pressure on India. Such pressure would be there to expose hegemonic desire of India and some level of isolation India might face. India has similar treaties with Bangladesh and other neighbouring countries and such hydro-politics may give jitters to them. Moreover, in case rivers flow stopped and being in the grip of famine like situation Pakistan may resort to active war (war of survival) against India to create a situation where world conscience may rise from slumber to see Indian aggression.
There are certain international conventions offering guidelines for the use of the waters of international rivers. The Helsinki Rules related to uses of the waters of international rivers were framed in a conference held in August 1966 at Helsinki in Finland. Besides, India’s hydro-terrorism may also be assessed in the light of ‘Convention on the Law of Non-Navigational Uses of International Watercourses’ which is an international treaty adopted by the United Nations on 21 May 1997, pertaining to the uses and conservation of all waters that cross international boundaries. Similarly Egypt being lower riparian of river Nile has treaties with countries like Sudan and with other upper riparian for receiving its due water share.
India being upper riparian will have no grouse whatsoever against Pakistan being lower riparian. Rather it could be other way around as rivers are flowing from India to Pakistan. Hence there should be no technical reason with India showing violation of treaty by Pakistan to justify possible scrapping of the treaty. Abrogation of the treaty due to other problems between the two countries neither holds legal nor moral weight for India. Treaties are normally annulled when these become impracticable due to serious inherent flaws in them or exploitative attitudes of the parties signatories to these. Neither reason is seen in this case.
To weaken Pakistan’s economy which is largely based on irrigation dependent agriculture to achieve other sinister designs would not be seen by the international community in sync with international law and moral grounds. A perception held that there are probably some characters unwilling to see Pakistan going for China assisted/ asserted CPEC and India is being used as tool to press Pakistan from certain angles so that it may stand dissuaded. If true then threat to IWT certainly emanates from said strategy. How Pakistan will use its diplomatic space to wriggle out of the situation being created for it only time will tell. But there is no deniability with regard to a huge mass of militancy and extremism existing in Asian continent. ISIS, Daesh, al Qaeda, Taliban etc are active with so-called Jehadi fang. And Pakistan has been battling against this odd mass for over a decade. Engaging Pakistan in non-issues like water sharing problem etc would obviously slacken its anti-militancy drive offering an opportunity to rag-tag militias to assert and spoil the improving landscape in the region. Regional peace and stability should be endeared more than narrow vested interests.
