#324: Indus Water Treaty
History, Abeyance & Way Forward
Imagine:
You are living somewhere north of Multan💪🏻
Chenab feeds your fields & you believe in god's blessings on Pak for Indus Water.🕌
You have Indus Water Treaty which stays untouched through 3 wars!😮
Your regime fuels terror against Indians while managing to quench your thirst!
All of this ends one day when your rulers sanctioned Pahalgam Terror Attack..
..and India said: ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!
This post is about what's rightfully India's.
This post is about Indus Water Treaty.
This post is about justice.
Read everything carefully!
Let's start with History:
World Bank acted as a broker of a treaty that divided water of Indus River System in 1960. 6 rivers split into East & West Zone
East is for India, it said.
Western chunk with majority? Pakistan.
Eastern Rivers: Ravi, Beas & Sutlej
Western Rivers: Chenab, Jhelum & Indus
But hey, India can use western rivers BUT
Only for non-consumptive purposes:
Irrigation & Hydropower
..and if there's a dispute, solve it through
• Bilateral consultation
• Neutral expert analysis
• IF NEEDED, court of arbitration
You know how it was endured back then?
"Rare success in water diplomacy"
All things go smooth till public sentiment changes
New people make it to the govt in 2014
Resonating the sentiment comes a word from top:
"Blood and water cannot flow together"
India still managed non-consumptive purposes in Kishanganga Project. This alarmed Pakistan👇🏻
What do they say?🤔
• Dam design gives excessive control over water to India (especially in lean seasons)
• The 'intention' is to harm agriculture & ecology
'intention'?😂
India never backtracked on the word even in '65, '71, '99, this spoke more about Pak's malintent
What did we reply?
"We are in sync with provisions of IWT and using waters ONLY for non-consumptive purposes"
Pak being Pak went running to International organization👇🏻
World Bank! What did it say?
Boom! Take a look at below pointers:
• India sought neutral expert (tech issue) [WB agreed]
• Pak sought Court of Arbitration
• In 2016, WB even paused both to avoid parallel processes
• 2022, allowed both processes to proceed
India did what we thought is right for our interest:
- Participated in Neutral Expert Review
- Boycotted Arbitration
Wait, what's the basis of this, CSEWhy?👇🏻
• Upholding "Shimla Agreement (1972)", disputed w/ Pak to be resolved bilaterally
• Since IWT predates Shimla Agreement (1960), open to keep up with spirit of the word to have mutually agreed mediators defined by treaty
But the reality of today needs to be seen!
Pak expects a treaty signed in 1960 to be held in letter & spirit
We refuse for some reasons stated below
• Different economy size, different priorities
• A 65 years old treaty may not meet the realities of today
Moreover, Indian sentiments are against liberal attitude towards Pak
Before we proceed to way forward, let's see
how other such disputes are handled in the world
1. Post WWI, Hungry-Czechoslovakia clash on Danube
• Resolved through negotiations of League of Nations
• Called Gabcikovo-Nagymaros case went to Int'l Court of Justice which found both parties violating the treaty terms.
ICJ urged 'cooperative implementation'
2. Laos, Cambodia, Vietnam & Thailand | Mekong
• Tensions over hydropower projects
• Mekong River Commission promotes peace via dialogue, transparency & data sharing
Both these give a core insight:
Unilateralism leads to deadlock while legal & diplomatic channels enable progress
Now that IWT is in 'abeyance', what're the 'textbook' risks of withdrawing from IWT👇🏻
• Damages credibility as a responsible regional power
• Expect WB intervention both diplomatically & legally
• Potential distrust among other neighbors
• Legally Untenable: IWT being binding treaty w/ no exit clause u/ Vienna Convention
• Unilateral withdrawal possible only under extreme & narrowly defined conditions
Other thoughts: Water is a basic human right and not a tool of retaliation since it can devastate downstream communities.
Discussion:
To this, DO ADD YOUR THOUGHTS ON HOW Right to Life is Indian basic human right being violated time & again by Pakistan
Pak's existence is based on anti-India perception & its existence poses a threat to India, Indians & Indian interests.