Indus Water Treaty

The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by chaanakya »

J&K government admits to having started work on Wullar Barrage

In a first such admission, the J&K government has said it has started work on Wullar Barrage, a project that has been a bone of bitter contention between India and Pakistan. Though work on the project, which was attacked by militants in August earlier this year, has been going on for a long time, the government had then termed it as Jhelum Prevention Flood Control Scheme.

“Minister for Irrigation and Flood Control Taj Mohi-ud-Din informed the House that work on the construction of Wullar Barrage Project is in full swing,” a government statement said on Wednesday 11 October.

However, following the militant attack on the project in August, the state government had denied that the construction had anything to do with the barrage. “This is not Wullar Barrage. It is only an embankment under Jhelum Prevention Flood Control Scheme,” J&K’s minister for irrigation and flood control Taj Mohiudin had said. “We are not violating the Indus Water Treaty. And even under this treaty we have the right to store water. The condition is that we have to release it back into the river. This is what we are doing,” added the minister.

Now the government, for the first time, has described the project as ‘Wullar Barrage’.
On 27 August, militants had stopped work on the scheme near Wullar Lake, India’s largest fresh water lake. They had hurled a grenade at the construction site and warned labourers against continuing their work.
....
.....
......
Pakistan took the case to Indus Waters Commission in 1986 but it didn’t resolve the issue. But before Pakistan could move the International Court of Arbitration, India stopped work on the barrage.


There have been 12 rounds of dialogue between the two countries to break the impasse since, but to no avail.

Work on the Wullar conservation started last year. The Union Ministry for Environment and Forests has already sanctioned Rs 386 crore for the project to restore the lake’s lost glory.
J&K can not violate IWT. It is not a party to the treaty. Now Pakistan can go to Hague and say that J&K , which is not a pakistani territory, is constructing Wullar barrage in violation of the treaty. Having special status J&K need not be forced by India ( although we have discussed this issue earlier) to stop construction.

On a side note , Wullar barrage is an important component of KHEP. Hence start of construction indicates the confidence of Indian Govt about arbitration order which would be passed soon by Hague.
arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by arun »

Borrowing son-in-law of the Congress party Robert Vadra’s term, this “mango man in banana republic” is quite surprised by the comment of “a senior government official”, presumably from the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, that “India is not even working on those parts of the dam, where work has not been restricted by the court,”.

So has the Congress Party led UPA administration of our Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh unbeknownst to this “mango man in banana republic” granted yet another concession to the Islamic Republic of Pakistan?:

Visit to Kishanganga Dam site: India has stopped work following court’s orders
Lisa
BRFite
Posts: 1718
Joined: 04 May 2008 11:25

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by Lisa »

Description, revisionist history of IWT for all those who enjoy watching paint dry,

Insight (Indian Water Terrorism and Aggression) 20 May 2012

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=55b5B2V8 ... re=related
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by chaanakya »

http://www.thenews.c om.p k/Todays-News-3-140670-India-violated-Indus-Water-Treaty-in-Nimoo-Bazgo-hydropower-project
ISLAMABAD: A three-member committee headed by Syed Raghib Abbas Shah, chairman of the Water and Power Development Authority (Wapda), has held India responsible for building Nimoo-Bazgo hydropower project in violation of the Indus Water Treaty :rotfl: :rotfl: and declared Syed Jamaat Ali Shah, former commissioner of Pakistan Commission of Indus Water as innocent, said sources on Friday.

Shah was earlier found helping and facilitating India build the project as per the preliminary report furnished by Imtiaz Tajwar, secretary Wapda, they said.

The committee was constituted to assess the criminal negligence on the part of the then commissioner of Pakistan Commission of Indus Water in the light of the report of Tajwar by the then secretary water and power Imtiaz Qazi when Naveed Qamar was the minister for water and power, said sources.
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 32282
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by chetak »

vishvak
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 5836
Joined: 12 Aug 2011 21:19

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by vishvak »

This is not a dispute as this can not be labelled as 'a dispute' by one side alone. Hopefully our educated establishment has enough brains to not allow anyone, any side to chip away at the Indus water treaty from one side for benefits while Indians are to adhere to the treaty as usual. Obviously it is very much unusual that one side is creating 'disputes' out of treaties while Indians are maintaining silence.
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25087
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by SSridhar »

Water Wars, Pakistani style - Khaled Ahmed in TFT
Pakistan first thought it could go for arbitration over India's Wullar Barrage on Jhelum River under the Indus Waters Treaty (1960), but the lawyers in New York told Islamabad it did not have a good case. Then it went for arbitration over the Baglihar Dam on Chenab River and lost the case. The latest development this year is that it raised a storm over India's Nimoo-Bazgo Dam on Indus River, only to be advised that it would lose at the more expensive Court of Arbitration.

November 2012 was a milestone month in the process of Indo-Pak normalisation of relations through free trade under a SAARC commitment called SAFTA. The month saw a thoughtful event staged by Beaconhouse National University in Lahore. It hosted a seminar India-Pakistan Relations: Prospects and Challenges jointly with India Pakistan Retired Soldiers Initiative for Peace (IPSI).

Among the positive aspects of the new relationship addressed by the two sides were two outstanding issues: Kashmir dispute and the quarrel over river waters. The river waters issue was raised by the Pakistani side along with the perennial Kashmir dispute; it received a measured response from the other side. Similar points were raised by the Pakistani side when an Indian chambers of commerce delegation visited Lahore earlier.

Pakistan raised a storm over India's Nimoo-Bazgo Dam on Indus River, only to be advised that it would lose at the expensive Court of Arbitration

The year 2011 can be described as a critical period of media hype about yet another alleged Indian trespass into the waters apportioned to Pakistan under the Indus Waters Treaty (1960) although the war cries had been gathering strength during 2010, centring on the Pakistani Indus Waters Commissioner Jamaat Ali Shah.

Jihadi periodical Jamaatud Dawa newspaper Jarrar (5 March 2010) reported that the people of Pakistan thought that Pakistan's Indus Water Commissioner Jamaat Ali Shah was bodily a Pakistani but his tongue spoke the language of Hindus. {He had to take a Canadian visa and run for his life} He had not stopped making the strange statement (darfuntani) that India had not stolen Pakistan's water. Jamaat Ali Shah was getting his salary from Pakistan but working for India, the paper said.

Unfortunately, Jamaatud Dawa took out a procession on Lahore's central mall in February 2010, its leader Hafiz Said making provocative speeches. Later the Chief of the Army Staff and the Prime of Pakistan also raised 'the issue of waters' in their statements.

Reported in Nawa-e-Waqt (3 June 2010) a seminar held by Nawa-e-Waqt Group of newspapers decided that Pakistan's Indus Waters Commissioner Jamaat Ali Shah was no longer speaking for Pakistan but was defending the Indian position on the stealing of river waters by India through 62 dams. Speakers including such "illustrious" men as Ambassador (Retd) Javed Hussain who said that India was stealing one crore forty acre feet of water and that the Indus Water Treaty was only good for the 1960s but today India's water aggression could lead to an Indo-Pak war that would soon turn into a nuclear world war.

Nawa-e-Waqt further reported that Indus Waters Treaty Commissioner Jamaat Ali Shah, while leaving for New Delhi to talk about waters shared by India and Pakistan, said that Pakistan was getting its share of waters under the Indus Treaty and that building a dam was the right of India. He said less water in Pakistani rivers was because of lack of rain, not because India had blocked it. The statement was a shock to many who thought India was waging a water war against Pakistan.

Quoted in Jang, Indus Water Commissioner Jamaat Ali Shah said in Lahore that Indus Water Treaty between Pakistan and India was an unhappy marriage over the years. He said India was preparing to build 25 to 20 dams on the rivers given to Pakistan. Although the dams were allowed by the treaty India should act on the spirit of the Treaty and agree to amend the amount of water given by the treaty to India from three Pakistani rivers. The reason was that the water flow in these rivers had decreased.

Reported in Nawa-e-Waqt (16 Dec 2010) Jamaat Ali Shah Pakistani's Indus Waters Commissioner under the Indus Treaty was made OSD by the PM after many years in service once considered meritorious. He was made the commissioner in 1993 and was on the job till 2010 while India changed four commissioners during this period. Zahurul Hasan Dahir of the anti-India lobby said Shah had accepted Indian influence and had allowed Indian dams to be built on rivers belonging to Pakistan.

Reported in Jang (5 Jan 2012), Indus Waters ex-commissioner Jamaat Ali Shah facilitated the building of India's illegal Nimoo-Bazgo dam so that Leh could get electricity which means that Indian soldiers at Siachen would get the benefit of more comfort through use of electricity.

Quoted in daily Pakistan (4 Jan 2012), former Indus Waters Commissioner Jamaat Ali Shah said in Canada that he was surprised by news that he had run away to Canada after violating exit-control orders against him. He said he had come to Canada to look after his ill mother and despite retirement from his job he had informed the concerned authorities before departing Pakistan. He said he was available to answer any charges.

On 23 January 2012, the Ministry of Water and Power and its subordinate institution - the Water and Power Development Authority (WAPDA) - started probing deeper into the alleged involvement of former Indus Water commissioner Jamaat Ali Shah in allegedly "facilitating" Indian authorities to construct the controversial Nimoo-Bazgo hydropower project. FIA swooped down and took control of the office of the Commissioner and began pouring over its files.

Dawn (16 April 2011) reported: 'Intelligence agencies seized on Friday the record of at least two federal ministries to investigate an alleged institutional lapse of not raising objections over Indian aggression on the country's water rights and securing international carbon credits on hydropower projects disputed by Pakistan'.

A preliminary report maintained that the former water commissioner did not play his due role and remained silent over the Nimoo-Bazgo hydropower project (built by India during 2002-2009) and did not raise any objections during the Pak-India meetings. But surprisingly, the commission started pursuing the project vigorously at all levels when it was known that it would be impossible to change the design of the project after its completion. The 57-metre-high controversial Nimoo-Bazgo hydroelectric project is being developed in the Leh district on the Indus River and it is a run-of-the-river power project on the Indus River situated in village Alchi, 70 kilometres from Leh.

Express Tribune (3 January2012) reported: 'Pakistan is gearing up for yet another legal battle over India's 'aggression' on the country's water rights and securing international carbon credits on hydropower projects disputed by Pakistan. The latest case under dispute is the construction of the controversial 45-MW Nimoo-Bazgo hydropower project on the Indus River by India, after Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani approved challenging the project in the International Court of Arbitration (ICA)'.

Daily Times (18 July 2012) reported that the federal government had decided not to file a lawsuit in the Permanent Court of Arbitration-International Court of Arbitration (PCA-ICA) in Hague regarding its concerns and grievances over the controversial 45MW Nimoo-Bazgo hydroelectric power project.

Annexure C of the Indus Waters Treaty is about India's right to divert certain amount of water in certain months from the Western Rivers given to Pakistan. There is also no bar on the building of water storage for electricity production or any other non-consumptive use on Western Rivers (Annexure E). If anyone complains in Pakistan about India building dams and taking some water out of our rivers, he speaks out of ignorance.

Brahma Chellaney in his book Water: Asia's New Battleground (Harper/Collins 2011) remarks: 'Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi told a national news conference in April 2010 and said: "Is India stealing that water from you? No, it is not. Please do not fool yourself and do not misguide the nation. We are mismanaging that water". Despite his confession, the Pakistani government has continued to spotlight water as a contentious bilateral matter. One possible reason for its raking up the water issue in recent years is that it helps Pakistan to redirect attention away from India's focus on cross-border terrorism emanating from Pakistani territory as the core concern' (p.223).
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by chaanakya »

Court of Arbitration
All Judges

Image
kish
BRFite
Posts: 960
Joined: 07 Jun 2010 23:53

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by kish »

Nothing new about the treaty or dispute. The First Secretary( Inf) JANARDAN SINGH trying to talk sense to pakis.

[url=xhtttp://dawn.com/2012/12/05/indus%20-waters-treaty-indian-view/]Indus Waters Treaty: Indian view[/url]
THIS is apropos of the letter ‘India violating water laws’ (Nov 24). The statements by the writer that the Indus Waters Treaty) “surely does not make any allowances for building any sort of reservoirs, dams, etc, for storage purpose.

India, however, uses the water from western rivers flowing within its territory for irrigation and has been accused of constructing multiple projects for storing water, thus impacting Pakistan’s supply” are factually incorrect.

The Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) provides for agricultural use of waters of the western rivers by India as laid down in Annexure C of the treaty.

India can have additional irrigated cropped area (ICA) of 1.34 million acres, however, only additional 0.15 million acres of area has been irrigated.

The IWT provides that the aggregate storage capacity of all single-purpose and multi-purpose reservoirs, which may be constructed by India after the treaty of western rivers, shall not exceed 3.6 MAF (1.25 MAF of general storage, 1.6 MAF of power storage and 0.75 MAF of flood storage).

As compared to the above entitlement, India has built no storage so far. In general, India’s use of waters of the western rivers is much less than it is entitled to under the IWT.

The writer further makes another factually incorrect comment that “Pakistan has been opposing projects by India that violate water laws such as the Baglihar, Kishenganga and Wullar projects that have built greater water storage”.

On Baglihar, Pakistan’s objections were referred to a neutral expert in 2005 at the request of Pakistan. The expert upheld India’s design approach and suggested only minor changes in the scope of construction. The changes have since been carried out by India.

The other issue raised by Pakistan regarding initial filling of the Baglihar reservoir was resolved by the Permanent Indus Commission at its meeting held in June 2010.
Thus issues related to Baglihar stand settled.

The Kishenganga Hydroelectric Project is now in the court of arbitration constituted at Pakistan’s request. The court is yet to render its award.

The works on the Tulbul navigation project/Wullar Barrage were unilaterally stopped by India in October, 1986, and remain suspended since then.

On the basis of such incorrect facts, the writer concludes that “India being the upper riparian play its role according to international water laws to minimise water scarcity to reduce security threat at the regional level”.

India has all along adhered to the provisions of the Indus Waters Treaty in letter and in spirit. We have never deprived Pakistan of its share of water under the treaty and have no intention of doing so.

In our view, sharing of waters between India and Pakistan must be rooted firmly in the framework of this treaty, which is an example of the mutually-beneficial cooperation for the past more than 50 years.
kish
BRFite
Posts: 960
Joined: 07 Jun 2010 23:53

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by kish »

Now jokes about IWT which paki journos call news and publish.

Govt asked to foil Indian designs to turn Pakistan into desert
The Pakistan Economy Watch (PEW) :lol: (what do they watch), Tuesday, asked the government to move International Court of Arbitration immediately to stop India from constructing illegal hydropower projects meant to turn Pakistan into desert.
If they hate desert so much, they also should reject something which has its origins in desert.
It asked the Supreme Court to expose the hidden hand which has been delaying the Pakistan’s response to Indian violation of Indus Water Treaty (IWT).
'hidden hand' the one between legs. :lol:
Government has been delaying response to the construction of Nimoo-Bazgo hydropower project since one year which amounts to facilitating Indian plot against Pakistan, said Dr. Murtaza Mughal, President PEW.
bakistan not building a dam is a 'Indian plot against pakistan'.
India has already constructed many dams including Baglihar and Kishanganga in violation of the IWT and now it has almost completed one of the highest hydro-power project in the world on River Indus at Ladakh. Similarly, India has almost finished construction work on Chuttak hydroelectric project on the River Suru, a tributary of Indus in the Kargil while it has initiated plan to construct nine more dams in Ladakh region.
which one is that?
Dr. Murtaza Mughal said that India is not only building dams with an amazing speed to destroy Pakistan :D but also sponsoring some politicians, nationalists, regionalists and pseudo-intellectuals to oppose Kalabagh dam to make Pakistan a failed state. Amazingly, Pakistan Commissioner for Indus Waters, officials of the water and power ministry, ministry of environment and foreign affairs have failed to react in time which amounts to colluding with India, he observed.
Bakistan is a failed state because of you Indians.
He said that the water bureaucracy and always let India to complete illegal projects quietly denying Pakistan the option of counter-measures. These projects would reduce the flow of River Indus which will badly damage masses, industry and agriculture of Pakistan.
Big power projects cannot be built quietly, there will be some noise at the construction site. :mrgreen:
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25087
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by SSridhar »

US pledges $200m for Diamar-Basha dam

India should object strongly. But, with Aman-ki-Asha around and India having given up hope of taking back POK, I presume that this government will keep quiet.
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by chaanakya »

Wapda asks for immediate release of funds for Neelum Jhelum Dam


ISLAMABAD: The Water and Power Development Authority (Wapda) has warned that the strategically-important 969 megawatt (MW) Neelum Jhelum hydropower project may face further delays if the government does not release $1 billion immediately. Due to prior delays, the cost of the Neelum Jhelum project has already jumped to Rs274.8 billion, from initial estimates of Rs 84.5 billion.

India is constructing the Kishanganga Dam upstream of the Neelum River, and Pakistan had reciprocally initiated the project in order to secure its rights over the river’s waters. Officials, however, seem complacent as they claim that India cannot claim rights over the river, even if it completes the dam, as the provisions of the Indus Water Treaty prohibit it from doing so. An international court of arbitration has granted a stay order preventing the permanent construction of the Kishanganga Dam.

Wapda, however, is worried nonetheless. “If the required amount is not provided, it will be impossible to complete the Neelum Jhelum hydropower project on schedule in 2016,” Wapda Chairman Syed Raghib Hussain Shah told a parliamentary panel here on Friday.

The Senate Standing Committee on Water and Power was also reviewing progress on other projects.

In his briefing, Shah also told lawmakers that 45% of every unit of power generated was lost in transmission and distribution.



While on the topic of the Kurram Tangi Dam, he said Transparency International – the global watchdog monitoring corrupt practices – had raised a red flag on the project, thereby causing it to be delayed. “Transparency International should avoid interfering in hydropower projects to avoid such delays,” Shah told the panel.



He informed the committee that the contract for the Kurram Tangi Dam will be awarded in December this year. He said that law enforcement agencies had provided ample security assistance for those working on the dam, and that work was proceeding smoothly. The project costs Rs59 billion, and negotiations with the World Bank are underway, in order to secure financing for the project.

The Wapda chairman also told the committee that the World Bank will also extend assistance for the Dasu power project, and that multilateral negotiations with other donors for the Kurram Tangi, Dasu and Bhasha dam were currently underway. He also informed the panel that the Tarbela-IV extension project will be completed by March 2013.


However, at least one lawmaker was not satisfied with the Wapda chairman’s reassurances. Senator Nisar alleged that these projects existed only on paper, and there was nothing going on the practical front. He admonished the Wapda chairman, saying that officials had been parroting the same things for the last few years, and that any indication of progress has so far remained elusive.

Later, the Peshawar Electric Power Company CEO informed the committee that line losses and power theft through ‘kunda systems’ had become a major issue for the company. He said that the police refused to assist the company in this regard; therefore, meaningful measures could not be taken and the company faced billion of rupees in losses.

Published in The Express Tribune, December 8th, 2012.
They aren't going anywhere with NJP. Well they don't even deserve to do it with 45% power wastage in T&D losses. Water wastage is about 40% . With this kind of inefficiency in Pakistan only multinational fools would invest in any of their projects.
Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11242
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by Gagan »

YYY conspiracy onlee.

How Kafir yindoos and yehudi-yamriki-yeuropi are stealing pakistan's water.

Below is a post in Skyscapercity by poster "IndiansUnite" which shows the TBMs employed in the Kishenganga project - Pakistan's most hated project.
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpost. ... ostcount=8
Image

Image

Image
For the Kishanganga project, SELI is providing a complete package of tunnelling equipment including the TBM and its backup system, the muck haulage and supply line rolling stock, segment moulds for the lining, and the ventilation system. It will also second a complete crew of TBM specialists for operation of the tunnel boring system. Excavation is expected to begin in October 2010 and finish in January 2014.
Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11242
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by Gagan »

X posting from TSP thread

This "Insight" wala dude has two programs on Water issues. One was posted in the Indus water thread a while ago.
These guys are pissed at India, and even more pissed at Jamaat Ali Shah.
Full of :((
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=55b5B2V81wo


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nU2kZ4MXLA8


:D
kancha
BRFite
Posts: 1032
Joined: 20 Apr 2005 19:13

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by kancha »

Gurus - "India is removing electricity from water" - was this statement made by someone in jest, or is it an actual statement by some Paki? If so, can someone give me a link?
Google has been of no use

Thanks
member_22872
BRFite
Posts: 1873
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by member_22872 »

It was a comment to this article:
http://dawn.com/2012/08/13/india-should ... er-fazlur/
Not only is India stopping the flow of water to Pakistan, by constructing hydel projects, it is also removing the electricity from the water. As a result Pakistan is getting weak water from which the electricity has been removed. We must go to the UN, the OIC, the ICC and the SPCA to protest this injustice!
prahaar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2831
Joined: 15 Oct 2005 04:14

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by prahaar »

venug wrote:It was a comment to this article:
http://dawn.com/2012/08/13/india-should ... er-fazlur/
Not only is India stopping the flow of water to Pakistan, by constructing hydel projects, it is also removing the electricity from the water. As a result Pakistan is getting weak water from which the electricity has been removed. We must go to the UN, the OIC, the ICC and the SPCA to protest this injustice!
Someone from BRF for sure (Shool inspired) :mrgreen:
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25087
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by SSridhar »

See, if the mard-e-momins drink such electricity-depleted water, they will become impotent. It is after all a conspiracy by the Yahud-Hanud-Nassara evil kafir axis to make the mard weak and then capture their nuclear weapons.
Anujan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7807
Joined: 27 May 2007 03:55

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by Anujan »

http://www.tunnelsonline.info/news/kish ... ss-121212/
Kishanganga project in the Himalayas has achieved a new excavation record in India last month. Seli recently announced that it excavated 815m with its TBM DSU designed for the challenging geological and environmental conditions of the work site in November.
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by chaanakya »

NHPC starts major construction work on Kishenganga dam
Not violating Indus Water Treaty: Taj

Sheikh Saleem
Srinagar/Dec 17: The NHPC has started major construction work of dam on Kishenganga river near Maliknag bridge in Badwan area of the Gurez Valley. The company has said the construction work does not violate orders of International Court of Arbitration (ICA) Hague.

Hindustan Construction Company (HCC) and National Hydroelectric Power Project (NHPC) – the two companies, who are executing work on Kishenganga power project, have started drilling and excavation work to erect a barrier on river Kishenganga for construction of the dam.


The workers said construction work of the dam started in late October after the ICA team visited the spot. “We were carrying out construction work of the dam before the ICA team’s visit also. However, when the team arrived to carry out inspection, we were asked to move away from the site and stop work. :twisted: Now we have again started work on the dam,” they said.

They said the work was actually suspended amid protests by local people, who were seeking employment in the project. “However, NHPC gave the impression that they suspended the work on dam site following ICA orders”. :rotfl:

On October 14, ICA team had visited the site and inspected the construction work.

The ICA had earlier directed India and Pakistan to arrange periodic joint inspections of the dam site in order to monitor the implementation of its orders.

The construction agencies (HCC and NHPC) have diverted water to a makeshift tunnel while taking up construction work on the dam over river Kishenganga.


Earlier, on September 23, 2011 ICA had issued an interim order, which prevented India from undertaking permanent works on or above the Kishenganga/Neelum River bed that may inhibit restoration of flow of the river to its natural channel.

Immediately after conclusion of ICA team’s visit in October this year, Indian Water Resources Minister Pawan Bansal had said that India can go ahead with construction of powerhouses, tunneling works, coffer dams, temporary bypass tunnel and concretization under riverbed for the dam.

“The only thing we cannot do is go above the surface of the river bed, which is not a problem since we would only be able to complete these works by 2012-end and 2013 beginning, by when the court will give its final decision,” he had said.

When contacted, PHE and Irrigation Minister Taj Mohi-ud-din said whatever is being done, it is as per Indus Water Treaty. “We are sticking to IWT and nothing is being done beyond that. Only a tunnel is being constructed”.

“Pakistan had raised objections on Tulbul project and we had to stop work on it also,” he said.

NHPC General Manager K D Shah denied any construction on the dam. "We are constructing only a coffer dam, which is allowed as per the ICA judgement. We are not doing anything beyond that”.

The coffer dam is a temporary dam construction to dry up the dam site, which has already been built near Malik bridge.

A dam of 37 meters is being constructed in Gurez on Kishenganga/Neelum where from 56 cusecs of water will be diverted through a 24 kilometers diversion tunnel to Kishenganga power project in Bandipore. The dam will divert the water of Kishenganga/Neelum to Wular Lake. Pakistan objects the construction of dam.

After the construction work started, Pakistan served a legal notice in ICA, Hague and accused India of violating the Indus Water Treaty. Pakistan had initiated the arbitration with India under Article IX and Annexure G of IWT, an international agreement concluded by India and Pakistan in 1960 which regulates the use by the two States of the Indus system of rivers.

Pakistan had raised concern over the construction of dam over Kishenganga/Neelum River in North Kashmir’s Bandipore district and blamed India for diverting the water of river. Pakistani officials claim the construction of Kishanganga dam on the Neelum-Jhelum River would deprive Pakistan of 13% of the river's water, which may deal a big blow to the country's agriculture sector. The Indian side had already rejected the Pakistani claims.

chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by chaanakya »

Contrcution Site at Kishanganga
Gurez

Image
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by chaanakya »

slamabad asks New Delhi to stop ‘ongoing construction’



Srinagar, Dec 21: Pakistan has taken a serious note of the ‘ongoing construction’ on the Wullar barrage in north Kashmir’s Bandipora district and has asked New Delhi to “stop it immediately.”

It has claimed that the work was a “gross violation” of the understanding reached between the two countries on the project and could impact the resumed dialogue process between the two countries.

The Pakistan’s Commissioner for Indus Water Treaty, Ministry of Water and Power, Mirza Asif Baig has written to his Indian counterpart G Aranganathan that it has been “reliably learnt” that the construction of the Wullar barrage/Tulbul Navigation project has resumed.


The “disputed” project has been under discussion between the two governments and is also the component of the resumed dialogue process between them, Baig has said in the letter.

It mentions that in the last round of talks held at New Delhi on March 27/28 (2012) the secretaries of the respective ministers from India and Pakistan had agreed that New Delhi would provide “additional technical data” to Islamabad which would be examined by it before furnishing its views ahead of next round of talks. “The technical data is still awaiting,” Baig has expressed.

New Delhi has now sought state government’s view point on the matter before responding to Pakistan.


The Public Health Engineering (PHE) and Irrigation Minister Taj Mohi-ud-Din confirmed the same.

Wullar barrage or Tulbul Navigation is an unresolved issue between New Delhi and Islamabad. The construction of 439-feet long and 40-feet wide barrage with a navigation lock at Wullar Lake near village Ningli in Sopore has been strongly opposed by Islamabad. Work was started on this project in 1984 and was aimed to increase the water level in the barrage. However it was stopped in 1987 following Pakistan's objections that it violates the water sharing treaty reached by the countries in 1960.

India says the barrage was not in violation of the Indus Water Treaty (IWT) and will be used only for transportation purposes.
However, Pakistan has been arguing it has potential to disrupt the triple canal project of Pakistan-Upper Jhelum Canal, Upper Chenab Canal and the Lower Bari Doab Canal.


Experts here say the water storage in the Wullar barrage would significantly help the two downstream power projects Uri-I and Uri-II and region's Lower Jhelum power project in the lean season and thereby maintain the power generation from the projects in winters as well.

So far, the two countries have held more than a dozen secretary-level talks to resolve the issue but are yet to reach any consensus.
The talks (on the project), the letter reads, between the two governments had begun on the conditions that the work on the site would remain suspended until amicable solution of the dispute was reached at.

“Resumption of the work is gross violation of the understanding reached between the governments. The construction of the barrage would involve storage in the Jhelum Main (Wullar Lake). The provisions of annexure E to the treaty expressly prohibit India from creating storage on the Jhelum main and thus the reported development is of serious concern to the Pakistan,” the letter reads.
Pakis being Pakis, dont know thw difference between a Barrage and a Dam. To enlighten the pea-brained PIWC
, a key difference between a barrage and a dam is that a dam is built for storing water in a reservoir, which raises the level of water significantly. A barrage is built for diverting water, and is generally built on flat terrain across wide meandering rivers, raising the water level only a few feet.[1] Barrages are larger than headworks.
So where is the question of violating the IWT. But then they are free to approach Court of Arbitration.
Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21233
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by Prem »

Paki Pukare, Pani Pani Aaa Rey
PM constitutes oversight committee for Neelum-Jhelum Project
Prime Minister Raja Pervez Ashraf on Monday stressed on the need to devote all energies for early completion of the Neelum-Jhelum Hydel Project.The Prime Minister made these observations during a high level meeting held at the PM House to review the progress on the project.The meeting was attended by Minister for Finance Dr Abdul Hafeez Shaikh, Minister for Water and Power Chaudhry Ahmed Mukhtar, Deputy Chairman Planning Commission Dr. Nadeem ul Haq and other senior officials.hairman of the Water and Power Development Authority (WAPDA) Syed Raghib Abbas informed the meeting that 42% of the work on the tunnel had been completed so far and the project was expected to be completed by 2016.
neeraj
BRFite
Posts: 372
Joined: 12 Jun 2001 11:31
Location: UK

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by neeraj »

x-post from TSP thread

MFN status to India: Issue to be linked to release of water
Various representative bodies of farmers have demanded that the “Most Favoured Nation” (MFN) status to India be linked to the release of water in the dried up Pakistan rivers Ravi and Sutlej to the tune of 30,000 acre feet per day to revive the river life and supplement the replenishing of underground water for drinking purposes, especially in south Punjab.
He said that treaty was a result of Pakistan’s fear that since the source of the rivers of the Indus basin were in India, it could potentially create droughts and famines in Pakistan, especially in times of war. ...
Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21233
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by Prem »

Planned Dams
Image
manjgu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2615
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by manjgu »

a good summary http://www.pca-cpa.org/showpage.asp?pag_id=1392

interesting arguments from both sides...i think the award is likely in march 2013
SriKumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2243
Joined: 27 Feb 2006 07:22
Location: sarvatra

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by SriKumar »

prahaar wrote:
Not only is India stopping the flow of water to Pakistan, by constructing hydel projects, it is also removing the electricity from the water. As a result Pakistan is getting weak water from which the electricity has been removed. We must go to the UN, the OIC, the ICC and the SPCA to protest this injustice!
Someone from BRF for sure (Shool inspired) :mrgreen:
The comment is genius. 'weak water' :lol: .....and complain to OIC, ICC (!) and SPCA (!!). Not many caught on, even after IcedSpore flagged SPCA. The sincere responses only contributed to the comedy.....!
Anujan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7807
Joined: 27 May 2007 03:55

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by Anujan »

This is on the Paki side
http://tribune.com.pk/story/489578/with ... ssibility/
The government has not yet deployed tunnel boring machines (TBMs) to expedite excavation for the Neelum Jhelum hydropower project, contrary to claims made by senior officials in meetings on the project’s progress. 8)
This puts a large question mark on the assertion that the TBMs were acquired to help complete the project ahead of India’s Kishanganga Dam, as was claimed earlier, and give substance to allegations that the procurements were made only to mint money. :mrgreen:
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25087
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by SSridhar »

That the procurement of TBMs, possibly at a higher cost than usual justified by the urgency of it all, were made to only make money must be true because India's stakes on the waters comes from having started the project much much before Pakistan even contemplated this and where there was no apriori claim on these waters. Procuring TBMs and starting some semblance of work were not going to alter the weak Pakistani position but, it was an opportunity to make quick money.
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by chaanakya »

Ok Tarbel is a gone case in less than 34 years. All money sunk there is now history. Just like Three Gorges dams would be due to heavy silt load. A Chinese consultant would know better.
http://dawn.com/2013/01/07/tarbela-desi ... n-new-dam/


ISLAMABAD: An independent consultant hired by the Water and Power Development Authority (Wapda) is of the opinion that desilting of Tarbela dam is not a viable option, either economically or technically, and may damage the country’s largest power house and reservoir.

A senior government official told Dawn on Sunday that Wapda had hired the Chinese consultant to conduct a feasibility study for desilting the Tarbela reservoir to recoup over 30 per cent capacity lost to silting over the years.

One of the world’s largest earth-filled dam was completed in 1978 with World Bank’s assistance under the Indus Water Treaty signed by Pakistan and India. Owing to continuous silting and sedimentation, the dam’s storage capacity declined from 9.6 million acres feet (MAF) to about 6.6 MAF.

The official said the feasibility study concluded that instead of undertaking such a mammoth exercise it would be more economical to build a new dam of the same size and capacity. “The silt and rock deposits in the dam are huge and require massive financing almost equal to the cost of a new dam.”

He said the consultant was of the view the work of breaking rocks and boulders and flushing out silt deposits could damage the infrastructure of the power house and perhaps the dam structure. It would speed up the movement of delta and silt deposits.
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by chaanakya »

http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-5 ... sin-Treaty

White Paki complains that India never provided accurate water figure. AFAIK the only body which can raise this issue is PPIWC. And IIWC has consistently provided data as per legal requirement under IWT. If Pakis need more data they should ask for it and provide finance to make arrangements for that. It could run into millions of dollars and when it is not provided under IWT why should India spend extra penny to provide additional data to Pigs. Fartings of white pakis notwithstanding.
In his key note address, Dr Danish Mustafa, an eminent geologist from Kings College London, UK, said that mistrust on the issue of water could lead to major conflict between Pakistan and India. He said that the biggest issue of water security in Indus Basin was that India had never provided accurate water figures to Pakistan or to any international body. He, however, said Pakistan critically needed to preserve rainwater in the three Western Rivers-Indus, Jhelum and Chenab in the Monsoon season. He said that there was highest level of silt concentration in Indus waters in the world and there was a dire need for indigenous study on construction of dams in Pakistan.
kancha
BRFite
Posts: 1032
Joined: 20 Apr 2005 19:13

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by kancha »

Jhujar wrote:Planned Dams
Image
Jhujar, can u pl share the source of this pic. Thanks
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by chaanakya »

Theo_Fidel

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by Theo_Fidel »

This puts a large question mark on the assertion that the TBMs were acquired to help complete the project ahead of India’s Kishanganga Dam, as was claimed earlier, and give substance to allegations that the procurements were made only to mint money. :mrgreen:
[/quote]

Not to mention the TBMs were wrong for the geology in this section. The terrain is full of mudstones and soft shales under very high pressure. TBM's typically need much tougher rock.

This is why the Banihal tunnel, 11.5 km long, just across the border in India was excavated in a record time 3-4 years using NAT (Austrian) techniques and equipment. It increasing looks likely they bought two because India had two for its solid rock mountain. No understanding of actual tunneling required. :rotfl:
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by chaanakya »

The real worry for Pakistan is that India controls the flow if Indus basin water. Unfortunately treat can not change geography.
http://tribune.com.pk/story/494013/indu ... aggerated/

Pakistan Counsel for Indus Water Treaty Feisal Naqvi
said that that there were some issues, but as a whole the treaty had been a success.

“The fundamental issue for Pakistan is about the potential control of water by India.
” Naqvi said that for Pakistan, the concern was that India not decide the flow of water.

Giving India little discretion in this regards as possible, he said, was a provision of the treaty’s technical mechanism.


Naqvi said that there were disputes between the two nations about the treaty but negotiating a new treaty would not be wise. :twisted: While India acted illegally from time to time, Pakistan’s disputes with India over water issues were exaggerated, he added.
:rotfl:

Dr Daniel Haines, a British Academy postdoctoral fellow at the Royal Holloway University of London, said that the treaty was the best possible option available to Pakistan at the time.

He said Pakistan had already tried to resolve the water issue as early as 1948 and failed to achieve any solution.

Therefore, a bilateral treaty was the only way out.

Dr Haines said Pakistanis tend to be sceptical of foreign intervention. “It would be naive to think that the United States would not have had influence. But there is a misconception about the power the World Bank wields,” he said.

He said that in the early 1950s, the World Bank was not a mighty power. “Power tends to flow down the stream; people at the head of a canal will have greater power than the ones at the tail end.”

“The water dispute situation is far more complex today than what the two countries are and are not doing,” said Dr Douglas Hill, a senior lecturer at the Development Studies at the University of Otago, He said that it was time to start talking about the regional dimension of the water issue. “Indus Basin is not just about two countries. At the very least it is about four.” He pointed out that the Indus Basin also involved Afghanistan and China. He said it was essential to explore other regional interventions which could help dilute the bilateral aspect of the issue.
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by chaanakya »

Experts for strategy to end water dispute with India

Pakistan seems to be doing this very often and creeping internationalization of Indus basin issue by calling experts from all over country.


EXPERTS from all over the world have called for adopting integrated, multidimensional strategies to resolve the issue of water crisis which otherwise can result into a major conflict between Pakistan and India in the future.

........

As many as 120 experts, besides 17 foreigners, participated in the conference which was spread over eight technical sessions. Addressing the participants, Dr Butt said more than 100 experts participating in the conference had agreed that water scarcity was the biggest threat to the countries that inhabit the Basin, especially Pakistan and lack of participation of all stakeholders might hindered integrated approaches for regional water governance. He said GCU would soon publish the proceedings of the conference which would be helpful for all stakeholders.



Treason case: Central leader of Pakistan Muthidda Kisan Mahaz (PMKM) Muhammad Ayub Khan Mayo alleging that recent conference on Pakistan-India water issues at the Government College University (GCU) was Indian funded demanded authorities to register a high treason case against those faculty members who had organised the “controversial” conference.


.....................


......................
....................
....................


Highlighting the importance of Indus Water Basin Treaty, he said that this agreement was signed by presidents of both the countries in 1960 by agreeing on water distribution. He said GCU by organising conferences at its campus supported India’s claim for capturing Pakistani waters by suggesting the participants that the Treaty should be revised.



“Through demand of revision of treaty by the participants it seems that they agreed that Pakistan has enough water for use and India’s point of view was justified vis-à-vis construction of new dams on Pakistani rivers”, Mayo said.

chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by chaanakya »

Pakistan sees Indus Water Treaty violations in proposed Pakal Dul hydroelectric plant
Pakistan's Punjab Irrigation Department has objected to Indian plans for a new 1,500 MW hydroelectric plant at the Pakal Dul Dam, HydroWorld.com has learned.

India's proposed Pakal Dul hydropower project -- to be located on the Marusdar River in Jammu and Kashmir -- is subject to terms of the Indus Waters Treaty of 1960 since the Marusdar is a tributary to the Chenab River.


Sources said India submitted the proposal to the Pakistan Commission for Indus Waters, which in turn forwarded it to the Punjab Irrigation Department for further analysis.

According to India's plan, the Pakal Dul hydroelectric complex would include a reservoir with a capacity of .108 million acre feet that would be impounded by a concrete-face, rock-fill dam with a height of 1,708 meters.

The Irrigation Department's primary concern is that Pakaul Dul Dam could decrease the flow of water into Pakistan, which violates the Indus Water Treaty.

However, the department has also questioned several aspects of the project's design which, according to Pakistan, are cause not to endorse the project.

HydroWorld.com reported that India's National Hydroelectric Power Corporation (NHPC) had attempted to prequalify builders for the plant's construction beginning in May 2006 through March 2007.
http://tribune.com.pk/story/497127/trea ... -dam-plan/
In its input, the Irrigation Department observed that the project would allow India to stymie the flow of water to Pakistan, which would be a violation of the IWT. “India should keep in mind the lower riparian water rights of Pakistan and environmental impacts on the Indus Basin system,” it said.

According to the plan sent by India, the 1,500 MW project would have a reservoir capacity of 0.108 million acre feet (MAF), dead storage capacity of 0.014 MAF, full reservoir level of 1,700 metres and a dead storage level of 1,620 metres. The concrete-face, rock-filled dam would have a height of 1,708m and a maximum water level of 1,703m. It will have a surface spillway with crest level of 1,684m with two bays and two tunnels. According to the design, the tunnel-type spillway will have a dual purpose: to pass floods and sediment management. It will have two head race tunnels of 10,000m each and four tail race tunnels of 125m each.

The Punjab Irrigation Department, in its observations regarding the plan, questioned the maximum flood discharge for the plant. It said India should provide hydrological data on the Barsar Dam, which is upstream, to allow an estimate of the water inflow at the proposed site.

The department said India should provide flood routing details through the spillways. According to the IWT, the intake structure of a power plant with a storage component should be at the highest level, whereas India had provided the sill level of the intake at an elevation of 1605m. India had also failed to provide water discharge data at the site for the last 25 years, which was also a requirement under the treaty.

The department observed that the sediment data given in the Indian plan was not as per international practice. It also needed to reveal the maximum aggregate capacity of the power units, whether they would be base load or peaking load plants, and the load factor requirement of the hydroelectric plant with weekly use of inflow of water, power storage use and power output from the reservoir.

The department rejected the Indian claim that there would be an increase in the river supplies below the storage works in lean flow season as a result of the dam.

According to the IWT, flushing outlets should be located at the highest level and be of a minimum size. The design of the tunnel type spillway and its location at 1,580m violated this provision, the department observed.
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by chaanakya »

Arbitration decision from COA will come within February.
* * *
Under the Court of Arbitration’s Rules of Procedure, “[t]he Court shall endeavour to render its Award
within 6 months of the close of the hearings.”
Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21233
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by Prem »

The treaty is named wrongly. It is Hindu Water Treaty (HWT).
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25087
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by SSridhar »

Indo-Pak Water Talks Put Off
Talks between the Water Secretaries of India and Pakistan, scheduled to begin in Islamabad on January 28, have been put off in the wake of tensions over ceasefire violations along the LoC . The two sides were scheduled to discuss the Tulbul navigation project-Wullar Barrage issue .
Probably postponed by Pakistan under the pretext of tensions.
Post Reply