Indus Water Treaty

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 12 Aug 2015 07:04

This post is not to do with IWT per se, but about Farraka and Pakistan's attitude and objections.

From the Archives, The Hindu dated Aug 12, 1965

India to go ahead with Farakka

Dr. K.L. Rao, Union Minister for Irrigation and Power, told a Press conference here [NEW DELHI] to-day that the Government of India was determined to go ahead with the Farakka project and complete it according to schedule, whatever be the attitude of Pakistan. Referring to a number of statements from responsible persons in Pakistan during the last few days that this and some other projects India was taking up would deprive it (Pakistan) of water, he said this was far from the truth. These views were misconceived and that was why the Government of India had proposed a meeting of experts of the two countries to remove such doubts and suspicions on the part of Pakistan. The meeting would now be held shortly though no firm date had yet been fixed. Dr. Rao explained that the Gandak and the other projects had been before the nation for quite a long time. These had not been decided overnight to spite Pakistan as its rulers alleged. The Gandak project, for example, was nearly 100 years old. While there was no desire to comment on what Pakistan should or should not do, it might be pointed out, he said, that the effects of the projects in India would be beneficial to Pakistan in reducing the flood havoc caused by the Ganga. In fact, one of the technically “accepted measures of flood control was to develop storages, diversion and utilisation of the rivers in the upper reaches. Dr. Rao said the Farakka barrage would help in keeping the Bhagirathi in a flushed-out state, thus enabling it to carry larger volumes of water from the Ganga, and in this manner the floods in Pakistan would be reduced. It was, therefore, a travesty of facts and scientific thinking to say that the construction of the projects including Farakka, in India would aggravate the floods in East Pakistan. Dr. Rao said it was important to remember that the Ganga was the most precious river India possessed. It was essentially and almost entirely an Indian river. More than 90 per cent of its length lay in India. If one took into account its course along the Indo-Pakistan boundary, one would find more than 98.5 per cent of its length of the river lay between the Indo-Pakistan boundary and the site where Pakistan was anxious to build a barrage.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 13 Aug 2015 08:59

Pakistan set to move WB against Indian power plants
Hare We Go Again

LAHORE - The government is all set to move the Word Bank in a week after India ignored its call for mutual agreement on appointment of a neutral expert to decide the fate of two hydel power plants in Occupied Kashmir.Despite serious opposition by Pakistan, India sped up construction work on both the projects, official sources told The Nation. Indus Water Commission of Pakistan has been raising serious objection to the design of 330MW Kishanganga Hydroelectric Project (KEHP) and 850MW Ratle Hydroelectric Plant (RHEP). Fed up with the delaying tactics of India, Pakistan wrote a letter on July 24, proposing appointment of an international expert to decide the matter.
However, New Delhi did not bother to reply to Pakistan’s call while the work on both the projects is in full swing, officials of the water sector aware of the developments said. It is mandatory for the World Bank, being the broker of the Indus Water Treaty, to appoint an expert on the request of Pakistan and give verdict on the matter. Pakistan had lost the case of Baglihar Dam because of its failure to raise objection to the design parameters of the project before the start of the construction work on it, but India would not get a similar benefit in international arbitration in case of KHEP and RHEP as Indus Water Commission officials have evidence of repeated correspondence with their counterparts in India, raising objections to the designs of the water sites. Kishanganga project is designed to divert water from the Kishanganga River to a power plant in the River Jhelum basin. It is located 5km north of Bandipore in Occupied Kashmir. Ratle project is located in the River Chenab basin.
Besides the two projects, Pakistan had expressed concern over the design of three other projects being built by India on River Chenab. These projects are: 1,000MW Pakal Dul, 120MW Miyar and 48MW Lower Kalnai.In 2010, Pakistan appealed to The Hague’s court against the construction of KHEP. However, India was given a go-ahead for the construction of the dam by the court in December 20, 2013. But this time Pakistan is moving against the design of the project which is not meeting the treaty’s requirements. “We have objection to the depth of spillways of the Kishanganga and other dams at the Chenab River as India cannot do this under the Indus Water Treaty,” said the sources in water commission.
When asked, the Indus water commissioner confirmed that they were moving the World Bank within a short span of time. However, despite serious objections to the designs, the Pakistani side is still willing to resume the talks on three other controversial projects, he added. He stated that Pakistan’s point of view on the two sites was very clear and hoped it would win the case. Water experts believe that apart from adverse impact to be caused by the Kishanganga dam on Pakistan’s irrigation system and energy sector schemes, it would have a devastating effect on biodiversity and ecosystem in Neelum Valley. It is being considered the proposed projects of India would drastically impact the water flows in the Chenab and the Jhelum rivers which irrigate most of the land in Pakistan.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 13 Aug 2015 18:39

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ddyCnHPB9Lw

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 14 Aug 2015 13:08

We bound ourselves with an UNSC resolution on J&K unnecessarily and we bound ourselves with an IWT again unnecessarily, both at the instigation of Anglo-Saxons.

member_29040 · Post by **member_29040** » 14 Aug 2015 14:52

^^^
Water treaties are not legally binding, India has full right to abrogate IWT. Only requirement is leadership with guts.
http://www.thedailystar.net/op-ed/%E2%8 ... 0%9C-90961

I came across this old article
India to Abrogate Indus water treaty. Old article 2001. Ideas were good but as usual we did not have guts to disobey amarikis.
http://m.rediff.com/news/2001/dec/26ccs1.htm

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 14 Aug 2015 16:27

Prashant, any sovereign state can at any point of time withdraw from a treaty it has signed citing national interests. I think the Vienna Convention has a clause on that. Why did we not revoke the IWT in 2001 ? We have had plenty of discussion here on that issue.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 14 Aug 2015 17:05

Article 357 in J&K can also be added to that list of unnecessary and harmful things that India has bound itself to.
Pakistan has gone ahead and gifted the shaksgam valley to the chinese, gave them mining rights in GB, have divided POK into two, yet India is committed to maintaining status quo in J&K.
We need to dilute the hardliners in J&K with migration of more Indic people.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 14 Aug 2015 17:06

Wait till India starts its projects directly on the Indus river, these are a few years down the line. Pakistan is going to unleash all hell in terms of complaining then !!!

Abhay_S · Post by **Abhay_S** » 14 Aug 2015 19:34

Gagan wrote:Wait till India starts its projects directly on the Indus river, these are a few years down the line. Pakistan is going to unleash all hell in terms of complaining then !!!

Gagan Ji,

The Indus goes thru a Major refilling after it crosses the LOC so i doubt this will have much impact to porkistan . Leh does have huge power cuts so a hydro electric project will surely help.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 14 Aug 2015 20:16

India is going to build the Dhumkar and the Nimoo-Bazgo directly on the Indus.

India already has the Chutak dam on the Suru River in the Kargil area, which drains into the Indus in POK.
Dhumkar will generate 130 MW, and Nimoo Bazgo will generate about 45 MW. Chutak's generating 44MW on the Suru already.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 23 Aug 2015 11:50

India for resolving Ratle hydro plant issue with Pakistan through talks - PTI

With Pakistan expressing reservations over the under-construction Ratle Hydroelectric Power Project in Jammu and Kashmir, India has sought resolution of the issue through talks.

The Centre's response came after the Pakistani Government sent a missive to India demanding appointment of a 'neutral expert' under provisions of the Indus Waters Treaty for the 850-MW power project being constructed on the Chenab river, sources in the Union Water Resources Ministry said

In a communication to the Indus Water Commissioner in India about 20 days ago, the sources said, Pakistan raised certain apprehensions over the project design.

Pakistan has raised the issue of setting up of lower spillways for sediment management, which it apprehends could lead to flooding. Pakistan is of the view that higher spillways should be established instead of lower spillways, the sources said.

"In return, we have written to the Pakistan Government 10 days back. In our reply, we have sought to hold talks over the issue," a senior ministry official, who is privy to the development, told PTI here [New Delhi].

Noting that the design Ratle Hydroelectric Power Project has already been shared with Pakistan, the official said that the date for the next Indus Water Commission meeting between the two countries was yet to be decided.

Under the Indus Waters Treaty, India and Pakistan have each created a permanent post of Commissioner for Indus Waters. As per the provisions, the Commissioners may discuss questions arising under the treaty related to settlement of differences and disputes and in the case of non-resolution, take further action for resolution through a neutral expert, negotiators or Court of Arbitration.

Former Prime Minister Manmohan Singh had laid foundation of the power plant on the Chenab river in 2013. The run-of-the -river project, which is the country's first hydroelectric project that was bid out through tariff based international competitive bidding, will cost Rs 5,500 crore.

The sources recalled a similar case in the past wherein, Pakistan had sought appointment of a 'neutral expert' during the construction of Baglihar hydropower project in Jammu and Kashmir about a decade ago.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 25 Aug 2015 03:00

^^We should link these talks with the NSA level talks on terrorism that we wanted and the pakis ran away from. No talks on Ratle dam or any other issues pakis might have with proposed Indian water projects unless they agree to talks about terrorism and terrorism alone at NSA level.

We often complain that we have no leverage over Pakistan. Their paranoia about Indian water projects on western rivers is something we haven't exploited at all.

Gyan · Post by **Gyan** » 25 Aug 2015 16:11

How was the failure of Salal explained in the verdict of Bhaglihar which again prevented us from using low level gates?

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 25 Aug 2015 18:41

Baglihar has low level gates.
Inly the dam height was reduced by a few meters.
For all the efforts of the Pakistanis and the millions of dollars down the drain, this was all that they could achieve

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 11 Sep 2015 10:16

Ramaswamy Iyer no more - The Hindu

Renowned water policy expert Ramaswamy R. Iyer passed away in New Delhi on Wednesday following a severe bout of viral fever.

Born in October 1929, in Thakkalai, Tamil Nadu, Mr. Iyer was known for producing a rich body of commentary on water policy and environmental issues. His erudite opinion pieces in the pages of The Hindu were widely read and appreciated by regular readers.

His last held position was that of an honorary research professor at the Centre for Policy Research here. Prior to that, as an officer of the Indian Audit and Accounts Service, Mr. Iyer served as Secretary of Water Resources in the central government and was instrumental in drafting India’s first National Water Policy in 1987.

It is a sad loss. His deep insights into IWT will certainly be missed. May Mr. Iyer's soul rest in peace.

kancha · Post by **kancha** » 14 Sep 2015 15:53

Twitter Link

Harpreet ‏@CestMoiz Sep 12
1/n
Ravi River waters belong to India as per Indus Water Treaty, yet the last headwork to divert waters of this river that India has is ..

Harpreet ‏@CestMoiz Sep 12
2/n
.. at Madhopur (near Kathua), a cool 126 km as the crow flies from the point where the river finally flows out of India near Lahore!

Harpreet ‏@CestMoiz Sep 12
3/n
All the water that flows into the river after that, and the water that cannot be retained upstream of the headworks is allowed to flow..

Harpreet ‏@CestMoiz Sep 12
4/n
.. into Pakistan without any check!
Is there no place in between where water can be diverted to the existing canal system?

5/n
One possible method is to increase the capacity of the canal linking the Ravi at Madhopur Headwork to Beas near Mukerian. Beas waters ..

Harpreet ‏@CestMoiz Sep 12
6/n
.. ultimately drain into the Harike Barrage South-West of Kapurthala, from where part of the canal system feeding Rajasthan originates.

Harpreet ‏@CestMoiz Sep 12
7/7
The waters from Madhopur, instead of flowing into Pakistan, can thus be diverted to Rajasthan.
Catchment downstream of Madhopur needs ..

Harpreet ‏@CestMoiz Sep 12
8/n
.. another solution. The river flows very close to existing canals natural drains.
A link from the river to these, or perhaps a ..

Harpreet ‏@CestMoiz Sep 12
9/n
.. new canal altogether, akin to Ichhogil which served as a barrier opposite Lahore in 1965 could serve a dual purpose - utilize ..

Harpreet ‏@CestMoiz Sep 12
10/10
.. your allotted waters for augmenting supplies to Rajasthan, while at the same time add another defensive barrier in Punjab.
JMTs

arun · Post by **arun** » 10 Oct 2015 19:46

X Posted from the STFUP thread.

Jhujar wrote:The honesty deficit

Modiveni, DovalVidi Indiavici

...............{Snipped}............... The Indians have instead begun to eye what we own. They unabashedly extend their claim to the northern areas and have successfully had international funding for Diamer-Bhasha stalled – claiming it to be ‘disputed’ territory. Somehow such formulation has missed our attention. Whatever India does on the Indus, Jhelum and Chenab, even within the run-of-the-river construct, also happens to be in a disputed region. Pakistan too must raise sufficient noise to seek parity in treatment; otherwise the certainty of Indian investment already made in permanent structures could alter the case to its advantage were any adjudication sought on the issue. ..................{Snipped}..............

The Islamic Republic of Pakistan tries its luck to tap the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank aka AIIB to fund the Diamer Bhasha Dam. India must ensure that AIIB is prevented from financing any project in Pakistan occupied Jammu & Kashmir. Dawn editorial:

…………………… The old issue raised was the Diamer Bhasha dam. The AIIB chief was asked to provide the financing for investment in this mega project which Pakistan has been pursuing for many years.

Thus far all major multilaterals have balked at funding it, saying that it lies in ‘disputed’ territory and would, therefore, require India’s approval.

It is likely that the real reason for their reluctance lies elsewhere, and it is equally likely that the AIIB will also eventually refuse to fund this project.

For one, India opposes the project and is the second largest shareholder in the bank. For another, the AIIB is unlikely to want to commit to such a vast project with massive uncertainties hanging over it, for fear of being pulled into a quagmire so early in its career.

It would be better for the government of Pakistan to draw up a more realistic list of projects that they would like to see funded through the AIIB, and use the early years of the bank to build a relationship rather than go for broke with a proposal for a mega dam.

There is no shortage of infrastructure requirements in Pakistan, and realism shouldn’t be very hard to pitch.

AIIB visit

arun · Post by **arun** » 15 Oct 2015 07:02

S Sridhar,

Do you make anything out of this?:

Kishan Ganga Dam: Pakistan decides to opt for a ‘neutral expert’

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 15 Oct 2015 16:29

arun, I have no idea about this. Are they trying to raise a new issue over and above all that they raised with the CoA? If it is a new issue, they have to notify the Permanent Indus Commissioner of India and the two PICs must hold talks. If the talks fail, then, it should be taken at the government-to-government level. Even if they remain deadlocked after that, only then can they mull over whether it is an issue for NE or CoA. The 'issue' decides if it has to be a NE or a CoA. STFUP-TSP cannot just toss a coin and decide between the NE and CoA based upon heads or tails. Besides all these, what is the issue now?

How I wish they had taken up the case to the ICJ, their fetish for a long, long time. They have not learnt from the case of Atlantique, it seems. A thoroughly disgusting country. How are they part of the same gene?

Vipul · Post by **Vipul** » 15 Oct 2015 21:11

Sridhar not for nothing the Dharmic way of life and its philosophy been appreciated by everybody. The same gene pool when followed the path away from the dharmic way of life is now a big stinking cesspool of wasted mongrels.

Shankk · Post by **Shankk** » 15 Oct 2015 22:45

I am not even thinking about IWT case, much less worry about the outcome from it. Pakistan is not going to get much out of this.

What such incidents are really useful for is to highlight the travesty by Indian pak lovers. We should use all incidents such as this, border shelling, terrorist attacks, paki army killing Indian soldiers etc. to highlight the fact that we are two enemy countries at war and pak lovers in India are trying to obfuscate that fact by making noise like aman ki asha and other stunts. This only serves pakis because they don't have any such confusion and get to earn money from India and use it to kill Indians.

Ask questions to these people, put them in defensive, let them come up with explanations that will further expose them. This will help weaken them and keep people's memory fresh about the nature of relations between two countries. What is necessary is to make a list of prominent people actively supporting paki cause and are known by majority Indians and start a small campaign in social media, Whatsapp etc. on every such incident. That will increase the cost of supporting pakistan and make it difficult to confuse Indians thus making our job easier.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 17 Oct 2015 03:04

Watch the Paki Paani Rudalli.
India lighting up Delhi with paki Paani !!

arun · Post by **arun** » 24 Oct 2015 06:34

X Posted from the STFUP thread.

Transcript of our Ministry of External Affairs comment on the US visit of the Prime Minister of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. Questions on US supply of F-16’s, US funding of Diamer Bhasha dam construction on territory of India occupied by the Islamic Republic, Islamic Republic sponsored Mohammadden Terrorism, and threat of Nuclear weapons deployed by the Islamic Republic etc:

Transcript of Media Briefing by Official Spokesperson (October 23, 2015)

Excerpt:

Question: In the same joint statement between Pakistan and the United States of America there is a mention of US extending help in funding projects such as Diamer-Bhasha dam which is in Gilgit-Baltistan, Pakistan Occupied Kashmir. Comments by India, Sir.

Official Spokesperson: On this our position has been very clear and consistent. We oppose any developmental projects in an area which belongs to India but which is under the forcible and illegal occupation of Pakistan. We have made this clear to all countries.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 23 Nov 2015 07:14

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 23 Nov 2015 09:19

Jhujar wrote:

Sirji,

is the link OK??

K Mehta · Post by **K Mehta** » 24 Nov 2015 22:02

Any description or summary for the bandwidth challenged like us?

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 24 Nov 2015 22:33

K Mehta wrote:Any description or summary for the bandwidth challenged like us?

Usual whine but acknowledging their helplessness and knowing well that India was generous in giving them greater water share , any renegotiations on treaty will be disaster for Poaklanditian creatures.

Peregrine · Post by **Peregrine** » 16 Dec 2015 03:07

Neelum-Jhelum project continues without timeframe

LAHORE: The Neelum-Jhelum Hydropower Project, which is considered as one of the vital projects to overcome energy crisis in the country, has no timeframe of completion, Daily Times learnt on Monday.

Neelum-Jhehlum project's completion under revised PC-1 (969 Megawatt) has put many questions for WAPDA to answer, as increase in the total cost of the project means the consumers would have to pay surcharge on bills until the completion of the project. Initially, the project was of Rs 84.55 billion, which now has been told by WAPDA to be completed at a cost of Rs 416 billion.

A committee was formed for the Neelum-Jhehlum project, which forwarded the revised PC-1 to the National Economic Council's (ECNEC) Executive Committee for approval of increase in total cost of the project, but so far work on the project is continuing and no final date has been given for the completion of project due to lack of funds for the purpose.

The cost of revised PC-1 has been increased by Rs 7,376 million in engineering and supervision, exchange loss increased with a cost of Rs 36,850 million, duty and taxes with Rs 10,877 million, price escalation at Rs 44,086 million, interest during construction with Rs 28,110 million, others at Rs 9,266 million and total construction cost with Rs 2,418 million. He informed that departments are unable to give specific timeframe for the completion of the project so far. A WAPDA official, on the condition of anonymity, said the project should be completed within 2016.

In the start of current year, a WAPDA meeting, presided over by its Chairman Zafar Mahmood, was held. The meeting was also attended by Member (Water) Muhammad Shoaib Iqbal, Member (Power) Badrul Munir Murtiza and Member (Finance) Anwarul Haq.

While reviewing the revised PC-1 for 969-MW Neelum-Jhelum Hydropower Project before sending it to Ministry for Water and Power, the meeting deliberated upon the factors responsible for cost escalation of the project. It was noted that right from the beginning, the basic project concept went through major changes. Initially the project was designed for 550MW capacity with the powerhouse situated at Majhoi. However, subsequently, to optimise the power generation from the project, the powerhouse was shifted to Chattar Kalas, 21 km west of Muzaffarabad. This change resulted in additional financial implication.

The meeting further noted the 1st revised PC-I was approved by ECNEC in 2002 for Rs 84.55 billion on 2001 price level. At that time, the work on the project could not start due to lack of upfront funds. The funds were made available in 2007 and contract work was awarded the same year. The amount of awarded contract was Rs 90.9 billion and is one of the reasons of increase in overall cost of the project.

It was further discussed that in the aftermath of 2005 earthquake, the project consultants, as a part of their assignment, reviewed the tender design and undertook additional studies and investigations. The design review identified many areas of concern requiring design changes, which resulted in increased quantities and additional scope of work with substantial financial implication. The major design changes, which form the huge chunk of this additional cost, include change in the height and design of dam.
Cheers

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 16 Dec 2015 03:45

^Neelum-Jhelum has no timeframe obviously because it was conceived to thwart Kishenganga by fraudulently laying claim on Pakistan's first right to waters. What else would a country that is founded on fraud and duplicity do?

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 16 Dec 2015 22:21

I am sure that the Pakistanis were hoping that the cheeni will bring in their own money and equipment, and build the project for them.

If they did it in time, all well and good. If not, then Pakistan would have just washed their hands off the repayments and walked off.

But they forgot one tiny detail - The Cheeni Bunniyas

They overcharged, fined their way throught the process, delayed it to cause cost escalation

)

Peregrine · Post by **Peregrine** » 23 Dec 2015 18:26

Innovation in agriculture

The highly controversial building of dams in India, which would divert water from Pakistan, could eventually lead to a nuclear conflagration between these two nuclear states.

Cheers

pratik · Post by **pratik** » 04 Jan 2016 05:28

Cross posting from Pathankot thread.

Temporary Solution which will work for sure...
Automatic mechanism to Suspend the Indus Water Treaty (1-year after every cross border attack.

Effect: Paki Army will fall in line for good relations and clean all those madarsa's which is feeding piglitants (Lets use this word now on @BR, Today it comes to my mind so pls add it to your dictionary as well).

Permanent Solution:
- Perfect time to cancel IWT. World needs us more than other way around.

If Jawaharlal can sign the IWT than our Shri Narendrabhai can reverse it as well. I am waiting for that moment.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 04 Jan 2016 07:08

All please explore the actual text of treaty and see how it can be utilized for India after Pathankot attack.

Eg.
- If India stops the water what redress does Pakistan have?
- Does India have storage facilities for this?

Yagnasri · Post by **Yagnasri** » 04 Jan 2016 08:22

Cross posted from retaliation thread

I am looking into Indus Valley Treaty 1960. But I am not getting much in way of withdrawal from it. Normally treaties are governed by Vienna Convention on the law of treaties 1969. IVT is before that date. Need to look into older conventions and also see if this convention has any bearing on the existing treaty obligations. We need to look carefully to see if there is any scope to withdraw from IVT in total or even suspend the same for some time.

There is also the possibility of not doing anything other than that is provided in the IVT and yet hurt pakis every badly. For example, release the entire paki share at once in the peak period so that they do not have the capacity store. It shall be possible and less controversial.

Peregrine · Post by **Peregrine** » 22 Jan 2016 18:30

Neelum Jhelum: First unit to be commissioned in June 2017

LAHORE: The first unit of the 969MW Neelum-Jhelum Hydropower project will be commissioned in June 2017, while the other three – one at a time – will also come online by December 2017, said Water and Power Development Authority (Wapda) Chairman Zafar Mahmood.

During his visit, the chairman observed that progress on most of the components was ahead of the revised schedule.

He appreciated project authorities, consultants and contractors for their efforts in expediting the construction work and directed them to continue working at the same pace to complete the strategically important project on time.

The chairman visited the dam site at Nauseri, river crossing at Majohi to attend the break-through ceremony of the right tunnel and power house at Chattar Klas.

It is pertinent to mention that the two sections of the right tunnel – one excavated from the dam site and the other from the power house – were connected on January 9 against the target date of January 15.

“The Neelum Jhelum project is a monument of the Pak-China friendship towards the development of hydropower in Pakistan,” said the chairman while performing the connecting ceremony of the two sections. He was also briefed that the overall progress of the project currently stood at 76%; out of the 68km long tunnel, so far 59km have been excavated while 74% of the dam construction is complete.

The power house and the switchyard of the project are scheduled to be completed in November this year.

Upon completion, the Neelum Jhelum Hydropower Project will contribute 5.15 billion units of electricity every year to the national grid.
Cheers

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 22 Jan 2016 19:36

Does anyone have the inputs on what exactly the BJP / PDP deal was about transferring some hydro power projects in cashmere to the control/ ownership of the J&K govt/state??

sounds very fishy to me.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 22 Jan 2016 19:40

Yagnasri wrote:Cross posted from retaliation thread

I am looking into Indus Valley Treaty 1960. But I am not getting much in way of withdrawal from it. Normally treaties are governed by Vienna Convention on the law of treaties 1969. IVT is before that date. Need to look into older conventions and also see if this convention has any bearing on the existing treaty obligations. We need to look carefully to see if there is any scope to withdraw from IVT in total or even suspend the same for some time.

There is also the possibility of not doing anything other than that is provided in the IVT and yet hurt pakis every badly. For example, release the entire paki share at once in the peak period so that they do not have the capacity store. It shall be possible and less controversial.

what is the object of withdrawing from the treaty??

we also cannot store the water as we have no such capacity to do so and because of that the waters will continue to flow to the pakis whether we honor the treaty or not.

Exactly, how much water is to be released continuously to the pakis, what quantities, at what time of the year is already agreed upon.

Peregrine · Post by **Peregrine** » 22 Jan 2016 20:42

An Old Article :

HydroVision International

Which hydroelectric project, 969-MW Neelum-Jhelum or 330-MW Kishenganga will determine priority rights?

Neelum-Jhelum Hydroelectric Project

Both Pakistan's 969-MW Neelum-Jhelum hydroelectric project and India's 330-MW Kishenganga hydropower project are being built on tributaries to the Neelum River (Kishenganga River in India).

According to interpretation of the 1960 Indus Water Treaty between India and Pakistan, the country that completes its project first will have priority rights to the Neelum/Kishengana River's waters.

India’s US$773 million Kishenganga hydroelectric project began in 2008 and the scheme consists of a concrete-faced rockfill dam 37 meters in height to divert water from the Kishenganga River (Neelum River in Pakistan). The water delivery system is a 24 kilometers long headrace tunnel that uses a 1,000 meters long inclined pressure shaft 4 meters in diameter to send water to three 110-MW Pelton turbine-generator units in an underground powerhouse at Bandipur.

Contractors completed excavation of Kishenganga’s tailrace tunnel in September 2014 and completion is scheduled for November 2016.

Funding issues continue to delay the completion of Neelum-Jhelum, originally scheduled to begin generating power in 2015 that might push back its commissioning date to sometime in 2016, according to the Pakistani Water and Power Development Authority (WAPDA).

Some of the potential international funding sources for the project, according to published reports, have refused to provide financial backing because the project is being built on the Neelum River in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir.

The region of Kashmir is in an area of which territorial control is in dispute between India and Pakistan.

Neelum-Jhelum is part of a run-of-the-river scheme designed to divert water from the Neelum River to a power station on the Jhelum River. The power station is located in Azad Kashmir, 22 km south of Muzaffarabad, Azad Jammu and Kashmir in Pakistan.

So far, US$2.68 billion has been spent on the project that is 69% complete. On Jan. 13, the project director, retired Pakistan Army Lt. Gen. Muhammad Zubair, briefed the Pakistan Senate Standing Committee on Kashmir Affairs regarding progress at the WAPDA development. Zubair said its total cost has risen from US$2 billion to almost US$4.5 billion.

According to Zubair, the Neelum-Jhelum project has already received US$587 million through a project surcharge, and the charge is expected to provide an additional US$354 million during the next two years.

In addition to a US$448 million loan Neelum-Jhelum received from the Export-Import Bank of China in May 2012, the China Gezhouba Group of Companies is providing the project with additional workers to expedite dam construction.

WAPDA raised close to US$150 million for the plant by issuing term finance certificates in October 2012, following a loan agreement signed with Saudi Arabia worth another US$100 million at the end of September. OPEC then made a contribution to the project by providing a US$50 million cash infusion in October 2013.

If funding is received as planned, WAPDA says it should see the project begin generating power in November 2016.

Cheers

Peregrine · Post by **Peregrine** » 23 Jan 2016 19:31

Pakistn - Water under threat

Cheers

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 24 Jan 2016 06:21

Peregrine wrote:Pakistn - Water under threat

When, therefore, people claim Pakistan as an 'artificial construct', the above is one vindication of that claim.