Bharat Rakshak Forum Announcement

Hello Everyone,

A warm welcome back to the Bharat Rakshak Forum.

Important Notice: Due to a corruption in the BR forum database we regret to announce that data records relating to some of our registered users have been lost. We estimate approx. 500 user details are deleted.

To ease the process of recreating the user IDs we request members that have previously posted on the BR forums to recognise and identify their posts, once the posts are identified please contact the BRF moderator team by emailing BRF Mod Team with your post details.

The mod team will be able to update your username, email etc. so that the user history can be maintained.

Unfortunately for members that have never posted or have had all their posts deleted i.e. users that have 0 posts, we will be unable to recreate your account hence we request that you re-register again.

We apologise for any inconvenience caused and thank you for your understanding.

Regards,
Seetal

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.
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14083
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Postby chetak » 18 Oct 2016 09:15

salaam wrote:Swarajya Magazine - Clearing the fog around Indus waters treaty faqs

    IWT cannot be abrogated - False
    World Bank is the third party to IWT - False
    China will retaliate on behalf of Pakistan and stop the flow of Brahmaputra and Indus - Irrelevant
    India cannot use the waters of the Western Rivers due to geography - False
    Pakistan can go to International Court of Justice (ICJ) - False
    Pakistani public, which is sympathetic to India, will become hostile to India - False
    War will become imminent - True and False


paki public is unwavering and staunchly anti India. This stupid theory is being floated by many interested parties. Since when can any one separate the Army and the populace in any country (except, maybe pakiland, where one is evil and the other even more so)

Did the paki public protest kargil on the streets?? or the 1971 war in bangladesh?? They simply lined up in the streets and wildly cheered their army on. Just like in India.

the paki people, their army , their camels, their goats et al are just one big indistinguishable mass. They may have their differences from time to time like any other but they are all one evil lot.

we cannot be so foolish to see them differently at any time and for any reason whatsoever.

Peregrine
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2911
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Indus Water Treaty

Postby Peregrine » 19 Oct 2016 04:04

Rabi 2016 sowing season: Sindh and Punjab face 18% cut in water share
ISLAMABAD: The Indus River System Authority (Irsa) has decided on a reduction of 18% in the water share of Sindh and Punjab in the Rabi 2016 crop-sowing season, which commences from October 1.
System losses in the earlier Kharif 2016 crop-planting season, which ran from April to September, stood at 15.54 MAF compared to anticipated losses of 12.58 MAF in the Indus River.
On the basis of 10-year average, Punjab’s share was 16.31 MAF, Sindh’s 12.64 MAF, Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa’s 0.54 MAF and Balochistan’s 0.86 MAF.
It was for the first time in 16 years when Mangla and Tarbela reservoirs were not filled by September 20. According to proposals, Pakistan should fill Mangla and Tarbela by August 20 each year because after this date water flows decline drastically.
At present, Tarbela and Mangla reservoirs are at heights of 1,515.48 feet and 1,216.60 feet respectively. The reservoirs are 34.52 feet and 25.40 feet below their respective maximum conservation levels of 1,550 feet and 1,242 feet respectively.
Cheers Image

KJo
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8876
Joined: 05 Oct 2010 02:54

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Postby KJo » 19 Oct 2016 04:17

Modi was reviewing the IWT. Anything come out of it?

Falijee
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4046
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Postby Falijee » 20 Oct 2016 21:20

Pakistan warns of taking legal action if India violates bilateral pacts including Indus Water Treaty :((
Pakistan today warned that it will take legal action if India breaches any of the bilateral pacts signed between the two countries.
According to a report in ‘Dawn’, Foreign Office (FO) spokesman Nafees Zakaria said that Pakistan was keeping an eye on the Indus Water Treaty.
Zakaria’s statement comes after India hinted at revisiting the water treaty in view of Islamabad's continued support to terror groups operating from its soil which are targeting India.India also holds Pakistan-backed terrorists responsible for Uri attacks that led to the killing of 19 Indian soldiers.
Zakaria accused India of violating 2003 ceasefire along the Line of Control (LoC) in Kashmir and said that Pakistan would reply to them in a befitting manner.The FO spokesperson also condemned “political manoeuvring" of the eight-nation South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) and alleged that its summits had been postponed eight times in the past due to India.However, Zakaria added that India has failed in its attempt to isolate Pakistan diplomatically. "Indian attempts to diplomatically isolate Pakistan have failed miserably," Zakaria said.


File under "Pakistani Propanganda !

Rohit_K
BRFite
Posts: 436
Joined: 09 Nov 2006 22:53
Location: atop Sukkur Barage

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Postby Rohit_K » 23 Oct 2016 10:45

China's CGGC-CMEC consortium has achieved a TBM breakthrough for Neelum-Jhelum hydroelectric project's 10 km left headrace tunnel
https://www.facebook.com/anas.bilal.581 ... 4946000498

Contract was awarded in 2007. Project map:
https://media.licdn.com/mpr/mpr/shrinkn ... Y2Q1Mw.jpg
Nausadda is barely 3km from the LOC

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20444
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Postby SSridhar » 27 Oct 2016 18:18

Asian Development Bank refuses to fund Pakistan dam that India says is in 'disputed area' - Shailaja Neelakantan, ToI
Pakistan has had no luck with the World Bank funding its 4500 megawatt Diamer-Bhasha dam, a project that India opposes, because it's located in a disputed area in Gilgit-Baltisan. And yesterday, the Asian Development Bank (ADB) too declined to fund the $14 billion dam over the Indus river, Pakistani media reported.

Two years ago, the World Bank refused to come on board as a lender for Diamer-Bhasha, because Pakistan didn't want to seek a no-objection certificate from India for the project. The dam is planned in the Gilgit-Baltistan region, which India claims is a part of the former princely state of Jammu and Kashmir.

Yesterday, ADB said the project was too big to be funded solely by them. {This is not acceptable to India. When it acceded to China's request not to fund projects in the North East, it cited territorial disputes. At that time, the ADB's Director for China said that it was “a mistake” stemming from the ADB's lack of a policy on disputed territories. Therefore, India must strongly object to ADB to issue a properly worded reasoning and explain its stand.}

Delhi has long protested moves to support the Diamer-Bhasha dam and other infrastructure ventures in or bordering Pakistan-occupied-Kashmir. A little over a year ago, the US was making noises about supporting the project and India didn't shy away from showing it was peeved.

Now, especially after the brazen terror attack in Uri in Jammu and Kashmir, India can expect to get, and is getting, tacit and overt support from around the world in slamming Pakistan for cross-border terror. In this scenario, the Diamer-Bhasha dam may not go much further.

"The refusal from and reluctance of international financial institutions such as the ADB and World Bank to fund the project, allegedly at India's insistence, have somewhat constrained Pakistan's geo-economic designs in the region," wrote Priyanka Singh, associate fellow at the Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses, New Delhi, in January.

"We haven't decided [whether to fund] this project yet because it needs big money," ADB president Takehiko Nakao said yesterday in Islamabad.

Nakao said the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) was conducting a feasibility study on the dam. He added that while it was a very important project for Pakistan's energy and irrigation requirements - Bloomberg News said last year the dam could wipe out half of Pakistan's energy shortfall - it called for the formation of more partnerships that could provide funding for the project.

The ADB earlier advised Islamabad to restructure the Diamer-Bhasha dam project by separating its power generation, land acquisition and main dam structures and their modes of financing. That's when Pakistan engaged USAID for a feasibility study. Islamabad is also seeking investment from US investors to develop Diamer-Bhasha as an independent power project.

Bloomberg News reported in April last year, that even China is skirting the Diamer-Bhasha project, despite its $51 billion pus in Pakistan through the China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), because it doesn't want to get involved in an Indo-Pak water war.

Priyanka Singh of the Institute for Defense Studies wrote that reports indicated that Pakistan had formally requested China to allocate funds out of its CPEC budget for Diamer-Bhasha project, and that China has neither confirmed nor denied such a request.

"It's a very big project, and the world isn't foolish enough to invest in it," said Nadeemul Haque, former deputy chairman Pakistan's Planning Commission and an International Monetary Fund economist, to Bloomberg last year.


It appears not much has changed.


India must not be happy with this news because ADB has not attributed the reasons that India wants to hear.

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8674
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Postby arun » 28 Oct 2016 09:02

X Posted from the STFUP thread.

Problems in the Mohammadden Terrorist fomenting Islamic Republic of Pakistan’s power generation sector seems to be the flavor of the week. Yesterday saw mention of the Asian Development Bank (ADB) refusing to fund the Diamer Basha Dam in Indian territory illegally occupied by the Islamic Republic and refusal of Sweeter than Honey friend Peoples Republic of China to finance the Gadani Power Park:



Prem wrote:Paki Dastan Ha Yeh: Azal Sey Shuru Azal pey Khatam

Work on 7,000MW coal-based power plants likely to be abandoned


Today the news reported is that the Neelum Jhelum Dam which was unsuccessfully designed to scuttle India’s Kishenanga Dam by attempting to “secure water rights over Neelum”, is beset with problems:

Hydroelectric power production: Neelum-Jhelum project had a poor design, says WAPDA chief

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20444
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Postby SSridhar » 28 Oct 2016 12:12

arun wrote:Today the news reported is that the Neelum Jhelum Dam which was unsuccessfully designed to scuttle India’s Kishenanga Dam by attempting to “secure water rights over Neelum”, is beset with problems:

Hydroelectric power production: Neelum-Jhelum project had a poor design, says WAPDA chief

I am not surprised.

Back in the early 2000s, when India took members of the PIC of Pakistan and its engineers to the National Institute of Hydrology at Roorkee on the Baglihar HEP issue, they later complained that the calculations etc. flew over their head.

Peregrine
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2911
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Indus Water Treaty

Postby Peregrine » 28 Oct 2016 17:17

SSridhar wrote:
arun wrote:Today the news reported is that the Neelum Jhelum Dam which was unsuccessfully designed to scuttle India’s Kishenanga Dam by attempting to “secure water rights over Neelum”, is beset with problems:

Hydroelectric power production: Neelum-Jhelum project had a poor design, says WAPDA chief

I am not surprised.

Back in the early 2000s, when India took members of the PIC of Pakistan and its engineers to the National Institute of Hydrology at Roorkee on the Baglihar HEP issue, they later complained that the calculations etc. flew over their head.

SSridhar Ji :

From the above Article here is the Killer :
According to the project management, the original commissioning deadline for the first unit was July 2017 whereas the contractor and consultant put it at July 2018 and September 2018 respectively.

As such, IMO, India's KHEP Project will most definitely be completed before Cwapistan's N-J Project :rotfl:
Image

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20444
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Postby SSridhar » 28 Oct 2016 18:36

Peregrine ji, that Neelum-Jhelum project's completion or incompletion does not matter for our Kishenganga project because the CoA has already established our rights. I remember to have explained this in a post several months back.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19913
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Postby Prem » 31 Oct 2016 01:33

Minhaz Merchant ‏@MinhazMerchant Oct 29

Meanwhile 4 power projects in J&K fast tracked to use full quota allocated to India in #IndusWatersTreaty, cutting Pak supply to legal limit

Guddu
BRFite
Posts: 641
Joined: 01 Dec 2008 06:22

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Postby Guddu » 31 Oct 2016 08:37

Do we know how much time will it take for these projects to be completed, and affecting pak. What state of completion are they in at present ?

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8483
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Postby pankajs » 31 Oct 2016 13:39

IIRC most of the *current* projects would be *run of the river* with limited storage. Completion of these on fast track wouldn't make much of a dent. perhaps we could raise the dam's crest by a few meters but my *guess* is that it too wouldn't make much of an impact. It is signaling India's intent more than anything.

To utilize our full quota we would need to build new *storage* dams which would involve issues like seismic risk, inundation of human habitation amongst others. Other option is to move the water out of the basin which *may* not be possible without breaking the IWT.

Even otherwise new storage dams will take not less than 10 years more likely 15 years from start to finish. Past record in similar terrain could be our guide.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19913
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Postby Prem » 02 Nov 2016 04:55

Paki Pukare , Pani Pani , 292 dams by 2030.

manjgu
BRFite
Posts: 1176
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Postby manjgu » 05 Nov 2016 11:15

http://www.dawn.com/news/1292901/assess ... ter-threat ..the map is excellent indicating dams and status

Yagnasri
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8248
Joined: 29 May 2007 18:03

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Postby Yagnasri » 05 Nov 2016 11:17

In case of rivers coming in our quota, we need to use it fully. No one can object to that.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19913
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Postby Prem » 05 Nov 2016 11:19

http://www.dawn.com/news/1292901/assess ... ter-threat
Assessing India's water threat
( Check the good map" Paki Fear and Fukrapan)

The Indus Waters Treaty of 1960, which governs water sharing arrangements between India and Pakistan, outlines a framework for how either country can exploit water potential and how they can’t. While the Indus Waters Treaty is upheld, India cannot turn the taps off — in fact, it does not have the capacity at the moment to do so either — but it can definitely delay the release of water flows. And historically, India hasn’t been averse to using this tactic when relations with Pakistan turn sour. This time has been no different.In a story printed in the October 12 edition of Dawn, irrigation department officials warned of a record reduction of water levels at Head Marala in the Chenab. The fear is that water shortage in the river and two of its canals, Marala-Ravi Link Canal and Upper Chenab Canal, can adversely affect the sowing of crops particularly in Sialkot, Gujrat, Gujranwala and Sheikhupura districts. The situation has worsened at the time of this report going into print.
Beyond hyperbole and nationalistic fervour, the two South Asian giants need to be at the negotiating table. Normally a dispute like the one reported by Dawn on October 12 could have been resolved at a meeting of the Indus water commissioners, mandated by the Indus Waters Treaty to be held once a year. But the Indian assertion that these meetings will resume only once “an atmosphere free of terror is established” spells disaster for our farmers. The only safeguard that the Indus Waters Treaty offered Pakistan was through the Permanent Indus Commission whose meetings India has been routinely flouting under one pretext or the other. If the situation persists, Pakistan will have no option but to take the matter through the cumbersome route of World Bank and international arbitration. All through this period, India will enjoy undue exploitation of water resources at the expense of the people of Pakistan. :eek: Caught in nationalistic fervour, hawks in the Indian media have been blaming their previous governments for failing to exercise a water offensive like the one PM Modi is intent on implementing.Indeed, India can hypothetically terminate the Indus Waters Treaty and restrict even the rivers flowing into Pakistan through the diversion of Indus rivers waters. But when it comes to practice, this position remains untenable.The waters of the Indus rivers flow through deep gorges of the Karakoram and Himalayan mountains. The only way to divert water from here is to tunnel through hundreds of kilometres of the world’s highest and toughest mountains.Granted that all technical problems have technical solutions. However such an undertaking would be financially prohibitive, technically extremely challenging, and with minimal cost-benefit ratios. The longest tunnel dug in the world is the Gotthard Base Tunnel to facilitate rail travel. Although it is being drilled for the last 22 years through the Swiss Alps, it is merely 57 kilometres long and has already incurred an estimated cost of 12 billion US dollars. For India to divert waters of the western Indus basin rivers for meaningful use, it will have to dig up to 300 kilometres of tunnels.As such, diverting the water going into western rivers which feed Pakistan is not a feasible option.While India may not have the capacity to turn off the taps immediately or divert the waters of the rivers flowing into Pakistan, it is undertaking a number of projects that could have an adverse impact on Pakistan’s water availability in the future.The Indus Waters Treaty handed Pakistan the right to unrestricted use of the three western rivers — Indus, Chenab and Jhelum. The eastern rivers — Sutlej, Beas and Ravi — went to India. While the treaty allowed India to divert the waters of the eastern rivers, it could only tap into 3.6 MAF of water from the western rivers for irrigation, transport and power generation.
Experts at the Indus River System Authority (IRSA) complain that India has been constructing huge water storages on all six Indus basin rivers, not just on the three under its full control. For example, Baglihar and Salal on Chenab are already generating 450 MW/h and 690 MW/h respectively while the planned Bursar and Pakal hydroelectric projects also on the Chenab will produce 1020MW and 1000 MW/h respectively. The size of the energy outputs is an indication of the size of the projects. Pakistan’s Mangla, for comparison, generates 1000MW/h.In all, India is in different phases of planning or construction of some 60 storages of varying capacity over the six Indus rivers, though analysis of satellite imagery obtained by Dawn suggests the number may be more [see map]. Technical experts in Pakistan worry that such storages will provide India ultimate strategic leverage of increasing or decreasing river flows during tensions between the two countries, even if it cannot legally divert the waters for its own use.Sheraz Memon, additional commissioner of the Indus Water Commission, argues that India does not have sufficient capacity to withhold the water of the western rivers nor it can divert them. “But they may keep the implementation of the treaty at a snail’s pace, for example through delaying the meetings of the Permanent Indus Commission and not providing data or information about their new hydroelectric plants,” he warns.
There is also talk of expediting the construction of the Pakal Dul, Sawalkot, and Bursar dams, also in Jammu and Kashmir. Indian media reports claim that the Indian government might also resume work on the Tulbul Navigational Project — also known as Wullar Barrage — work on which began in 1985 but stopped soon after Pakistan lodged a formal complaint against its construction. Pakistan opposed the project at the time since it would have allowed India to store, control and divert River Jhelum, which was a clear violation of the Indus Waters Treaty. If completed, Tulbul will adversely affect the water storage potential of Mangla Dam.
During 1956, Pakistani negotiators were warned by their irrigation officials and technical experts not to accede to Indian delegation chief ND Gulhati’s demand — also supported by the World Bank — to allow India to build small storages over the western rivers.Until the signing of the treaty, the Indian predicament was that while Customary International Law and conventions gave them a legitimate right over 33 MAF or 21 percent of the six Indus rivers water — corresponding to 21 per cent of the Indus basin being in Indian territory — India had little room to utilise this water within the basin. The Indus Waters Treaty gave them an opportunity to divert water towards Rajasthan for irrigating over 700,000 acres of land which was previously bare sand dunes.Before the Treaty, the waters of the Ravi, Beas and Sutlej were utilised for the cultivation of lands as far south as Bahawalpur State. Suddenly there was no water for thousands of farmers on this side of the border until Tarbela Dam was finally opened in 1976.
But Pakistani negotiators at the time acquiesced, on the pretext that this shared water would also benefit their Muslim brethren in Kashmir. Pakistani negotiators did not even bother to specify the size of the so-called small storages but agreed to India officially withdrawing up to 3.6 MAF of water for local use. In comparison, the current storage capacity of Mangla Dam, after expansion, is about 7.4 MAF.Given the pliancy of Pakistani negotiators at the time, the Indus Waters Treaty emerged as a treatise that was skewed in favour of India. Perhaps it is for this reason that PM Modi announced that while India will not review or abrogate the Indus Waters Treaty, it will exploit water under its share to the fullest. It will, for example, build more run-of-the-river hydropower projects on the western rivers and irrigate over 400,000 acres in Jammu and Kashmir.

One thing seems certain: India will continue to build additional storages on the Indus rivers to store more than its allowed quota of up to 3.6 MAF of water. This will also provide hawks the option of delaying khareef crops in Pakistan from time to time. If the winters’ torment is harsh, delay in summers sowing would be a national crisis.There is a real danger that current Indian antics will push Pakistan towards construction of very large dams at Diamer and Kalabagh, displacing more people and adversely impacting our environment which is already in a poor state.India is employing pressure tactics on Pakistan by announcing it will speed up dam construction,” argues Dr Pervaiz Amir, director of the Pakistan Water Partnership. “Pakistan must address its own internal water security and create sufficient storage. India has 200 projects in hand. Saving water is a planned response by India, and Pakistan should follow suit.”During the last 69 years, Pakistan has developed three major water storages at Tarbela, Mangla and Chashma with a cumulative storage capacity of 12.1 MAF against average water flows of 133 MAF annually through the three Indus rivers. There have been little or no independent studies to either assess or address the issues of resettlement, the massive loss to the environment and overall economic cost due to construction of large dams. In addition, issues of climate change —which have only recently come to the fore — raise questions about the risks posed to and by large dams. Freak weather conditions, such as unusually intense cloudbursts, are becoming more common and have already resulted in threats to people living downstream of large dams.To add insult to injury, we have been ruthlessly pumping out underground water through tubewells. Such pumping is severely affecting the underground water levels in the country and often being replaced by saline water, adversely affecting agricultural output. The number of tubewells in Pakistan has risen from 2,400 to over 600,000 since 1960.While we could continue to curse the World Bank bureaucracy, American interests in the region and Indian cunning for having deprived the country of its water share, we must also look at our own wasteful attitudes towards utilisation of available water resources as well as the politics around available water.Pakistan loses almost half of its existing available water through seepage in the irrigation system [see table]. This is a prime cause of waterlogging and salinity which are turning large areas of fertile land barren. Surely lining of water canals and water courses should be the first priority in saving the water we have at our disposal, rather than the construction of large dams.According to WAPDA’s published figures, average cereal production in Pakistan against a metre cube of water is mere 0.13 kg. In India, the same amount of water yields 0.39 kg, yield in China is estimated at 0.82 kg, in the US 1.56 kg and in Canada 8.2 kg [see table]. Clearly better management of water resources, efficient crop yields and serious efforts towards population control will be much more advantageous than building additional dams and storages that will ultimately result in catastrophic environmental issues and human resettlement crises as being faced in India and China.“Afghanistan is [currently] utilising 1.8 MAF of water [from the Kabul River which feeds into the Indus], which is estimated to rise to 3.6 MAF in the future,” says Rasheed. “Pakistan currently does not have any water sharing accord with its northwestern neighbor. But the projected increase of water use by Afghanistan can affect the lower riparian, Pakistan.”
The Indus Waters Commissioners of Pakistan and India have met every year since the Indus Waters Treaty came into force. The wars of 1965 and 1971, the Siachen and Kargil conflicts and the Mumbai attacks weren’t able to dent it. In standing the test of time, the treaty has shown that it generates the least conflict and more cooperation between the South Asian neighbours.The chances of India scrapping the treaty altogether and diverting the western rivers are negligible to none. But one must not put past India its flouting the spirit of the treaty and manipulating water flows to turn the screws on Pakistan.Pakistan’s response, however, should not be as cavalier as when it negotiated the treaty, ignoring sound technical advice and short-changing itself in the bargain. It needs to put its own house in order on an urgent basis — by better utilising its existing water resources. Pakistan’s protestations against India’s perfidy will then carry far more weight.
Last edited by Prem on 05 Nov 2016 11:20, edited 1 time in total.

manjgu
BRFite
Posts: 1176
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Postby manjgu » 05 Nov 2016 11:19

should preserve the map !

Rishi Verma
BRFite
Posts: 914
Joined: 28 Oct 2016 13:08

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Postby Rishi Verma » 05 Nov 2016 11:22

India should setup organic pig farms along Jhelum and Chenab just before it enters the NapakiLand. Two benefits: We can export organic "pashmina pork" to China, and all pakis will go to hell. :lol:

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19913
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Postby Prem » 05 Nov 2016 11:26

Image

manjgu
BRFite
Posts: 1176
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Postby manjgu » 05 Nov 2016 11:51

chenab is the real McCoy

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19913
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Postby Prem » 06 Nov 2016 00:44

Image

habal
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5879
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 18:46

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Postby habal » 06 Nov 2016 08:48

:((
KJo wrote:Modi was reviewing the IWT. Anything come out of it?


you want results of review to be made public.

Peregrine
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2911
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Postby Peregrine » 06 Nov 2016 17:01

Mods, if necessary, please move this to the correct Thread

Unfazed by Chinese troops' 'sit-in', Army engineers finish canal work in Ladakh

LEH/NEW DELHI: Unfazed by the ' sit-in+ ' by the Chinese border guards at Demchok in Ladakh that led to a face-off with Indian troops earlier this week, Army engineers have finished the work for laying a water pipeline for irrigation purpose for local villagers in Ladakh division.

China had pressed its People's Armed Police Force (PAPF) personnel at the Line of Actual Control (LAC) in Demchok this time instead of usual PLA who came to erect a Fibre-Reinforced plastic (FRP) hut on Friday at the border but was not allowed by Army and Indo-Tibetan Border Police (ITBP) troops, official sources said.

The sources said that while the face-off between the two sides continued for three days ending Saturday evening, the Army engineers, ignored the warnings by PAPF personnel and continued laying pipeline for nearly a kilometre for irrigation purpose of the villagers in Demchok, located 250km east of Leh.

According to the sources, the formula of 'active patrolling' adopted by the ITBP and Army ever since 2013 fortnight long stand-off near Daulat Beig Oldie has been reaping rich dividends and Chinese have been cautious in carrying out incursion especially in Ladakh sector.

This time also, the sources said, army and ITBP personnel did not allow the PAPF guards to erect the hut and they were forced to take the material back to their base camp located a kilometre away at Demqog from the place of face-off.

The fresh incident had erupted on November 2 when Chinese troops took positions on the LAC and demanded that work be stopped as either side needs to take permission from each other before undertaking any construction work, a claim disputed by the India which says that as per the agreement between the two countries, information about construction needed to be shared only if it was meant for defence purposes.

Both sides pulled out banners and have been stationed on the ground, the sources said, adding the Army and ITBP troopers were not allowing the Chinese "to move an inch" ahead despite the PLA claiming that the area belonged to China.

The area had witnessed a similar incident in 2014 after it was decided to construct a small irrigation canal at Nilung Nalla under the MNREGA scheme which had been a sore point with the Chinese.

The PLA had mobilised villagers from Tashigong to pitch Rebos (tents) at Charding-Ninglung Nallah (CNN) Track Junction to protest Indian action.
Cheers Image

Peregrine
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2911
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Indus Water Treaty

Postby Peregrine » 10 Nov 2016 23:00

India takes strong exception to World Bank decision on Indus Waters Treaty

NEW DELHI: India on Thursday night took strong exception to the World Bank's "inexplicable" decision to set up a Court of Arbitration and appoint a Neutral Expert to go into Pakistan's complaint against it over Kishenganga and Ratle hydroelectric projects in Jammu and Kashmir.

Surprised at the World Bank's decision to appoint a Neutral Expert, as sought by the Indian government and at the same time establish a Court of Arbitration as wanted by Pakistan, India said proceeding with both the steps simultaneously "legally untenable".

"Inexplicably, the World Bank has decided to continue to proceed with these two parallel mechanisms simultaneously. India cannot be party to actions which are not in accordance with the Indus Waters Treaty.
"The government will examine further options and take steps accordingly," External Affairs Ministry spokesperson Vikas Swarup said.

Under the Indus Waters Treaty, signed between India and Pakistan and also the World Bank in 1960, the World Bank has a specified role in the process of resolution of differences and disputes.

Swarup said on the issue of differences between India and Pakistan on Kishenganga and Ratle hydroelectric projects under the Indus Waters Treaty, India had asked the World Bank to appoint a Neutral Expert to resolve the differences of a technical nature which are within the domain of a neutral technical expert.

Pakistan had sought the establishment of a Court of Arbitration, which is normally the logical next step in the process of resolution in the Treaty. The Neutral Expert can also determine that there are issues beyond mere technical differences, he noted.

Pakistan has raised objections over the design of the hydel project in J&K, saying it is not in line with the criteria laid down under the Indus Water Treaty between the two countries.

"The World Bank has decided to proceed with both steps simultaneously. It was pointed by the government to the World Bank that the pursuit of two parallel difference/ dispute resolution mechanisms - appointment of a Neutral Expert and establishment of a Court of Arbitration - at the same time is legally untenable," Swarup asserted.

Noting that despite India's clear advice not to proceed with both together, the World Bank has decided otherwise, thereby, raising questions over the "viability and workability" of the 56-year-old Treaty.
Cheers Image

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20444
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Postby SSridhar » 11 Nov 2016 12:12

India slams World Bank process on Indus Treaty - Suhasini Haidar, The Hindu
India lashed out at the World Bank over its decision to favour Pakistan on the Indus Water Treaty dispute process over the Kishenganga and Ratle dam and hydropower projects. While India had asked for a neutral expert to be appointed over Pakistan’s objections to the projects first, Pakistan appealed directly for a Court of Arbitration (CoA) to be set up as it claims India has violated the 1960 treaty.

“Inexplicably, the World Bank has decided to continue to proceed with these two parallel mechanisms simultaneously. India cannot be party to actions which are not in accordance with the Indus Waters Treaty,” said a statement issued by the MEA spokesperson from Tokyo, shortly after Prime Minister Narendra Modi landed there.

When asked if the strong language in the statement indicated India would consider cancelling the Indus Water Treaty arbitration process, or even, as it had threatened after the Uri attacks, would consider abrogating the Treaty itself, a government source said, “The World Bank’s illegal action has brought into question the workability of the Indus Water Treaty.”

Dispute internationalised

The MEA statement came just hours before the World Bank was due to draw lots by which it selects “umpires” for the Court of Arbitration. On Tuesday, Pakistan’s Water and Power secretary Mohammad Dagha had informed its Senate that the World Bank had begun the process requested by Islamabad under Arbitration Article IX of the Indus Water Treaty rather than India’s appeal for the Permanent Indus Commission (PIC) or at most a neutral expert to mediate on what India called “technical issues” with Pakistan

Officials said the World Bank’s action of going ahead with Pakistan’s claim had escalated the differences into an international dispute. The Hindu has learnt that Mr PM Modi held a high level meeting on the issue last week, where several senior officials proposed that India should pull out of the arbitration entirely unless the World Bank changes what one official referred to as its “legally untenable” stance on Pakistan “intransigience”.

The World Bank country director Junaid Ahmad, an official of Bangladeshi origin is expected to speed up efforts at reconciling the matter in the next few days. “This is a matter of worry for us all,” a diplomat from a third country told The Hindu , indicating that the current military tensions between India and Pakistan were adding to the urgency. .

Rishi Verma
BRFite
Posts: 914
Joined: 28 Oct 2016 13:08

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Postby Rishi Verma » 11 Nov 2016 12:23

Del duplicate
Last edited by Rishi Verma on 11 Nov 2016 12:25, edited 1 time in total.

Rishi Verma
BRFite
Posts: 914
Joined: 28 Oct 2016 13:08

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Postby Rishi Verma » 11 Nov 2016 12:24

Paki gov sponsoring terrorism on Indian soil is sufficient excuse to abrogate all agreements shimla, iwt, mfn, and the rest. It's black and white. When India stops caring about world opinion then only India will rise to super power status. It needs to begin in the minds first.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20444
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Postby SSridhar » 12 Nov 2016 07:49

Hydel projects: World Bank asks India, Pak. to agree to mediation - Suhasini Haidar, The Hindu

The World Bank has “urged” India and Pakistan to agree to mediation on how to proceed in their dispute over two hydropower dam projects in Jammu and Kashmir.

Replying to a strong statement from India that the World Bank, a signatory to the Indus Waters Treaty 1960, was favouring Pakistan by going ahead with an arbitration process, the Bank said it had gone ahead with both countries’ requests.

Conceding that a “draw of lots” was held to appoint three neutral umpires despite India’s objections, a senior World Bank official explained that the decision was a “procedural one.”

“The World Bank Group has a strictly procedural role under the Indus Waters Treaty and the treaty does not allow it to choose whether one procedure [India’s] should take precedence over the other [Pakistan’s]. This is why we drew the lots and proposed potential candidates for the Neutral Expert,” said Senior Vice-President and World Bank Group General Counsel Anne-Marie Leroy.

However, Ms. Leroy admitted that two parallel processes were “unworkable” in the long run, and therefore mediation was required.

The dispute is over the Kishenganga (330 MW) and Ratle (850 MW) hydel plants India is constructing on the Kishenganga and Chenab rivers.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20444
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Postby SSridhar » 12 Nov 2016 08:08

Pakistan believes that its chances are better with a CoA while India, going strictly by the merits of teh case, is always confident that it can present its case before a technically competent Neutral Expert and hope to win it on the basis of facts, treaty provisions, and technological advancement since the 1950s when the IWT was drawn up.

The IWT provision for members of CoA can be engineers or practitioners of international law. In fact, the Chairman of the CoA need not even be an engineer or a lawyer. He/She can be just anybody!

OTOH, a Neutral Expert has to be a "highly qualified engineer".

That is the chance that Pakistan wants to take. Pakistan cannot remain idle with India. It has to constantly prick & prod, attack, stop our progress, and paint us black in international community. Each idle day is a precious day wasted. It does not bother about its own losses in the bargain. Pakistan must make every effort to give India a black eye even if, in the process, Pakistan becomes totally blind.

manjgu
BRFite
Posts: 1176
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Postby manjgu » 14 Nov 2016 08:38


nandakumar
BRFite
Posts: 686
Joined: 10 May 2010 13:37

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Postby nandakumar » 14 Nov 2016 14:10

I have a question for members who are familiar with the Punjab's agrarian economy. Is any water from Sutlej flowing into Pakistan because we haven't built irrigation infrastructure within Punjab and/or in neighbouring states? As I see it, Haryana's claim which is technically not a lower riparian state or for that matter Delhi or Rajasthan can lay claim to this water within the framework of the Indus Water Treaty only if unutilised water flows into Pakistan as the natural course of the river takes the water only to Pakistan.

abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9653
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Postby abhishek_sharma » 25 Nov 2016 12:47

PMO IndiaVerified account
‏@PMOIndia
The fields of our farmers must have adequate water. Water that belongs to India cannot be allowed to go to Pakistan: PM @narendramodi

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 20444
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Postby SSridhar » 25 Nov 2016 14:24

This has to be recorded here. Ignore the headline.

After our surgical strikes, Pakistan knows what Indian Army is capable of, PM Modi says - ToI
PM Modi also brought up the issue of water-sharing and the Indus Water Treaty.

"Our farmers have the right over the water that flows through Indus. The government has formed a task force to see what can be done to make maximum use of water that flows to Pakistan under the Indus Water Treaty," he said.

He also said he would stop "every drop" of Indus water from going to Pakistan, and that he would keep it for Jammu and Kashmir, for Punjab and for India's farmers.

"The fields of our farmers must have adequate water. Water that belongs to India cannot be allowed to go to Pakistan," he said.

The PM then had a few words of advice for India's north-western neighbour.

"Instead of waging war against India, Pakistan should fight poverty, black money (and) corruption," he said.


The PM has chosen the words carefully, like his reference to Balochistan. Reaction from Pakistan is understandable. But, I expect some useless Indian politicians. commentators & analysts to go ballistic now.

Kashi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2066
Joined: 06 May 2011 13:53

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Postby Kashi » 25 Nov 2016 17:01

And the screws begin to tighten...

venug
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 91
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 21:39

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Postby venug » 25 Nov 2016 18:23

abhishek_sharma wrote:PMO IndiaVerified account
‏@PMOIndia
The fields of our farmers must have adequate water. Water that belongs to India cannot be allowed to go to Pakistan: PM @narendramodi


In this clip, he is very clear he meant IWT:
https://twitter.com/ANI_news/status/802050153435643904

manjgu
BRFite
Posts: 1176
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Postby manjgu » 25 Nov 2016 18:28

yes..water from sutlej does flow into Pakistan. we often dont dry it completely before it flows into pakistan...

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14083
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Postby chetak » 25 Nov 2016 18:37

manjgu wrote:yes..water from sutlej does flow into Pakistan. we often dont dry it completely before it flows into pakistan...


Full election mode onlee and also a hard swipe at the pakis in their punjab.

Bart S
BRFite
Posts: 509
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 00:03

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Postby Bart S » 25 Nov 2016 18:59

manjgu wrote:yes..water from sutlej does flow into Pakistan. we often dont dry it completely before it flows into pakistan...


It is a sorry state of affairs at the state level. Politicians from Punjab seem to be happier to let water go to TSP than to Haryana. 70 years of divide and rule by brown sahibs has truly screwed us.

Rishi Verma
BRFite
Posts: 914
Joined: 28 Oct 2016 13:08

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Postby Rishi Verma » 25 Nov 2016 19:58

India Should not Waste Water in Toilet

Modi just saying this and having this headlines makes me distribute mithai to friends.

Only problem is when bakistan becomes a desert then the smart Bakis will breed camels and export CBIEDs to ISIS to payoff the 72 Trillion of interest to IMF. And pakis will actually believe IMF means I am Fu*ked.

No water means no water for cars?

PS: I feel saaari for Gagan-mullah who has to work overtime to get clips of Bakis Crying on TV so we can :rotfl: on BRF.


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 24 guests