Indus Water Treaty

Vivek_A · Post by **Vivek_A** » 17 Apr 2009 05:56

http://www.thenews.com.pk/top_story_detail.asp?Id=21578

Pakistan to move int’l court against India on water issue

Friday, April 17, 2009

By Khalid Mustafa

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan has decided to inform India about its intention to move the International Court of Arbitration and the neutral expert against diversion of Neelum River water to Wullar barrage and faulty design of the Kishanganga hydropower project.

The decision was taken during a high-level but secretive meeting held here on Tuesday last with Water and Power Minister Raja Pervez Ashraf in the chair. Former water and power secretary Ashfaq Mehmud, top officials of the water and power ministry, foreign office, GHQ, ISI, law division and the deputy attorney-general attended the meeting. Pakistan Indus Waters Commissioner Syed Jamaat Ali Shah briefed the participants over the controversial project. In his presentation, Shah told the meeting that talks between Pakistan and India have failed after exhausting all endeavours at the Permanent Commission of Indus Waters level.

“Being Pakistan’s commissioner, I served notice on the Indian commissioner in March after exhausting all endeavours mentioned in the 1960 Indus Waters Treaty at the PCIW level to resolve the issue,” a senior official, who was part of the meeting, divulged this to The News while quoting Syed Jamaat Ali Shah, having told the meeting.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 17 Apr 2009 07:48

In any other 'normal' country, a person like Jamaat Ali Shah would have been dismissed from service for mis-informing the government due to his incompetence in handling the Baglihar issue. Pakistan had a better chance of extracting some more concessions from India through talks rather than taking the matter to the Neutral Expert. The NE's verdict settled a few issues whose ambiguity could have been a source of help for Pakistan in harassing India in future projects. However, TSP being what it is, such people who show unbridled hostility towards India are considered as true heroes.

Be that as it may, why is TSP talking of both the NE and Court of Arbitration in the same breath ? Surely, it is one or the other unless TSP has decided o slap multiple cases against India. There are certain disputes that fall under the NE and others under the Court of Arbitration.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 24 Apr 2009 09:37

These Chankian SDRE fellas

India’s state-run power producer – the National Hydro-electric Power Corporation (NHPC) – is planning to start construction on three more power projects on Chenab River in Indian-held Kashmir (IHK) soon after the Indian parliamentary elections are over.

Addressing a press conference on Thursday, NHPC Chairman and Managing Director SK Garg said his organisation had signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) with the Jammu and Kashmir State Power Development Corporation (JKSPDC) and the Power Trading Corporation (PTC) for developing Pakal-Dul and two other hydroelectric projects in the Chenab River basin with aggregate installed capacity of 2,100 megawatts (MW) through a joint venture. “We signed the MoU with the JKSPDC and the PTC in October, 2008 for three projects of 2,100MW capacity. We (NHPC) and the JKSPDC have 49 percent stake each in the JV Company and two percent is held by the PTC,” Garg said. The work on the projects would start soon after the elections, as the IHK government could not approve tenders to award work due to the election code of conduct, he said.

“The corporation is also constructing Sewa-II (120MW) on Chenab and Uri-II (240MW) on Jhelum,” he said, adding that the Sewa project would be commissioned by October 2009.

The NHPC chairman said initial work on the 330MW Kishangaga project had begun, and the project would be completed by January 2016. He said the survey and investigation to state work on the 1,020MW Bursur project on Marusudar River, a tributary of the Chenab, was in the final phase. The proposed project is located approximately 80 kilometres from Kistwar town. The project consists of a 252-metre-high rock-fill dam. According to the project’s details, like Baglihar, Bursur is also a storage project in which the flow of water could be regulated not only to the benefit of the project but all downstream projects like Pakal Dul, Dul Hasti, Rattle, Baglihar, Sawalkot and Salal hydroelectric projects.
{TSP is going to be very upset.}
Due to this dam, the NHPC officials said power generation in the Chenab valley power stations will increase three-fold during October to April, and would thus mitigate the shortage of water in the river during the winter months.

AoA onlee.

Vivek_A · Post by **Vivek_A** » 27 Apr 2009 04:14

Breach of Indus Water Treaty : Farmers to block borders with India, warns PMKM

* Mahaz president says West, India want to see Pakistan destabilised through a water crisis

Staff Report

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan Muttahida Kisan Mahaz (PMKM) on Sunday accused India of violating Indus Water Basin Treaty to destroy Pakistan’s irrigation system. It warned the treaty’s violation if continued could force Pakistani farmers to block Wagah, Monabao and Kashmir borders for Afghan Transit Trade and Indian commodities’ import to Pakistan.

PMKM President Ayub Khan Mayo told reporters at the press club that India was building dams on Pakistani rivers in violation of the Indus water basin treaty.

He asked Islamabad to hold objective dialogues with New Delhi over water conflict. He said only Baglihar Dam’s construction had deprived the country of thousands of cusecs of water and more such work was in the pipeline as had been indicated by India.

Mayo said all western countries and India wanted to see Pakistan destabilising through a water crisis. “We’re to put our acts together to avert such a situation otherwise India will block all rivers’ water flowing to Pakistan,” he warned.

The PMKM president announced to arrange agricultural conferences, seminars and meetings of farmers throughout the country to create awareness of violation of Indus basin water treaty by India. He said Pakistani farmers were already facing economic damages due to import of Indian vegetables and other crops. “We should also raise the issue globally to stop India from economic terrorism,” he said.

Mayo said the PMKM had condemned the Indian act of depriving Pakistan of water of river Ravi, Sutlaj and Bias.

“We are amazed as to what prevented Pakistani government from not responding to it promptly,” he said.

He said if India refused to hold further rounds of composite dialogue with Pakistan, the PMKM would stage a ‘million march’ on Wagah border. The Mahaz president said India wanted to occupy waters of three more rivers, Chenab, Jehlum and Indus, by deploying 0.8 million troops in occupied Kashmir.

He alleged India was eyeing a construct of 4,000 miles Greater Canal Project to turn the direction of Indus to destroy Pakistan’s agricultural economy. He said Pakistanis should forge unity to safeguard its irrigation system against Indian exploitations.

shynee · Post by **shynee** » 27 Apr 2009 08:28

Neelum-Jhelum power project moves ahead - Puke Observer

AT long last, the Water and Power Development Authority (WAPDA) has arranged finances for the 969-megawatt Neelum-Jhelum project and various financial institutions have also shown interest in funding Diamer-Basha dam.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 27 Apr 2009 09:34

From the above post by shynee,

As per provisions of the Treaty, if Pakistan manages to complete the Neelum-Jhelum project first, India would not have the right to divert the river flow, as it plans to do at present.

Of course, there is a snowball in hell chance of Pakistan completing its project ahead of India. Nevertheless, let me quote from Indus Water Treaty, Article 15 (iii) of Part 3 of Annexure D which deals with 'GENERATION OF HYDRO-ELECTRIC POWER BY INDIA ON THE WESTERN RIVERS'

(iii) where a Plant is located on a Tributary of The Jhelum on which Pakistan has any Agricultural use or hydroelectric use, the water released below the Plant may be delivered, if necessary, into another Tributary but only to the extent existing Agricultural Use or hydroelectric use by Pakistan on the former Tributary would not be adversely affected.

There are no existing hydroelectric and agricultural use on the Pakistani side. Wet dreams are not counted. Pakistanis have not yet achieved even financial closure whereas the work on the Indian side has been going on for years now. Pakistan, let's be clear here, has already forfeited any claims on this issue. In order to save their already precarious foreign exchange position, they must abandon the project forthwith.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 01 May 2009 11:14

Pakistan to seek World Bank help over Kishenganga Project

The Foreign Office (FO) said on Thursday that Pakistan would approach the World Bank (WB) to appoint a neutral arbiter to resolve the Kishanganga dispute with India.

“We have not received any satisfactory response to a letter written on Kishanganga by the Indus water commissioner to his Indian counterpart in March, and we are now in the process of considering the option of approaching the WB for a neutral expert,” FO spokesman Abdul Basit told at weekly briefing.

Nihat · Post by **Nihat** » 01 May 2009 11:42

If they wish to embarrass themselves in front of the world , who can stop them.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 04 May 2009 18:05

Pakistan to contact WB over Kishenganga

“Every project has its own nature ... India must not apply the decision in the Baglihar Dam dispute to the Kishanganga project.”

He seems to imply that the Baglihar resolution went in India's favour and that India will get similar results in every dispute. But, wasn't he saying all along that Pakistan had won its case against India in the BHEP issue ?

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 06 May 2009 08:37

x-post from TSP thread.

Gerard wrote:Pak accuses India of 'water terrorism'

From the above, some fantastic hallucination.

He { Chairman Indus Water Council Pakistan and Coordinator World Water Assembly Zahoorul Hassan Dahir} was of the view that problems of terrorism, insurgency and Talibanisation have been created just to divert attention from Indian 'Water Terrorism'.

He said Indian Parliament has approved construction of 500 km long train track from Himachal Pradesh to Ladakh which would be utilised for transportation of construction material for Kargil dam and three other reservoirs being built on the Indus River.

He was of the view that due to Indian water aggression, matters have reached to a point where World Bank could not play effective role, therefore, International Court of Justice was proper forum for seeking justice.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 06 May 2009 08:41

SSridhar wrote:x-post from TSP thread.

He was of the view that due to Indian water aggression, matters have reached to a point where World Bank could not play effective role, therefore, International Court of Justice was proper forum for seeking justice.

But wont this be kuffar , how can a Kaffir sit in judgment of case involving Muslim nation which is=Islam Itself.

Tilak · Post by **Tilak** » 06 May 2009 08:54

SSridhar wrote:x-post from TSP thread.

Gerard wrote:Pak accuses India of 'water terrorism'

Is Water a a "non-state actor", as it flows into the sea ?. If it is a state actor, then India should stop this "waters" terrorism.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 07 May 2009 16:25

x-Post from TSP thread

Posting here because the Sir Creek issue affects the delineation of the outer limit and extension to 350 nm. The Paki minister is simply spewing out lies to his own countrymen.

SSridhar wrote:Pakistan files its claims before UN Convention on Laws of the Seas

Pakistan’s continental shelf, or sea-water limits, will be extended from 200 to 350 nautical miles provided no nation objects within a week.

‘No country has challenged our claim for an additional 150 nautical miles into the sea,’ said the federal minister for Science and Technology, Azam Khan Swati

Vivek_A · Post by **Vivek_A** » 25 May 2009 09:21

Kalabagh dam scrapped: minister
By M. Hussain Khan
Sunday, 24 May, 2009 | 07:04 AM PST

HYDERABAD, May 23: Federal Water and Power Minister Raja Pervez Ashraf has said that Kalabagh Dam project has been scrapped and that he is making this statement with authority.

He was talking to journalists at a rest house here on Saturday after addressing a workers’ gathering.

“Kalabagh Dam project has been scrapped and I am making this statement as minister of water and power. The government has rejected this project,” he said when his attention was drawn to a statement of Deputy Chairman of Planning Commission Sardar Aseff Ahmed Ali that Kalabagh Dam project had not been scrapped.

The power minister didn’t answer when pressed why Mr Aseff had made such a statement while talking to journalists after the Annual Plan Coordination Committee (APCC) meeting in Islamabad.

He said that all power projects of Wapda were on time and the shortfall of 3,500 megawatts of electricity would soon be overcome.

He said that 165 megawatts of electricity had been made available and the prime minister would soon inaugurate a 235 megawatts power house in Lahore.

Around 3,000 to 3,500 megawatts of electricity had been injected into the system through improvement in supplies of oil and gas, Pervez Ashraf said. Wapda has managed to upgrade its system.”

He said that out of Rs185 billion, Rs85 billion had been paid by the government towards outstanding dues of Pepco against power distribution companies.

The remaining amount was being cleared through circular debt by the government, he said, adding that the government felt relatively comfortable this year as far as power crisis was concerned. He disagreed with a questioner who quoted Federal Labour Minister Syed Khursheeid Shah as saying that load-shedding won’t end by December this year.

“His (Shah’s) statement has been made somewhat spicy in media,” he said, pledging that load-shedding would come to an end by December.

He said that Wapda was opting for hydropower generation in addition to solar, solid-waste and windmill energy. He said that steam energy was also being worked out and a contract had been signed with a Turkish firm.

The minister said that the government intended to ensure electricity for tube-wells and streetlights through solar energy.

About Thar coal, he said the government would go for international competitive biddings and best companies would be chosen for the project because there were several companies based in South Korea, China and Australia which had shown interest in the project. Through energy conservation, he said, 1,000 megawatts of electricity had been saved.

Tilak · Post by **Tilak** » 25 May 2009 09:44

Vivek_A wrote:Kalabagh dam scrapped: minister
By M. Hussain Khan
Sunday, 24 May, 2009 | 07:04 AM PST

A kick to Pakjabi Musharrafs..

shynee · Post by **shynee** » 27 May 2009 08:23

J&K planning to draw water from Ravi

NEW DELHI: The Indian-held Kashmir (IHK) government is planning to build a water tunnel in Kathua district to draw water from the Ravi river to provide irrigation facilities to 133,000 acres of land besides generating 35 megawatts of power. A proposal will soon be placed before the IHK cabinet in Srinagar to build the tunnel at Satwai village within four years. iftikhar gilani

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 31 May 2009 08:25

Pakistan urges India to honour IWT

Complaining of violations of the Indus Water Treaty, Foreign Office (FO) spokesman Abdul Basit on Saturday said India should honour the treaty in its true letter and spirit.

Talking to the state-run TV channel, the FO spokesman said a Pakistani delegation led by Indus Water Commissioner Syed Jamaat Ali Shah was on a three-day visit to India to convey Pakistan’s concerns about the Kishan-Ganga project and inequitable water distribution. He said the delegation would lay emphasis on fair distribution of water.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 31 May 2009 10:57

SS, What is the true area served by IWT in TSP? How much is due from India in +/- tmc? What crops get irrigated by IWT and in which States?

Thanks, r

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 31 May 2009 11:42

Ramana, hope it helps

Code: Select all

 Water Allocation among Pakistani Provinces, 1991 (in MAF)
Province	       Kharif	   Rabi	Total
Punjab	        37.07	    18.87	55.94
Sind *	        33.94	    14.82	48.76
NWFP **	        3.48	     2.30	 5.78
Civil Canals	   1.80	     1.20	 3.00
Balochistan	    2.85	     1.02	 3.87

MAF - Million Acre Feet

*	-	Including requirements of Karachi
**  -	Ungauged Civil Canals above the rim stations where measurements can be made

Code: Select all

Pakistan Water Requirements
Agricultural Water Demands (MAF)
Crops	         2000	       2025
Wheat	       28.8	          56.91
Rice	        22.24	         16.68
Cotton    	  15.71	         19.35
Sugarcane	   13.41	         13.93
Other crops	 30.59	         46.74
Total + Loss  188.28	        261.14

Domestic Water Demands*
Population (million)	140	260
Water (MAF)         5.2	     9.7
* Industrial demand of water assumed negligible

The crops are as follows:

Code: Select all

Around Sialkot/Gujrat                 Rice
Lahore/Kasur                          Wheat
Okara/Faisalabad/Sahiwal              Sugarcane
Multan                                Cotton
Dera Ghazi Khan/Bahawalpur            Wheat
Larkana (Sind)/Jacobabad              Rice
Hyderabad/Mirpur Khas                 Wheat
Hub/Karachi                           Rice

On the basis of over fifty years' record the mean flow in Indus River System (IRS) totalled 175 MAF on the eve of Partition of the Punjab in 1947. This comprised of 93 MAF including 27 of Kabul for Indus, 23 for Jhelum, 26 for Chenab, 6 for Ravi, 13 for Beas and 14 for Sutlej annually. The three western rivers alloted to Pakistan are Indus, Jhelum & Chenab (totalling 142 MAF) and the three Eastern rivers alloted to India are Ravi, Beas & Sutlej (totalling 33 MAF)

shynee · Post by **shynee** » 02 Jun 2009 00:38

J&K says no to Pak's compensation claims over Indus treaty

Jammu and Kashmir government has said that there was no point in compensating Pak for its claims as it has not violated the Indus water treaty in the first place.

With the Indus Water Commission meeting in New Delhi on Monday to discuss the compensation demanded by Pakistan for the damage to its crops in view of the obstruction in flow of the river Chenab due to filling of water in Baglihar dam, Jammu and Kashmir government said that there was no point in compensating the neighbouring country as it has not violated the Indus water treaty.

Jammu and Kashmir's Power Secretrary Sundeep Nayak said, “we have not violated the Indus water treaty so there was no point in compensating Pakistan for damages claimed by it.”

He said that the construction of the Baglihar power project was in accordance with the Indus water treaty agreement and there was no violation of the World Bank brokered treaty.

“Pakistan had earlier also raised objections but the World Bank gave its decision in our favour. It had earlier raised objections that the dam height was obstructing the flow of water to the neighbouring country.”

However this time Pakistan has demanded that it should be compensated for the crop loss for choking the flow of Chenab water into the country. The three day long meeting of the Indus Water Commission is being held in New Delhi to discuss the issue and is the first such meeting between India and Pakistan after the Mumbai terror attacks.

Power Secretrary Sundeep Nayak said “We have the same dam for both the phases of Baglihar power project and Pakistan government and there is no point that the dam is choking the flow of Chenab. Our representative is attending the meeting of Indus water commission tomorrow and we will present our case before it.”

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 02 Jun 2009 05:18

link

One good signal came when our Indus Waters Commissioner Mr Jamaat Ali Shah left for India last week for talks with his counterpart. Reported in Nawa-e-Waqt (May 31, 2009), 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.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 02 Jun 2009 08:43

Gerard wrote:link
One good signal came when our Indus Waters Commissioner Mr Jamaat Ali Shah left for India last week for talks with his counterpart. Reported in Nawa-e-Waqt (May 31, 2009), 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.

That is very, very strange. The same gentleman had on every occasion accused India of violating the treaty by building Baglihar in the first place and then filling it up illegally etc. He threatened to take the matter to the World Bank. If he now says that Pakistan was indeed getting its share of waters and that India has the right to build hydroelectric projects etc. then he has been consistently advising his country wrongly so far. GoP should punish him for that.

harbans · Post by **harbans** » 02 Jun 2009 09:06

Surprising indeed. On the basis of that false information they cursed and ranted on us, wanted to bomb/ nuke us/ our damns go to War.. Whatever happened..? I doubt they saw merit in India's stance. Somewheresome armtwisting has happened. Pukes are the last people on this planet to be convinced by logic, decency or rationality.

arun · Post by **arun** » 02 Jun 2009 11:31

Gerard wrote:link
..................... Indus Waters Treaty Commissioner Jamaat Ali Shah, ......................... 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 situation appears murkier than the above article in the Daily Times suggests.

ANI has reported difference/s between Pakistan’s Commissioner on the Indus Water Commission and Pakistan’s Foreign Office.

ANI has also reported that Pakistan, at least its Indus Water Commissioner, appears to have thrown in the towel on the attempt to stymie our Kishanganga project:

Pak’s foreign office and Indus Water Committee differ over water issues

May 31st, 2009 - 2:03 pm ICT by ANI Lahore/Islamabad, May 31 (ANI):

Pakistan’s Indus Water Commissioner Syed Jamaat Ali Shah and the Foreign Office seems to have different opinions over the water issues with India.

Talking to media persons before leaving for New Delhi to hold talks on the Kishanganga Dam project, Shah said there have been no violation of the agreement on Ranbir and Partap Canals on part of India, and that it could continue construction of dams on the rivers.

He added that Pakistan was not going to International Court of Justice on the Kishanganga Dam project, as was reported recently.

However, the Foreign Office spokesman Abdul Basit claimed that there have been many complaints about the violations of treaty by New Delhi. …………...............

LINK

]

arun · Post by **arun** » 02 Jun 2009 17:02

Gerard wrote:link
..................... Indus Waters Treaty Commissioner Jamaat Ali Shah, ......................... 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.

And the situation gets still murkier.

Same day, same newspaper but yet two contradictory stories

:

Tuesday, June 02, 2009

Pakistan takes up water compensation issue with India

NEW DELHI: Pakistan on Monday discussed with India compensation for the 200,000 cusecs it lost after India stopped the water flow to fill its newly built Baglihar Dam on Chenab River in Indian-held Kashmir. Led by Pakistan Indus Water Commissioner Jamaat Ali Shah, ……………………

APP via Daily Times

Vipul · Post by **Vipul** » 04 Jun 2009 20:13

SSridharji,

Has India filed an objection to Pakistan’s claim for extension in its continental shelf from 200 nautical miles to 350 nautical miles to United Nations Commission?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 04 Jun 2009 20:23

Most likely India will follow suit.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 05 Jun 2009 08:30

Vipul wrote:Has India filed an objection to Pakistan’s claim for extension in its continental shelf from 200 nautical miles to 350 nautical miles to United Nations Commission?

Pakistan is wrong on two counts. First, the one week deadline, it was talking about. Pakistan made it appear as though that once it filed its claims on the continental shelf, any other country would be given just a week's time to object and otherwise, its claims would simply be accepted. The deadline was May 13, 2009 for filing by countries before the UNCLOS (UN Convention on the Laws of Seas), not for objections etc. Secondly, countries do not need to object. Each country makes its own claims substantiated by extensive bathymetry and other data. The claims will have to be resolved by the Commission. Even if there is no counter claim from another country, unless a claimant proves its claim unequivocally, its claim will be rejected and the seabed will become common property of the entire humanity. As usual, Pakistan is misleading its own people.

Let me explain in the India-Pakistan context.

The extension of the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) beyond the 200 nautical mile (nm) limit from coastal baseline depends on the ability to prove the sedimentation of the Indus river into the sea. If not claimed before May, 2009, it becomes a common heritage of mankind under the control of the International Sea Bed Authority (ISBA) which is an autonomous body under UNCLOS to manage and implement the agreements. While most of India’s claim is in the Bay of Bengal area where it has already come to maritime boundary agreement with Myanmar, Thailand, and Indonesia and Sri Lanka, it remains to be done with Pakistan in the Arabian Sea.

The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Seas (UNCLOS-III) protocol allows the EEZ to be extended beyond the conventional 200 nm limit into the sea under several conditions. In places like the sedimentary basin of the Indus river, the sediment thickness of the rivers beyond the foot of the continental slope can be used to establish the outer limit of the continental shelf of a claimant. This requires baseline and bathymetry survey data.

There are five maritime zone boundaries out of which four are defined by distance, viz. Coastal Waters (3 nm from baseline), Territorial Sea (12 nm), Contiguous Zone (24 nm), and EEZ (200 nm). The fifth zone, the outer limit of the extended continental shelf, is defined by Article 76 of UNCLOS based on several combinations of geophysical, hydrographic and geomorphological data. One such determinant is the "1% thickness formula" which is the line joining “…the outermost fixed points at each of which the thickness of sedimentary rocks is at least 1% of the shortest distance from such point to the foot of the continental slope.”

The Indus thus becomes important for India as she is a claimant to the Indus basin.A crucial part of the claim is the delineation of the Territorial Sea Baseline (TSB) which is the set of coordinate points that define the line from which the seaward boundaries are to be measured.The TSB, from which maritime zones defined by distance are measured, can consist of either normal baseline, which includes bay closing lines and river closing lines or other parameters. The continuing Pakistani wrangle with regards to Sir Creek has delayed the compilation and validation of the TSB thereby delaying the computation of the zone boundaries. The Sir Creek in the Rann of Kutch is a distributary of the Indus and has deposited sedimentation beyond the EEZ, enabling India to stake a claim as per UNCLOS beyond the EEZ. This is important for India in view of the potential it has for national security, energy prospecting, mining, laying pipelines etc.

Pakistan's delaying tactics with respect to Sir Creek had been to deny India any opportunity in making its claims. In other words, Pakistan was willing to lose its own claim so long as India could not claim anything. Classic Pakistani thinking.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 05 Jun 2009 16:14

‘Rice exports expected to cross $2bn during FY09’: Daily Times

Now why can't we control the Indus River System water throughput, so that during the crucial rice planting season, there is a paucity of water. Less foreign exchange means less military hardware to shoot at Indians.

Vipul · Post by **Vipul** » 05 Jun 2009 19:21

Thanks SSridharji.

arun · Post by **arun** » 05 Jun 2009 20:20

ramana wrote:Most likely India will follow suit.

India has followed suit. She filed her submission with the UN Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf on May 11th, 2009.

The submission is available here:

India’s Submission

India’s Continental Shelf Notification providing information like latitude and longitudes of boundaries claimed etc., is available at the below link. Care the document runs to 600 KB:

India’s Continental Shelf Notification

From the below listed webpage it is possible to access every submissions made to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf. That includes the submissions of Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Myanmar and Indonesia. Further from the individual countries webpage, their Continental Shelf Notifications can be accessed:

All Submissions to UNCLCS

arun · Post by **arun** » 05 Jun 2009 20:37

I thought it was haraam in Pakistan besides being a violation of the IEDology of Pakistan to consider anything prior to the 715 CE coming of Muhammad bin Qasim, as being a part of Pakistani hertage:

Heritage will go down when dam rises

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 06 Jun 2009 10:33

Indo Pak Indus Water Commissioners' talks break down on Kishenganga

Talking to media in Islamabad on his return from India, Shah said the issue of the Kishanganga project came under discussion at the request of India but no progress could be made.

Indian and Pakistani officials had on Friday approved, after strenuous negotiations, the minutes of the annual Permanent Indus Commission meeting.

Though the meeting concluded on Wednesday, there were serious disagreements on the wording, content and notes of discussions.

Pakistan had raised the issue of compensation for the choking of 200,000 cusecs of water in the Chenab by New Delhi in August, 2008, to fill up the newly-constructed Baglihar dam in Indian-held Kashmir.

Pakistan claimed it had suffered bad crops due to minimal water inflows. India has rejected the charge, citing hydrological data.

Shah said Pakistan had the option of approaching the World Bank in case India continues to reject Pakistan’s stance under the Indus Water Treaty.

An official at India’s Ministry of Water Resources said there has never been an agreement on issues like water compensation, Kishanganga and Uri-II. He said "Pakistan has assumed that India has held back water. But we have told them that this assumption is not correct as last year’s flow of water (in the Chenab) was low anyway".

Will try again: Shah said a second round of talks between Pakistan and India on the commissioner level would be held in October in Pakistan.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 06 Jun 2009 11:18

RajeshA wrote:‘Rice exports expected to cross $2bn during FY09’: Daily Times

Now why can't we control the Indus River System water throughput, so that during the crucial rice planting season, there is a paucity of water. Less foreign exchange means less military hardware to shoot at Indians.

Pity.
Uncle obama's military hardware deliveries do not depend on the Indus or pukis rice exports

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 17 Jun 2009 08:04

Manmohan Singh, Zardari agree India-Pakistan potential untapped

The reference to untapped potential holds out the prospect of a potential expansion in areas of bilateral discussion, including those like water which Pakistan is deeply concerned about, provided conducive conditions are created for the resumption of the peace process.

Tilak · Post by **Tilak** » 17 Jun 2009 08:50

arun wrote:
India has followed suit. She filed her submission with the UN Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf on May 11th, 2009.

The submission is available here:

Thanks!

Rahul Mehta · Post by **Rahul Mehta** » 17 Jun 2009 09:27

Can we demand compensation for 10,00,000 Indians who were killed in 1947 and 4 crore who were forced to flee?

And we keep ALL the waters till compensation is paid?

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 18 Jun 2009 14:27

Data from India to help Pakistan limit flood damage

Indus Waters Commissioner informed the meeting that adequate arrangements had been made for receiving from India up-to-the-minute flood flow data of rivers crossing over into Pakistan from the neighbouring country.

The chairman of the commission described in considerable detail the collaborative arrangements made for effective management of floodwaters.

arun · Post by **arun** » 18 Jun 2009 15:14

Per my reading of the Indus Water Treaty, India is only legally obliged to provide daily data aggregated for a calendar month no later than three months after the calendar month to which the data pertains to.

Why then are we providing this needless concession to Pakistan?

Stan_Savljevic · Post by **Stan_Savljevic** » 18 Jun 2009 15:15

SSridhar, can we expand the scope of this thread to include all water-related issues with India's neighbors? There is the Tipaimukh issue thats causing a lot of heat inside BD, then there is the case of India's submission on sea boundary which is being challenged, vainly, by BD etc. We need to keep track of all these, a separate thread is just more mess....