Indus Water Treaty

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 06 Apr 2010 13:02

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 764118.cms

As Pakistan drums up officially-sponsored hysteria on the "water dispute" with India, the government believes Islamabad is giving political overtones to "technical" issues.

On Saturday, Sharat Sabharwal, Indian envoy to Pakistan, described Islamabad's attempts to paint a picture of India as a water thief as "preposterous and completely unwarranted".

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 06 Apr 2010 14:27

Najam Sethi's take

Speakers at a seminar on ‘Realities of Indo-Pak relations’ unanimously agreed that both the nations needed to resolve all outstanding issues between them through dialogue.

Prominent journalist Najam Sethi said the Kashmiris did not want to join Pakistan.He denied that India was stealing Pakistan’s water. Sethi was of the view that how could the Pakistani government solve the water dispute with its neighbours when they could not resolve the same problem within its own provinces.

arun · Post by **arun** » 07 Apr 2010 17:08

The Army of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan has been caught indulging in Water Jihad in the path of Allah with the Punjab province Irrigation Department accusing the Army of “blatant water theft” :

Army, Rangers accused of stealing water

By Ahmad Fraz Khan
Wednesday, 07 Apr, 2010 | 02:32 AM PST |

LAHORE, April 6: Accusing the Army and Rangers of being involved in “blatant water theft”, the Punjab irrigation department has urged the chief minister to “immediately take up the matter at appropriate level”.

In a summary to the provincial chief executive, the department said that water theft by “state agencies greatly undermines its moral authority (to check individual farmers and other influential people involved in the crime)”.

“Water theft has become a serious issue over the past two decades and is seriously affecting canal operations and equitable distribution of water. Theft by influential people at the head-reaches results in water shortage and deprives the poor farmers at the tail of these channels. Against this backdrop, water theft by state agencies robs the department of any moral authority to go after small farmers.” …………

Dawn

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 08 Apr 2010 11:11

arun wrote:The Army of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan has been caught indulging in Water Jihad in the path of Allah with the Punjab province Irrigation Department accusing the Army of “blatant water theft” :
Army, Rangers accused of stealing water

Pakistan also uses the waters of the Indus rivers for another purpose, fortification of its defences along Indian borders. It has built a series of “defence canals” at strategic locations which are flooded at times of wars and tensions to prevent crossing by Indian armour and artillery. For example, the Upper and Lower Chenab canals are specifically for defence purposes. Similaly, Pakistan built the Ichchogil Canal (aka Bambanwala-Ravi-Bedian Link or BRBL) in 1958 to link the Ravi in the north with the Sutlej in the south for the express purpose of the protection of Lahore. In 2002, after India mobilized its forces as part of Operation Parakram subsequent to the Dec. 13, 2001 attack on the Indian Parliament, Pakistan diverted waters to these “defence canals” accentuating the then already severe water shortage of 50% to over 70%

kmkraoind · Post by **kmkraoind** » 08 Apr 2010 12:03

SSridhar wrote:Pakistan also uses the waters of the Indus rivers for another purpose, fortification of its defences along Indian borders. It has built a series of “defence canals” at strategic locations which are flooded at times of wars and tensions to prevent crossing by Indian armour and artillery. For example, the Upper and Lower Chenab canals are specifically for defence purposes. Similaly, Pakistan built the Ichchogil Canal (aka Bambanwala-Ravi-Bedian Link or BRBL) in 1958 to link the Ravi in the north with the Sutlej in the south for the express purpose of the protection of Lahore. In 2002, after India mobilized its forces as part of Operation Parakram subsequent to the Dec. 13, 2001 attack on the Indian Parliament, Pakistan diverted waters to these “defence canals” accentuating the then already severe water shortage of 50% to over 70%

Is it a mere coincidence or both events are related to the sudden stealing/diverting waters by PA and its biggest war games?

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 08 Apr 2010 12:15

kmkraoind wrote:
Is it a mere coincidence or both events are related to the sudden stealing/diverting waters by PA and its biggest war games?

Right now Operation Brasstacks II is going on and PA is using defensive mechanism. Their tolerance to any sign of conflict is very low. This is a country bankrupt and with no friends and worried about survival.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 08 Apr 2010 12:58

On the subject of pakistan using canals as a defence mechanism against India.

On satellite images, two types of defensive formations are visible in the immediate vicinity of the IB.
1. Triangular walls of mud, much like the ones in Iraq which the allied forces crossed. These are likely mined too.

2. Canals located parallel to the IB.

No wonder the IA corps have a good supply of mine clearing tank attachments and bridge laying equipment.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 08 Apr 2010 15:44

Acharya wrote:
kmkraoind wrote:
Is it a mere coincidence or both events are related to the sudden stealing/diverting waters by PA and its biggest war games?
Right now Operation Brasstacks II is going on and PA is using defensive mechanism. Their tolerance to any sign of conflict is very low. This is a country bankrupt and with no friends and worried about survival.

Good sir, how did you fathom that 'Brasstacks II' is in progress? Are you aware of the scale and size of these exercises by IA and what was the scale of operations under Brasstacks? And PA exercise is a defensive mechanism? And how is 'stealing' of water same as diverting water for BRBL/Icchogil Canals?

I will await your reply and hope you'll honor this request.

Vikas · Post by **Vikas** » 08 Apr 2010 18:03

It is all becoming too funny now.
Pakistanis in their infinite wisdom decide to pull a issue out of their musharaff for whatever tactical reasons. The result..

a) Another source of tension between Pakis and India which can now never be resoled to the satisfaction of Pakistan
b) Jingos in India (& BRF) going bonkers everytime GoI announces construction of even a small wall along the rivers covered by IWT
assuming it to be some great Chanikian move while poor GoI has been working on these dams/walls/creeks etc. for ages
c) Pakis get another reason for Gas and aciditiy since now every problem in Pakistan can be tied to "Water stealing" by big eastern neighbor.
d) Any move on IWT rivers is now linked to strategy
e) The Punjabi Paki is making most of the noise because if this is true then they are really screwed and the Bania who they have been making fun all their life has finally started to act like Chaanaakia (sic.)
f) Fault lines between Pakis and Kashmiri Muslim would accentuate as only one of the parties can be beneficiary of power generation and so called water stealing
g) GoI realises that if they help Afghan Govt to build dams on River Kabul or if they even talk about it, Pakistanis will get all the twist in the knickers

Last Pakis know that if India actually decides to steal the IWT water, there are two things they can do about it,
Love it or do nothing.

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 08 Apr 2010 19:34

kmkraoind wrote:Is it a mere coincidence or both events are related to the sudden stealing/diverting waters by PA and its biggest war games?

Sir, it would have helped to check the link about water theft before jumping to above question. Allow me to post excerpt from the link and we'll see that there is no link between war games and this issue:

Citing specific cases, the summary says the army (Corps IV) has a firing range near tail of Abbasia Link Canal (Head Qasimwala in Bahawalpur region). The army has leased out land to private people, called army contractors.

The contractors have laid illegal pipes and they also lift water through pumps. The Rangers have established two unauthorised outlets and the army another three on the same canal.

The army has also installed 15 pipes on Hakra Right Channel. Both agencies (army and Rangers) are thus jointly stealing 356 cusecs of water in Bahawalpur Zone alone.

Similarly, the army and its tenants are repeatedly tampering with 16 outlets on 4L distributary in Okara district. This is in addition to “five unauthorised outlets” on the same distributary. These 21 outlets have made it impossible for the department to ensure equitable distribution of water in the local system.

In Sheikhupura division, the army formations laid 44 pipes on nine different channels of the Upper Chenab Canal (Lahore Zone) during Kharif 2009 and Rabi 2009-10, the summary says.

surinder · Post by **surinder** » 08 Apr 2010 20:58

SSridhar wrote:In 2002, after India mobilized its forces as part of Operation Parakram subsequent to the Dec. 13, 2001 attack on the Indian Parliament, Pakistan diverted waters to these “defence canals” accentuating the then already severe water shortage of 50% to over 70%

Which means that India can mount aggressive moves during certain times of the year and create havoc with their crops and water issues. A water war in reverse, i suppose---making the enemy waster water.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 08 Apr 2010 22:22

Pukes might have to revisit their DCB strategy if Desi comes to manage to control the flow. Indian should offer Sindh direct access to water via canal from Indian side.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 09 Apr 2010 07:22

http://thenews.jang.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=233358
Going 'down the drain'
(Paki trying to back down as introspection is not their trait)

What is interesting is that, other than the 10 days India took the waters of the Chenab to fill the reservoir for the Baglihar Dam, Pakistan's Permanent Commissioner of Indus Waters has never said that India has consumed the waters of the western rivers in a manner that violates the Indus Water Treaty. Also, historical data of flows of the western rivers will show anyone that, other than seasonal and other naturally occurring variations, the Indus Water Treaty and India's exercise of rights under it have not affected the amount of water Pakistan gets.
At the same time, we are also told that Pakistan's water resources are falling fast. This is true (we've gone from 5,000 cubic feet of water per person per year to less than 1,500, and it is expected that we will fall to "water-scarce" levels in the near future), but it has to be seen in context. The water resource is not falling because of the Indus Water Treaty. It's falling because of our phenomenal population growth. If you double the people of Pakistan, you're halving the per-capita water resource. So the water scarcity issue has more to do with the way we breed than with India or the Indus Water Treaty. The real story of ? How come no one is asking questions about the manner in which water is priced in Pakistan?
How come no one is asking questions of the many tens of thousands of mosques where drinking water is used, religiously and untrammelled, five times a day for the purposes of wuzu (ablution)? How come there are no water-use legislations? The pre-eminent political issue of water seems to be more about our own habits and our abuse and disregard of an existential and rapidly depleting resource. Yesterday, a newspaper reported that the irrigation department of the Government of Punjab has accused the Rangers and the army of theft of water from the canals in the Bahawlapur and Lahore Zones. How come no one is asking questions and how come, given these circumstances, there are people openly accusing India of being responsible for our water-related issues?

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 09 Apr 2010 07:27

Wuzu? No problem-recycle the water.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 09 Apr 2010 18:03

Folks, let's be clear here about the PA's water stealing operations. They steal water for two reasons. One, to water the official PA farms that are huge in Okara area.About 6 or 7 years back, there was a huge stand-off between the haris employed in Okara military farms and the PA. The second type of water stealing is what I have posted here from this week's TFT. The 'land entitlement' that PA officers are privileged to enjoy as a just reward for their glorious service in the Cause of ALlah, gets increasingly allocated from non-fertile, non canal-irrigated lands, for which watering needs to be arranged. A grateful PA undertakes to steal the water of genuine farmers and supply the retired PA officers. While vested interests may see something wrong here, true 'momin' cannot be ungrateful to the 'Army of Islam', can they ?

And, of course, the third type of association between the PA and the Indus system of rivers is the 'Defence Canals'. No momin can dare question these canals as after all they are used to protect the faithful from the infidels.

chaanakya · Post by **chaanakya** » 09 Apr 2010 19:51

Looks like Pakistan's water problem is finally pinned down on their prolific breeding. Their own lawyer speaks about it

At the same time, we are also told that Pakistan's water resources are falling fast. This is true (we've gone from 5,000 cubic feet of water per person per year to less than 1,500, and it is expected that we will fall to "water-scarce" levels in the near future), but it has to be seen in context. The water resource is not falling because of the Indus Water Treaty. It's falling because of our phenomenal population growth. If you double the people of Pakistan, you're halving the per-capita water resource. So the water scarcity issue has more to do with the way we breed than with India or the Indus Water Treaty.

The pre-eminent political issue of water seems to be more about our own habits and our abuse and disregard of an existential and rapidly depleting resource. Yesterday, a newspaper reported that the irrigation department of the Government of Punjab has accused the Rangers and the army of theft of water from the canals in the Bahawlapur and Lahore Zones. How come no one is asking questions and how come, given these circumstances, there are people openly accusing India of being responsible for our water-related issues?

Ahmad Rafay Alam
The writer is an advocate of the high court and a member of the adjunct faculty at LUMS. He has an interest in urban planning

Although it is not kosher, but truth certainly hurts when one of their own speaks up.

derkonig · Post by **derkonig** » 09 Apr 2010 20:48

^^^
The writer is also an LMU faculty AoA....

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 12 Apr 2010 07:25

Next Indo-Pak War will be over Indus waters - Prof. Hafeez Saeed

Lashker-e-Taiba founder Hafiz Muhammad Saeed claimed the next war between India and Pakistan could be fought over water if India does not stop what he described as "water terrorism".

Saeed, who currently heads the Jamaat-ud-Dawah, made the remarks while addressing a gathering at a mosque in Chowburji area of Lahore.

He claimed India was diverting the flow of rivers in Jammu and Kashmir by building dams and tunnels in a bid to turn Pakistan into a desert and to "spoil the regional situation".

Saeed, who remained out of the public eye for over a year following the 2008 Mumbai attacks carried out by the LeT, called on the people of Pakistan to stand united against India and to oppose the construction of dams that allegedly rob the country of its share of river waters.

The 180 million people of Pakistan should also take revenge against India for its role in the separation of East Pakistan in 1971, he said. Saeed further claimed that India and the US were facing "defeat" in Jammu and Kashmir and Afghanistan.

The US is searching for a "safe exit" from Afghanistan and India is worried about what would happen to it after the US withdrawal from the region, he said.

Airavat · Post by **Airavat** » 13 Apr 2010 06:42

India is a cobra, Pakistan is a rat

Kishanganga has rendered River Neelam to a trickle and all but obscured Neelam Hydel Project. India has been left free to decide when it fills its reservoirs and releases water into the rivers allocated to Pakistan. Pathetically, Pakistan’s entire water and energy interests were left in the hands of one commissioner, while the financial and technical experts remained busy in churning out expensive feasibility studies.

All along the international border, India dumps untreated waste and flood waters into Pakistan. Three conspicuous points are Hudiara, Sulemanki and Haroonabad. Hudiara drain runs through the entire length of Lahore and debouches into the Ravi near Mehmoodbooti causing irreparable environmental damage. Water aquifers of Central Punjab are dying being recharged with contaminated waste water.

The saddest part of this tragedy is that despite being confronted by a hyperactive neighbour, Pakistan has shown fragility to set its own house in order. It is like a rat stunned by a cobra. Kalabagh, that hold the key to Pakistan’s future especially with the limited residual life of Tarbela has become too politicised to construct.

arun · Post by **arun** » 14 Apr 2010 21:22

Theo_Fidel wrote:http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/IOTD/v ... src=imgrss

The Hunza landslide lake enlarges.

The size of the lake & landslide is staggering.

The current status of the Attabad landslide in Hunza is available here:

Hunza landslide monitoring

Theo_Fidel · Post by **Theo_Fidel** » 15 Apr 2010 02:54

thanx arun.

Picture of dam w/ Spillway.

The other end.

If the lake rises another 100 feet the end of the lake will go past this barrier and increase another 7-8 kilometers.

Quick calculation on the volume shows ~ 5 TMC of water.

Imagine this had happened on the Indus. No water for a year or several years.

There is evidence for 900 feet deep lakes formed in the recent past on the Indus.

surinder · Post by **surinder** » 15 Apr 2010 03:22

What a beautiful area that we lost!!!

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 15 Apr 2010 03:35

surinder wrote:What a beautiful area that we lost!!!

Wonder how fast can they repair the link? Can the same be repeated by IA in time of war or onlee mother nature is capable of punishing the evil ones.

muraliravi · Post by **muraliravi** » 15 Apr 2010 03:36

surinder wrote:What a beautiful area that we lost!!!

POK is extremely scenic, lets see if we ever get it back, damn it this tiny little devil next to us, keeps talking of kashmir and we never even utter about POK even to hedge, just official maps show POK as part of India. A mega campaign through media and Internet should be launched just so that people know that we dont control POK and we should start asking for it.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 15 Apr 2010 05:39

If my observation is correct, GOI and the other power players in India DO NOT EVEN WANT to claim POK. It is one thing to lack the capability and another thing to lack the will.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 15 Apr 2010 05:44

RamaY wrote:If my observation is correct, GOI and the other power players in India DO NOT EVEN WANT to claim POK. It is one thing to lack the capability and another thing to lack the will.

Per Chacha ji, the denizens there were already bitten by the rabid dogs of Lahore and not loyal to Sheikh Abdula so he favoured cease fire before IA recover all the lost territory to Paki Jihadis. If we ever recover the land , let there be not a single Mirpuri MC breathing the cool air of J&K.

surinder · Post by **surinder** » 15 Apr 2010 19:50

Land is always there, it is not going to fly off. We can take it, if we are willing to pay the price. If we can win it once, we can surely win it again.

But one thing New Delhi must do is show stamina, protest every construction and every move to show this land belongs to us. Such protests are a necessary part of soverignety claims. TSP does it on Kashmir, PRC does it on Indian lands it claims. What is puzzling is that New Delhi is quite of lecture-bazzi & talk & gup-shup, but shuts the F up when it comes to areas it has lost.

Nihat · Post by **Nihat** » 15 Apr 2010 22:17

Ofcourse New Delhi protests every project in POK , wether it makes a difference or not is another thing altogether

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 16 Apr 2010 19:01

Found on a Paki forum, reproducing in full.

War or peace on the Indus?

Saturday, April 03, 2010

John Briscoe

Anyone foolish enough to write on war or peace in the Indus needs to first banish a set of immediate suspicions. I am neither Indian nor Pakistani. I am a South African who has worked on water issues in the subcontinent for 35 years and who has lived in Bangladesh (in the 1970s) and Delhi (in the 2000s). In 2006 I published, with fine Indian colleagues, an Oxford University Press book titled India’s Water Economy: Facing a Turbulent Future and, with fine Pakistani colleagues, one titled Pakistan’s Water Economy: Running Dry. I was the Senior Water Advisor for the World Bank who dealt with the appointment of the Neutral Expert on the Baglihar case. My last assignment at the World Bank (relevant, as described later) was as Country Director for Brazil. I am now a mere university professor, and speak in the name of no one but myself.

I have deep affection for the people of both India and Pakistan, and am dismayed by what I see as a looming train wreck on the Indus, with disastrous consequences for both countries. I will outline why there is no objective conflict of interests between the countries over the waters of the Indus Basin, make some observations of the need for a change in public discourse, and suggest how the drivers of the train can put on the brakes before it is too late.

Is there an inherent conflict between India and Pakistan?

The simple answer is no. The Indus Waters Treaty allocates the water of the three western rivers to Pakistan, but allows India to tap the considerable hydropower potential of the Chenab and Jhelum before the rivers enter Pakistan.

The qualification is that this use of hydropower is not to affect either the quantity of water reaching Pakistan or to interfere with the natural timing of those flows. Since hydropower does not consume water, the only issue is timing. And timing is a very big issue, because agriculture in the Pakistani plains depends not only on how much water comes, but that it comes in critical periods during the planting season.

The reality is that India could tap virtually all of the available power without negatively affecting the timing of flows to which Pakistan is entitled.

Is the Indus Treaty a stable basis for cooperation?

If Pakistan and India had normal, trustful relations, there would be a mutually-verified monitoring process which would assure that there is no change in the flows going into Pakistan. (In an even more ideal world, India could increase low-flows during the critical planting season, with significant benefit to Pakistani farmers and with very small impacts on power generation in India.) Because the relationship was not normal when the treaty was negotiated, Pakistan would agree only if limitations on India’s capacity to manipulate the timing of flows was hardwired into the treaty. This was done by limiting the amount of “live storage” (the storage that matters for changing the timing of flows) in each and every hydropower dam that India would construct on the two rivers.

While this made sense given knowledge in 1960, over time it became clear that this restriction gave rise to a major problem. The physical restrictions meant that gates for flushing silt out of the dams could not be built, thus ensuring that any dam in India would rapidly fill with the silt pouring off the young Himalayas.

This was a critical issue at stake in the Baglihar case. Pakistan (reasonably) said that the gates being installed were in violation of the specifications of the treaty. India (equally reasonably) argued that it would be wrong to build a dam knowing it would soon fill with silt.

The finding of the Neutral Expert was essentially a reinterpretation of the Treaty, saying that the physical limitations no longer made sense. While the finding was reasonable in the case of Baglihar, it left Pakistan without the mechanism – limited live storage – which was its only (albeit weak) protection against upstream manipulation of flows in India. This vulnerability was driven home when India chose to fill Baglihar exactly at the time when it would impose maximum harm on farmers in downstream Pakistan.

If Baglihar was the only dam being built by India on the Chenab and Jhelum, this would be a limited problem. But following Baglihar is a veritable caravan of Indian projects – Kishanganga, Sawalkot, Pakuldul, Bursar, Dal Huste, Gyspa… The cumulative live storage will be large, giving India an unquestioned capacity to have major impact on the timing of flows into Pakistan. (Using Baglihar as a reference, simple back-of-the- envelope calculations, suggest that once it has constructed all of the planned hydropower plants on the Chenab, India will have an ability to effect major damage on Pakistan. First, there is the one-time effect of filling the new dams. If done during the wet season this would have little effect on Pakistan. But if done during the critical low-flow period, there would be a large one-time effect (as was the case when India filled Baglihar). Second, there is the permanent threat which would be a consequence of substantial cumulative live storage which could store about one month’s worth of low-season flow on the Chenab. If, God forbid, India so chose, it could use this cumulative live storage to impose major reductions on water availability in Pakistan during the critical planting season.

Views on “the water problem” from both sides of the border and the role of the press.

Living in Delhi and working in both India and Pakistan, I was struck by a paradox. One country was a vigorous democracy, the other a military regime. But whereas an important part of the Pakistani press regularly reported India’s views on the water issue in an objective way, the Indian press never did the same. I never saw a report which gave Indian readers a factual description of the enormous vulnerability of Pakistan, of the way in which India had socked it to Pakistan when filling Baglihar. How could this be, I asked? Because, a journalist colleague in Delhi told me, “when it comes to Kashmir – and the Indus Treaty is considered an integral part of Kashmir — the ministry of external affairs instructs newspapers on what they can and cannot say, and often tells them explicitly what it is they are to say.”

This apparently remains the case. In the context of the recent talks between India and Pakistan I read, in Boston, the electronic reports on the disagreement about “the water issue” in The Times of India, The Hindustan Times, The Hindu, The Indian Express and The Economic Times. (1)

Taken together, these reports make astounding reading. Not only was the message the same in each case (“no real issue, just Pakistani shenanigans” ), but the arguments were the same, the numbers were the same and the phrases were the same. And in all cases the source was “analysts” and “experts” — in not one case was the reader informed that this was reporting an official position of the Government of India.

Equally depressing is my repeated experience – most recently at a major international meeting of strategic security institutions in Delhi – that even the most liberal and enlightened of Indian analysts (many of whom are friends who I greatly respect) seem constitutionally incapable of seeing the great vulnerability and legitimate concern of Pakistan (which is obvious and objective to an outsider).

A way forward

This is a very uneven playing field. The regional hegemon is the upper riparian and has all the cards in its hands. This asymmetry means that it is India that is driving the train, and that change must start in India. In my view, four things need to be done. First, there must be some courageous and open-minded Indians – in government or out – who will stand up and explain to the public why this is not just an issue for Pakistan, but why it is an existential issue for Pakistan.

Second, there must be leadership from the Government of India. Here I am struck by the stark difference between the behaviour of India and that of its fellow BRIC – Brazil, the regional hegemon in Latin America.

Brazil and Paraguay have a binding agreement on their rights and responsibilities on the massive Itaipu Binacional Hydropower Project. The proceeds, which are of enormous importance to small Paraguay, played a politicised, polemical anti-Brazilian part in the recent presidential election in Paraguay. Similarly, Brazil’s and Bolivia’s binding agreement on gas also became part of an anti-Brazil presidential campaign theme.

The public and press in Brazil bayed for blood and insisted that Bolivia and Paraguay be made to pay. So what did President Luis Inacio Lula da Silva do? “Look,” he said to his irate countrymen, “these are poor countries, and these are huge issues for them. They are our brothers. Yes, we are in our legal rights to be harsh with them, but we are going to show understanding and generosity, and so I am unilaterally doubling (in the case of Paraguay) and tripling (in the case of Bolivia) the payments we make to them. Brazil is a big country and a relatively rich one, so this will do a lot for them and won’t harm us much.” India could, and should, in my view, similarly make the effort to see it from its neighbour’s point of view, and should show the generosity of spirit which is an integral part of being a truly great power and good neighbour.

Third, this should translate into an invitation to Pakistan to explore ways in which the principles of the Indus Waters Treaty could be respected, while providing a win for Pakistan (assurance on their flows) and a win for India (reducing the chronic legal uncertainty which vexes every Indian project on the Chenab or Jhelum). With good will there are multiple ways in which the treaty could be maintained but reinterpreted so that both countries could win.

Fourth, discussions on the Indus waters should be delinked from both historic grievances and from the other Kashmir-related issues. Again, it is a sign of statesmanship, not weakness, to acknowledge the past and then move beyond it. This is personal for me, as someone of Irish origin. Conor Cruise O’Brien once remarked, “Santayana said that those who did not learn their history would be condemned to repeat it; in the case of Ireland we have learned our history so well that we are condemned to repeat it, again and again.”

And finally, as a South African I am acutely aware that Nelson Mandela, after 27 years in prison, chose not to settle scores but to look forward and construct a better future, for all the people of his country and mine. Who will be the Indian Mandela who will do this – for the benefit of Pakistanis and Indians – on the Indus?

The writer is the Gordon McKay Professor of Environmental Engineering, Harvard University. Email: jbriscoe@seas. harvard.edu

(1)Respectively,

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... Pakistans- diversionary- tactic-/articles how/5609099. cms,

http://beta. thehindu.com/news/ national/ article112388. ece,

http://www.hindustantimes.com/ News-Feed/ india/River- waters-The-next-testing- ground/Article1- 512190.aspx,

http://www.indianex press.com/ news/Pak-heats-up-water-sharing/ 583733,

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics/ nation/Pak-takes-water-route-to-attack-India/ articleshow/5665516.cms

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 16 Apr 2010 19:32

This is the letter I wrote:

Dear Professor Briscoe:

Regarding your recent article - War or Peace on the Indus? - a copy of which was published on the Pakistan Teahouse blog:
http://pakteahouse.wordpress.com/2010/0 ... the-indus/

I have the following comment (and this is based on the very first comment on that blog)

You wrote:

"This vulnerability was driven home when India chose to fill Baglihar exactly at the time when it would impose maximum harm on farmers in downstream Pakistan."

Best I can find, India filled Baglihar in August 2008.
E.g., The Dawn reports August 23, 2008, about the filling of the Baglihar.
http://www.dawn.com/2008/08/23/top15.htm

This is squarely in the middle of the monsoon season, which runs from June to September (e.g., as per Wiki)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monsoon#Southwest_Monsoon

As per the Hindu, the rains in Indian Punjab were mostly normal at that time.
http://www.thehindu.com/2008/08/17/stor ... 621000.htm

Quote:
In Uttar Pradesh, 34 out of the 64 districts have recorded excess rainfall, 20 normal and five deficient. In Punjab, 10 out of the 16 districts have recorded excess rainfall, four normal and two deficient.

---
The Pakistani growing seasons are:
http://sappk.wordpress.com/2010/03/08/a ... solutions/

Crop | Sowing season | Harvesting season
Kharif | April – June | Oct – Dec
Rabi | Oct – Dec | April – May

----
I.e., India filled Baglihar in the middle of the monsoon.

Also in 2008, the monsoon rains were quite heavy in Pakistan.

http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Natura ... p?id=20333
Quote:

Unusually intense monsoon rains pounded Pakistan in late July and early August 2008.

-----

Therefore, you may be a very well-intentioned South African, but you have essentially shot your credibility with any concerned Indians - unless you can explain exactly what you meant by

""This vulnerability was driven home when India chose to fill Baglihar exactly at the time when it would impose maximum harm on farmers in downstream Pakistan."

-----

If you want to do any good for India and Pakistan whose people you claim to love, you had better stick strictly to the truth.

Sincerely,
-Arun Gupta

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 16 Apr 2010 19:46

India was filling Baglihar late August 2008 (Dawn article cited above complaining about India filling the Baglihar was August 23, 2008).

Prof. John Briscoe of Harvard claims India filled Baglihar at the time when Pakistan was most vulnerable.

Relief Web
http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/rwb.nsf/db9 ... enDocument

reports floods in Pakistan in early August 2008. The above report is from August 5:

Monsoon rains across Pakistan have caused hill torrents and river bank overflows, leading to flood situations in various parts of the country. The Pakistan Meteorological Department has forecasted more rains over the next few days. The Indus river at Tarbela and Guddu, Chenab river at Khanki and Qadirabad, Ravi river at Balloki and Kabul river at Nowshera are at a low flood level, while all other major rivers are flowing below the low flood level.

So much for the credibility of Professors from Harvard! What better time to fill a dam when the downstream area is suffering from floods?

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 16 Apr 2010 20:28

fantastic A_G. Absolutely fantastic. Folks, this is the sort of letter to be written to chaps like Briscoe. Factual, blunt, non-adversarial, but not unnecessarily polite. Awesome.

surinder · Post by **surinder** » 16 Apr 2010 20:43

Why should we be kow towing to so called experts. Why does desh need to prove its good intentions all the time. We filled the dam, go do whatever you want to do. If that makes us bad, so be it. Our continous desire to prove we are right, or moral, ethical, peaceful is disastrous. We need to convince only ourselves of our good intentions. Rest is all slavery.

Anujan · Post by **Anujan** » 16 Apr 2010 20:51

A_G good effort. You could have also pointed out to the "expert" that IWT (Annexure E, article 18) says

India may carry out the filling as follows :
(a) if the site is on The Indus, between 1st July and 20th August ;
(b) if the site is on The Jhelum, between 21st June and 20th August ; and
(c) if the site is on The Chenab, between 21st June and 31st August at such rate as not to reduce, on account of this filling, the flow in the Chenab Main above Merala to less than 55,000 cusecs.

So the IWT itself stipulates when we can fill water for power generation (India has ~60 days per year and India has no flexibility in adjusting the dates during when India can fill up the dam) and he is talking out of his musharraf if he claims that India did it to cause maximum inconvenience. Maybe as a starting exercise our "expert" should read the IWT? The article by SSridhar ji could be a good start....

muraliravi · Post by **muraliravi** » 16 Apr 2010 20:51

surinder wrote:Why should we be kow towing to so called experts. Why does desh need to prove its good intentions all the time. We filled the dam, go do whatever you want to do. If that makes us bad, so be it. Our continous desire to prove we are right, or moral, ethical, peaceful is disastrous. We need to convince only ourselves of our good intentions. Rest is all slavery.

Spot on, I say Spot on. This is the the attitude we need to cultivate to defend ourselves against these satans next door and worldwide. Why do we need to give a damn to these fools? We should just say that IWT is already too generous towards the lower ripparian when all the waters are from here.

Man here again, I wish the GOI of the day would take a more aggressive tone on POK (not just protesting construction there), we should claim it in full and only in territorial context. That is the best hedge we can have to shut these porkis up

surinder · Post by **surinder** » 16 Apr 2010 21:41

By arguing with these so-called experts we implicitly acknowledge that this is a domain they have authority over. We need to deny them this intrusion, whether we are right or wrong is besides the point. We are not willing to be judged by them.

IWT is not for eternity. It stands as long as India wants it to stand.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 16 Apr 2010 22:38

The IWT calls for a neutral arbitrator appointed by the World Bank (?) to settle disputes over river waters that come up between India and Pakistan.

That arbitrator one day might be a student of this professor, or could be this professor.

Saying we don't have to engage foreign experts or we don't care what they think is false bravado.

Brad Goodman · Post by **Brad Goodman** » 16 Apr 2010 22:41

Just reponding to John Briscoe's article posted by a_gupta. He gived example of Brazil's attitude towards its neighbours and expects India to show same generosity towards TSP. What the author needs to understand is TSP is sending thousands of terrorist into India since 80's how can you ever show any magnanimity towards a neighbour who is take it as cowardice and immediately launch another Kargil to test its assumptions.

Brad Goodman · Post by **Brad Goodman** » 16 Apr 2010 22:46

My honest feeling over the years about how to end this TSP sponsored jihad in India is that India needs to make sure that pakis are made to realize the cost they have to pay for their actions. Till now average abdul has not had to pay much price for this jihad so he is gleefully happy to see India suffer. One way to make them pay is by really altering the flow of the water as they fear so that their agriculture takes a hit. Second is to pay them with their own coin again their own fear of support to TTP. If we use the famous sholay dialog "tum agar ek maroge to hum char marenge" is the way. We need to build many more upstream dams to give them fright of their lives.

Vikas · Post by **Vikas** » 16 Apr 2010 23:01

I think Pakis get the fact that IWT stands as long as India wishes it to stand and someday once the 1947 generation passes away, the cup of goodwill for Pakistan will also run dry. Thats the whole reason of trying to grab Kashmir from India by hook or crook.