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.
ajit_tr
BRFite
Posts: 412
Joined: 16 May 2010 21:28

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by ajit_tr »

Ebb and flow
''A bilateral resolution is the best way.''

It is rare to see India and Pakistan amicably resolving their disputes, but the three-day meeting of the Permanent Indus Water Commission last week stood out for its success in addressing some contentious issues about the the flow of water from India to Pakistan.

The complaints were from Pakistan and most of them were resolved to the satisfaction of both sides. The disputes which were resolved related to India’s Baglihar dam and the Uri-II and Chutak projects. Pakistan had lost its case over Baglihar in the World Bank, which is the adjudicating authority under the Indus Water Treaty of 1960, when the bank’s neutral authority upheld the Indian position. After that no substantial issue of dispute remained. The Indian designs of Uri-II and Chutak projects were accepted by Pakistan after explanations from the Indian side. What remained unresolved on the agenda was the difference over the design of the Nomoo Bazgo project on the Indus in Leh. If the trend of talks is an indication, it can be resolved at the meeting to be held later this month or next month.
arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by arun »

Inexplicable that against the backdrop of a fiscal year gone by (2009-2010) marked by a substantial amount of raving and ranting by the Islamic Republic of Pakistan that they have suffered a shortage of water as India is depriving them of the same, there is very little the Islamic Republic proposes to do in the immediate future to help itself and mitigate the impact of reduced water availability :eek: .

Indeed far from increasing funding for resolving water related issues, the Islamic Republic of Pakistan is actually cutting back on future funding :roll: :

Allocation for water sector down by 39.85%

Meanwhile there is no mention that funds have been allocated in the 2010-2011 budget for the Neelum-Jhelum project the supposed existence of which numbers among one of the claims made by the Islamic Republic of Pakistan to show prior Pakistani use of waters and thus scuttle India’s Kishanganga Project.
Theo_Fidel

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by Theo_Fidel »

arun,

good observation.

Also keep in mind that a special 10% tariff on electricity was levied for this project which is also probably being 'diverted'.

Apparently intentions are all you need in the wonderful republic.
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25384
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Pollution by India

Post by SSridhar »

The issue now is pollution by India of the Pakistani rivers
ndia and Pakistan are usually bickering over the quantity of water received from Kashmir rivers, however they will soon have to lock horns on the issue of quality of this water as well, as a team of experts has found proof that a major lake that supplies water to the River Jehlum is becoming more and more contaminated.

A survey carried out by a non-government organisation (NGO) in Indian-held Kashmir’s (IHK) Wullar Lake has found large quantities of deadly methane gas in the reservoir.

Experts from the Kashmir Environmental Protection Coordination Organisation (KEPCO) also found high levels of chemicals in the River Jehlum due to the flow of millions of tonnes of solid waste, garbage and sewage into the river.

Wullar Lake, which was once Asia’s largest fresh water reservoir, is situated between Sopore and Bandipura, and is considered the “water-bank” for the Pakistani Punjab, as it supplies water to the River Jehlum.

KEPCO Spokesman Dr Taha Mubashir told reporters in Srinagar that his team had found gas bubbles catching fire as they rose from the lake in many places.

Earlier, local fishermen had informed the NGO about the gas bubbling up from the lake. “In the past, the bubbles would emanate from just one spot, however lately they have been seen in many places,” said Mubashir.

While some experts believe the gas is produced by normal biological processes, others point out that it is a sign of rising contamination levels. They have accused authorities of ignoring the lake, which is a vital source of water supply for the Mangla Dam.

A few years ago, a similar report prepared by the International Water Management Institute (IWMI) had highlighted sedimentation, sewage disposal and excessive willow plantation in the area. The report warned that due to these activities, the lake’s ecosystem had entered a dangerous phase, as it stimulated the growth of aquatic plants that reduced oxygen levels in the water.

Lake shrinking: Though the Wetland Directory published by the Indian government puts the lake area at 189 square kilometres, the Survey of India maps show its area at no more than 58.7 square kilometres. The state revenue records, however put the lake’s area at 130 square kilometres, of which around 60 square kilometres is under agricultural use. Experts, however, believe the lake has shrunk from the original area of 200 square kilometres to barely 24 square kilometres now.

Moreover, a scientific study on the River Jehlum has found its waters turning more and more acidic. According to the study, there is gradual increase of sodium and potassium, sulphates, nitrates, nitrogen containing substances, and iron in water as it moves downstream, but at the same time massive depletion of essential chlorides.

Experts maintain this is a result of the millions of tonnes of solid waste, municipal garbage, sewage from human settlements that flows into the river daily.

A research scholar at Department of Environmental Sciences at University of Kashmir has found that 525 to 575 cubic metres of solid waste from Srinagar is drained into the river.

While, a survey conducted by the Jammu and Kashmir State Pollution Control Board (JKPCB) had earlier also found high levels of chemical oxygen demand in the River Jehlum.
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25384
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by SSridhar »

Hunza Lake erosion increases: July will be dangerous
Erosion was increasing in the Attabad lake's spillway. Secretary Interior Gilgit-Baltistan Usman Younis ruled out the option of widening the spillway through a small explosion.

Meanwhile, relief service through helicopters was suspended in Hunza and nearby areas due to weather conditions.

Around 4,300 cusecs of water was going out through the spillway while 200 cusecs was gushing out from the base of the lake. The depth of river was now 379 feet and its total length stood at 23 kilometres.

The month of July was predicted to be more dangerous with regard to water inflows in the region.
durvasa
BRFite
Posts: 171
Joined: 11 Dec 2000 12:31

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by durvasa »

Lucky Pakis,

We Yindoos take 10 years, 5000 people and $2+ bn to build a puny SDRE Baghliar dam; and Allah gives Pakis a much bigger dam free of cost ready in just 2 hours of strategically occuring landslides. And no Yindoo or yUN judge can take it away.

Now to generate Terawatts of free electricity, all Pakis have to do is to stick 2 Orient PMPO fans under water. Like this
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25384
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by SSridhar »

durvasa wrote:Now to generate Terawatts of free electricity, all Pakis have to do is to stick 2 Orient PMPO fans under water. Like this
Wow! That surely is a TFTA fan-blade worthy of being used in martial Pakistan. Looks like the scimitar of their glorious predecessors like Abdali, Ghori Muhammad, Taimur et al.
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: Pollution by India

Post by chaanakya »

SSridhar wrote:The issue now is pollution by India of the Pakistani rivers
Moreover, a scientific study on the River Jehlum has found its waters turning more and more acidic. According to the study, there is gradual increase of sodium and potassium, sulphates, nitrates, nitrogen containing substances, and iron in water as it moves downstream, but at the same time massive depletion of essential chlorides.

Experts maintain this is a result of the millions of tonnes of solid waste, municipal garbage, sewage from human settlements ( how humiliating to drink shit flowing from srinagar)that flows into the river daily.

A research scholar at Department of Environmental Sciences at University of Kashmir has found that 525 to 575 cubic metres of solid waste from Srinagar is drained into the river.

While, a survey conducted by the Jammu and Kashmir State Pollution Control Board (JKPCB) had earlier also found high levels of chemical oxygen demand in the River Jehlum.
Well , we don't need to fight Pk, J&K will be enough for PK. or shall we say Srinagar? :twisted:
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34966
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Pollution by India

Post by chetak »

SSridhar wrote:The issue now is pollution by India of the Pakistani rivers
ndia and Pakistan are usually bickering over the quantity of water received from Kashmir rivers, however they will soon have to lock horns on the issue of quality of this water as well, as a team of experts has found proof that a major lake that supplies water to the River Jehlum is becoming more and more contaminated.

A survey carried out by a non-government organisation (NGO) in Indian-held Kashmir’s (IHK) Wullar Lake has found large quantities of deadly methane gas in the reservoir.

Experts from the Kashmir Environmental Protection Coordination Organisation (KEPCO) also found high levels of chemicals in the River Jehlum due to the flow of millions of tonnes of solid waste, garbage and sewage into the river.

Wullar Lake, which was once Asia’s largest fresh water reservoir, is situated between Sopore and Bandipura, and is considered the “water-bank” for the Pakistani Punjab, as it supplies water to the River Jehlum.

KEPCO Spokesman Dr Taha Mubashir told reporters in Srinagar that his team had found gas bubbles catching fire as they rose from the lake in many places.

Earlier, local fishermen had informed the NGO about the gas bubbling up from the lake. “In the past, the bubbles would emanate from just one spot, however lately they have been seen in many places,” said Mubashir.

While some experts believe the gas is produced by normal biological processes, others point out that it is a sign of rising contamination levels. They have accused authorities of ignoring the lake, which is a vital source of water supply for the Mangla Dam.

A few years ago, a similar report prepared by the International Water Management Institute (IWMI) had highlighted sedimentation, sewage disposal and excessive willow plantation in the area. The report warned that due to these activities, the lake’s ecosystem had entered a dangerous phase, as it stimulated the growth of aquatic plants that reduced oxygen levels in the water.

Lake shrinking: Though the Wetland Directory published by the Indian government puts the lake area at 189 square kilometres, the Survey of India maps show its area at no more than 58.7 square kilometres. The state revenue records, however put the lake’s area at 130 square kilometres, of which around 60 square kilometres is under agricultural use. Experts, however, believe the lake has shrunk from the original area of 200 square kilometres to barely 24 square kilometres now.

Moreover, a scientific study on the River Jehlum has found its waters turning more and more acidic. According to the study, there is gradual increase of sodium and potassium, sulphates, nitrates, nitrogen containing substances, and iron in water as it moves downstream, but at the same time massive depletion of essential chlorides.

Experts maintain this is a result of the millions of tonnes of solid waste, municipal garbage, sewage from human settlements that flows into the river daily.

A research scholar at Department of Environmental Sciences at University of Kashmir has found that 525 to 575 cubic metres of solid waste from Srinagar is drained into the river.

While, a survey conducted by the Jammu and Kashmir State Pollution Control Board (JKPCB) had earlier also found high levels of chemical oxygen demand in the River Jehlum.

Why are they complaining??

Its all pure halal stuff. :D
Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11240
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by Gagan »

The Paqustanis - always complaining!
The very essence of Paqistan is coming their way along with the water for free along the jhelum.

No wonder they are so shit headed, they've been drinking that water for 60 odd years.
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by chaanakya »

Gagan wrote:The Paqustanis - always complaining!
The very essence of Paqistan is coming their way along with the water for free along the jhelum.

No wonder they are so shit headed, they've been drinking that water for 60 odd years.
:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:
Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21234
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by Prem »

Gagan wrote:The Paqustanis - always complaining!
The very essence of Paqistan is coming their way along with the water for free along the jhelum.

No wonder they are so shit headed, they've been drinking that water for 60 odd years.
Tell them it contain .00000072 % Pure Arabian Waste to make it Aab-e_Halal.
vic
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2412
Joined: 19 May 2010 10:00

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by vic »

SSridhar wrote:Hunza Lake erosion increases: July will be dangerous
Erosion was increasing in the Attabad lake's spillway. Secretary Interior Gilgit-Baltistan Usman Younis ruled out the option of widening the spillway through a small explosion.

Meanwhile, relief service through helicopters was suspended in Hunza and nearby areas due to weather conditions.

Around 4,300 cusecs of water was going out through the spillway while 200 cusecs was gushing out from the base of the lake. The depth of river was now 379 feet and its total length stood at 23 kilometres.

The month of July was predicted to be more dangerous with regard to water inflows in the region.

I think that outflow from the Attanboy lake and hopefully "lot of rains from July monsoons" will solve all the water problems of Pakistan for times to come
pratik
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 56
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:07
Location: Zannat-e-Karachi

Cross posting from National Security Thread

Post by pratik »

Source: http://pamirtimes.net/2010/06/07/jamat- ... anization/

Jamat Dawa active in Hunza

The banned religious organization, Jamat Dawa, is actively working in Hunza despite of being on the list of officially banned organizations.

Public circles have demanded action against the organization.

Writ of the government is not visible anywhere”, said a social activist who did not want to be named. “Hunza has been flooded by religious and political organizations but the local administration is not taking any action against the banned organizations”, he said.
This is the first step of getting the sympathy of the innocent people..And Jamat Dawa has the necessary skills to turn them into anti-India weapon.. Be careful
pratik
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 56
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:07
Location: Zannat-e-Karachi

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by pratik »

I think that outflow from the Attanboy lake and hopefully "lot of rains from July monsoons" will solve all the water problems of Pakistan for times to come
I do not believe this problem is too serious. Landslides are very common in Himalayan region; And water knows how to create a path. I believe more and more erosion will take place, and spillway will become the part of the river.

I think we always have to remember that; We treat pakistani state actors as our enemies not the innocent civilians. I know that they (Pakistanis) do not think this way. But This is the difference between us and them, and it should remain forever.
Anindya
BRFite
Posts: 1539
Joined: 02 Feb 2003 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by Anindya »

We treat pakistani state actors as our enemies not the innocent civilians. I know that they (Pakistanis) do not think this way
Unfortunately, the line that you're drawing does not exist in the case of Pakistanis...probably OT here.
pratik
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 56
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:07
Location: Zannat-e-Karachi

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by pratik »

Unfortunately, the line that you're drawing does not exist in the case of Pakistanis...probably OT here.
My friend you might be correct...

One more observation i have here is...Human-Dirt (My name for the people who are against humanity) is their on both the side of the border. May be the ratio is higher on the other side.
One difference i can observe is... this pakistani-dirt is only affecting indian-citizens, while indian-dirt is affecting indian-citizens only.. Why?
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25384
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by SSridhar »

Resolving the water crisis
The solution to Pakistan's water problems has two aspects: how the country can utilise its own potential, and how its potential can be affected by India.

In accordance with the Indus Water Treaty between Pakistan and India in 1960 under the auspices of the World Bank, Pakistan receives unrestricted use of the western rivers: Indus, Jhelum and Chenab. India was allowed exclusive rights to use the waters of the Ravi, Sutlej and Bias. The replacement works required by Pakistan as a result of this treaty involved two major dams, five barrages and eight link canals.

However, the treaty also allows India to tap the hydroelectric power potential of the Chenab and Jhelum rivers before they enter Pakistan, with the stipulation that the quantity of water reaching Pakistan, and the natural timing of the inflow, not be affected. Timing is an important issue because Pakistan's agriculture depends also on the water's availability during the sowing season.

One of the treaty restrictions on India is the limit on the amount of storage for its hydroelectric projects on the Chenab and Jhelum {Incorrect}, and the amount is an element which can affect the timing of the rivers' flow into Pakistan. The restriction is losing its significance as a result of Baghliar Dam. {He has either got it totally wrong or this is deliberate}

The treaty restriction on storage also required that India not build gates for flushing silt out of its dams. {Wrong again} This meant that any Indian dam on the Chenab and the Jhelum rapidly fills with silt. {This is exactly what Pakistan wants and hence the insistence on not having low-level gates} India used this feature as an argument in favour of Baghliar Dam before the Neutral Expert appointed by the World Bank. Deciding in favour of Pakistan on three issues, the Neutral Expert ruled in favour of India on the fourth: building of gates. Pakistan is thus left without a mechanism for protection against manipulation of flows by India.{The cat is out of the bag} When India chose to fill Baghliar it did that exactly at a time when the filling caused the maximum damage to Pakistani farmers.{Again wrong}

Baghliar is not the only dam India has built on Chenab and Jhelum. India has commissioned 11 projects on the Chenab and is considering 74 projects on the Jhelum. :!: Another crisis in the making is the Kishanganga hydroelectric project on the Neelum River in India. The average flow of Neelum water will drop by 21 per cent in Pakistan, which will not only cause energy losses amounting to billions of rupees but also serious environmental damage. In due course, India will have the ability to damage Pakistan's resources. {Pakistanis rapidly build up a scenario of doomsday based on their own fraudulent stories}

Two things should be done immediately: the World Bank arbitration process should be reactivated, and the pace of work at Neelum-Jhelum should be significantly increased. India is already doing that at the Kishanganga project.

Pakistan's water issues with India are about as important as the resolution of the Kashmir problem. In fact, the two are interlinked. {The cat is out of the bag again} Therefore, the resolution of the water issue should be part and parcel of any process of normalisation between India and Pakistan.
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25384
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by SSridhar »

A kafir writes a letter
Sir: This is with reference to the letter by Zanab Khatoon ‘War over water’ (Daily Times, June 9, 2010). We frequently hear in Pakistan nowadays that India is to be blamed for the water woes of Pakistan and the dire situation would lead to war, etc. One concurs with the fact that water is unlike any other resource, including land, and any disruption to its availability will lead to very unpleasant consequences.

Let me assure my Pakistani friends that their assumptions about water shortage in Pakistan being due to Indian intervention are patently incorrect. Based on a 50 year pattern of flow, it was estimated in 1960 that the three western rivers of Indus, Jhelum, Chenab carried 142 million acre feet (MAF) of water annually while the three eastern rivers of Ravi, Beas and Sutlej carried 33 MAF. Thus, the Indus Water Treaty (IWT) allocated more than four times of water to Pakistan than India. Since that time, through wars, skirmishes and terrorism, the IWT has remained completely operational and water has flowed without hindrance. Obviously, this did not happen miraculously but because the upper riparian India chose to stick not only to the letter but also the spirit of the treaty.

The IWT also allows India rights to generate electricity through run-of-river projects on the Pakistan-allocated western rivers. Unlike ‘storage’ dams like Tarbela or Bhakra-Nangal, these hydroelectric projects do not impound water permanently except for a small amount of dead storage.

The Indus system of rivers needs a cooperative, not a combative and competitive, approach, if both countries need to make best use of these waters. Also, if we genuinely want to bridge the trust deficit, we should not let unsubstantiated, false and frivolous disinformation flow from either side.
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by chaanakya »

Glacier melting spawns another lake
Shimshal : Another lake has been formed at Shamshal, north of the Attabad lake, due to melting of a glacier.
Quoting sources, the TV channel said that Shimshal nallah was blocked in wake of the melting of a glacier, some 60 kilometers away from Hunza. Resultantly, another lake was spawned, where the water level is continuously going up, the channel added.
The newly-formed lake has endangered some more villages. Meanwhile, teams have been sent to review the situation.
http://daveslandslideblog.blogspot.com/
Meanwhile, the local people have confirmed formation of another lake in the Shamshal area, some 60 km from Attaabad, due to another landslide that occurred a few days back. “A landslide occurred in the area that halted the flow of water into the river that finally joins the Hunza River. Water level in the recently formed lake is continuously rising and it may submerge the surrounding areas,” said Mir Ali, a resident of Shamshal.
At this stage it is not possible to tell whether this is a small or large blockage, or whether overtopping is likely at any point in the future. However, the possibility that there is another source of a sudden major inflow is distinctly uncomfortable, and requires investigation urgently.

Meanwhile, landslides continue to occur with a high frequency in the Attabad area
Read in full

Hunza Lake baffles NDMA, no safe exit in sight

According to unofficial sources, the water level has risen by one foot in the lake during the last 24 hours and inundation of upstream villages is still a big problem. An official, who requested anonymity, said there was some consensus over expansion of spillway to increase the outflow of water but experts opined that presence of solid rocks in the ground was necessary or expansion could lead to more landslides.
So far no lake formed by landslide in Hunza valley had survived, nor will it now. The only issue is that how long bigger rocks, which are temporarily blocking the spillway widening, would hold out. The channel instead of widening would be deepening and might lead to burst. If rocks are bigger than the force of water could move it than the crisis is only going to prolong, just as in case of Sutlej blocking in china, which forced tonnes of mud and rocks after 7 or 8 months of its forming. Additional lake is another factor to contend with the possibility of sudden inflow of water from new lake into attabad lake with unpredictable results.Meanwhile people of Hunza valley would suffer and be target of disaffected organisations like d'aawa.
suryag
Forum Moderator
Posts: 4112
Joined: 11 Jan 2009 00:14

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by suryag »

I am not sure if the temperatures in the attabad region could cause freezing of the lake in winter, but if that happens they are in for trouble next summer, even if they survive this one, when the frozen mass as well as newer water will try to make its push downstream
Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21234
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by Prem »

Tibet's watershed challenge

By Uttam Kumar Sinha
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 03331.html
China, well-accustomed to brinkmanship, is likely to maintain a strategic silence on its river diversion plans, to keep downstream states guessing. (China denies any activity on the Yarlung Zangbo, but publicly reported satellite imagery shows otherwise.) And with no legally binding international treaty on such water-sharing, there is nothing to stop China from manipulating river flows and increasing downstream dependency.
More than 2 billion people in South and Southeast Asia depend on the waters flowing out of Tibet. Building a lower riparian coalition of, say, Pakistan, India, Nepal, Bhutan, Bangladesh, Burma, Laos, Cambodia and Vietnam would help cement recognition of Tibet's water as a common resource. India has a diplomatic opportunity here and, given its downriver position, needs to take the initiative. One plus is that India has experience dealing with river treaties. But Tibet's unresolved political status will affect any proposals on how to sustainably manage its water resources and ensure its rivers' natural flow are not disturbed by Chinese diversion plans.

Just dawned on me that Paki and Chinese are co-ordinating the current IWT dance, keeping India busy while PRC build up the capacity to divert Tibet water. It cant be co-incident that Paki statred Pakithing as te same time when PRC started digging for dams in Tibet.
pgbhat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4172
Joined: 16 Dec 2008 21:47
Location: Hayden's Ferry

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by pgbhat »

Can't redraw border but can make it irrelevant: Rao
Flaying Pakistan’s “water” propaganda, Rao said, “The myth of water theft does not stand the test of rational scrutiny or reason. India has never sought to deny Pakistan its fair share of the Indus waters.” But in a sign that New Delhi wants to be “reasonable” and “forward looking”, India offered to set up another bilateral mechanism to share “best practices” in water utilisation and irrigation. It might give Pakistan a face-saver on the water issue.
ajit_tr
BRFite
Posts: 412
Joined: 16 May 2010 21:28

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by ajit_tr »

Talks with Delhi a waste of time: Fazl
ISLAMABAD (Online) - Chairman Parliamentary Committee on Kashmir Maulana Fazlur Rehman Monday urged the government to construct small dams in line with Indus Water Treaty rather than wasting time in holding talks with India on water issue.
Talking to media after meeting of the committee, Fazl said India prolonged the dialogue process on water issue and constructed Baglihar Dam by buying the time in contravention of Indus Water Treaty.
Pakistan was now suffering a shortfall of 200,000 acre-feet, which had also been acknowledged the Indus Water Commissioner in the meeting, he added.
In order to compensate the loss caused by decline in water flows from Kashmir, water reservoirs should be constructed, he urged. “It will not only help meet water needs but also impart momentum to power generation,” he remarked.
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25384
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by SSridhar »

India nominates its members to the Arbitration Court for Kishenganga
India has decided to nominate a sitting judge of the International Court of Justice at Geneva and a Swiss international law expert to represent it in the Kishanganga project dispute with Pakistan.

The names of Peter Tomka, a Slovak diplomat who is the Vice-President of the International Court of Justice, and Lucius Caflisch, a professor at the Graduate Institute of International Studies in Geneva, were finalised on Tuesday pending their formal acceptance.

On the selection, the government consulted, among others, eminent lawyers R.K.P. Shankar Dass and Fali Nariman, who represented India in 2006-07 in the dispute with Pakistan on the Baglihar dam on the Chenab in Jammu and Kashmir.

India has to send its response on Kishanganga arbitration to Pakistan within 30 days of its receiving the request for setting up a Court of Arbitration. Sources said the request was received on May 18 and the reply must be sent by June 17.
manjgu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2615
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by manjgu »

Ssridhar..

the following text from Annexure D will be interpreted in this case??

"where a Plant is located on a Tributary of Th e
Jhelum on which Pakistan has any Agricultura l
Use or hydro-electric use, the water released belo w
the Plant may be delivered, if necessary, into an -
other Tributary but only to the extent that the then
existing Agricultural Use or hydro-electric use by
Pakistan on the former Tributary would not be
adversely affected . "



You had commented on this aspect in your posts.. could u provide the link or post your comments afresh just to jog the memory !! if i remember correctly you said that there is no Hydro use and very minimal agricutural use on thr napaki side..
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25384
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by SSridhar »

manjgu wrote:.. could u provide the link or post your comments afresh just to jog the memory !! if i remember correctly you said that there is no Hydro use and very minimal agricutural use on thr napaki side..
See this
arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by arun »

The press of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan reports that the US has consented to Pakistan’s request to be roped in to act as a mediator in the dispute manufactured by Pakistan against India on the matter of water:
US to mediate in Pak-India water row

Friday, June 18, 2010
By Khalid Mustafa

ISLAMABAD: Washington has extended assurance to take up Islamabad’s concerns on water issues with New Delhi. Secretary Ministry of Water and Power Shahid Rafi revealed this on Thursday while talking to a select group of mediapersons after the Pak-US strategic dialogue on water and power issues.

However, Ms Maria Otero, Undersecretary for Democracy and Global Affairs at the Department of State on the occasion hesitantly confirmed that US had agreed to mediate between the two nuclear states in this regard, but strictly being within the framework of Indus Water Treaty of 1960. However, in the two-day meeting, water issues with India have not been discussed as the said issues were discussed at higher level.

This is the first meeting of the Water Working Group of the US-Pakistan Strategic Dialogue as the group plans to meet again in six months. .........................

The News
PTI via TOI is reporting that the Islamic Republic of Pakistan’s attempt to insinuate the US into the dispute manufactured by Pakistan against India on the matter of water has been spurned by the US:
US dismisses reports of offering mediation between India, Pak
PTI, Jun 18, 2010, 02.31pm IST

ISLAMABAD: The US on Friday described as "completely inaccurate" media reports that it had offered to mediate between India and Pakistan to resolve their differences over the sharing of river waters. ..........................

US embassy spokesman Rick Snelsire described the media reports as "completely inaccurate".

He told PTI: "The issue didn't even come up during the meeting of the Water Working Group."

"The consistent position of the US has been that there is a treaty in place and it has a mechanism to address disputes between India and Pakistan. The US will encourage both parties to use the mechanism in the treaty," he said.

Snelsire said that during a media interaction, Under-Secretary Otero too had pointed to the Indus Waters Treaty and the existing mechanism to resolve disputes without making any offer of US mediation.

Othero was asked about Pakistan's differences with India over the sharing of river waters during an interview with a TV news channel, and she replied: "Clearly we believe that is something that Pakistan and India have to do together and resolve together. Where the US comes in is in helping Pakistan, how it manages its water internally because there is a great deal of work that could be done." ..........................

PTI via TOI
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25384
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by SSridhar »

arun wrote:
US to mediate in Pak-India water row

However, Ms Maria Otero, Undersecretary for Democracy and Global Affairs at the Department of State on the occasion hesitantly confirmed that US had agreed to mediate between the two nuclear states in this regard, but strictly being within the framework of Indus Water Treaty of 1960.
I do not know how the US can insert itself into a mediatory role and still claim that it would be within the framework of IWT. The US Government is not designated as an arbitrator by the IWT.

It would be thoroughly unwise on the part of India to let the US arbitrate anything.
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by chaanakya »

While the constitution of all seven members of the Arbitration Court is still some months away, India might need to take some steps to safeguard its interest.
Pakistan would be relying upon Para 28 of Annexure G which states that
" either party may request the Court at its first meeting to lay down, pending its award,such interim measures , as in the opinion of that party, are necessary to safeguard its interests, under the treaty with respect to the matter in dispute, or to avoid prejudice to the final solution or aggravation or extension of the dispute. The court shall, thereupon, after having afforded and adequate hearing to each party , decide , by a majority consisting of at least four members of the court, whether any interim measures are necessary for the reasons hereinafter stated and, if so, shall specify such measures : provided that
(a) the court shall lay down such interim measures only for such specified period as, in its opinion, will be necessary to render the Award; this period may , if necessary, be extended unless the delay in rendering the Award is due to any delay on the part of the Party which requested the interim measures in supplying such information as may be required by the other party or by the court in connection with the dispute; and
(b) the specification of such interim measures shall not be construed as an indication of any view of the Court on the merits of the disputes."
PK has been going in steps testing limits of each procedure provided under IWT for dispute settlement. Initially it was negotiations, which resulted in In realising the futility of not having Gated Spillway for Salal project. Second was that of Baglihar which was settled with the help of NE. Now this is the last method being tried. We would , sooner or later, see the efficacy of this method for both the countries.
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by chaanakya »

Image

The proposed Kishanganga Hydroelectric Project would be located on river Kishanganga, a tributary of river Jhelum, in Baramulla district of Jammu & Kashmir. The project involves construction of a 37m high concrete faced rockfill dam and a underground powerhouse. A maximum gross head of 697 m is proposed to be utilised to generate 1350 Million Units of energy, in a 90% dependable year with an installed capacity of 3x110 MW. An additional energy generation 312.62 MUs at Uri-I and Uri-II HE Projects would be available after completion of Kishanganga HE Project

  • Location-- Village Kralpore near Bandipore in Baramulla District of Jammu & Kashmir
    Approach-- Nearest Rail Head - Jammu (370 Km.). Nearest Airport- Srinagar (70 Km.)
    Capacity-- 330 MW (3 x 110 MW)
    Annual Generation-- 1350 MUs (in a 90% dependable year)
    Project Cost-- Rs. 3642.04 Crores (September 07 Price Level)-(Including Interest free sub-debt of Rs. 469 Crores)
    Beneficiary States-- J&K, Himachal Pradesh, Punjab, Haryana, Uttar Pradesh, Uttaranchal, Rajasthan, Union Territory of Chandigarh & Delhi
    Year of Commissioning/Completion Schedule-- 7 years from date of Government Sanction i.e. by January 2016
TECHNICAL FEATURES

* 37m high, Concrete Face Rockfill Dam
* 5.4m dia, 8 km long Horse Shoe shaped followed by 5.2m dia 16 Km long, Circular shaped Head Race Tunnel
* 15m dia, 100m high Restricted Orifice type Shurge Shaft
3.5m dia, 998m long, trifurcating into 2.1m dia horizontal branches
* Underground, with 3 units of 110 MW each, Pelton Wheel Turbine
* 4.1m dia, 746m long D shaped Tail Race Tunnel followed by 120m cut and cover and 111m long open channel


Image

Vis a Vis Line of Control

Image
ajit_tr
BRFite
Posts: 412
Joined: 16 May 2010 21:28

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by ajit_tr »

India and Pakistan to arbitrate water feud
India and Pakistan are establishing an arbitration panel to address an intensifying dispute over rival hydro-electric projects, highlighting the growing importance of water in the tensions between the dry but nuclear-armed neighbours.
The dispute centres on India’s plans to build the 330-megawatt Kishanganga hydro-electric project in Kashmir, the divided region at the centre of the decades-old animosity between the neighbours. Pakistan’s decision to seek arbitration over Kishanganga comes as New Delhi has accused Islamabad of deliberately ratcheting up tensions on the sensitive issue of water-sharing to mobilise popular anger against India.

Pakistan claims India’s project, which has been designed to divert water from one tributary of the Jhelum river to another, will adversely affect its own 969MW Neelum-Jhelum project, being built downstream on the Jhelum with Chinese backing.
Brahma Chellaney, a professor of strategic studies at the New Delhi-based Centre for Policy Research, says Pakistan’s reopening of the water-sharing agreement could backfire, as it may prompt India to rethink a treaty that he says is extremely generous to Pakistan.

“There is no treaty in the world which has been so generous on the part of the upper riparian to the lower riparian state,” he said. “The issue really is the fact that India is starving its own northern regions and reserving four-fifths of the water for Pakistan. If Pakistan plays this dangerous game, they will make India review its generosity.”

Earlier this year, a top Indian official told the Financial Times that Islamabad was using its domestic water shortages to “create another anti-India issue that can capture the popular imagination in Pakistan”.
ajit_tr
BRFite
Posts: 412
Joined: 16 May 2010 21:28

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by ajit_tr »

The Indus Water Treaty: Disputes, Debates & Concerns
The Indus Water Treaty was signed by India and Pakistan in 1960. Contrary to the fact that it was seen as one of the long lasting agreements, the issue of water distribution has become an unending dispute and tension between both the countries. Newsclick in an exclusive interview spoke to Farooq Tariq, General Secretary of Pakistan Labour Party.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4KFYdJuk0I
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by chaanakya »

Kishenganga water dispute: Pakistan on strong wicket


But Baglihar was probably an easier verdict, according to internal assessments in the government. For one thing, the Kishenganga project is not as advanced as Baglihar was, and Pakistan’s Neelum-Jhelum project is already under construction. Most important, the unknown of an international legal verdict is disquieting to the Indian system, hence India’s greatest effort will go into ensuring that Pakistan should not get a veto on forthcoming water projects in India.

For Pakistan though, the legal recourse is more political — in a note verbale (diplomatic missive) to India on May 17, Pakistan’s primary complaint appears is the fundamental structure of the treaty itself — questioning India’s right to divert water. Here, India is on more solid ground, because the Indus Waters Treaty is fairly clear on the subject, because it shows that Pakistan is taking a more political stance on water disputes rather than a technical one, which was India’s objection from the start.

Pakistan’s main disputes are __ first that India’s proposed diversion of the Kishenganga (its called Neelum in Pakistan) to another tributary, Bonar-Madmati Nallah “breaches India’s legal obligations under the treaty.” (Legal position of India and Pakistan would be tested here)

Pakistan also objects to India’s decision to deplete the level of the reservoir level of the plant to “below the dead storage level (DSL)”. (this issue is settled in Baglihar Award) Its reason being that it says the treaty places strict limitations on drawdown of water.

What does Pakistan want?
First, to prevent India from proceeding on the project until the verdict.( Must not be allowed ) India doesn’t want to do this because it’s a financial liability and then the project could become threatened like the Tulbul project. Second, Pakistan wants a legal declaration that the diversion is a breach of the treaty.( relates to main dispute) Third, that India should not draw down the water level of the reservoir. India says the treaty permits India to move water from one tributary to another after power generation. India will refute Pakistan’s contention of the depleted water destroying Pakistan’s agriculture activities, by showing that there is very little agricultural activity there anyway. Indian government sources said the NHPC had also kept a provision of an extra 150 cusecs of water to be released downstream for Pakistani use, if necessary.
ANNEXURE D—GENERATION OF HYDRO-ELECTRIC POWER BY INDIA ON THE WESTERN RIVERS
(ARTICLE III (2) (d) )

1. The provisions of this Annexure shall apply with respect to the use by India of the waters of the Western
rivers for the generation of hydro-electric power under the provisions of Article III (2) (d) and, subject to the provisions of this Annexure, such use shall be unrestricted : Provided that the design, construction and operation of new hydro-electric plants which are incorporated in a Storage Work (as defined in Annexure E) shall be governed by the relevant provisions of Annexure E .


Annexure D Para 15(iii) says that
"
Subject to the provisions of Paragraph 17, the works connected with a Plant shall be so operated that (a) the volume of water received in the river upstream of the Plant, during any period of seven consecutive days, shall be delivered into the river below the Plant during the same seven-day period, and (b) in any one period of 24 hours within that seven-day period, the volume delivered into
the river below the Plant shall be not less than 30%, and not more than 130%, of the volume received in the river above the Plant during the same 24-hour period : Provided however that :

When a Plant is located on a Tributary of the Jhelum on which pakistan has any Agricultural Use of hydroelectric use, the water released below the plant may be delivered, if necessary, into another Tributary but only to the extent that the then existing Agricultural Use of hydroelectric use by Pakistan on the former Tributary would not be adversely affected."
ANNEXURE E—STORAGE OF WATERS BY INDIA ON THE WESTERN RIVERS (Article III (4) )

1. The provisions of this Annexure shall apply with respect to the storage of water on the Western Rivers , and to the construction and operation of Storage Works thereon, by India under the provisions of Article III (4) .



10. Notwithstanding the provisions of Paragraph 7, any Storage Work to be constructed on a Tributary of The Jhelum on which Pakistan has any Agricultural Use or hydro-electric use shall be so designed and operated as not to adversely affect the then existing Agricultural Use or hydro-electric use on that Tributary .
"
Clearly, the treaty provides that the only EXISTING USE ( either hydro or agricultural) would not be affected. It does not talk about use which might come into existence after the notification of new work or alteration of existing works have been made by India. As pointed out in earlier posts by S Sridhar, several visits by Indian Team , facilitated by PIC , had failed to yield any evidence of existing agricultural use. Further when Kishanganga project was notified to PIC, Pakistan did not have any existing hydroelectric use on Kishanganga(aka Neelum).

The onus of proving existing usage would lie on pakistan and until this is done COA should be prevailed upon not to give any interim orders stopping the work.

Since four members ( two from each side has been nominated) now a panel of Umpires has to be drawn for selecting remaining three members.
ANNEXURE G--COURT OF ARBITRATION (ARTICLE IX(5) )

4. Unless otherwise agreed between the Parties, a Court of Arbitration shall consist of seven arbitrators appointed as follows :
(a) Two arbitrators to be appointed by each Party in accordance with Paragraph 6 ; and
(b) Three arbitrators (hereinafter sometimes called the umpires) to be appointed in accordance with Paragraph 7, one from each of the following categories :
(i) Persons qualified by status and reputation to be Chairman of the Court of Arbitration who may, but need not, be engineers or lawyers.
(ii) Highly qualified engineers.
(iii) Persons well versed in international law.
The Chairman of the Court shall be a person from category (b) (i) above.

5. The Parties shall endeavour to nominate and maintain a Standing Panel of umpires (hereinafter called the Panel) in the following manner :
(a) The Panel shall consist of four persons in each of the three categories specified in Paragraph 4(b) .
(b) The Panel will be selected, as soon as possible after the Effective Date, by agreement between the Parties
and with the consent of the persons whose names are included in the Panel .
(c) A person may at any time be retired from the Panel at the request of either Party : Provided however that he may not be so retired
(i) during the period after arbitration proceedings have been instituted under Paragraph 2(b) and before the process described i n
Paragraph 7(a) has been completed ; or
(ii) during the period after he has been appointed to a Court and before the proceedings are completed.
(d) If a member of the Panel should die, resign or be retired, his successor shall be selected by agreement between the Parties .

The arbitrators referred to in Paragraph 4(a) shall be appointed as follows :
The Party instituting the proceeding shall appoint two arbitrators at the time it makes a request to the other Party under Paragraph 2(b) . Within 30 days of the receipt of this request, the other Party shall notify the names of the arbitrators appointed by it .

7. The umpires shall be appointed as follows :
(a) If a Panel has been nominated in accordance with the provisions of Paragraph 5, each umpire shall be selected as follows from the Panel, from his appropriate category, provided that the category has, at that time, at least three names on the Panel :
The Parties shall endeavour to agree to place the names of the persons in each category in the order in which they shall be invited to serve on the Court. If such agreement cannot be reached within 30 days of the date on which the proceeding is instituted, the Parties shall promptly establish such an order by drawing lots . If, in any category , the person whose name is placed first in the order so established, on receipt of an invitation to serve on the Court, declines to do so, the person whose name is next on the list shall be invited . The process shall be repeated until the invitation is accepted or all names in the category are exhausted.

(b) If a Panel has not been nominated in accordance with Paragraph 5, or if there should be less than three names on the Panel in any category or if n o person in a category accepts the invitation referred to in Paragraph 7(a), the umpires, or the remaining umpires or umpire, as the case may be, shall be appointed as follows :

(i) By agreement between the Parties .

(ii) Should the Parties be unable to agree on the selection of any or all of the three umpires, they shall agree on one or more persons to help them in making the necessary selection by agreement ; but if one or more umpires remain to be appointed 60 days after the date on which the proceeding is instituted,or 30 days after the completion of the process described in sub-paragraph (a) above, as the case may be, then the Parties shall determine by lot for each umpire remaining to be appointed, a person from the appropriate list set out in the Appendix to this Annexure, who shall then be requested to make the necessary selection.

(iii) A national of India or Pakistan, or a person who is, or has been, employed or retained by either of the Parties shall be disqualified
from selection under sub-paragraph (ii) above :

Provided that (1) the person making the selection shall be entitled to rely on a declaration from the appointee, before his selection, that he is not disqualified on any of the above grounds ; and

(2) the Parties may by agreement waive any or all of the above disqualifications in the case of any individual appointee .

(iv) The lists in the Appendix to this Annexure may, from time to time, be modified or enlarged by agreement between the Parties .

8. In selecting umpires pursuant to Paragraph 7, the Chairman shall be selected first, unless the Parties otherwise agree.

9. Should either Party fail to participate in the drawing of lots as provided in Paragraphs 7 and 10, the other Party may request the President of the Bank to nominate a person to draw the lots, and the person so nominated shall do so after giving due notice to the Parties and inviting them to be represented at the drawing of the lots .

10. In the case of death, retirement or disability from any cause of one of the arbitrators or umpires his place shall be filled as follows :
(a) In the case of one of the arbitrators appointed under Paragraph 6, his place shall be filled by the Party which appointed him. The Court shall, on request , suspend the proceedings but for not longer than 1 5 days pending such replacement .
(b) In the case of an umpire, a new appointment shall be made by agreement between the Parties or, failing such agreement, by a person determined by lo t from the appropriate list set out in the Appendix to this Annexure, who shall then be requested t o make the necessary selection subject to the provisions of Paragraph 7(b) (iii) . Unless the Parties otherwise agree, the Court shall suspend the proceedings pending such replacement.

11. As soon as the three umpires have accepted appointment, they together with such arbitrators as have been appointed by the two Parties under Paragraph 6 shall for m the Court of Arbitration. Unless the Parties otherwise agree, the Court shall be competent to transact business only when all the three umpires and at least two arbitrators are present.

12. Each Party shall be represented before the Court by an Agent and may have the assistance of Counsel .

13. Within 15 days of the date of institution of a proceeding, each Party shall place sufficient funds at the disposal of its Commissioner to meet in equal shares the initial expenses of the umpires to enable them to attend the first meeting of the Court . If either Party should fail to do so, the other Party may initially meet the whole o f such expenses.

14. The Court of Arbitration shall convene, for its firs t meeting, on such date and at such place as shall be fixed by the Chairman.

15. At its first meeting the Court shall

(a) establish its secretariat and appoint a Treasurer ;
(b) make an estimate of the likely expenses of the Court and call upon each Party to pay to the Treasurer half of the expenses so estimated : Provided that ,
if either Party should fail to make such payment , the other Party may initially pay the whole of the estimated expenses ;
(c) specify the issues in dispute ;
(d) lay down a programme for submission by each side of legal pleadings and rejoinders ; and
(e) determine the time and place of reconvening the Court.

Unless special circumstances arise, the Court shall not reconvene until the pleadings and rejoinders have bee n closed. During the intervening period, at the request of either Party, the Chairman of the Court may, for sufficient reason, make changes in the arrangements made under (d) and (e) above .

16. Subject to the provisions of this Treaty and except as the Parties may otherwise agree, the Court shall decide all questions relating to its competence and shall determine its procedure, including the time within which each Part y must present and conclude its arguments . All such decisions of the Court shall be by a majority of those present and voting. Each arbitrator, including the Chairman, shall have one vote. In the event of an equality of votes, the Chairman shall have a casting vote .

17. The proceedings of the Court shall be in English .

18. Two or more certified copies of every document produced before the Court by one Party shall be communicate d by the Court to the other Party ; the Court shall not take cognizance of any document or paper or fact presented by a Party unless so communicated.

19. The Chairman of the Court shall control the discussions . The discussions shall not be open to the public unless it is so decided by the Court with the consent of the Parties. The discussions shall be recorded in minutes drawn up by the Secretaries appointed by the Chairman . These minutes shall be signed by the Chairman and shall alone have an authentic character .

20. The Court shall have the right to require from the Agents of the Parties the production of all papers and other evidence it considers necessary and to demand all necessary explanations . In case of refusal, the Court shall take formal note of it .

21. The members of the Court shall be entitled to put questions to the Agents and Counsel of the Parties and to demand explanations from them on doubtful points. Neither the questions put nor the remarks made by the members of the Court during the discussions shall be regarded as an expression of an opinion of the Court or any of its members.

22. When the Agents and Counsel of the Parties have , within the time allotted by the Court, submitted all explanations and evidence in support of their case, the Court shall pronounce the discussions closed . The Court may, however, at its discretion re-open the discussions at any time before making its Award . The deliberations of the Court shall be in private and shall remain secret.

23. The Court shall render its Award, in writing, on the issues in dispute and on such relief, including financial compensation, as may have been claimed. The Award shall be accompanied by a statement of reasons. An Award signed by four or more members of the Court shall constitute the Award of the Court . A signed counterpart of the Award shall be delivered by the Court to each Party . Any such Award rendered in accordance with the provisions of this Annexure in regard to a particular dispute shall b e final and binding upon the Parties with respect to that dispute .

24. The salaries and allowances of the arbitrators appointed pursuant to Paragraph 6 shall be determine d and, in the first instance, borne by their Governments ; those of the umpires shall be agreed upon with them by the Parties or by the persons appointing them, and (subject to Paragraph 13) shall be paid, in the first instance , by the Treasurer . The salaries and allowances of the secretariat
of the Court shall be determined by the Court and paid, in the first instance, by the Treasurer .

25. Each Government agrees to accord to the members and officials of the Court of Arbitration and to the Agents and Counsel appearing before the Court the same privileges and immunities as are accorded to representatives of member states to the principal and subsidiary organs of the United Nations under Sections 11, 12 and 13 of Article IV of the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations (dated 13th February 1946 ) during the periods specified in these Sections . The Chairman of the Court, with the approval of the Court, has the right and the duty to waive the immunity of any official of the Court in any case where the immunity would impede the course of justice and can be waived without prejudice to the interests of the Court. The Government appointing any of the aforementioned Agents and Counsel has the right and the duty to waive the immunity of any
of its said appointees in any case where in its opinion the immunity would impede the course of justice and can be waived without prejudice to the effective performance of the functions of the said appointees . The immunities and privileges provided for in this paragraph shall not be applicable as between an Agent or Counsel appearing before the Court and the Government which has appointed him.

26. In its Award, the Court shall also award the costs of the proceedings, including those initially borne by the Parties and those paid by the Treasurer .

27. At the request of either Party, made within three months of the date of the Award, the Court shall reassemble to clarify or interpret its Award . Pending such clarification or interpretation the Court may, at the request of either Party and if in the opinion of the Court circumstances so require, grant a stay of execution of its Award . After furnishing this clarification or interpretation, or if
no request for such clarification or interpretation is mad e within three months of the date of the Award, the Court shall be deemed to have been dissolved .

28. Either Party may request the Court at its first meeting to lay down, pending its Award, such interim measures as, in the opinion of that Party, are necessary to safeguard its interests under the Treaty with respect to the matter in dispute, or to avoid prejudice to the final solution or aggravation or extension of the dispute .
The Court shall, thereupon, after having afforded an adequate hearing to each Party, decide, by a majority consisting of at least four members of the Court, whether any interim measures are necessary for the reasons hereinbefore stated and, if so, shall specify such measures : Provided that

(a) the Court shall lay down such interim measures only for such specified period as, in its opinion, will be necessary to render the Award : this period may, if necessary, be extended unless the delay in rendering the Award is due to any delay on the part of the Party which requested the interim measures in supplying such information as may be required by the other Party or by the Court in connection with the dispute ; and

(b) the specification of such interim measures shall not be construed as an indication of any view of the Court on the merits of the dispute.


29. Except as the Parties may otherwise agree, the law to be applied by the Court shall be this Treaty and, whenever necessary for its interpretation or application, but only to the extent necessary for that purpose, the following in the order in which they are listed :
(a) International conventions establishing rules which are expressly recognized by the Parties .
(b) Customary international law.

APPENDIX TO ANNEXURE G
(Paragraph 7(b) )

List I
for selection of Chairman
(i) The Secretary-General of the United Nations (Ban Ki Moon)
(ii) The President of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development ( World Bank) (Robert B. Zoellick)

List II
for selection of Engineer Member
(i) The President of Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Mass., U .S.A. (Susan Hockfield, "President and Professor of Neuroscience ,She is currently a corporate director of GE Industrial)
(ii) The Rector of the Imperial College of Science and Technology, London, England (Sir Keith O'Nions)

List III
for selection of Legal Member
(i) The Chief Justice of the United States (Chief Justice John Roberts)
(ii) The Lord Chief Justice of England (Lord Igor Judge)
By nominating Peter Tomka current Vice President of ICJ , the field of Choice for legal member has been restricted.
India needs support of at least two more members to prevent interim award.List of umpires ( the Panel) and the selection of members thereof would be of extreme interest to both the parties. Rumour of USA mediating , while proceedings are being initiated, is quite interesting.
Last edited by chaanakya on 20 Jun 2010 15:10, edited 1 time in total.
vic
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2412
Joined: 19 May 2010 10:00

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by vic »

Legally speaking, no interim award should be passed unless the project is already at the stage when the water is going to be diverted forthwith. Interim order cannot be used for stopping of construction as the party which is doing the construction does it at its own riskl if the final award goes against it. But If the project has already reached a stage where the water is going to be diverted then interim order can be considered if Pakistan can prove a prima facie case. Further Pakistan will also have to prove that financial compensation at final award stage is not adequate remedy in place of interim orders. Finally for interim orders Pakistan will have to assure that it will compensate India if Pakistan looses the case. On the other hand another argument against interim order can be that possible financial loss to pakistan is so negligible that India can afford to compensate for it while vice versa is not possible.


If US tries to meddle then we should request Indian Supreme Court to re-open Bhopal gas Case and enhance compensation to US$ 100 Billion dollars. If US does not pay up then it will set an interesting precedent

India should award contracts for all the 100 or hydel projects that Pakistan is claiming that we are builiding, that will create a lot of vested interest in financial circles "not to interfere" in a genuine award

J&K assembly should be encouraged to pass a resolution advising annulament of Treaty to put pressure on international players that things can go bad if they interfere too much
manjgu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2615
Joined: 11 Aug 2006 10:33

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by manjgu »

chaanakya...

i did not understand the title of your last post "pak on a strong wicket... ". what did you provide to support that contention?? are you convinced?

on the contrary, i think India is on a strong wicket wrt Kishenganga .. even to a lay person like me it is evident by reading the provisions of IWT that what india is doing is legally tenable. I have enough faith in our legal/tech experts to correctly interpret and present the case. we saw that in baglihar.. i think we have learnt to legally screw the napakis. I dont know who said/wrote that India being the upper riparian state is at a natural advantage in any legal tangle.
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by chaanakya »

manjgu wrote:chaanakya...

i did not understand the title of your last post "pak on a strong wicket... ". what did you provide to support that contention?? ( how plasbhemous!!) are you convinced? (not at all)
Ahhh, that's the original TOILET headline , if you click the link you will know. TOILET doing it is beyond my comprehension or may be they are suffering from sekoolaritis.
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25384
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by SSridhar »

The story of the Tarbela Dam
Another blunder certifying the mounting negligence of the government and institutions was the story of the disaster of the Tarbela Dam, the largest earth-filled dam, under Bhutto in the seventies. The tender for the construction against the usual procedure was given to a consortium of three countries which made it impossible to include the country of origins warranty for the proper execution of the project into the contract, this would not be the case when 3 countries are involved in a contract. The consortium called TJV worked under supervision of American consultants “TAMS” then started messing it all up. Instead of putting the foundation on a base of solid rock as required in the project design, they just left it floating. When several of the gates that had been ordered and delivered from Switzerland got choked and did not open on the day of inauguration the power of the water uprooted the whole set-up and the concrete of the foundation burst and reservoir developed cracks. It had to be filled up with loads and loads of cement which as a consequence reduced the capacity of the reservoir by almost half. {That is an exaggeration that the capacity reduced by half. But, we know silt management is extremely poor at Tarbela leading to an artificial island extending a couple of dozen kilometres upstream} There was nothing that could be done later and may be this was the reason why all future governments refused to go into hydel power generation projects but preferred thermal power creation. {The power generation at Tarbela has been well below its installed capacity and this flows directly from the poor silt management. The silt has been damaging the turbines and turbine blades leading to frequent failures and costly replacements}
Post Reply