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.
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by chaanakya »

http://www.zeenews.com/news641499.html

Paa'stan's game plan is unfolding on predictable and scripted manner. Perhaps it hope to do better in draw of lots ( aka the famous Hand of God goal of maradona) or fall back on unkil and its royal lackey 's goodwill and support.
New Delhi: India and Pakistan today failed to reach consensus on the names of three neutral umpires for the International Court of Arbitration which will decide on resolution of dispute over Kishenganga power project to be constructed in Jammu and Kashmir.

The two countries had exchanged names of the neutral umpires in Islamabad on Tuesday. But they failed to reach a consensus as the deadline for deciding on the names ended today.

The two countries had suggested two names each for the post of chairman and two names each for the other umpires.

With their disagreement, the umpires will now be decided by organisations like the UN and World Bank.

As per the provisions of the 1960 Indus Water Treaty, once the process of arbitration is initiated by any of the two countries, the three umpires, including the chairman, have to be appointed within 60 days.

If the two countries fail to appoint umpires, the two parties prepare a draw of lots and request a "person" mentioned in the Treaty to select the umpire.

While the Chairman can be selected by either the Secretary General of the United Nations or President of the World Bank, the engineer member umpire can be selected from a draw of lots by President of Massachusetts Institute of Technology or Rector, Imperial College of Science and Technology, London.

The Legal member umpire can be selected from a draw of lots by either the Chief Justice of the United States or Lord Chief Justice of England, as per the provisions of the Treaty.
Airavat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2326
Joined: 29 Jul 2003 11:31
Location: dishum-bishum
Contact:

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by Airavat »

25,000 people trapped in upper Hunza
The 23-kilometre long Attabad lake was formed after a massive landslide struck the area earlier this year, killing 20 people and injuring several others. At least 25 kms of the strategic KKH has been submerged as the lake expanded upstream. At least a five-inch drop has been recorded in the lake level as the outflow of 17,176 cusecs surpassed the inflow on Friday, according to the officials.

Around 25,000 people have been trapped in upper Hunza for the past six months, due to the submerged Karakoram Highway (KKH). The problems of those displaced by the Attabad lake disaster are further being compounded by a lack of life saving facilities and rude officials, residents complained.
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by chaanakya »

Kishanganga: Names of umpires rejected
With the Foreign Ministers of India and Pakistan failing to make any headway in talks, the two sides on Friday rejected the names suggested for three neutral umpires by either side to resolve the dispute between them over the 330 MW Kishanganga hydel project in Jammu and Kashmir.

This paves the way for international involvement in the appointment of the three neutral umpires —chairman, a legal expert and a technical expert—to the International Court of Arbitration for resolving the Kishanganga dispute. Both countries have already nominated two arbitrators each for the Arbitration Bench.

While the names for the neutral umpires were exchanged during a meeting in Islamabad on Tuesday, both sides are likely to hold discussions on the next step in New Delhi by the end of July. With July 16 deadline for finalising the three neutral umpires by mutual consent coming to an end on Friday, the neutral umpires would now be finalised through a draw of lots prescribed in Annexure G that deals with the procedure for setting up a court of arbitration under the Indus Water Treaty, 1960.
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12686
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by Pratyush »

chaanakya wrote:Kishanganga: Names of umpires rejected
With the Foreign Ministers of India and Pakistan failing to make any headway in talks, the two sides on Friday rejected the names suggested for three neutral umpires by either side to resolve the dispute between them over the 330 MW Kishanganga hydel project in Jammu and Kashmir.

This paves the way for international involvement in the appointment of the three neutral umpires —chairman, a legal expert and a technical expert—to the International Court of Arbitration for resolving the Kishanganga dispute. Both countries have already nominated two arbitrators each for the Arbitration Bench.

While the names for the neutral umpires were exchanged during a meeting in Islamabad on Tuesday, both sides are likely to hold discussions on the next step in New Delhi by the end of July. With July 16 deadline for finalising the three neutral umpires by mutual consent coming to an end on Friday, the neutral umpires would now be finalised through a draw of lots prescribed in Annexure G that deals with the procedure for setting up a court of arbitration under the Indus Water Treaty, 1960.
Well nothing surprising in that.
satyam
BRFite
Posts: 224
Joined: 15 Jun 2010 01:07

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by satyam »

Pak to urge US to help resolve water sharing issue with India during Clinton's tour

http://www.business-standard.com/india/ ... /101770/on

Pakistan is also likely to ask the US to increase the $7.5 billion Kerry Lugar aid to $50 billion in order to improve its image in the country and help Pakistan succeed in the ‘war on terrorism’.
neeraj
BRFite
Posts: 379
Joined: 12 Jun 2001 11:31
Location: UK

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by neeraj »

Water crisis more important than any other issue
The coming week will usher in the second phase of the strategic dialogue between Pakistan and the United States, but behind-the-scene preparations for the talks make it evident that the Pakistan military is in charge of the dialogue and has decided that the focus of the interaction will remain the country’s economic needs, especially water.

Equally interesting is the fact that the strategic dialogue papers prepared for the talks under the supervision of the COAS have placed the water crisis with India as the foremost issue of concern, more important than terrorism or the dispute over Kashmir. The core issue always has been water since Independence. Pakistan could never reconcile to the fact that India controls the rivers flowing into Pakistan.

In fact, Dawn has been told that in contrast to earlier meetings, water has replaced the security situation in terms of priority.

Officials told Dawn that resolving the water dispute between Pakistan and India is on top of the agenda in the upcoming strategic dialogue between Pakistan and the United States, which has been set by the military.

“Pakistan will request the US to influence India and play its role in settlement of water dispute, mainly related to diversion of water,” sources said. In short Pakistan is now trying to get concessions over and above the IWT as they know that India is not violating the treaty.

According to the paper, the water issue with India is emerging as a serious crisis, which will have long-term implications on the agriculture output and is likely to cause tension between the two countries. It adds that the control of Pakistan’s water share by India is being seen as a major threat to the security and economy of the country.

Thee document highlights that more than two dozen water projects under way or planned on the western rivers in occupied Kashmir will enable India to control the flow of water into Pakistani territory. These projects are allowed as per the IWT. India has just only now started to make the full use of its share allocated in the IWT. This is being spinned by Pakis as going against the spirit of the treaty.

Dawn has learnt that the concern, which is shared by the Pakistan military, is that the diversion of Pakistan’s water share in hydroelectric projects by India has already led to a shortage, which in turn has caused huge losses to the agriculture sector, including delay in the sowing of major crops and reduction in cultivated area.

The document says that continued diversion of Pakistan’s water share will not just destroy the agriculture sector but also give India an added ability to cause floods in Pakistan during the monsoon seasons. Again no shred of evidence to prove India is doing this.

The paper also argues that this manipulation of water is not just adding to the tension between the countries but also fuelling extremism in rural society as livelihood is affected due to water scarcity.
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25362
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by SSridhar »

neeraj wrote:The paper also argues that this manipulation of water is not just adding to the tension between the countries but also fuelling extremism in rural society as livelihood is affected due to water scarcity.
Now I understand. It was inadequate water supply due to India stealing it that forced the Faridkot farmer Ajmal Amir Kasab and nine others from different parts of Pakistan to launch an urban warfare on 26/11/2008. So far, Pakistan has been saying that the CIA drones were fuelling extremism and suddenly we have one more just cause for terror. AoA. All this talk of jihad or the attraction of 72+28 are mere kafir propaganda.
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by chaanakya »

I think people of J&K should be made aware of Paa'stan's hidden agenda of stealing its water by controlling their territory. THey want J&K not because best interest of J&K is in their heart, but its water they want to use without giving these people their due.
If water is root cause of conflict between India and PK then let next war be on this issue. That will give perfect excuse to India to stop all water and resort to inter basin transfers of waters and re-appropriate water as we might need to feed National River Linking Project . However I am aware that shortfall due to Chinese water diversion from Brahmaputra may nor be entirely met from Indus system. Yet war with water as an excuse and Chinese project would give India good rationale to rework the Indus system.

Paa'stan should be told in no uncertain terms the likely consequences of their actions.
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25362
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by SSridhar »

chaanakya wrote:I think people of J&K should be made aware of Paa'stan's hidden agenda of stealing its water by controlling their territory.
Chaanakya, there have been many discussions in the J&K Assembly calling for scrapping the IWT because India and by extension J&K, was getting much less water in the bargain. Most elected members have said that India must quicken the pace of the hydroelectric projects. J&K is criss-crossed by the Western Rivers on which India conceded almost all privileges thereby putting J&Kites at a big disadvantage. On the Pakistani side too, they realize that Mangla served the Punjab while it only submerged their lands. Cleverly, Pakistan and the UK colluded to relocate the Mirpuris into the UK thereby blunting any opposition. The Neelum-Jhelum project has also caused revulsion but the iron hand with which the Federal Government rules PoK and the blandishments it offers to various factions of political parties there keeps their mouth shut.
sanjaykumar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6571
Joined: 16 Oct 2005 05:51

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by sanjaykumar »

Equally interesting is the fact that the strategic dialogue papers prepared for the talks under the supervision of the COAS have placed the water crisis with India as the foremost issue of concern, more important than terrorism or the dispute over Kashmir.


So they expect a payoff of Indian water. India should start squeezing the water supply to demonstrate Pakistan's impotence. They should make it so that it is made public in spite of the Pak establishment's discomort.
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by chaanakya »

SSridhar wrote: Chaanakya, there have been many discussions in the J&K Assembly calling for scrapping the IWT because India and by extension J&K, was getting much less water in the bargain.

The Neelum-Jhelum project has also caused revulsion but the iron hand with which the Federal Government rules PoK and the blandishments it offers to various factions of political parties there keeps their mouth shut.
I meant primarily general public. Organisations can take up this issue by way of public demonstrations( duly facilitated and advertised). Anger of people have to be channelised to anti pak demonstrations rather than anti india. Also I meant occupied Kashmir, where people get shortchanged in bargain.They should be given voice to blunt paki propaganda.
Moreover there could be demand to make IWT applicable only after water is used by J&K. Remaining water could only be allowed to be apportioned.This would highlight the entitlement of J&K. Of course , all this has to be done subtly and without violating the IWT in its present form. Pressure of J&K people would make pakis rethink of their strategy of using water as an excuse.
strategic dialogue papers prepared for the talks under the supervision of the COAS have placed the water crisis with India as the foremost issue of concern, more important than terrorism or the dispute over Kashmir.
COAS PA is cleverly juxtaposing demand for water with action on terrorism. By this they might be meaning cooperation with unkil and not action against anti india elements. That would neutralise the force of their argument. Due to civil strife within Pakistan support for J&K issue or terrorism could be under threat and water might fetch pak army some popular support in next war as it affects masses directly.

By using Water as payoff under pressure of unkil India would gain nothing in return.

Already kureshi is looking like a fool before international community in contrast to SMK ( though I felt he should have yawned), let pakistan take the first step of initiating water war.

I think they would take some more time to reorganise before feeling confident enough to take on India.

First India has to do is to neutralise 3.5. and there are many ways to do that.
neeraj
BRFite
Posts: 379
Joined: 12 Jun 2001 11:31
Location: UK

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by neeraj »

x-posting from TSP thread
Do more against terrorism: Hillary
Sources said Pakistan would adopt a decisive stance on India’s violation of Indus Waters Treaty and would demand US to play its role in this regard.
:rotfl:
Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by Gerard »

would demand US to play its role in this regard.
Isn't the World Bank a signatory to the treaty, not the USA?
neeraj
BRFite
Posts: 379
Joined: 12 Jun 2001 11:31
Location: UK

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by neeraj »

http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/daw ... nton-hh-05
Water dispute

The secretary of state, curtly rejecting Pakistan’s request for help in solving its water disputes with India, asked it to first manage its own resources before seeking external mediation. :lol:

“Pakistan has to get control of the water you currently have, because if you go to a mediation body and say water is being diverted, the first response will be you are not efficiently using the water you have,” she said.

In the Strategic Dialogue document prepared by Pakistan, Islamabad had placed the water crisis with India as the foremost issue of concern.

Pakistan has the world’s most extensive system for irrigation and transportation of water, but it has “been neglected and fallen into disuse” and steps need to be taken to address the situation, she said during her interaction with television anchors.
Last edited by neeraj on 20 Jul 2010 11:17, edited 1 time in total.
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25362
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by SSridhar »

Gerard wrote:
would demand US to play its role in this regard.
Isn't the World Bank a signatory to the treaty, not the USA?
Yes, the USA has nothing to do with the IWT. So also the UK. Bit, Pakistan repeatedly asks for their intervention. Even the WB's {IBRD's} role is very limited and that is limited to for the purposes specified in Articles V and X and Annexures F, G and H. These deal with Financial Provisions, Emergency Provision, Neutral Expert, Court of Arbitration and Transitional Agreements respectively.
arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by arun »

NYT on the Kishenganga project and related fulminations emanating from the Islamic Republic of Pakistan:

Water Dispute Raises Tension Between India and Pakistanis
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25362
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by SSridhar »

From the above,
Laborers who work long hours in Bandipore said the work is not merely a matter of electricity. National pride is at stake, they said. {Hats off to these poor labourers}
abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by abhishek_sharma »

From the NYT article
The treaty, the result of a decade of painstaking negotiation that ended in 1960, gave Pakistan 80 percent of the waters in the Indus River system, a ratio that nationalists in Pakistan often forget.
Why did we give 80% of water to the Pakis? :evil: :evil:
neeraj
BRFite
Posts: 379
Joined: 12 Jun 2001 11:31
Location: UK

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by neeraj »

Pak and India rejected nominees for Kishanganga project
ISLAMABAD: Pakistan and India have rejected each other’s proposed nominees for the Court of Arbitration which will adjudicate on a dispute over the Kishanganga hydropower project.

The two sides have decided to draw lots to determine three individuals who will now select the umpires under three categories — chairman, legal member and engineer member.

Pakistan is waiting for a date, time and venue in New Delhi to draw lots.

“There is a complete mistrust and the Indians show zero flexibility towards Pakistan,” said an expert. Where is the question of trust. Indians simply follow the IWT

Pakistan has opposed the Kishanganga project on the grounds that it will reduce generation capacity of the 969MW Neelum-Jhelum power project by 16 per cent on the same river downstream Muzaffarabad in Azad Kashmir. The project will result in a loss of energy equivalent to Rs6 billion every year.

The diversion will also reduce river flows near the Line of Control, on the Pakistan side, for at least six months and cause irreparable losses to environment, particularly the Musk Deer Gurez Park — a vast grassland in AJK — and denude the Neelum valley of its attraction for tourists. :rotfl: Reduction of tourists is now touted as a reason to stop Kisenganga project

About 200 kilometres of riverbed in Azad Kashmir will be affected by the project. The river will turn dry over 40km, a negation of international environmental laws. So now they are harping on International law and not IWT. The river bed of Indus in Pakistan is itself mostly dry due to the numerous canals

Under the law, at least 70 per cent of river flows are to be protected in case any project is taken in hand. Pakistan has also objected to the design of the Kishanganga project because it envisages drawdown flushing which is against the spirit of the 1960 treaty. :lol: Again the use of spirit - so effectively IWT alllows it.

The design will arm India with the power to cause floods and water scarcity on the Pakistani side.
Airavat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2326
Joined: 29 Jul 2003 11:31
Location: dishum-bishum
Contact:

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by Airavat »

No more water shortage In Pakistan, for Indra Deva has ensured a "flood-like situation":

Water inflow of 105,000 was recorded in Chenab River at Marala, showing medium flood level. Similarly, medium level flood was witnessed in Kabul River with inflow of 61,000 cusecs at Nowshera. Medium to high level flood is expected in Jehlum River at Mangla on Wednesday (today) with inflow of 100,000 to 180,000 cusecs. More importantly, outflow of River Indus at Kotri Barrage into sea has jumped to 15,500 cusecs.
Christopher Sidor
BRFite
Posts: 1435
Joined: 13 Jul 2010 11:02

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by Christopher Sidor »

The Indus Water Treaty was flawed from day one.
1) It divided waters based on rivers and not based on proportion of the population which depends on the river. The Indian states of Rajasthan, Gujarat, Western Madhya Pradesh, were deprived of waters from Indus and its tributaries.
2) It allowed foreigners, namely World bank selected, to interfere into a resolution. This allowed pakistan to say "If in IWT we can have foreigners meddling in a purely bilateral issue, why not in kashmir and whatever issue we feel like?" Also with China now getting a more prominent role in World Bank, it is not is India's interest any more to have people from world bank meddling in a bilateral issue.
3) It allowed Pakistan to have a veto over many Hydro projects in India. And Pakistan has never ever passed any opportunity to veto any project.
4) This treaty was supposed to have taken water off the Pakistan-India table. It has done nothing of such sort. In fact Pakistan blames its entire mismanagement of water resource on India. Notice the recent Paki Foreign Minister's statement with US Secretary Of State Hillary Clinton.

It is time that India scraps this treaty. The people of India should get their fair share of water from Indus and its tributaries. India's gains from IWT have been minuscule.
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by chaanakya »

first round of talks in Lahore on Thursday on Kishanganga Arbitration
LAHORE: The water commissioners of India and Pakistan started their first round of talks in Lahore on Thursday.

Ahead of these talks, Pakistan and India rejected each other’s nominees for the Court of Arbitration which will adjudicate on a dispute over the Kishanganga hydropower project.

Two months ago, Pakistan had requested for arbitration on the disputed Kishanganga project which violates the Indus Waters Treaty of 1960. Pakistan contended that having the drainage at the very base of the dam will allow India to manipulate the water flow.
( again misinformation, this is a matter for NE on which final verdict has been given in baglihar, here main question will be diversion of water is permissible under IWT or not and if India is following IWT stipulations in this regard)
Pakistan and India will follow the settlement mechanism outlined in the treaty to settle the dispute.

Kishanganga is the first case of arbitration under the treaty since 1960.(Now Paa'stan has reached the pinnacle of its foolishness in case of IWT, what next for it. India has scores of Dam projects in the offing. All decisions would act as precedence)
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by chaanakya »

http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/the-newspaper/national/19-faulty-telemetry-system-leads-to-dispute-over-water-970-hh-06
The official said that even important aspects of feasibility studies were ignored during installation of the system but no one was ever held responsible. As result, about 66,000 cusec of water was being reported as lost or stolen between Taunsa and Guddu and about 35,000 cusec between Taunsa and Sukkur barrage.

ISLAMABAD: The non-functioning of the )$(350-million telemetry system that was installed in 2004 to ensure real-time verification of water flow for inter-provincial harmony has led to the current dispute between Sindh and Punjab over opening of Chashma-Jhelum Link canal.

Senior government officials said the ongoing controversy among the provinces over water could have a negative effect on Pakistan’s dispute with India over the Kishanganga hydropower project because New Delhi had been attributing Islamabad’s water problems to domestic mismanagement.

In background discussions, a government official said that besides the usual scepticism over the use of Chashma-Jhelum as a regular canal, Sindh province had been opposing its opening because of heavy water losses between Trimmu and Panjnad headworks, with no dependable monitoring mechanism.

The province has been saying that system losses in the transfer of water from Jhelum Zone to Indus Zone exceeded 70 per cent.

The officials said the major cause of inter-provincial mistrust was absence of a verifiable mechanism to record water flows for which the telemetry system had been installed but which was not functioning.

They said a meeting of parliamentarians from Sindh and Punjab had decided on June 16 to send a team of Irsa engineers to monitor the telemetry system but this had not been done so far. They said an influential group of field engineers in almost all the provinces were intentionally creating hindrances in the smooth functioning of the telemetry system because of their vested interests.

A senior Irsa official said the 1991 water accord was a perfect document but its implementation did not achieve the desired result of removing inter-provincial misunderstanding. To resolve this issue an advanced satellite-based telemetry was installed at a cost of Rs350 million in 2004.

The objective of the system was to achieve equitable distribution of water, ascertain system losses, and ensure efficient use of water through remote measurement of water quantity in real-time and report information on water flows and diversions at all barrages, dams and canal-head regulators from 23 sites to all the stakeholders at eight monitoring positions at federal and provincial government headquarters.

These sites were Tarbela and Nowshera in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Kalabagh, Chashma, Taunsa, Mangla, Rasul, Marala, Khanki, Qadirabad, Trimmu, Panjnad, Sidhnai, Balloki, Suleimanki and Islam in Punjab. In Sindh, the sites were at Guddu, Sukkur and Kotri barrage while in Balochistan the sites were at Garang Regulator at Kirthar, Patfeeder, Uch and Manuthy.

The officials said the Irsa rejected the telemetry system when the project failed to meet its objective of providing reliable and continuous data because of frequent breakdowns despite the fact that the project was required to be “capable of withstanding all stresses under most severe electrical, mechanical and atmospheric conditions”.

An internal government inquiry suggested the design parameters were, however, not according to the ground realities. More than ten sites immediately went out of order due to burning of circuits and communication equipment.

A senior official said the system could have been made operational through provision of suitable voltage stabilisers and protective devices, back-up power supply lines, standby batteries and generators and protection against overheating of distribution panels but that was never taken in hand. As a result, even a minor defect in communications resulted in disconnection.

The official said that even important aspects of feasibility studies were ignored during installation of the system but no one was ever held responsible. As result, about 66,000 cusec of water was being reported as lost or stolen between Taunsa and Guddu and about 35,000 cusec between Taunsa and Sukkur barrage.
Well water mismanagement by Pakistan is nothing new for India. What is surprising is that they are unable to adhere to their own inter-provincial water sharing accord. To resolve the accusation of water theft by Pakjabis, Paa'stan has installed advanced satellite based telemetry system at a cost of over )$(350 Mn and it has failed to work.

The same system is insisted Paa'stan to be installed by India to provide reliable RT data to Paa'stan for verifying adherence by India to IWT.

Once India accedes to this proposal, Paa'stan would come up with non maintenance of system, accusation of fudging of data etc saying it has more experience in fudging telemetry system and so it would know for sure India is manipulating . Besides Paa'stan would not have money to fund installation of such a system under IWT and would resort to shameless begging as usual.
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25362
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by SSridhar »

Draw of Lots to determine Kishenganga Arbitrators
India and Pakistan will decide, by draw of lots at the end of this month, the agencies that will select the chairman, technical umpire and legal umpire for the Court of Arbitration that is to be set up to adjudicate the differences on the Kishanganga project in Jammu and Kashmir. Earlier this month, the two countries failed to reach a consensus over selecting candidates for the court.

It is expected that they will meet in New Delhi for the draw of lots to decide who, between the United Nations Secretary-General and the World Bank President, willappoint a chairman to head the court.

The draw of lots will also decide whether the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), United States, or the Imperial College of Engineering, U.K., will select the technical umpire, and whether the Chief Justice of the U.S. or the Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales will appoint the legal umpire.

The two sides have named two experts each to be members on the Court of Arbitration. The court will consist of six members and a chairman.
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25362
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by SSridhar »

From the link in the previous post, other issues are also being discussed.
It is expected that during the three-day meeting of the Permanent Indus Commission that began on Thursday in Lahore, the two sides will discuss Pakistan's demand for satellite telemetry in the Indus water system for real-time hydrology data on rivers it shares with India.

High on the agenda will also be the issue of strengthening the Commission. This was discussed in the annual meeting held in New Delhi in June. India wants the scope of the Commission to be expanded to allow consultation with experts before taking disputes and differences to outside agencies.
neeraj
BRFite
Posts: 379
Joined: 12 Jun 2001 11:31
Location: UK

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by neeraj »

neeraj
BRFite
Posts: 379
Joined: 12 Jun 2001 11:31
Location: UK

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by neeraj »

New approach to the Indus Treaty
Indo-Pakistani water relations are bound, limited and defined by the Indus Water Treaty of 1960. The treaty divides the resources of the Indus Basin, one of the largest and oldest basins on the planet, and states that India will have control over the waters of the three eastern rivers of the basin (the Ravi, the Sutlej and the Beas) and that Pakistan will have control over the waters of the three western rivers (the Indus, the Chenab and the Jhelum). The treaty then goes on to set out the rights and obligations of the riparians and, importantly, allows India to avail itself of the waters of the western rivers for domestic consumption, non-consumptive functions, limited agricultural use and for hydroelectric purposes.

So far, the treaty has held strong. However, because of a variety of factors, some voices are accusing India of stealing Pakistan's water and violating the treaty. I will not dwell upon these voices in this article because they are incorrect and, as I will try to show, they can be made irrelevant. Finally an enlighted Paki. However, some factors providing these voices their motives and reasons must be acknowledged: the mistrust that characterises Indo-Pakistani relations, gross mismanagement of water resources within Pakistan, outdated irrigation practices, poorly planned agricultural zoning, a rising population and resultant water scarcity.

What these voices are doing is choosing to ignore Pakistan's most pressing political, economic, social and environmental issues, and instead are looking for solace in the age-old chestnut: India is to blame. This guy must be a BR reader. What else explains the reason given for having more troops deployed on its eastern border than its western, when the trouble so clearly is: to ensure water security?

One of the problems in Indo-Pakistani water relations, as far as Pakistan is concerned, is that, thanks to Sir Cyril Radcliff and the outcome of English colonialism in India, Pakistan is a lower riparian. What the treaty does is set up a riparian hegemony by dividing the resources of the Indus Basin, creating an asymmetrical relationship between the two riparians and cementing India's position as the riparian hegemon. In other words, the treaty stacks the cards against Pakistan and makes it close to impossible for it to rationalise the disproportionate relative bargaining positions the treaty allocates. This is because, in practice, the more powerful riparian is loath to give up the benefits it has.

There are some who suggest that, for this very reason, the treaty should be scrapped and another negotiated. To these gifted geniuses, I ask this: Very well, then, but what brilliant strategy do you have hidden away that will outmanoeuvre the riparian hegemon and get the lower riparian more than it already has under the treaty? This question is met with silence. :mrgreen:

How can Pakistan get itself out of this situation? The answer is simple: Don't look at the Indus Water Treaty for solutions. The treaty is based on a sort of divide-the-resource-of-the-Indus-Basin theory, which will always result in a zero-sum game for Pakistan. What we need is to look outside the "divide the resource" paradigm and look towards the opportunities afforded by the "sharing the resource" paradigm. What we need to do is see whether it is in the economic, social or political interest of both riparians to cooperate on water, rather than be antagonistic over it. What we need is a trans-boundary water opportunity analysis.

Trans-boundary analysis looks at the positive sum outcomes of sharing the resources of a water basin. The approach is unique, in that it allows the weaker riparian to offer the hegemon some additional benefit.

The idea would be to conduct a full-spectrum trans-boundary water opportunity analysis that will identify the areas where cooperation between India and Pakistan over the waters of the Indus Basin will yield in economic, social or other benefits. For example, if India is building run-of-the-river dams on the western rivers, this need not be a cause of alarm in Pakistan. After all, what keeps Pakistan from purchasing the electricity from India? We are more than willing to pay an extortionately high cost for electricity from diesel-powered rental power projects when everyone knows hydroelectric power is a fraction of the cost.

Selling electricity to Pakistan would also be in the economic interests of India because of the premiums it could charge. Similarly, there could be economic benefit to India if it allowed Pakistan to expand, say, its fisheries along the eastern rivers. The purpose of the trans-boundary water opportunity analysis would be to identify and quantify the all the possible positive sum outcomes of a "sharing the resource" strategy. The wider the scope of such an analysis, the more chances of identifying more and more areas of cooperation.

The analysis would involve other issues as well. One would be the identification of what sort of "green water" resources exist (as in water that falls from the sky, and distinct from "blue water" which is, essentially surface water) and how such resources could be harnessed for the benefit of either India or Pakistan. (The study of "green water" is rare, as most hydrologists tend to ignore something they can't pipe, and government doesn't care about stuff it can't tax.) The inclusion of such things could widen the overall opportunities, at least in Pakistan, of harnessing the water resources of the country.

The economic science of sharing resources is also cutting-edge. Elinor Ostrom was awarded the Nobel Memorial Prize for Economic Sciences this year for her study of shared resources. I had the opportunity of meeting Ms Ostrum last month and to speak to her about Indo-Pakistani water relations. She hadn't studied the Indus Basin (she has studied others), but told me that, should the two countries ever decide to go down such a path, the only problems they would encounter would be working out the right profit-sharing formulas.

And, finally, in the Pakistani context again, if Pakistan could be seen sitting down with India and doing something large-scale, without the rhetoric of Kashmir or terrorism clouding the way, it would create enormous international goodwill that, surely, Pakistan could leverage to its advantage.

On almost all counts, it is impossible to deny how attractive a proposition a trans-boundary water opportunity analysis is. It's difficult to judge how the governments of these countries would respond to the call for such an analysis. Perhaps this is not the time for such a call and perhaps it isn't for the governments of the countries to conduct such an analysis. At this stage, the opportunities of sharing the resource of the Indus Basin are the perfect place for players in Track-II diplomacy to pick up the gauntlet and show their respective governments the way forward.


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. Email: [email protected]
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25362
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by SSridhar »

The 'solution' that the above article offers hinges on cooperation on water. That would be a non-starter. India must be really foolish to offer a selective cooperation because a lower riparian state needs more water because of its poor water management, burgeoning population, dependence on water-guzzling crops and crop patters, poor farming techniques and skills etc. while that country continues to maintain unbridled hatred, unrelenting animosity, sending in terrorists to destroy us, allowing its terrorist tanzeems to recruit and train jihadis, maintaining a disproportionate armed force and nuclear weapons specifically to harass and threaten us and lying through their teeth not only to its own people but the rest of the world about evil Indian hegemon.

Pakistan must radically change before the kind of cooperation proposed by that author can be thought of. Water cannot be part of any CBM.
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34831
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by chetak »

SSridhar wrote:The 'solution' that the above article offers hinges on cooperation on water. That would be a non-starter. India must be really foolish to offer a selective cooperation because a lower riparian state needs more water because of its poor water management, burgeoning population, dependence on water-guzzling crops and crop patters, poor farming techniques and skills etc. while that country continues to maintain unbridled hatred, unrelenting animosity, sending in terrorists to destroy us, allowing its terrorist tanzeems to recruit and train jihadis, maintaining a disproportionate armed force and nuclear weapons specifically to harass and threaten us and lying through their teeth not only to its own people but the rest of the world about evil Indian hegemon.

Pakistan must radically change before the kind of cooperation proposed by that author can be thought of. Water cannot be part of any CBM.
Similarly, there could be economic benefit to India if it allowed Pakistan to expand, say, its fisheries along the eastern rivers. The purpose of the trans-boundary water opportunity analysis would be to identify and quantify the all the possible positive sum outcomes of a "sharing the resource" strategy. The wider the scope of such an analysis, the more chances of identifying more and more areas of cooperation.

Expand fisheries along eastern rivers and claim squatters rights later?

These guys want to pitch their tents on the Indian banks of any and every river in that area.
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by chaanakya »

Talks concluded
during Thursday’s talks, Pakistan and India agreed in principle to put in place a telemetry system on the Indus to record and transfer real-time data for the benefit of both countries.

In today's meeting, both sides agreed to jointly inspect the flood embankment of River Ravi.
all pending water issues with Pakistan can be resolved
Pakistani commissioner Jamaat Ali Shah said a Pakistani delegation will leave for New Delhi next month to undertake inspection of Indian rivers. He also called for refining the role of the Indus Water Commission.
anchal
BRFite
Posts: 227
Joined: 01 Aug 2009 16:41

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by anchal »

Dus percenti and watery dreams

http://news.rediff.com/report/2010/jul/ ... ardari.htm
Since India had not come up with a viable solution to the water issue, Pakistan opted for international arbitration, he said.

"The first time I met (Indian Prime Minister) Manmohan Singh [ Images ], the first thing I spoke to him about was water. I am talking about the time almost two years ago, when I had just become President and I was at a United Nations programme where I met Manmohan Singh," he told the gathering.

"When (Singh) met me again, he said if there is a dispute on water, then you can go to the World Bank, you can go to the adjudicating authorities with your problem and we will not mind that," he added.
Finally some sense!
Shankk
BRFite
Posts: 246
Joined: 30 Jan 2006 14:16

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by Shankk »

I have read on this forum that IWT does not forbid India charging for real-time telemetry data. Is there any way for Pakistan to get the verdict from NE or arbitration court to "formally rule" that India cannot charge for real-time data. Would such a ruling be binding on India?
Nihat
BRFite
Posts: 1340
Joined: 10 Dec 2008 13:35

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by Nihat »

SSridhar wrote:The 'solution' that the above article offers hinges on cooperation on water. That would be a non-starter. India must be really foolish to offer a selective cooperation because a lower riparian state needs more water because of its poor water management, burgeoning population, dependence on water-guzzling crops and crop patters, poor farming techniques and skills etc. while that country continues to maintain unbridled hatred, unrelenting animosity, sending in terrorists to destroy us, allowing its terrorist tanzeems to recruit and train jihadis, maintaining a disproportionate armed force and nuclear weapons specifically to harass and threaten us and lying through their teeth not only to its own people but the rest of the world about evil Indian hegemon.

Pakistan must radically change before the kind of cooperation proposed by that author can be thought of. Water cannot be part of any CBM.
Very true , the IWT offers us the strategic advantage of being the upper riparian and when the situation turns desperate across the border (signs already evident) , the treaty buys us a significant negotiating tool.
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by chaanakya »

Shankk wrote:I have read on this forum that IWT does not forbid India charging for real-time telemetry data. Is there any way for Pakistan to get the verdict from NE or arbitration court to "formally rule" that India cannot charge for real-time data. ( No)Would such a ruling be binding on India?(No)
But then if India offers to do it free of charge in good neighbourly spirit................
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25362
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by SSridhar »

Shankk wrote:I have read on this forum that IWT does not forbid India charging for real-time telemetry data. Is there any way for Pakistan to get the verdict from NE or arbitration court to "formally rule" that India cannot charge for real-time data. Would such a ruling be binding on India?
Article VI, 'Exchange of Data', details what data needs to be exchanged periodically between the two countries. While such data collection is 'daily', data exchange is 'monthly' unless these are determined as 'operational data' in which case they may be transmitted daily or even less frequently. There is no provision currently for instantaneous and continuous data and therefore India is *not* obliged to agree to this request. IWT further states
Should one Party request the supply of any of these data by telegram, telephone, wireless, it shall reimburse the other Party for the cost of transmission.
India has been transmitting such data telegraphically without charging Pakistan anything for a long time now.

The below is what Article VII says under 'Future Cooperation'
(a) Each Party, to the extent it considers practicable and on agreement by the other Party to pay the costs to be incurred, will, at the request of the other Party, set up or install such hydrologic observation stations within the drainage basins of the Rivers, and set up or install such meteorological observation stations relating there to and carry out such observations thereat, as may be requested, and will supply the data so obtained.
See also my earlier posts on this
This was one
This was another
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by chaanakya »

Nihat wrote:
SSridhar wrote:The 'solution' that the above article offers hinges on cooperation on water. That would be a non-starter. India must be really foolish to offer a selective cooperation because a lower riparian state needs more water because of its poor water management, burgeoning population, dependence on water-guzzling crops and crop patters, poor farming techniques and skills etc. while that country continues to maintain unbridled hatred, unrelenting animosity, sending in terrorists to destroy us, allowing its terrorist tanzeems to recruit and train jihadis, maintaining a disproportionate armed force and nuclear weapons specifically to harass and threaten us and lying through their teeth not only to its own people but the rest of the world about evil Indian hegemon.

Pakistan must radically change before the kind of cooperation proposed by that author can be thought of. Water cannot be part of any CBM.
Very true , the IWT offers us the strategic advantage of being the upper riparian and when the situation turns desperate across the border (signs already evident) , the treaty buys us a significant negotiating tool.
The treaty is an example , a landmark one at that, in water conflict management between countries which are part of an international river basin. There are states ( J&K, Himanchal) which do not derive much benefit out of it. There are countries , such as China and Afganistan, which are not part of this river basin.

The main beneficiary of the traty is Pakistan. As has been noted in this thread, about 80% of water of the Indus system ( excluding those flowing from AFG) get allocated to it. Now which upper riparian country would concede 80 % of water to lower riparian country with which it had fought wars and a terrible partition episode and was/is a weak country when treaty was concluded.

So one can accuse India of not cooperaing with lower riparian country only if his senses have taken leave of oneself. Moreover, all official pronouncements by PK indicate and acknowledge the fact of careful adherehence to IWT by India even when hostalities broke out.

It is patently unfair to even suggest that IWT give India undue advantage and that India is not cooperating. Now I do not understand what more cooperation PK needs from India. . Do they want India to surrender all rights to western rivers and give all waters of eastern rivers to them? This can not even be contemplated.

This cry for cooperation is compounded by their water mismangement which results in 40% wastage of precious commodity. This is nothing but criminal waste and Pakistan should be taken to task by upper riparian state. Clean up your water dance or loose rights to water.

If they fear Indian action of stopping water at some unforeseen time in future they should analyse what is the source of this fear. A guilty conscience, having perpetrated acts of terrorism and caught in the process , can not rest easy on their heads. Yet India has shown remarkable restraint in all aspects of its relations with them. Of course India would never mind Pakistan exploring all avenues available to it under IWT.

Yet in their foolhardines they object to all schemes on the river basin as if they own the property ( IWT does not permit the ownership of area issue to come into the picture) . They hold a virtual pocket veto by taking recourse to each and every avenue available to them, right from delay in response to their own lack of technical competence to understand projects to prolonged negotiations, raising absurd demands at each turn and resorting to threats of instituting NE /Arbitration proceedings. They have even resorted to unprovoked firings in the project areas close to borders to scare away workers and militants/terrorists often threaten to blow up the works.After vitiating the atmosphere and muddying the water they expect fullest cooperation in delivering Indian interest to them on a plater. We can very well cut out head and give it to them and somehow they would be propitiated.

The so called moderate voices in Pakistan are nothing but the blunt edge of the knife they want to put in the heart of India.
The writer suggests "opportunities afforded by the "sharing the resource" paradigm".
India has set itself a target of adding 78,700 MW capacity in the Eleventh Five Year Plan.

The Government is hopeful that the country may end up adding a capacity of just 62,374 MW, about 20 per cent below the original target for the plan.
When India itself is energy hungry and it is unlikely that its demand is satiated for next few decades the question of selling electricity to Pakistan does not arise. As regards water, it is already getting 80% of it and wasting it. It has not constructed a single large storage dam after Tarbela to mitigate its problem nor has it constructed any HydroElectricity plants to tap the potential.If it has no plan to tap the resources available to it why it wants to ride on other's target. Will it be in a position to contribute financially or materially? I think it would demand free electricity and water so that it is not forced to fire the gun cocked at the head of India. Once sharing the resources idea is accepted it would demand a joint watershed /resource management authority where only Pakistan would weild veto with possibility of third parties meddling in the issues giving free advice.

Pakistan has to take following actions to solve its water problem.This advice is free ( to my dear pakilurks)
1. Invest heavily in tapping your water and hydro electricity potential
2.Build dams where you can manage water efficiently
3. Enforce strict water usage discipline, impose penal taxes and fines reduction in supplies to violators.

Now how to address their worst nightmere
They have to do one or two simple thing

1. Stop all state and non state actors and eat all Dossas provided by Lungimaster
2. Show result which demostrate their sincere desire for detente
3.Give Occupied J&K back to where it belongs
4. This space is reserved for future statements once first three are done.

That would make repproachment possible and then we can dream of living happily everafter.Right now Pakistan is suffering from Hyper Hydration and needs emergency treatment.
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25362
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by SSridhar »

India & Pakistan to jointly inspect pollution of drains
Indus Water Commissioner Syed Jamaat Ali Shah said on Friday that Pakistan and India had decided to conduct joint inspections to measure pollution levels in the Jhelum River, Hudiyara drain and Kasur drain.

Talking to reporters after the conclusion of the two-day meeting of the Indus Water Commission, Shah said both the countries had decided to conduct a joint survey to monitor river pollution. He said the schedule for the inspection would be announced later.

He said five issues, including the installation of telemetry monitoring systems on rivers, were discussed during the two-day meeting.

He said the issue of constructions along the Ravi River in India was also discussed and Pakistan would soon inspect the sites. He said the meeting had also decided to strengthen the working of the commission by setting up a body to oversee it.
Shankk
BRFite
Posts: 246
Joined: 30 Jan 2006 14:16

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by Shankk »

Thank you Sridhar for detailed reply. I do read this thread regularly and had seen those posts. Thank you for taking the time to elaborate. What I really wanted to ask was that does IWT give NE or CA powers like our constitution gives to the Supreme Court...SC verdicts are almost considered as laws passed by parliament. Looks like the answer is NO as Chanaakya said verdict is non binding unless something in IWT can be interpreted in such a way.

@Chanaakya - Regarding India showing readiness to share data, I am not at all concerned with that. It is all about acquiring the capability. All these concessions made unilaterally to Pakistan can also be used as a leverage as long as India does not bind herself legally. If terrorism tap is opened by Pakistan...India closes the tap of co-operation. Now it is about data...going forward...once the dam is built...
chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by chaanakya »

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/asia-pacific/india-pakistan-water-treaty-poised-to-burst/article1652763/#article
Even the veteran water expert who assisted with the original negotiations now feels that the treaty was inadequate.

“At the time, we felt it would be all right,” Mr. Malik said. “But now, I don't think it was a good treaty for Pakistan.”

Loss of faith in the Indus Water Treaty comes at a time when water disputes between the nuclear-armed neighbours have reached unprecedented levels of bombast
.

Pakistan claims its neighbour is behaving aggressively with plans to build dozens of hydroelectric projects in the coming years, accusing India of seeking the capacity to interrupt flows on three key rivers – the Indus, the Chenab and the Jhelum – protected under the treaty.

For its part, India says Pakistan is stirring up nationalist sentiment as a way of deflecting attention from water disputes and mismanagement inside its own borders.

Both accusations have a basis in fact, but neither side seems capable of giving ground. India faces an increasing shortage of electricity, with growing demand from industry and a burgeoning class of consumers who can afford household appliances, and seems unlikely to halt any of the 33 projects now at various stages of completion on the rivers covered by the treaty.

In a background briefing for journalists in New Delhi, senior Indian officials noted with concern that water campaigners on the other side of the border have promised that if rivers go dry in Pakistan, local people will “drink the blood of Indians.”

That kind of rhetoric is not only unhelpful, the government officials said, it is unnecessary, because India’s projects are strictly “run-of-the-river.” In other words, they generate power without interfering with river flows, as required by the treaty.

But in the Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir, where most of the construction is under way, the government’s own Chief Minister Omar Abdullah said the projects could affect river levels in Pakistan.

“A lot of people will tell you that future battles will be fought over water, not over oil,” Mr. Abdullah said in an interview. “If India has the potential to close the gates and shut off the water, that’s a problem for Pakistan. Whether India would do it or not is a different matter, but obviously the potential would exist.”
At least I have not read Mr Omar Abdullah making this statement. however if Pakis are not satisfied with the treaty after getting 80% of water they are welcome to trash it ans use Nookar method of negotiation with India.


Even the radical group Jamaat-ud-Dawa, an Islamic charity described by the United Nations as a front for the terrorist organization Lashkar-e-Taiba, recently formed a group called the Pakistan Water Movement and took up irrigation issues as a central part of its campaign.

The
convener of the new group, Hafiz Saif Ullah Mansoor, owns a 28-hectare farm in Punjab and says his yields have fallen 20 per cent this year because of water shortages. When he led a rally through Lahore recently, he said, hundreds of farmers on tractors crowded the streets. Even more astonishing, he said, was a train of at least 60 camels carrying outraged farmers from an arid district 300 kilometres southwest of the city.

“The people are flared up,” Mr. Mansoor said. “The government of Pakistan will have no choice but to respond with war.”

His colleague, Jamaat-ud-Dawa spokesman Yahya Mujahid, nodded in agreement. His group has gained added support since becoming vocal about water issues this year, he said. The group’s campaigns have become a way of drawing attention away from the water conflicts among Pakistan’s provinces, he said, and focusing on India as a common enemy.

“This is a way to create unity in Pakistan,” Mr. Mujahid said.
What happened to Islam as a basis of Unity and nation formation, drowned in flood of IWT???
neeraj
BRFite
Posts: 379
Joined: 12 Jun 2001 11:31
Location: UK

Re: Indus Water Treaty

Post by neeraj »

River Chenab in high-flood at Head Marala, Khanki
Image
LAHORE: Many villages have come inundated due to high-flood in River Chenab at Head Marala and Khanki areas on Wednesday morning, Geo news reported.

According to Head Khanki and Head Marala authorities the flow of fierce floodwater mounting at 2,10,000 cusecs is passing by two areas, resulting in turning the river in high-flood.

As many as five villages near Marala in Sialkot, thirteen villages between Head Khanki and Rasool Nagar and a village namely Kala Shadian near Qadirabad have been flooded by incessant overflow of fierce floodwater from River Chenab.

Meanwhile, a mammoth number approximating 70 villages are at stake of being washed out by outflow of floodwater from River Chenab in case the high-flood remains on rise, sources feared.

The authorities has held India responsible for flooding in River Chenab as they said India has released a big amount of water at Jammun Tavi place in River Chenab, sending the areas along river at high risk of being inundated and wiped out. Does India have any storage facility to hold water in Jammu Tavi. As usual blame yindoos for everything
Post Reply