In a bid to create irritants in the construction of Kishenganga and Ratle dams by India, Islamabad in its typical style had taken up misconceived complaint on the basis of breach of design specifications delineated under the Indus Water Treaty (IWT) to the World Bank’s Court of Arbitration (CoA). The World Bank in response recently appointed Prof. Sean Murphy as Chairman of the CoA and Michel Lino as the Neutral Expert (NE) in line with its responsibilities under the IWT.

Notwithstanding, the treaty’s most generous and unequal sharing of waters favouring Pakistan vis-a-vis India, Pakistan continuously resorts to complaint against India whenever the latter tries to develop any project on its side. This despite the fact that it is the only water-sharing pact in the world that compels the upper riparian state, i.e. India to defer its rights and interests to the downstream country, i.e. Pakistan.

Under IWT, Pakistan gets maximum share of water resources. Waters of Western rivers – Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab – amounting to around 135 Million Acre-Feet (MAF) annually – have been assigned largely to Pakistan, giving more than 78% of water share of the Indus River system. Of all the waters of the eastern rivers – Sutlej, Beas, and Ravi, India gets only 33 MAF annually for unrestricted use.

Ironically, the Pak objections on India’s Kishenganga (330 MW) and Ratle (850 MW) hydroelectric power plants on the tributaries of Jhelum and Chenab Rivers are on technical grounds rather than construction of dam in principle, despite India’s full compliance to the technicalities stipulated under the IWT. Notably, Islamabad sought World Bank intervention seeking specifically appointment of CoA. It is driven by the intent to disrupt development of water resource on the Indian side rather than any genuine apprehension.

As per the treaty, India is permitted to construct hydroelectric power facilities on the tributaries of Jhelum and Chenab Rivers. India as per IWT can create water capacity storage upto 3.6 MAF on Western rivers but no storage capacity has been created so far which largely flow into Pakistan. India has also been given the right to generate hydroelectricity through run of the river (RoR) projects on the Western Rivers in IWT, like freeboard, intake, spillway, bondage and low-level outlet.

Since India has never breached technical specifications of IWT, the Pak effort to seek World Bank’s arbitration is pointless. Islamabad’s only intention appears to impede the development of water projects on Indian side and distort India’s image on the false pretexts.

Seeking arbitration from the World Bank on water sharing with India is part of Islamabad’s blame game. As it has been lax and inefficient in addressing its economic woes and meeting the priorities of development, Islamabad, as part of its strategy to obfuscate, blames India for its own failures. The fact is that Islamabad’s concerns are overlaid by its changing demographics, increased urbanisation and rising demands on the agricultural and industrial sectors while it has failed to develop and manage water resources available to it. Pakistan is fast emerging as one of the most water stressed countries in the world due to its failure in capacity building despite IWT guaranteeing it sufficient water.

One reason is that Islamabad lacks resources for maintenance and development of its water resources to ensure adequate supply for catering to increased demand and ensure environment and people friendly flow. While India is developing projects to exploit allotted water resources, Pakistan is trying to stall or delay these projects so as to blame India for its failure.

Along with the crisis posed by rivers and streams running dry, Pakistan’s dangerously depleted groundwater levels have left most parts of the country parched. If present trends persist, the entire country may face “water scarcity” by 2025, according to a report by the Pakistan Institute of Development Economics.

IWT is the only international treaty that has survived for more than 6 decades, despite three wars fought by the two neighbouring countries. The treaty remained unaffected and hence is considered one of the most successful water-sharing endeavours in the world.

Analysts point out that there are loopholes in the treaty that are extensively of technical nature which Pakistan exploits to stall legitimate Indian projects. This is hampering the scientific utilisation of the water with the latest technology which are now available.

Islamabad had objected to Indian dam construction earlier also. The World Bank had appointed Raymond Lafitte as the NE in the dispute relating to Baglihar dam by India on the Chenab River as a run-of-the-river plant. In its ruling in 2007, the NE upheld India’s right to utilise the waters of the western rivers more effectively calling them within the ambit of the treaty for power generation.

The canals in Punjab and Rajasthan – Rajasthan Feeder and the Sirhind Feeder – had become old and were not maintained properly. This had resulted in the lowering of their water carrying capacity. The infrastructure to utilize the waters has remained under-developed in Indian Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir (J&K). Thus, the water from the Harike Barrage on the confluence of the Beas and Sutlej in Punjab was usually released downstream into Pakistan. Pakistan is getting more waters than its entitlement in the Eastern rivers also. Islamabad is also looking at Kishenganga and Ratle projects with similar intention.

Pakistan had also raised objections on the construction and technical designs of the Pakal Dul and Lower Kalnai hydropower plants located on Marusudar River, a tributary of the Chenab in Kishtwar district of J&K. Pakistan wants to engage India in unwarranted objections for capturing Indian water resources by referring technical specifications of these dams.

India has been transparent and cooperative on the water sharing issue with Pakistan. Rather than focussing on developing and managing water resources available to it, Islamabad is using false pretexts to derail and delay development on the Indian side. Earlier on several occasions India and Pakistan had discussed the exchange of hydrological and flood data. Every time India underscored that all its projects are fully compliant with the provisions of the IWT.

The time has come now for Pakistan to resolve its own funds crisis and policy paralysis on development and management of its water resources rather than blaming it on India. There is also need for revisiting the IWT’s technical specifications in the wake of climatic change that has taken place in the last six decades since IWT was signed in 1960. The basin’s size and volume is getting altered by climate change and it is going to intensify in future. Experts predict that there could be instances of more high-intensity rainfall as well as long stretches of scanty rainfall. There would be a high influx of water due to glacial melt.

The contribution of glaciers in the Indus basin is higher than in the Ganges or Brahmaputra basins. Indian plans would actually benefit Pakistan in managing and averting climate related future disasters. If Pakistan cooperates and calibrates its efforts for water resources development and management with that of India, it would go a long way to prepare a robust system against natural disasters caused by climate change. Pragmatism also entails that there is a need to update certain technical specifications and expand the scope of the IWT to address these issues as well as climate change concerns. But Pak authorities always see conspiracy rather than possibility of peaceful coexistence with India. Would they change for the people of both the countries? Has it learnt from recent floods?

L'articolo Indus Water Treaty: Pak Intention to Stall Indian Dam Construction proviene da InsideOver.

The future of talks between Egypt and Ethiopia on the latter’s gigantic Nile River dam is uncertain after Ethiopia absented itself from a recent meeting on the dam in Washington.

What Happened?

The foreign and water ministers of Egypt, Ethiopia and Sudan were scheduled to meet in the U.S. capital on February 27 and 28 to sign a final and important deal on the dam, following four months of talks sponsored by the White House and the World Bank. The deal determines regulations for the filling of the dam reservoir and its operation, as well as mechanisms for dealing with droughts and disputes between Ethiopia and the two downstream states, Egypt and Sudan. However, Ethiopia did not send its delegation to the meeting, giving rise to fears about what the future may hold in the stalemate over the Ethiopian project.

Egyptian Anger

Egypt has been trying to get Ethiopia to commit to signing a deal on the dam for several years now. The Nile River is the only source of water for Egypt’s population of 100 million. It gives Egypt 55.5 billion cubic meters of water every year, but this is around 30% below national needs. The same share has also been the same over the years, while the population keeps growing.

The dam will significantly lessen the amounts of water arriving in Egypt, further exacerbating its water shortages. The prospect of reduced water revenues from the Nile puts Egypt’s agricultural sector in peril, threatens the nation’s livestock, and opens the door for water shortage-induced social and political unrest.

Previous Attempts to Reach a Deal

The two countries started negotiating over the dam five years ago, but failed to reach a deal. In March 2015, Ethiopia, Egypt, and Sudan signed a declaration of principles on water sharing. The same document allows the three countries to seek international mediation in case of their failure to reach a deal. In October last year, Cairo demanded mediation from the U.S. and the World Bank.

The U.S. Department of the Treasury held a series of meetings with the delegations of the three countries since then. The meetings culminated in a deal that should have been signed by the three states during the February 27-28 meeting. However, the Ethiopian delegation was nowhere to be found.

Egypt initialed the deal on February 28. It also criticized the Ethiopian absence, describing it as “unjustified.”

“Egyptian institutions will deal with this issue with all due seriousness and defend the interests of the Egyptian people with all available means,” the Egyptian Foreign Ministry said in a statement.

US Warning for Ethiopia

The U.S. Department of the Treasury said Ethiopia should not fill the dam reservoir before signing the deal with Egypt and Sudan. It added in a statement on February 28 that it looked forward to Ethiopia’s conclusion of its process of national consultations on the deal with Egypt and Sudan as soon as possible to provide for its signing at the earliest possible time. Final testing and filling of the dam reservoir, the Department of the Treasury said, should not take place without an agreement.

“We also note the concern of downstream populations in Sudan and Egypt due to unfinished work on the safe operation of the dam, and the need to implement all necessary dam safety measures in accordance with international standards before filling begins,” the statement said.

It added that the U.S. is committed to remain engaged with the three countries until they sign the final agreement.

The Department of the Treasury noted that an agreement would be transformational for the region, resulting in significant cross-border cooperation, regional development and economic integration, and improvement in the lives of the more than 250 million people of Egypt, Ethiopia, and Sudan.

Ethiopian Persistence

Ethiopia countered the Egyptian criticism and the U.S. warning against filling the dam reservoir before signing the agreement by saying that it would start filling the dam reservoir in July. In a joint statement, the Ethiopian water and foreign ministers expressed disappointment over the statement of the Department of the Treasury.

“Ethiopia had notified Egypt, Sudan, and the US that it needed more time to deliberate on the process,” the ministers said.

The dam is Ethiopia’s national mega project. Addis Ababa says the project is necessary for social and economic development in Ethiopia. Ethiopia is investing close to $4 billion in the construction of the dam. It should generate 5150 megawatts of electrical power after its completion and full operation in 2021.

The foreign and water ministers of Ethiopia said in their statement that their country would commence first filling of the dam reservoir in parallel with the construction of the dam in accordance with the principles of equitable and reasonable utilization and the causing of no significant harm as provided for under the 2015 declaration of principles with Egypt and Sudan.

“Ethiopia does not accept the characterization that the negotiation on the Guidelines and Rules on the First Filling and Annual Operation of the dam is completed,” the two ministers said.

They added that the text initialed by Egypt in Washington is not the outcome of the negotiation or the technical and legal discussion of the three countries.

“Ethiopia is set to fill the dam reservoir step by step with a maximum period of seven years,” the ministers said. “According to the plan, the first round of filling the dam will begin in July this year,” they added.

L'articolo Uncertain Future For Nile Dam Talks After Ethiopia Skips Crucial Meeting proviene da InsideOver.