Indus water talks: Unbroken patterns
https://arab.news/py3qj
In the deadlocked political and diplomatic situation between India and Pakistan, the recently concluded India-Pakistan Permanent Indus Commission (PIC) talks between the two commissioners for Indus Water were seen as a sign of better times to come. The fact is that the PIC Commission is a platform for bilateral meetings but it neither flows from a bilateral architecture nor does it have any potential to create positive pathways for the troubled relationship.
At the meeting earlier this month, it was Pakistan’s asking, yet again. One related to the design of two dams. The location of these dams is Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir. The other was about information sharing with each other on the flow of water.
Pakistan reiterated its observations on the Kiru Hydroelectric project (HEP) located upstream river Chenab and India’s new run-of-the-river small HEPs on Western rivers. Response to Pakistan’s objections to Indian projects including Pakal Dul and Lower Kalnai was also sought, the communiqué read.
On the two dams, Pakal Dul and Lower Kalnai, the Pakistan delegation was told that on the subject of the former, the Indians were still in the process of gathering information for the design which could then be shared with Pakistan. The Pakistan delegation sought an earlier meeting than the scheduled meeting a year later so that India could share the information and also arrange an on-site visit. Pakistan’s concern was that receiving information on the dam a year later at the annual scheduled meeting would mean that India would begin and continue construction until then, since the Indus Water Treaty (IWT) has no provision for asking either country to stop construction of a dam if questions are raised by the other country.
Regarding the Lower Kalnai dam, Pakistan was informed that work had stopped because of the absence of a contractor and India had opted to abandon it. No plans for a substitute dam were mentioned by India at the meeting.
Interestingly no substantive move had taken place specifically by India, who had been asked by Pakistan at the March 2021 meeting for information on these very dams.
Experiencing the usual stonewalling by India on information sharing regarding India’s run of the river dams, Pakistan did propose invoking Article 6 of the IWT and took the matter to the third party dispute resolution mechanism provided for within the treaty.
India disagreed with Pakistan’s position that the bilateral platform for resolving the matter had been exhausted. Pakistan agreed to not invoke the dispute resolution mechanism. Pakistan’s rationale reportedly was that it did not want to be seen as being ‘hasty’ or non-cooperative. Also, Pakistani negotiators occasionally consider overlooking technical questions related to smaller dams that India plans to build in the hope that they may be able to leverage this goodwill gesture in a later IWT-related dispute.
The political climate between Pakistan and India is an inevitable influencer of what happens during the talks, but these talks on the very critical question of water also generates a whole new dynamic of its own.
Nasim Zehra
Pakistan also raised with India the question of it discontinuing sharing advance flood flow information with Pakistan, a requirement laid down in the IWT and practiced by the two countries between 1989 to 2018. The Pakistan delegation stressed upon the criticality of this IWT-mandated information especially in the monsoon seasons when the risk of flood is at the peak. Pakistan stressed upon the peoples’ suffering on the Pakistani side when high volume water discharge leads to death and destruction.
India disagreed with Pakistan’s position that information sharing was treaty mandated or that it was legally bound to share that information.
The deliberations between Pakistan and India during the PIC meeting were generally a repeat of old patterns: Pakistan invokes IWT clauses to get information, somewhat belatedly on the dams India has planned. And India stalls.
For example, on the controversial Baghliar dam, Pakistan on an erroneous assumption that bilateral talks would help, delayed invoking the dispute resolution mechanism. Also there is a lack of clarity on legal matters, delayed responses often because of vacillation in top level policy decisions which are also vulnerable to advice by Washington, and often the third pole when Islamabad-Rawalpindi take key policy decisions in addressing old or new bilateral crises and conflicts.
The political climate between Pakistan and India is an inevitable influencer of what happens during the talks, but these talks on the very critical question of water also generates a whole new dynamic of its own.
How prepared is Pakistan at the strategic level, focused primarily on the law-fare, to ensure fair play for itself on this matter of life and death? Despite Pakistan’s clear realization of this, its occasional patterns of delays, misplaced assumptions regarding Indian goodwill reciprocity, ad-hocism and piece-meal approach, underscore the need for a thoroughly thought-through comprehensive strategy.
- Nasim Zehra is an author, analyst and national security expert.
Twitter: @NasimZehra
