oz

fo
eh
M
hi
India, Pakistan, & Modifying

la
El
the Indus Waters Treaty
y
rb
aa
j
eh
Sh
 oz
fo
Context

eh
Recent geopolitical and environmental changes have prompted calls for Indus

M
Waters Treaty (IWT)’s modification and exploring the complexities and challenges
involved in renegotiating the IWT, considering the perspectives of both nations.

hi
About the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT)

la
It is a landmark agreement between India and Pakistan, was signed in 1960,

El
brokered by the World Bank, to manage and share the waters of the Indus River

y
system. It has been a cornerstone of cooperation and conflict resolution between
rb
the two nations, despite their often strained relations.
Note: Eugene R. Black was the president of the World Bank when the Indus
aa
Waters Treaty was signed in 1960.
j
eh
Sh
 oz
Historical Context

fo
The partition of British India in 1947 not only divided the land but also the Indus
River system, which flows through both countries.

eh
The initial agreement, the Inter-Dominion Accord of 1948, failed to provide a

M
lasting solution, leading to disputes over water sharing.

hi
The World Bank’s intervention in 1951 eventually led to the signing of the IWT by
Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru and Pakistani President Ayub Khan in

la
1960.

El
Key Provisions

y
The treaty allocates the waters of the six rivers of the Indus basin between the
rb
two countries: Eastern Rivers (Ravi, Beas, Sutlej): Allocated to India for
aa
unrestricted use. Wester Rivers (Indus, Jhelum, Chenab): Allocated to Pakistan,
with India allowed limited use for agriculture, domestic purposes, and non-
j
eh

consumptive uses like hydropower generation.

Sh
Sh
eh
jaa
rb
y
El
la
hi
M
eh
fo
oz
 oz
fo
Mechanisms for Cooperation

eh
The IWT established the Permanent Indus Commission (PIC), comprising

M
commissioners from both countries, to manage the treaty’s implementation and
resolve disputes. The PIC meets regularly to discuss issues and ensure

hi
compliance.

la
India’s Perspective

El
India’s recent move to seek modifications to the IWT is driven by several factors.

y
The demographic and agricultural demands have significantly increased since
rb
1960. India argues that the treaty needs to reflect these changes to ensure
sustainable water management. Additionally, India is keen on accelerating its
aa
hydropower projects on the western rivers, which are permitted under the treaty
j
eh

but have faced objections from Pakistan.

Sh
 oz
fo
Pakistan’s Concerns

eh
Pakistan, as the lower riparian state, is primarily concerned with ensuring

M
uninterrupted water flow. The country relies heavily on the Indus River system for

hi
its agriculture and drinking water. Pakistan fears that India’s proposed
modifications could reduce water availability, impacting its agricultural output

la
and overall water security.

El
Islamabad had in the past reached out to the World Bank to express its objection

y
to the design and construction of the 330 MW Kishanganga hydroelectric project
rb
and the 850 MW Ratle hydroelectric project on the tributaries of the Indus in
Jammu and Kashmir. Tulbul Navigation Project has also come under criticism and
aa
objection.
j
eh
Sh
 oz
fo
What is the Kishanganga water dispute?

eh
The dispute revolves around a hydroelectric power plant on the Kishanganga

M
River, which is a tributary of the Jhelum and is known as the Neelum in Pakistan.

hi
Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Saturday (19 May, 2018) dedicated the state

la
run NHPC Ltd’s Kishanganga hydro power project in Jammu and Kashmir to the
nation. The development assumes significance given the strategic importance of

El
the 330 megawatt (MW) project on the river Kishanganga, a tributary of Jhelum.

y
While Pakistan had challenged the project under the Indus Waters Treaty of 1960,
rb
the International Court of Arbitration at The Hague ruled in India’s favour in 2013.
The Jhelum originates in India and flows into Pakistan, and according to the Indus
aa
Water Treaty, whoever builds the project first will have the first rights on the river
j
eh

water.
Sh
 oz
fo
Kishanganga hydropower project will provide 13% free power to Jammu and

eh
Kashmir including 1% for local area development fund amounting to around

M
Rs133 crore per year.

hi
la
El
y
rb
j aa
eh
Sh
 oz
fo
eh
Ratle Hydroelectric Power Project Dispute

M
On the issue of the Ratle Hydropower plant, Islamabad has raised four
objections. It wants India to maintain the freeboard at one metre; whereas, India

hi
wants to keep it at two metres. In addition, India wants to keep the pondage of

la
24 million cubic metres but Pakistan wants it to be restricted to eight million
cubic metres. Pakistan also wants the intake of the project to be raised by up to

El
8.8 metres and its spillways should be raised by up to 20 metres.

y
The 850MW Ratle Hydropower project, if constructed under its existing
rb
objectionable design, will reduce a sizeable water flow of the Chenab River at
Head Marala, which will be detrimental to the irrigation in central Punjab of
aa
Pakistan.
j
eh
Sh
Sh
eh
jaa
rb
y
El
la
hi
M
eh
fo
oz
 oz
fo
Tulbul Navigation Project

eh
The Tulbul project is a “navigation lock-cum-control structure” at the mouth of
the lake, located on the Jhelum river. It is a key intra-state channel to ferry state’s

M
goods and people.

hi
The idea is to ensure year-round navigation along the 20-km stretch from

la
Anantnag to Srinagar and Baramulla, and on the 22 km-stretch between Sopore
and Baramulla that becomes non-navigable in winter with water depth of only

El
2.5 ft (to sustain navigation through the year a minimum depth of water in the
lake is necessary).

y
rb
The project envisages water release from lake to maintain minimum draught of
4.5 feet in Jhelum. India had started constructing a 439 feet long barrage at the
aa
lake’s mouth. India unilaterally suspended the Tulbul project (Islamabad calls it
j
Wullar Barrage) in 1987 after Pakistan objected.
eh
Sh
 oz
Current Challenges

fo
Hydropower Projects: India’s construction of hydropower projects on the

eh
western rivers has been a point of contention. Pakistan fears these projects could

M
affect water flow, while India insists they are within the treaty’s provisions.
Technical Disputes: One of the primary issues plaguing the IWT today is the

hi
technical dispute over the interpretation of its provisions. Both countries have

la
different understandings of how the treaty should be implemented, particularly

El
concerning the construction of hydroelectric projects by India on the western
rivers. Pakistan fears that these projects could reduce the flow of water into its

y
territory, while India insists that they are within the treaty’s guidelines.
rb
Political Tensions: The bilateral relationship between India and Pakistan is
aa
currently at a low point, with minimal diplomatic or economic engagement. This
strained relationship exacerbates the difficulties in resolving technical disputes
j
eh

and finding common ground on water-sharing issues.

Sh
 oz
fo
eh
Climate Change: The impacts of climate change, including altered precipitation

M
patterns and glacial melt, are adding another layer of complexity to the
management of the Indus Basin. These changes threaten the long-term

hi
sustainability of the water resources that the treaty was designed to manage.

la
Renegotiations:

El
Modifying the Indus Waters Treaty

y
In recent years, India has sought to modify the treaty to address its growing
rb
water needs and concerns over cross-border terrorism affecting treaty
operations. However, renegotiating the treaty remains a complex and sensitive
aa
issue, given the lack of trust between the two nations.
j
eh
Sh
 oz
fo
eh
Arguments for Modifying the Treaty

M
Adaptation to Modern Challenges: The treaty may not fully address

hi
contemporary issues such as climate change, increased water demand, and new
technological advancements. Updating the treaty could help both countries

la
manage their water resources more effectively in the face of these challenges. •

El
Securing Water Interests: For India, modifying the treaty could provide an
opportunity to secure its water interests more robustly, particularly in light of its

y
rb
growing population and agricultural needs. It could involve clearer guidelines on
the construction of hydroelectric projects and better mechanisms for dispute
aa
resolution
j
eh
Sh
 oz
fo
eh
Risks of Modifying the Treaty

M
Escalation of Tensions: Any attempt to modify the treaty could be perceived

hi
as a unilateral move by Pakistan, potentially escalating tensions. Given the

la
already strained relations, this could lead to further diplomatic and possibly
military confrontations.

El
Political Sensitivities: Water is a highly sensitive issue in both countries, and

y
any changes to the treaty could be met with significant political resistance
rb
domestically. It could complicate negotiations and make it difficult to reach a
mutually acceptable agreement.
j aa
eh
Sh
 oz
fo
eh
M
Way Forward: Balancing Act
To navigate these challenges, a balanced approach is necessary. Engaging in

hi
dialogue with Pakistan, possibly with the involvement of neutral third parties like

la
the World Bank, could help in finding common ground. Both countries need to

El
recognize the mutual benefits of cooperation over conflict when it comes to
shared water resources. Ultimately, while modifying the IWT could help address

y
modern challenges and secure India’s water interests, it must be approached with
rb
caution to avoid exacerbating tensions. Constructive dialogue and a willingness to
compromise will be key to any successful renegotiation.
j aa
eh
Sh
 oz
Additional info:

fo
• The World Bank has appointed a "neutral expert" and a chairman of the Court

eh
of Arbitration regarding the Kishenganga and Ratle hydroelectric power plants,

M
in view of disagreements and differences between India and Pakistan over the
1960 Indus Waters Treaty. Michel Lino has been appointed as the Neutral

hi
Expert and Sean Murphy has been appointed as Chairman of the Court of

la
Arbitration regarding the Kishenganga and Ratle hydroelectric power plants.

El
• A five-member Pakistani delegation was flown to Jammu’s Kishtwar on Monday

y
rb
to inspect power projects set up on the rivers covered under the Indus Waters
Treaty (IWT) of 1960. Visit comes against the backdrop of Pakistan’s technical
aa
objection to Kishanganga and Ratle projects. India has opposed Pakistan’s bid
to hold ‘parallel proceedings by an illegally constituted Court of Arbitration.
j
eh
Sh
Sh
eh
jaa
rb
y
El
la
hi
M
THANK YOU

eh
fo
oz