Home Contact Us  
   

India - Articles

Print Bookmark Email Facebook Subscribe
#3198, 22 July 2010
 
Indus Waters Governance-III: Keep the IWT away from the Composite Dialogue
D Suba Chandran
Deputy Director, Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies (IPCS), New Delhi
email: subachandran@gmail.com
 

During the recent months, there has been an increasingly shrill noise from Islamabad vis-à-vis the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), in terms of India violating the treaty. See ‘Pakistan and the Indus: The Blame India Project’, 21 June 2010 There has also been an increased emphasis from the Pakistani side, to include the waters issue into the composite dialogue. Will this be a better strategy to discuss the water issue, than the present one? Or will this prove counter-productive?

India, at the outset, is apprehensive and in fact has rejected the idea of including the water issue in the composite dialogue. The primary reason for New Delhi’s rejection is its cautious approach – that it does not want one more issue to be added to the Composite Dialogue. Also it does not want one more contentious issue, whose weight will pull down the composite dialogue.

The more pertinent question is if including the water issue in the composite dialogue will help India and Pakistan in achieving better results. It is unlikely, for the following reasons.

First, so far, India and Pakistan have been discussing water issues in a separate platform – Indus Waters Commission, which is historically older than the composite dialogue. Article VIII of the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) signed in 1960 provides for a permanent Indus Waters Commission and two Commissioners, one in India and the other one in Pakistan. The IWT also ensures that these two Commissioners “meet regularly at least once a year, alternatively in India and Pakistan” and “undertake, once in every five years, a general tour of inspection of the Rivers for ascertaining the facts connected with various developments and works on the Rivers.” Besides, the IWT provides that “the Commission shall also meet when requested by either Commissioner.” In terms of the appointment of the commissioner, the IWT says, the Commissioner should be a high ranking engineer, competent in the field of hydrology and water use.”

What the IWT provides is the following: competent and specialist engineers, who will meet annually (and more, if there is a requirement) and undertake a general inspection of the Rivers. Thus the treaty provides for permanency, specialists, regular visits and meetings. Compare this with the other important issues, which are discussed as a part of the composite dialogue from J&K to nuclear stability. In terms of regular meetings and relative success no other issues can claim a similar positive output, as that of the Indus Waters Commission meetings.

Second, the composite dialogue is not only a recent phenomenon, but also highly dependent on the nature of regimes, leadership and events of importance. There is no need to repeat, that the change in regimes, at times even governments affect the nature and intensity of the composite dialogue. Issues such as terrorism and sub conventional wars (like those on the Kargil conflict, terrorist attacks on the Indian Parliament and Mumbai) derail the composite dialogue. In short, the composite dialogue is unreliable, in terms of sustenance and seriousness.

Third, the composite dialogue also suffers from a huge disadvantage in terms of its failure to insulate forward or backward movement on one issue, from the other issues. In most cases, all the eight issues that form the composite dialogue are discussed over a period of three to five days, in the same venue by different groups. If there is no forward movement on the first issue discussed on the first day, it has a domino effect on the other issues. As a result, the failure to find a forward movement on the first issue, affects the progress of the other issues.

Fourth, the water issue is no more a bilateral issue between India and Pakistan. There are serious differences within each country; for example, in J&K, there are numerous complaints from the people of across the Line of Control (LoC) on the sharing of waters. While J&K on the Indian side has been upset about the IWT, for not allowing them to exploit the water resources, especially in terms of power generation, both the administrative units across the LoC in Muzaffarabad and Gilgit have been equally upset with the IWT. The AJK government has been complaining about the Mangala dam, especially in terms of the environmental impacts and also the non-settlement of people who have been displaced due to this dam, there are numerous problems vis-à-vis the Diamer-Basha dam, for which Gilgit-Baltistan have raised substantial objections. Besides the two parts of Kashmir across the LoC, the smaller provinces of Pakistan, especially NWFP and Sindh have been extremely upset with the government of Pakistan. They complain that the internal sharing of Indus Waters within Pakistan is beneficial to Punjab, at the cost of Sindh and NWFP. In the last few years, there have been numerous discussions in the Sindh provincial assembly that have repeatedly emphasized that the Indus Waters Treaty is not in their favour.

Given the above complications, it would be useful and beneficial to keep the IWT out of the composite dialogue, to keep it productive and meaningful. Moreover, one should learn from the IWT and split the composite dialogue into smaller insulated and regular processes.

(This is a part of a series on Indus Waters Governance; forthcoming articles will focus on issues relating to Chashma-Jhelum canal, Greater Thal controversy and Kalabagh dam)

Other Article in the Series

Indus Waters Governance-I: Crisis of Institutions
Indus Waters Governance-II: From ‘Letter and Spirit’ to ‘Letter vs Spirit’

Print Bookmark Email Facebook Subscribe
IPCS Columnists
Af-Pak Diary
D Suba Chandran
Resetting Kabul-Islamabad Relations: Three Key Issues
Can Pakistan Reset its Relations with Afghanistan?
The New Afghanistan: Four Major Challenges for President Ghani
Big Picture
Prof Varun Sahni
Understanding Democracy and Diversity in J&K
When Xi Met Modi: Juxtaposing China and India
Pakistan?s Tactical Nuclear Weapons: The Inevitability of Instability

Dateline Colombo

Asanga Abeyagoonasekera.
Sri Lanka: Moving Towards a Higher Collective Outcome
The Importance of Electing the Best to our Nation's Parliament
Sri Lanka: Toward a Diaspora Re-Engagement Plan
Dateline Islamabad
Salma Malik
Pakistan's Hurt Locker: What Next?
IPCS Forecast: Pakistan in 2015
India-Pakistan Relations in 2015: Through a Looking Glass
 
Dhaka Discourse
Prof Delwar Hossain
IPCS Forecast: Bangladesh in 2015
18th SAARC Summit: A Perspective from Bangladesh
Bangladesh in Global Forums: Diplomacy vs. Domestic Politics
Eagle Eye
Prof Chintamani Mahapatra
India-US: Significance of the Second Modi-Obama Meet
Has President Obama Turned Lame Duck?
Modi-Obama Summit: Criticism for Criticism?s Sake?

East Asia Compass
Dr Sandip Mishra
India-Japan-US Trilateral: India?s Policy for the Indo-Pacific
China-South Korea Ties: Implications for the US Pivot to Asia
Many ?Pivots to Asia?: What Does It Mean For Regional Stability?
Himalayan Frontier
Pramod Jaiswal
Nepal?s New Constitution: Instrument towards Peace or Catalyst to Conflict?
IPCS Forecast: Nepal in 2015
Constitution-making: Will Nepal Miss its Second Deadline?

Indo-Pacific
Prof Shankari Sundararaman
IPCS Forecast: Southeast Asia in 2015
Indonesia's Pacific Identity: What Jakarta Must Do in West Papua
Modi in Myanmar: From ?Look East? to ?Act East?
Indus-tan
Sushant Sareen
IPCS Forecast: Pakistan in 2015
Islamic State: Prospects in Pakistan
Pakistan: The Futility of Internationalising Kashmir

Looking East
Wasbir Hussain
Myanmar in New Delhi's Naga Riddle
China: ?Peaceful? Display of Military Might
Naga Peace Accord: Need to Reserve Euphoria
Maritime Matters
Vijay Sakhuja
Indian Ocean: Modi on a Maritime Pilgrimage
Indian Ocean: Exploring Maritime Domain Awareness
IPCS Forecast: The Indian Ocean in 2015

Nuke Street
Amb Sheelkant Sharma
US-Russia and Global Nuclear Security: Under a Frosty Spell?
India's Nuclear Capable Cruise Missile: The Nirbhay Test
India-Australia Nuclear Agreement: Bespeaking of a New Age
Red Affairs
Bibhu Prasad
Countering Left Wing Extremism: Failures within Successes
Return of the Native: CPI-Maoist in Kerala
The Rising Civilian Costs of the State-Vs-Extremists Conflict

Regional Economy
Amita Batra
India and the APEC
IPCS Forecast: South Asian Regional Integration
South Asia: Rupee Regionalisation and Intra-regional Trade Enhancement
South Asian Dialectic
PR Chari
Resuming the Indo-Pak Dialogue: Evolving a New Focus
Defence Management in India: An Agenda for Parrikar
Pakistani Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan: Implications for Asian Security

Spotlight West Asia
Amb Ranjit Gupta
Prime Minister Modi Finally Begins His Interaction with West Asia*
A Potential Indian Role in West Asia?
US-GCC Summit: More Hype than Substance
Strategic Space
Manpreet Sethi
India-Russia Nuclear Vision Statement: See that it Delivers
Global Nuclear Disarmament: The Humanitarian Consequences Route
Nasr: Dangers of Pakistan's Short Range Ballistic Missile

The Strategist
Vice Admiral Vijay Shankar
Jihadi Aggression and Nuclear Deterrence
The Blight of Ambiguity
Falun Gong: The Fear Within


OTHER REGULAR contributors
Gurmeet Kanwal
Harun ur Rashid
N Manoharan
Wasbir Hussain
Rana Banerji
N Manoharan

Ruhee Neog
Teshu Singh
Aparupa Bhattacherjee
Roomana Hukil
Aparupa Bhattacherjee


 
Related Articles
D Suba Chandran,
"Indus Waters Governance-V: One River, Three Dialogues," 27 September 2010
D Suba Chandran,
"Indus Waters Governance-IV: Don’t Securitize the Water Debate," 26 August 2010
Firdaus Ahmed,
"Jammu and Kashmir: Need for a Political Solution," 20 July 2010
D Suba Chandran,
"Indus Waters Governance-II: From ‘Letter and Spirit’ to ‘Letter vs Spirit’," 19 July 2010
D Suba Chandran,
"Indus Waters Governance-I: Crisis of Institutions," 15 July 2010
Pia Malhotra,
"Water: an Opportunity for SAARC?," 14 May 2010
Mohammad Ashraf,
"Security Détente Before Political Détente," 8 March 2010
Rekha Chakravarthi,
"From Mumbai to Lahore: Where Do We Go From Here?," 26 March 2009

Browse by Publications

Commentaries 
Issue Briefs 
Special Reports 
Research Papers 
Seminar Reports 
Conference Reports 

Browse by Region/Countries

East Asia 
South Asia 
Southeast Asia 
US & South Asia 
China 
Myanmar 
Afghanistan 
Iran 
Pakistan 
India 
J&K  

Browse by Issues

India & the world  
Indo-Pak 
Military 
Terrorism 
Naxalite Violence 
Nuclear 
Suicide Terrorism 
Peace & Conflict Database 
Article by same Author
Will the Genie Want to Go Back?

The Fall of Rajapaksa: Why Democracies Fail Strongmen

Pakistan: The Military Courts

From Kashmir to Kabul

A Fractured Mandate: The Big Picture

And Now, They Are Coming For Our Children

Pak-Afghan Reset: Will the Taliban and al Qaeda follow?

Resetting Kabul-Islamabad Relations: Three Key Issues

Rise India, avoid regional pitfalls

Foreign Fighters of Pakistan: Why Pashtuns and Punjabis?

Can Pakistan Reset its Relations with Afghanistan?

The New Afghanistan: Four Major Challenges for President Ghani

Narendra Modi and Xi Jinping: Strong Leaders, Hard Issues

Pakistan: The Coup that didn’t take

Pakistan: Crouching Democrats, Hidden Khakis

Processes at the cost of peace?

Cost of Peace

Rise of Democratic Anarchists

Don’t steal the election now

Mullah Fazlullah: Challenges to the “Eliminate or Extradite” Approach

The Tahirul Qadri Affair

Dhaka as the Gateway to India’s Look East Policy

Modi, Sharif and the Cross-LoC Interactions

Region by Sub-regions

Civil-Military Equations in Pakistan: Que Sera Sera

ADD TO:
Blink
Del.icio.us
Digg
Furl
Google
Simpy
Spurl
Y! MyWeb
Facebook
 
Print Bookmark Email Facebook Subscribe
Year 2017
 January  February  March  April  May  June  July
 2016  2015  2014  2013  2012  2011  2010  2009
 2008  2007  2006  2005  2004  2003  2002  2001
 2000  1999  1998  1997
 
 

The Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies (IPCS) is the premier South Asian think tank which conducts independent research on and provides an in depth analysis of conventional and non-conventional issues related to national and South Asian security including nuclear issues, disarmament, non-proliferation, weapons of mass destruction, the war on terrorism, counter terrorism , strategies security sector reforms, and armed conflict and peace processes in the region.

For those in South Asia and elsewhere, the IPCS website provides a comprehensive analysis of the happenings within India with a special focus on Jammu and Kashmir and Naxalite Violence. Our research promotes greater understanding of India's foreign policy especially India-China relations, India's relations with SAARC countries and South East Asia.

Through close interaction with leading strategic thinkers, former members of the Indian Administrative Service, the Foreign Service and the three wings of the Armed Forces - the Indian Army, Indian Navy, and Indian Air Force, - the academic community as well as the media, the IPCS has contributed considerably to the strategic discourse in India.

 
Subscribe to Newswire | Site Map
18, Link Road, Jungpura Extension, New Delhi 110014, INDIA.

Tel: 91-11-4100-1902    Email: officemail@ipcs.org

© Copyright 2017, Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies.