Home Contact Us  
   

Indo-Pak - Articles

Print Bookmark Email Facebook Subscribe
#3193, 19 July 2010
 
Indus Waters Governance-II: From ‘Letter and Spirit’ to ‘Letter vs Spirit’
D Suba Chandran
Deputy Director, Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies (IPCS), New Delhi
email: subachandran@gmail.com
 

India and Pakistan signed a major treaty (Indus Waters Treaty) towards sharing the Indus river waters in 1960, and the four provinces of Pakistan signed an agreement (Inter-Provincial Water Apportionment Accord) in 1991 to share the waters within themselves. Both the agreements inter-state and intra-state have been extremely painful and were reached after arduous negotiations. Undoubtedly, the negotiating parties deeply felt, that there is a need to work together, which enabled them to reach an understanding. Both agreements are clear and unambiguous. In short, there was a clear spirit that guided them to reach an agreement in writing. Why then are the parties fighting today? That too, ironically over what constitutes the letter and spirit?

Consider the following issues. The Indus Waters Treaty was negotiated between India and Pakistan in the 1950s; the book authored by ND Gulati sketches the painful to and fro of points, counter points, positions and counter positions. Finally the treaty was signed in 1960. The World Bank did a great service by brokering this treaty; had it not been for its pressure, it is doubtful, India and Pakistan would have agreed to such a treaty. However, this should not take the credit from India and Pakistan; both countries ensured that the treaty was adhered to, even during the wars and proxy wars.

Today, one of the major accusations from Pakistan has been centered on India not adhering to the letter of Treaty, in terms of water flow, prior intimation of projects, and construction beyond what is provided by the IWT. India’s counter accusation is centered on Pakistan not following the spirit of the IWT, and acting as a spoilsport in delaying India’s projects, either by not responding or taking them to the neutral expert.

According to Pakistan, the provision for a neutral expert is provided by the IWT, hence there is nothing wrong in making use of that provision in case of a difference. India on the other hand considers, that the provision should be the last option and not recourse for each and every project that India proposes. The reference does cost time, money and efforts, in terms of delaying the project, thereby increasing the cost of not only construction, but also related expenditure, in not making use of the hydro potential.

Within Pakistan, Sindh prefers to strictly adhere to the 1991 Agreement, which is a consensus document amongst the four provinces. Sindh fears that the construction of a major dam (like Kalabagh) or canals (like Greater Thal and Chashma-Jhelum) will benefit only the Punjab, at its own cost. Punjab, on the other hand wants to see the 1991 Agreement as politically beneficial, that would provide space for better management of water resources. Punjab’s conviction is centered on the fact any such construction will greatly help its own agricultural and industrial sectors, without affecting smaller provinces of Balochistan, NWFP and Sindh.

What should be the primary focus of water governance between the parties? Should it be the letter or spirit?

It is unfortunate, that between India and Pakistan, and between the four provinces of Pakistan, the issue has become letter vs spirit instead of letter and spirit. This is not a unique situation between the above mentioned actors. Unfortunately, this is also the case between numerous inter-state and intra-state actors in South Asia. As of today, within India there are similar conflicts between Punjab and Haryana, Karnataka Tamil Nadu and Kerala over the sharing of water resources.

An earlier article in this series focused on the failure of Institutions, which deal with the water management and governance. See “Indus Waters Governance-I: Crisis of Institutions”. Not only the institutions that are dealing with water management are weak, even other institutions – especially legal and political, are equally fragile. In certain cases, States create a separate tribunal, to deal with water disputes between the provinces and keep away from the purview of regular legal institutions. Given the pace and inordinate delays associated with the courts in South Asia, one could easily conclude, even if they are referred to the regular institutions, they are unlikely to be fast and effective.

Unfortunately, the tribunals at national level, and arbitration at international level, not only take time, but also cannot effectively ensure the implementation of its verdict, in accordance with the letter, and more importantly, the spirit behind the verdict, and the original spirit behind the earlier water agreement itself.

Clearly, legal recourse will not enforce the letter and spirit, either at the national or the international levels. Worse, both parties (as in the case of the verdict given by Baglihar neutral expert) will interpret the verdict as a vindication of their point of view. The issue is political, hence would be resolved politically.

There is a need to invoke the ‘spirit’ argument; this needs to be done at multiple levels – governmental and societal. Pursuing an independent ‘letter’ approach will get a ‘judgment’ but not necessarily ‘justice’.  It should be letter and spirit, with an extra emphasis on the latter. The State alone will be unable to address this basic issue, which is essential in building trust for the other.

(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)

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
D Suba Chandran,
"Indus Waters Governance-III: Keep the IWT away from the Composite Dialogue," 22 July 2010
Pia Malhotra,
"Kashmir: A Case for Watershed Management?," 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

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
 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.