During his last visit to New Delhi, the renowned Pakistani journalist and Editor of The Friday Times, Najam Sethi, remarked that for most Pakistanis water is a more serious issue today than the resolution of Kashmir. He also remarked that the Baglihar and Kishanganga Projects have become highly emotive issues and India must understand Pakistani sensitivities. Any accommodation here would go a long way towards creating goodwill. There is therefore a need to analyse these issues before India-Pakistan relations become a hostage to them.

Under the Indus Waters Treaty, the waters of the three eastern rivers (Beas, Ravi and Sutlej) were allocated to India and the western rivers (Chenab, Indus and Jhelum) to Pakistan for unrestricted use. The Treaty also provided that both countries shall have unrestricted use of the waters in each other's rivers for four purposes: domestic use, agriculture use, restricted use of hydroelectric power, through a "run-of-the river" construction and non-consumptive use. The Treaty has stood the test of time and served its purpose despite two wars and the Kargil. However, the first setback to the Treaty was in 1991, when Pakistan objected to the Wullar barrage intended to increase the depth of water in the Jhelum and facilitate navigation for transportation. India stopped the construction of the barrage pending bilateral settlement of the dispute but has failed to convince Pakistan, reinforcing the belief that Pakistan's only aim is to prevent harnessing of J&K's immense water resources.

The government also started work on various hydroelectric power projects on rivers traversing in the state to mitigate the power situation. The 430 MW Baglihar power project was conceived in 1992. Work started in 2000. The power project envisages non-consumptive use of the Chenab waters since the discharge from the power station is released into the river. All such dams need temporary storage so that power generation is uniform over short durations of time and does not fluctuate from day to day depending on the river flow. Storage of upto 50 percent and extra discharge of upto thirty percent on a daily basis are permitted under the Treaty provided the total water received and discharged over a seven day period remains constant. Pakistan has also objected to pondage on the ground that it could flood Pakistan. The fact that India has not violated the Treaty despite grave provocations has failed to convince Pakistan. It has suggested that a smaller weir should be adequate and has objected to the fact that the dam is 4.5 m above the highest water level, and could be used to store extra water. Pakistan also objects to the outlets as being too low in the wall of the dam as they could be used to flood areas downstream, whereas they are necessary for clearing silt.

The Kishanganga project envisages building a hydro electric project on the Kishanganga River, a tributary of the Jhelum, and releases its discharge through a 22-km tunnel into the Wullar Lake on the Jhelum. All water flows from Jhelum and go to Pakistan, therefore there is no consumptive use of water. Pakistan has objected to the project because it is also planning the Neelam - Jhelum hydropower project in POK on river Neelam (as Kishanganga is called in POK). It claims the project would deny water to the Neelam Valley and scuttle the hydropower project. However, the project will reduce the flow of water by only 27 percent and will more than meet the irrigation requirements of Neelam Valley, though it may reduce the power generating potential of the proposed 969 MW Neelam-Jhelum hydropower project. Pakistan feels that by proposing these projects India is trying to pit the population of J&K against the Pakistan government. Most Kashmiris feel that the interests of the state were ignored while signing the Indus Water Treaty and support the Baglihar project to alleviate power shortage in the state.''

It is clear that India does not plan any consumptive use of the river waters, but the problem is the 'trust deficit' between the two countries that makes them view every step initiated by the other with suspicion. Pakistan has approached the World Bank for appointing a neutral expert in the case of Baglihar, who has has been appointed. This process will take long and his decision is unlikely to satisfy both parties. The fact of the case is that the issues involved and the differences are technical in nature. Politicizing them may derail the entire peace process. Setting up a permanent Indo-Pak commission to monitor the discharge from Baglihar could allay Pakistani fears about flooding. In the case of Kishanganga the differences could be resolved across the table, as the project is still in its early stages.