Introduction

• The Indus Water Treaty, negotiated in 1960 between India and Pakistan, stands as a landmark transboundary water-sharing agreement. However, both countries have faced ongoing disagreements over its implementation.
• Last year, India called for amendments to the treaty, expressing dissatisfaction with the dispute resolution process and citing Pakistan’s continued ‘intransigence’ in adhering to the treaty’s terms. 
• Conversely, Pakistan has raised concerns about India’s construction of the Kishenganga and Ratle hydroelectric projects, claiming these projects violate the treaty.

History Behind the Indus Water Treaty

• Pre-Independence
  • The six rivers of the Indus basin (Indus, Sutlej, Beas, Ravi, Jhelum, and Chenab) formed a common network for both India and Pakistan, originating in the Himalayas/Tibet.
• At the Time of Partition
  • The partition raised questions about the distribution of water between the two nations. Since the rivers flowed from India, Pakistan was concerned about India’s control over river waters.
• Inter-Dominion Accord (May 4, 1948)
  • India agreed to release water to Pakistan in exchange for annual payments. However, the arrangement soon proved problematic, prompting the need for a more permanent solution.
• Indus Water Treaty (1960)
  • With World Bank intervention, India and Pakistan signed the Indus Water Treaty, detailing the distribution of waters between the two countries.

Main Provisions of the Indus Water Treaty

• Eastern Rivers with India
  • India has exclusive rights over the waters of the Ravi, Sutlej, and Beas rivers, totaling an annual flow of 33 Million Acre-feet (MAF).
• Western Rivers with Pakistan
  • Pakistan controls the waters of the Chenab, Indus, and Jhelum rivers, with an annual flow of 80 Million Acre-feet (MAF).
• Western River Water Utilization for India
  • Limited irrigation and non-consumptive use (e.g., power generation, navigation).
  • India can generate hydroelectricity through run-of-the-river projects without storing water.
  • India can store up to 3.75 MAF of water for conservation and flood storage purposes.
• Water Division Ratio
  • India receives 20% of the water from the Indus River System, while Pakistan gets the remaining 80%.

Dispute Resolution Mechanism

• Permanent Commission: Disputes can be resolved through the Permanent Commission or at the inter-government level.
• Neutral Expert (NE): Unresolved questions or technical differences can be addressed by a Neutral Expert appointed by the World Bank.
• Court of Arbitration: If either party is dissatisfied with the NE’s decision, disputes can be referred to a Court of Arbitration.

Significance of the Indus Water Treaty

• Cross-Border Water Sharing
  • It is the only cross-border water-sharing treaty in Asia, exemplifying cooperation despite political tensions.
• Generous Towards Lower Riparian State
  • The treaty compels India, the upper riparian state, to defer to Pakistan, the lower riparian state, allocating 80% of the water to Pakistan.
• Passed the Crisis Test
  • The Permanent Commission has functioned even during wars between India and Pakistan (1965, 1971), showcasing the treaty’s resilience.
• India’s Generosity
  • India has not invoked the Vienna Convention to withdraw from the treaty despite major terrorist attacks, demonstrating commitment to trans-boundary river treaties.
• Successful Model
  • The treaty is a model for cooperation between rival countries, maintaining peace and stability over shared water resources.

Concerns with the Indus Water Treaty

India’s Concerns

• Most Generous Treaty: The unequal sharing, with 80% allocated to Pakistan, is seen as overly generous.
• Restrictions on Storage Systems: Despite provisions for building storage systems, Pakistan has blocked India’s projects, exploiting technicalities.
• Hydroelectric Project Disputes: Conflicts over projects like Kishenganga and Ratle have led to arbitration bypassing treaty protocols.
• Climate Change Impact: The over-stressed Indus basin, affected by climate change, necessitates renegotiation to meet current needs.
• Economic Losses: Indian states in the Indus basin suffer significant economic losses, e.g., Jammu & Kashmir’s annual losses due to the treaty.

Pakistan’s Concerns

• Lower Riparian Fears: Concerns that India’s infrastructure developments will reduce downstream flows.
• Accusations of ‘Water Terrorism’: Allegations against India for projects like the Shahpurkandi barrage.
• Environmental Flow Issues: Pakistan insists on maintaining environmental flows, supported by international arbitration rulings.

Concerns with Termination or Abrogation of the IWT

• Escalation of Geopolitical Tensions: Renegotiating or abrogating the treaty could heighten political tensions and risk water conflicts.
• Threat to Regional Stability: Instability in the IWT could affect water cooperation in the region, involving China and Afghanistan.
• Damage to India’s International Standing: Unilateral withdrawal could harm India’s reputation as a responsible global power and affect future water treaties.

Way Forward

• Appointment of Persons with Eminent Public Life

• • Recommendation: Appoint individuals with distinguished public service backgrounds as Governors, as suggested by Sarkaria, NCRCW, and Puncchi Commissions.
  • Purpose: This would help prevent the misuse of immunity by ensuring high ethical standards and integrity in office.
• Judicial Scrutiny and Interpretation
  • Supreme Court’s Role: Re-evaluate Article 361 to possibly allow judicial scrutiny in cases involving fundamental rights.
  • Example: The Supreme Court’s willingness to review the interpretation of Article 361 indicates a potential shift towards a balanced approach that respects both the dignity of the office and individual rights.
• Integration of Ecological Perspectives
  • Environmental Flows: Incorporate environmental flow requirements to sustain the Indus Valley ecosystems, as per the Brisbane Declaration and PCA rulings.
• Recognition of Climate Change Impacts
  • Strategy Development: Develop strategies to manage climate change effects, using it as a basis for renegotiating the IWT.
• Enhanced Water Data-Sharing
  • Legally Binding Framework: Establish a World Bank-supervised, legally binding data-sharing framework to monitor water quality and flow changes.
• Incorporation of International Legal Standards
  • Alignment: Align treaty provisions with the 1997 UN Watercourses Convention and the 2004 Berlin Rules on Water Resources for sustainable water use.
• Proactive Utilization of Allocated Water Share
  • Infrastructure Improvements: Repair canal systems in Punjab and Rajasthan to increase water-carrying capacity and fully utilize India’s water entitlements.
• Use of Pressure Tactic in Case of Escalation
  • Suspending Meetings: If hostilities escalate, India can suspend Permanent Commission meetings, stalling the dispute redressal process.