Canal consensus

Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif’s announcement to halt the construction of new canals pending consensus in the Council of Common Interests (CCI) is a welcome development. In a political climate that has too often been marred by unilateral decision-making and provincial resentment, this decision – reached after critical dialogue between the ruling PML-N and the PPP – is a rare moment of statesmanship and political maturity, values that are sorely needed in today’s Pakistan. The proposed project to construct six canals diverting water from the Indus River to irrigate the Cholistan desert had sparked a storm of opposition, particularly from Sindh. And rightly so. From the president of Pakistan to the chief minister of Sindh, and from political leaders to civil society, the resistance to the canal project was broad-based and rooted in serious ecological and constitutional concerns. This along with the PPP’s stance is probably what made the federal government re-evaluate a plan that could have deepened provincial fault lines.

Many have pointed out though that the issue was never just about canals. It was about the principles of federalism, equitable resource distribution and the dignity of provinces that have long felt marginalised. The 18th Amendment was a landmark step towards addressing these historic grievances, granting provinces the autonomy they had been denied for decades. Any attempt, intentional or otherwise, that undermines this framework threatens to undo years of hard-won progress. Water, as this episode reminds us, is not merely a utility. Water is life. It is politics. And it is survival. In a country like Pakistan, which sits precariously on the frontlines of the global climate crisis, the mismanagement of water could spark not just inter-provincial discord but full-blown ecological disaster. The Indus is regarded as the lifeblood of Sindh, and to tamper with its flow without consensus would have been reckless and unjust.

Environmental experts had warned that the canal project could have accelerated desertification in Sindh, already devastated by the 2022 floods and still struggling to recover. Diverting water when the province is staring down the barrel of climate change would have been shortsighted and dangerous. And yet, if it weren’t for the PPP’s pressure and the people’s protests, this project might well have proceeded under the radar, with devastating consequences for generations to come. This is why politicising water is not a crime. When decisions about such existential resources are made, they must be debated openly and resolved through dialogue. It is encouraging that the next CCI meeting on May 2 is expected to formally endorse the agreement between the coalition partners, potentially setting a precedent for how sensitive inter-provincial issues should be handled: not through coercion, but consensus. Still, caution must temper optimism. The ongoing sit-ins and protests in Sindh show that public trust remains fragile. A formal, binding notification to scrap the project is still being demanded. Verbal commitments and press conferences are not enough in a country where political backtracking is an all-too-familiar tale. This whole episode must also remind the federal government that no matter how noble the intentions or how strategic the goals, the rights of provinces cannot be bypassed. And remind political stakeholders that dialogue, when done in good faith, can defuse even the most volatile disputes.