India resisting World Bank’s move on IWT

On January 5, 2017, Indian officials told a World Bank representative in New Delhi that a neutral expert should help resolve the dispute with Pakistan over the Kishanganga and Ratle Hydropower projects, which violate the 1960 Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) between the two countries. The World Bank representative, Ian H Solomon, met the Indian delegation led by Gopal Baglay, Joint Secretary in the Ministry of External Affairs. The Indian team made a detailed a presentation on the two projects claiming that neither project violated the IWT. According to a report in the Indian media, “The Indian side had described the objections raised by Pakistan as technical, and therefore they would be best resolved by a neutral expert.”

It should be noted that after India had rejected Pakistan’s assertions on the two projects, Islamabad had gone to the World Bank in this regard.

On the other hand, Pakistan’s ambassador to the US recently said that “Islamabad had requested the World Bank to play the role of an administrator in terms of legal and technical objections raised by Pakistan on Kishanganga and Ratle Hydropower projects while India was seeking for the  appointment of a neutral expert.” He said Pakistan believed a neutral expert would have a limited mandate and would tend to focus only on technical aspects whereas legal aspects would not be considered by him.

The Kishanganga Hydroelectric Project on the River Neelum, called Kishanganga River by India, is located near the Line of Control in the Indian-Occupied Kashmir (IOK). The project seeks diversion of River Neelum, which is reserved for Pakistan’s Neelum-Jhelum Hydroelectric Project, work on which started in 1989 and is about to be completed.

The Kishanganga and Ratle projects are on the western rivers whose “non-consumptive use” is allowed to New Delhi under the Indus Waters Treaty. The three western rivers in the Indus Basin are Indus, Jhelum and Chenab.

While these two projects may be run-of-the-river hydropower projects yet there is danger that India could hold back its waters. Pakistan’s main objection, therefore, is about the height of the gates of the two projects which are inordinately high.

It is feared that diversion of water by the Kishanganga will reduce the water flow at the Neelum-Jhelum project and its generation capacity by 20pc. Also, it will have adverse effects on ecology of the area, especially fauna and flora, due to diversion of water from its original course.

Earlier, the Baglihar Hydroelectric Plant was commissioned by India in 2008. During the dam’s initial filling, India violated the clauses of the Indus Waters Treaty by not filling the dam in stipulated time-frame and by not ensuring requisite inflow at the Marala Headworks of Pakistan.

The reduction of inflow at Marla led to the closure of Marala-Ravi Link (MRL) Canal, which resulted in non-availability of irrigation water for paddy crops in Marala Command Canals area covering over 10,000,000 acres of land. It also resulted in the reduced filling of Mangla Dam due to excessive drawing of water from it to cover the deficiency of waters at the Marala Headworks. Consequently, the reduced filling of the Mangla Dam resulted in an acute shortage of water for Rabi (autumn/ winter) crops in Pakistan.

In the context of current events, Pakistan wants India to be conscious of its international obligations with regard to the Indus Waters Treaty. No pause by the World Bank as announced by it is desirable; the important international arbitrator should get fully involved in resolving the dispute around the Kishanganga and Ratle projects as they cannot be sorted out bilaterally by the two countries.

Thus, the importance of a clear, well-executed arbitration strategy by the bank remains and not any kind of pause in the process is required. The Bank’s role on the Indus Waters Treaty would provide sustainability and leverage against any kind of adventurism by New Delhi.