The Kalabagh debate

The perennial issue of the Kalabagh Dam – first proposed 65 years in 1953 – has arisen once again after the Supreme Court combined its suo-motu notice of Pakistan’s water insecurity with a petition demanding a referendum on construction of the dam. By now, the arguments for and against the Kalabagh Dam are familiar to everyone. Those who want to go ahead with the project point out that Pakistan is already facing severe water shortages and that the capacity of the Mangla and Tarbela dams is decreasing because of siltation and sedimentation. The case against the Kalabagh Dam is made by all provinces other than Punjab, particularly Sindh which is justifiably worried that its share of water will be reduced as water runoff from the dam will irrigate lands in Punjab. The coastal areas of Sindh would be particularly affected as the flow of water from the Indus River to the Arabian Sea is stopped by the dam, turning fertile land barren. Six decades of talks over the Kalabagh Dam have yet to yield a consensus between these opposing viewpoints and one is not about to emerge overnight. All the parties that have joined the Kalabagh debate seem to recognise this reality. Supreme Court Chief Justice Saqib Nisar has said that he would not push for the construction of the dam and the Wapda chief has told the Senate that the Council of Common Interests is the correct body for making a decision on the Kalabagh Dam.

Even if the debate on the Kalabagh Dam is shelved for now on the recognition that three of the four provinces have legitimate objections that are not about to be resolved anytime soon, the question of how to tackle our water crisis still remains. The Supreme Court has suggested building smaller, uncontroversial dams. This is an idea certainly worth pursuing. As the Wapda chief has pointed out, our dams only have a storage capacity of 30 days compared to India’s 170. Pakistan’s inability to construct new dams even as India has completed the Kishanganga and Rutle dams has hurt the Pakistani case at the World Bank and International Court of Arbitration that India is taking water that should rightly be routed to us. The endless delays, cost overruns and technical issues that have plagued the Neelum-Jhelum Hydroelectric Project show that the country’s problem is not its failure to approve mega dam projects but rather being unable to get existing projects off the ground. We should also remember that, while dams may help with the issue of the supply of water, until we have a comprehensive water conservation policy – especially in the agricultural sector – demand will always outstrip supply. To tackle the problem of water insecurity, a constructive water use policy would be preferable to wading into old controversies.