AP – WATER CRISIS IN PAKISTAN

"And We have created every living being from water...." (24:45). Al- Qur’an

“The wars of the 21st century will be fought over water” – Ismail Serageldin

Water Situation in the World

Water usage and demand have sky-rocketed with the bulge in human
population and activities such as industrialization. Water scarcity is defined as the lack
of fresh water resources to meet water demand. With only 0.5 to 0.75 % of fresh
underground water and receding glaciers, the need has surpassed the human
reqirement. 800 million people lack access to drinking water. According to the World
Economic Forum, in a report published in 2015, it was declared as the greatest threat
to humanity in the future. Water scarcity impacts 2 billion people across the globe for
at least 1 month every year. Half of the world’s largest cities experience water scarcity.
In terms of total quantity, water available on earth is sufficient to sustain the entire
human race, though unequal distribution and rise in overall demand due to industrial
expansion has brought forth a water crisis, with demand likely to outstrip supple by 40
% in 2030. This will make way for conflicts as has historically been the case with over
1800 cases of international water disputes and resolution from 1950 to 2000.

South Africa has recently encountered this crisis on a massive scale, with a
drought in the Western Cape Province in 2015, causing shortages, leading to water
regulating and rationing measures being imposed in the city of Cape Town. In early
2018, "Day Zero" was contemplated to be enforced, potentially making Cape Town
the first major city to run out of water.

Gloomy Water Situation in Pakistan

80 % of water in Pakistan is deemed unhealthy for use and it is one of the 36

most water-stressed countries in the world. Pakistan is ranked in the top 10 countries
with maximum people deprived of clean drinking water. 16 million people in Pakistan
are forced to use unsafe drinking water as a last resort exposing them to water borne
diseases. The report by IMF suggesting that Pakistan would be water scarce by 2025,
made way for a much warranted deep look at the issue. Notwithstanding the IMF
prediction, water experts have predicted this outcome for some time now. Moreover,
with a per capita availability hovering at about 1,000 cubic meters, the scarcity
threshold, Pakistan is already facing this issue. Available water per capita has dropped
from 5,600 to 903 cubic meters, as of 2016. At the current levels of consumption, this
number is expected to drop to 500 cubic meters per person in the coming years. Major
portion of the available water is utilized for agriculture and 60% of Pakistan’s
population is directly involved in the sector. However, from the 95 % of Pakistan’s
water used in agriculture an estimated 50% is lost, due to defects in irrigation systems,
including misuse, defective canals, and leaking pipes. While water supply and storage
are shrinking, Pakistan’s population is rapidly growing, placing greater stress on the
already taxed water system.

Water Situation Projections for Pakistan

A UNDP report suggests that politicians and relevant departments are casting
a blind eye to the precarious water situation in the country. This may have wide ranging
social, economic and security implications. Experts say, the South Asian country is
likely to dry up by 2025 and instead of the much publicized threat of terrorism, factually,
it is water scarcity which is the biggest threat to Pakistan. With the current population
increase rate of 2.4 % and increasing demand for agricultural sector, demand for water
is expected to increase to 274 MAF while supply is likely to remain stagnated at 191
MAF, by the year 2025. Study of Pakistan Counsel of Research on the water resources
of Pakistan (PCRWR) revealed that rapid depletion of ground water may soon worsen
the water crisis in Pakistan’s major cities, causing a drought-like situation, requiring
efforts at a national scale for mitigation. Moreover, with unchecked pumping of
underground water, contaminants such as copper, nickel and cobalt have infiltrated
the water reservoirs, causing heavy metal poisoning and other serious diseases.
Meanwhile, in 2017, PCRWR also declared that Pakistan would run out of water by
2025. It is believed that Pakistan’s existing water policy and plans will be unable to
sustain the demands of the future.

Impact on Economy, Society & Security

Water scarcity will herald economic disaster and famine in an agrarian country.
The agriculture sector is likely to incur a loss worth Rupees 90 billion in the event of a
drought, as per the Federal government. Agricultural sector employees around 45 %
work force. An unemployed work force of such massive proportions would create an
internal security threat. Raising of livestock is a main source of income in rural areas
and is a vital economic activity, contributing 9.7 % to the GDP will be severely affected
by water shortages. Fruit orchards, a major source of foreign exchange for Pakistan
will also be affected. Industries linked with the produce of crops such as sugarcane,
wheat, rice etc will experience financial disaster leading to further unemployment due
to employee layoffs and pay cuts. Reduced agriculture yield will force Pakistan to buy
food commodities from abroad, furthering straining the foreign exchange. Water
shortages may aggravate the provincial mistrust in terms of distribution of water and
magnify disharmony. It will also have national security implications and might spiral
into a conflict with India, a rival which is guilty of worsening the water situation in
Pakistan.

Reasons of Water Scarcity in Pakistan

Indian Violations
India, being an upper riparian country put forth the ideology of “absolute
sovereignty” (p.35). India claimed that as an upper riparian country power, it entirely
owned the water that flowed within its borders and could do as it wished with water.
Pakistan, on the other hand, advocated the principle of “territorial integrity” (p.35),
which meant that a downstream state has the right to continue receiving water, which
it has been previously receiving for irrigation, hydropower, industry or human drinking.
The author argues that the water dispute between India and Pakistan was not primarily
about water. It was more about the territories that the two countries governed and how
those territories could be developed economically. In this regard, the ability to control
the flow of water out of country or into a country became a symbolism of strength. This
was particularly important in the case of Pakistan, which faced numerous other
problems: political, linguistic, socioeconomic and ethnic. With Pakistan threatening to
use force, if water was denied to it, ultimately World Bank was involved.
India as by building Mangla Dam, Pakistan was able to integrate the part of Kashmir
in its water and energy supply network. India, on the other hand, felt that its
development plans in Kashmir were severely hampered by the IWT. Kashmiris have
been raising their voice in this regard and in 2003, the Jammu and Kashmir assembly
passed a resolution demanding renegotiation of the treaty.
Pakistan was deprived of the important headworks by the unjust Radcliff Commission
and the vital water regulatory system affecting Pakistan feel in Indian jurisdiction.
Indian pressure and coercion were experienced through water control for the first time
when it stemmed the flow of water into Pakistan through the headworks as early as
1948. Indus Water Treaty brokered by World Bank between India and Pakistan served
the two countries well in terms of water rights distribution with the three eastern rivers
falling to India while Pakistan was to meet her requirements through Western rivers.
India took advantage of the stipulation of the treaty, permitting her use of water for
domestic, non-consumptive (including navigation), agriculture and hydro-electric
power and has initiated some controversial projects over the Indus system which have
a potential of escalating tensions. The major point of contention is the design of these
projects which enables India to accelerate, decelerate and block the flow of water in
the river. This would be of immense strategic significance to India in times of conflict
with Pakistan for arm twisting.

Indian Leverage to hold water for 25-26 Days

There are numerous water disputes between the two, e.g., Wular Barrage,
Kishanganga Project, Baglihar Dam, etc. Salal Dam was started by India without
informing Pakistan, in violation of the IWT. Though an agreement was reached
between the two countries, yet there is no guarantee that India would not do the same
in future. Now India has got the leverage to hold water for 25-26 days which can cause
acute shortage of water for winter crops in Pakistan. According to Dr John Briscoe,
Professor of the Environmental Engineering and Environmental Health at Harvard
University and former Senior Water Advisor to the World Bank on the Baglihar case,
“in case of Baghliar, Pakistan’s vulnerability was driven home when India chose to fill
Baglihar exactly at the time when it would impose maximum harm on farmers in
downstream Pakistan. Following Baglihar is a veritable caravan of Indian projects, i.e.,
Kishanganga, Sawalkot, Pakuldul, Bursar, Dal Huste, Gyspa…The cumulative live
storage will be large, giving India an unquestioned capacity to have major impact on
the timing of flows.”
So, depending upon the degree of water regulation capability, India can create three
types of effects:
 Drying up of rivers-related canal
 Flooding of rivers
 Fluctuate discharge of rivers
India Re-thinking IWT
Indians consider IWT generous to Pakistan and Pakistan thinks it discriminatory right
from its inception. At official levels, there is no such demand by the Govt. of India/Indus
Water Commission India and so is the case with Pakistan as there is no such demand
from the Govt. of Pakistan/Indus Water Commission Pakistan. But at non-
governmental level, intellectuals/academia in India have started asking for re-
visiting/re-thinking the IWT and probably they are making a case for the future. Brahma
Chellaney, a Professor of Strategic Studies at the New Delhi-based Centre for Policy
Research, said that “Pakistan’s reopening of the water-sharing agreement could
backfire, as it might prompt India to rethink a treaty that was extremely generous to
Pakistan. There was no treaty in the world which had been so generous on the part of
the upper riparian to the lower riparian state. India was starving its own northern
regions and reserving four-fifths of the water for Pakistan. If Pakistan played this
dangerous game, they would make India review its generosity.”
1. IDSA Report: Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (IDSA) had published
its book/task force report in 2010 titled “Water Security for India—The External
Dynamics” in which they have given reasons and plans for re-visiting the IWT.
According to the report, “…with Pakistan, given some stringent provisions in the
IWT that thwart India’s plans of developing projects on the western rivers, a
‘modification’ of the provisions of the treaty should be called for. Whether it is
done through re-negotiations or through establishing an Indus-II Treaty,
modifications of the provisions are crucial in case of the western rivers. Under
the draft provisions of the International Law Commission ‘Responsibility of
States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, 2001’, India can consider the
abrogation of the treaty…Pakistan aids and abets terrorist actions from its soil.
India should quantify the damage it has sustained over the decades because
of Pakistani support to terrorism and seek as a first step suitable compensation.
If Pakistan does not comply, India can possibly threaten to walk out of various
bilateral agreements including the IWT.” Pakistan is using water propaganda to
get international attention on Kashmir so India should “talk” to Pakistan but not
“negotiate”. The talks should be about “water needs” and not “water rights”.
2. Five Constituencies/Point of Views in India on Re-thinking the
IWT: According to the same IDSA report, there are five constituencies that ask
for revision or a re-think. “The first constituency seeks to evolve an Indus-II
 under the provisions of Article VII and Article XII of the IWT for an integrated or
joint development of the Indus water basin. Indus-II should be fed into the
current peace process as a means both for defusing current political strains
over Indus-I and managing adverse impact of climate change.”
“The second constituency while understanding the merits of a new hydrologic
relationship on the Indus does not see any viability of Indus-II and contends that a
totally new treaty has to be negotiated. The IWT was a partitioning treaty, like the
partitioning of the land. How can cooperation be built on that basis?”
“The third constituency is the domestic pressure group in [Indian occupied] Jammu &
Kashmir which feels that the IWT has restricted the state’s overall development by not
allowing it the usage of “its” rivers, i.e., Jhelum, Chenab and Indus. It has been calling
for a complete review of the treaty. The [Indian occupied] Jammu & Kashmir
government has been contending that in spite of having an untapped hydro-electric
potential of 15,000 MW, the state continues to suffer from acute power shortage and
related agro-economic underdevelopment.”
“The fourth constituency springs into action when the political climate between India
and Pakistan becomes acrimonious. While war over water is not an option, this group
suggests strong-arm tactics in dealing with Pakistan and using water as a coercive
tool and a bargaining instrument in the larger politico-strategic objectives of India.”
“There is a fifth constituency that argues that any attempt to review the treaty, can be
done only after India exploits the potential already permissible under the treaty. Only
a crying child, it is argued, gets the mother’s milk. This constituency argues that first
India should fully exploit the existing potential and then cry for more. Any attempt
otherwise to review the treaty may not be seen as logical. The IWT is a product of its
time and could be fruitfully modified and renegotiated to bring it more in line with
contemporary international watercourse law, the Helsinki rules, and emerging
concerns with water quality, environmental sustainability, climate change, and
principles of equitable sharing.”
Pakistan’s serious projected shortages, India’s trend of damming and diverting waters
and global warming’s expected depletion of water in the IRS are a source of increasing
tensions between Pakistan and India. Based on supply and demand projections, India
faces its own water scarcity, which would provide India an excuse to store or divert
river water that would otherwise reach Pakistan. Water shortages would pressure the
Pakistani government to increase its share of water drawn from the Indus system
under the treaty as Pakistan is heavily reliant on the Indus and has few alternative
water supply sources unlike India. In this environment, renegotiation of the IWT may
become an important diplomatic issue between India and Pakistan. With India, water
issue will be far more political and strategic than just water. India has also started
propagating that Tibet’s water is for humanity, not for China alone. But they (Indians)
forget that the Indus-Ganges basins are also for humanity, not for India alone.

Maj Indian violations are:-

Baglihar Hydro-Electric Project. Run-of-River Hydro-electric plant with a
gross storage capacity of about 321,000 AF. Pakistan has objected to the
design of spillway that embodies under- sluice type gated-spillway. The
presence of these under-sluices might cause a shortage of inflows at Marala
headwork for about 30 days during lean months on mal-operation of dam by
India.

Salal Hydro-Electric Project. Located 45 miles upstream of Marala, Salal Dam

has a small reservoir of 0.23 MAF. The project is purely a run-of-river
hydroelectric plant. Its Stage-1 of 345 MW was commissioned in 1987,
whereas, the Stage-II was commissioned in 1994-95. The controversy on the
six low-level outlets provided in the body of the dam was resolved through a
separate agreement arrived at between the two Governments in 1978. These
outlets were plugged permanently.
Kishanganga Storage-Cum-Hydroelectric Project. The project is designed
to divert water as part of the run-of-the-river hydroelectric scheme to the
Kishanganga power plant in Jhelum valley from Neelum river. The project was
inaugurated by Indian Prime Minister on 19 May 2018. The Kishanganga
Hydro-electric Project also consists of a tunnel to divert some flows from
Kishanganga River to Bonar-Madmati Nullah, thus depriving Neelum-Jhelum
Link Hydro-electric Project with some critical discharges. Pakistan has objected
to diversion of water from Neelum to Jhelum river because it will reduce the
production capacity of Neelum Jhelum link Hydro-eletric Project.
Wullar Barrage. The construction of Wullar Barrage was a clear violation of the
Treaty started by India in 1985 without informing Pakistan. With the construction
of Wullar Barrage, India was able to create an additional storage capacity of
 0.336 MAF. This helped it to store water upto 6 months during wet season and
release discharges upto 4000 cusecs during the period from October to
February. In this way India would get regulation control of Wullar Lake, a natural
lake on River Jhelum.

Loses in Canals and Other Water Sources

From a total of 144 MAF, the irrigation system receives 105 MAF available in
rivers. Through evaporation, seepage, linking canals and unlevelled fields 60% of this
water is lost and around 34 % is available to crops.
Surface Water Outflow to Sea
It is compulsory to flow 10 MAF below Kotri in order to maintain the ecology of
the deltaic area and prevent seawater intrusion into inland fresh water areas. However,
the average outflow is 35 MAF. This precious resource amounting to 70 billion USD is
wasted due to lack of storage facilities.

Reduction in Capacity of Major Reservoirs

Owing to sedimentation and poor maintenance the capacity of water reservoirs
has depleted by 35 – 50 % which is likely to further reduce with time.
Increase in Cropping
45 % of the total labour of Pakistan is absorbed by agriculture being an
agricultural country .The agricultural sector has seen immense expansion in terms of
cropped area and yield. Water intensive crops like sugarcane, rice, wheat have been
grown by the farmers which puts a huge strain on the water resources.
Poor Maintenance
There is no progress seen when it comes to the maintenance of water
resources. The water reservoirs have deteriorated due to lack of resources and poor
planning by authorities.
Increase in Population
Population of Pakistan is also an alarming factor for the depletion of water
resources as it increases at the rate of 2.4%.
Expenditure vs Receipts of Irrigation Department
The expenditure required for maintenance of irrigation system have overtaken
the receipts due to which normal operation and maintenance costs cannot be met.
Lack of Awareness and Wasteful Practices
 People are not fully aware of the water crises in Pakistan. Daily usage habits
such as extensive and frequent car washing etc aggravate the water availability. In
cities like Karachi which suffers from water shortages every year, no public awareness
campaign has taken shape to highlight and project the issue. Pakistan as a nation is
in denial.
Dams and their Value and Impediments
Dams have survived through civilizations since the first dams were reportedly
built by Egyptians around 3000 BC. From the basic utility as water reservoirs dams
are used for power generation, flood mitigation and water regulation and distribution.
However, there is still a down side to constructing dams. The cause extensive damage
to aquatic life of rivers, cause pollution through greenhouse gases produced by growth
of algae in the stalled water, causes fish to die downstream due to lowering of oxygen
levels and require huge resources and long duration to build. Large dams such as the
Three Gorges dam constructed in China had other social impacts as well. More than
half a million people had to be moved to higher ground/ places as vast swath of land
went under water due to construction of the dam. Many people depended on the river
for their livelihood. The locals had a historic connection with the area, with temples as
old as the Confucius era. According to America Rivers, a non-profit organization, about
1000 rivers have been removed in the US as they came on the wrong side of the cost-
benefit analysis. The hydropower produced was far less than the damage the dam
was causing to the riparian ecosystem. Hence, it was logical and beneficial to remove
them.
It comes down to the mathematical cost-benefit analysis and keeping in view
the water lost at sea and rise in water scarcity, it is prudent for Pakistan to pursue dam
construction. Downsides of dams may be mitigated to some extent with proper
planning and damage mitigation in collaboration with environmentalists.
Salient of Indus Water Treaty 1960’
a. Water from Eastern Rivers. All waters of the Eastern rivers, namely Ravi,
Sutlej and Beas shall be available for the unrestricted use of India only. However,
waters of these rivers once finally crossed into Pakistan shall be available for the
unrestricted use of Pakistan.
b. Water from Western Rivers. Pakistan shall receive unrestricted flows of
waters from Western rivers (Indus, Jehlum and Chenab) except some percentage of
water for domestic use, non-consumptive use, agriculture use and for generation of
hydro electric power as set-out in the treaty; by India.
c. In 10 years Pakistan shall construct water channels so as to supply water
from Western Rivers to those canals, which have dependence on water supplies from
the eastern rivers, at the time of independence.
d. The two parties shall appoint commissioner for Indus water that together shall
form the permanent Indus Commission.
e. The use of the natural channels of the Rivers for the discharge of flood or other
excess waters shall be free and not subject to limitation by either party.
Resultantly, Pakistan constructed nine link canals, five new barrages and three
dams (Mangla, Tarbela and Warsak).
Afghanistan Perspective. Pakistan also shares water with Afghanistan. River Kabul
and its Tributaries8, River Kurram, Gomal, Pashin Lora, Kaisar, Kandai, and River
Kand flow from Afghanistan to Pakistan. Their accumulated discharge is more than
the inflow of River Jhelum. Afghanistan has already under taken a few projects on
tributaries of River Kabul. Mahipar, Naghlu, Sarobi, Darunta and Madan Sahar
projects already stand completed, whereas, there is substantial potential of harnessing
more hydroelectric and irrigation projects. Kama Project located 13 Km from Kabul
with 445000 AF capacity, was actively being considered. This project alone would
have reduced 5- 8% inflow in River Kabul besides causing 11% reduction in power
generation. If Afghan Government decides to undertake more projects on rivers
flowing into Pakistan then these will have adverse effects.
Differences among Provinces on the Interpretation of Water
Apportionment Accord of 1991. The apportionment agreed under the 1991 Accord,
thus, provides a total allocation of 55.94 MAF to Punjab, 48.76 MAF to Sindh, 5.78
MAF to NWFP and 3.87 MAF to Balochistan. Additionally, NWFP is entitled to 3.00
MAF being used through ungauged (civil) canals above the rim stations. The Water
Accord also lays down the distribution of the balance river supplies, including flood
supplies as well as the future storages as 37 per cent each to Punjab and Sindh, 14
per cent to NWFP and 12 per cent to Balochistan.
The Accord failed to end long simmering tensions between Sindh and Pakistan
over water sharing. Of all the provinces of Pakistan, Sindh probably feels the most
aggrieved because the accord does not guarantee a minimum “environmental flow” of
river water through the province and into the Arabian Sea. Sindh worries extraction of
water for dam building and irrigation in upstream provinces will deprive the region of
the water it needs. People feel their rights have been usurped and that the provincial
political leadership of the time was forced into signing this document. There is a
mechanism for India and Pakistan to try to resolve disputes through the Indus Water
Commission, after which it escalates to neutral experts, and as a last resort, goes to
the international court of arbitration. With the inter-provincial water accord, if a dispute
cannot be resolved within the Indus River System Authority, the only other resort is
the Council of Common Interest, which resolves power sharing disputes between the
federation and provinces. There is only one tier to resolve disputes and in many cases
a province may not wish to escalate a concern to that level – in which case there is no
mid-way. Furthermore the Council of Common Interest like any court of law will
evaluate a dispute against the existing Accord, not debate the Accord itself. Since we
see our water agreements as sacrosanct we will not discuss or debate them.
The Accord is not without its problems. Its clauses and terminology are ambiguous
and can be interpreted in different ways. Clause 2 stipulates how 117.35 million acre
feet (MAF) of water in the Indus Basin shall be allocated among the provinces.
However in reality there will never be exactly this amount since water is notoriously
variable. Of note is that clause 4 does not stipulate anything if the volume available is
less than 117.35MAF. Clause 14b states “The record of actual average system uses
for the period 1977-82……would form the basis of sharing shortages and surpluses
on all Pakistan….(sic)” . This latter clause is particularly controversial since it suggests
that provinces with water storage capacity/infrastructure by 1977 now have a prior
right over all “surpluses”. Unless we improve the clarity of the Accord, the next twenty
five years will be prone to subjective interpretations.
The Indus River Systems Authority responsible for overseeing the implementation of
the Accord reports what are euphemistically called “gains/losses”. A more appropriate
term for this would be “volume balance error”, as it is simply water that cannot be
accounted for. This error is significant and growing each year. For a country that claims
it suffers from water scarcity it is quite incredible that we fail to account for these large
volumes of water. If we extrapolate from the current rate over the next twenty five
years we will be reporting volume balance errors equivalent to the entire annual water
resources of Pakistan.
Water trading – provides the answer?
Water trading could go some way to resolving tensions between provinces over water.
But conversation about water trading in Pakistan is equivalent to “water blasphemy”;
we refuse to engage in it. We have a simple philosophy when it comes to water – if
you can extract your share of water, do with it what you will. This philosophy stems
from our vast irrigation system where water was shared amongst farmers and farmers
where left to their own devices as to how they use this water. Basin level water
resources are dominated by this irrigation engineering philosophy prevalent in the sub-
continent. This unduly punishes provinces such as Baluchistan or KP which can only
extract limited water due to topography. They cannot extract the value from the
resource because the Accord prohibits water trading. Water trading would involve
Punjab paying KP for water that KP was unable or did not wish to use. Without
opportunities for water trading, Baluchistan and KP will be incentivised to exploit all
the water they can from the Indus Basin as for them this remains the only way in which
to extract value.
Lack of Trust Between Provinces
Lack of trust among the provinces especially between Punjab and Sindh: Lack of trust
among the provinces especially between Punjab and Sindh is at the heart of the water
issues in Pakistan. All disputes stem from this crisis of confidence. Sindh (the lower
riparian in this case) questions the upper canal withdrawals and feels that it is either
being deprived or will be deprived of its share of water by Punjab. It, therefore, views
any new project or plan in the water sector with a great sense of skepticism. It feels
that because of the historical events its skepticism is justified. Punjab, on the other
hand, questions the 'surpluses' which pass downstream Kotri and considers a major
quantity of this ‘surplus’ as waste which should be stored and 8 put to use. Sindh on
the other hand considers the ‘surplus’ downstream Kotri as essential and feels
offended when this flow is termed as 'wastage'. Sindhi objections to Greater Thal
Canal and Kalabagh Dam Project also mainly stem from this lack of trust. The dispute
on sharing the water shortages during the past five drought years has further
accentuated this crisis of confidence. This lack of trust is the greatest issue in the
context of Water resources.
(1) Construction of Additional Storages (Section 6 of the WaterAccord-1991).
Section 6 of the 1991 Water Accord reads: “The need for storages16, wherever feasible
on the Indus and other rivers was admitted and recognized by the participants for
planned future agricultural development” The federal government and the provincial
government of the Punjab feel very strongly that this section amounts to an agreement
to construct Kalabagh, Bhasha and other dams on the river Indus. Sindh and
KHYBERPAKHTUNKHWA have serious objections to this project. The few political
stake holders strongly refute these objections on technical grounds but the opposition
continues.
(2) Terms of Reference of the Study Required to Establish Minimum Escapeage
to Sea downstream Kotri (Section 7 of the Water Accord-1991). The section 7 of
the 1991 Water Accord reads: “The need for certain minimum escapeage to sea,
below Kotri, to check sea intrusion was recognized. Sindh held the view, that the
optimum level was 10 MAF. Despite the passage of 22 years since the signing of the
accord, the study could not be commissioned because the provinces could not agree
on the scope and terms of reference of the study. The federal government cites the
historical records of the past 25 years according to which an average of 35 to 38 MAF
water has escaped below Kotri. Even if 10 MAF is allowed to escape below Kotri,
there is sufficient water for additional storage, the Punjab government contends.
(3) The Mode of Sharing Shortages (Section 14b of the Water Accord-1991).
Section 14(b) of the accord reads, “The record of actual average system uses for the
period 1977- 82 would form the guide line for developing a future regulation pattern.
In the 1991 accord, Punjab had agreed on its share of water that was 2.7 percent less
than its historical share; Sindh, on the other hand, was given a share of water that was
1.2 per cent higher than its historical share. Punjab’s contention was that it had agreed
to a reduced share for itself because of a 'package deal' in 1991 under which additional
storages were also to be constructed. Since, according to Punjab, the 1991 accord
was not implemented in entirety and storages were not constructed, Punjab sought its
share of water on pre-1991 historical average basis. Sindh19 contested this position
bitterly and considered 1991 accord sacrosanct.
(4) Reduction in Storage due to Silting of Existing Reservoirs. It is anticipated that
by 2014 and 2020, we would have lost 6.27 MAF or 34 % of the total capacity and
7.27 MAF or 40 % of the total storage capacity respectively. The federal government
is convinced that construction of new storage is the only effective response to this
situation. Some opponents of the new storages suggest that instead the possibility of
de-silting of the reservoirs should be explored. Most of the experts, however, feel that
de-silting and the subsequent disposal of the removed silt is simply not feasible.
(5) Wastage of Water in the Irrigation System. Pakistan has the largest contiguous
irrigation21 system in the world. It is estimated that 40 to 50 per cent of water is lost
between the canal head works to the farm gate. Lining of canals is considered a good
solution to this problem. But lining22 of canals in Sindh is a great issue as canals will
need to be closed long enough to deprive the farmers of at least one crop and the
farmers are not willing to pay this price.
Recommendations
National Water Policy
It is high time that we contemplate the seriousness of the water situation. Petty
provincial political struggles have hurt us the most by delaying the construction of
dams. The matter must be debated in the parliament and a comprehensive
development plan must be prepared and followed on emergency basis. Departments
like IRSA, WAPDA must be revitalized and reforms committee formulated with the
purpose of submitting their recommendations within 3 months’ time. Supreme Court
has taken a serious note of the issue of construction of dams by initiating a dam fund.
Though a well spirited endeavour, the court must push for undertaking a strong
decision in the light of the recommendations of the reforms committee. Social
awareness campaign must be part of the national water policy to educate the people
and children to make efficient use of water and to understand the true value of this
resource.

Underwater Wells Legalised

All underwater wells, pumps must be legalized and new pumping banned. Laws
must be enacted for requirement of seeking permission from local government before
making new wells.
Modern Flood Forecasting
Modern flood forecasting techniques must be adopted in Pakistan coupled with
efficient early warning system utilizing all resources at different tiers of government.
Construction of Dams
Kalabagh and Diamer Basha dams must be constructed on priority basis. In
case of shortage of funds, smaller dams must be constructed. Dams will enable
Pakistan to protect itself from the malicious water regulation practices of India. Floods
and drought both will be mitigated through construction of dams.
Projection of Indian Violations
Pakistan must highlight Indian violations of the Indus Basin Water treaty as part
of a foreign policy strategy. It is a matter of survival for Pakistan. It must be projected
as aggression against Pakistan from a coercive, hostile country seeking to browbeat
its neighbour into submission. A sympathetic international community shall force India
to abandon proposed and planned projects on the western rivers and push her to
eliminate violations conducted in the design of the constructed projects.
Efficient Water Management and Usage Systems
Considerable amounts of water is wasted while being delivered to the crops in
the fields through link canals/ streams. Moreover, crops require a certain amount of
water, less or excess is harmful/ undesirable as it results in wastage. At the national
level modern techniques may be introduced for farmers and incentives be introduced
for farms employing these methods. Trickles, bubbler and sprinklers may be used.
Mud banks of canals, link canals and streams must be cemented.
Maintenance of Canals
Tax reforms for water and efficient collect mechanisms must be adopted to
enable periodic maintenance of irrigation system of Pakistan and investment in
projects for reducing water losses.
Restoration of Water Storage Capacity of Major Dams
Sedimentation must be removed from the dams to restore their water storage
capacity as a priority measure until construction of new dams.

International Lobbying
Pakistan should engage with India within the context of the IWT in a
comprehensive way. International lobbying should be intensified on the point, i.e.,
water being the “lifeline” issue for Pakistan and this could trigger war.
Water Forecasting
Pakistan should be calling for a sophisticated forecasting system, accurately
estimating how much water flows into the IRS, as almost 90% of the water in the Upper Indus
River Basin comes from remote glaciers of Himalaya and Karakorum mountain ranges, which
border Pakistan, China and India. This region is so remote that the authorities in Pakistan do
not know the exact weather conditions there. This system will also help in alleviating droughts
in the country. The water forecasting system could ultimately help Pakistan in optimizing water
allocation at national level by working out how much water is used for irrigation, industry, and
domestic purposes.
Water Part of Security Agenda
Internally, water management in Pakistan has been poor. So, keeping in view the
dwindling water resources, water must be made part of new “security agenda.”