ORGANIZATIONAL CHART OFFICE OF PAKISTAN COMMISSIONER FOR INDUS WATERS (MINISTRY OF WATER AND POWER)

Thousands have lived without love, no one without water.

Water Disputes1Water DisputesHistory 1947Punjab, Sindh and Bahawalpur were dependant of the water of Madhupur and Feropur head worksMadhupurRavi, upper bari doaab Feropur Satlug ,Lower barri doaab ,Debalpur, Eserman Stream for BahawapurCommittee B (Responsible for division of Punjab) decleared ,water disputes ;settled !Punjab High Court Judges, Justice Din Muhammad and Justice Muhammad Munir, both nominees of the Muslim League, and Justice Mehr Chand Mahajan and Justice Teja Singh (nominees of the Indian National Congress).

2ContTenure of Commission ended on 31-03-1948 and India stopped water on 01-04-194804-05-1948 water restored on humanitarian groundsCh.Muhammad Ali it was criminal negligence by Committee-B (emergence of Pakistan)1954 foil attempt of WB to settle the issue1958, Water was stopped again3HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVEIndus River System, Sutlej, Ravi, Beas, Chenab, Jhelum, Indus 168 MAF (pre-partition). Punjab Irrigation System the largest Irrigation Network Drawing 107,350 cusecs from Indus River System.Important Headworks at Ferozepure and Madhupur which fed about 1.7 million Acres in Western Punjab (Pakistan) were given to Eastern Punjab (India).Chairman Boundary Commission Cyril Radcliffe assumed in his award that existing system will continue. I think it only right to express the hope that, where the drawing of a boundary line cannot avoid disrupting such unitary services as canal irrigation, railways and electric power transmission, a solution may be found between the two states for some joint control of what has hitherto been a valuable common service.

4HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVEThe Committee on Division of Physical Assets was formed to settle questions of future management of joint assets by Punjab Partition CommitteeThe Committee gave a unanimous report on the issue of post partition water shares of East & West Punjab.The Committee is agreed that there is no question of varying the authorized shares of water to which the two zones and various canals are authorized.Accordingly a standstill agreement to continue status quo till 31st March 1948 was made between Chief Engineers (designate) of East and West PunjabAt the expiry of standstill agreement India severed supplies to Pakistan from Madhupur and Ferozpur Headworks on 1st April 19485 CLAIM OF PARTIESPakistan Existing (Historical) uses to be sacred Excess water could be divided according to area and population etc. The principle had support of several treatiesIndias Claim Upper riparian has an absolute right Lower riparian can only get it under an agreement or treaty6 RESOLUTION OF DISPUTE World Banks offer to the two Prime Ministers 6th September, 1951 Difficulties in resolution World Banks proposal 5th February, 1954 Resolution in terms of Treaty Contribution by friendly countries for Replacement Works7 BASIS FOR RESOLUTION Due to the availability of water in Western Rivers, the replacement works could be a solutionWorld Bank to provide grants and loansto construct replacement worksIndependent control and regulation of works8REPLACEMENT WORKSLINK CANALSLINK CANALS

CAPACITY (CUSECS)LENGTH (MILES)

EXCAVATION (MILLION CU. YDS.)

1. TRIMMU-SIDHNAI11,000

44

21.0

2. SIDHNAI-MAILSI

10,100

62

31.3

3. MAILSI-BAHAWAL

3,900

10

2.4

4. RASUL-QADIRABAD

19,000

30

38.3

5. QADIRABAD-BALLOKI18,600

80

80.3

6. L.C.C. FEEDER

4,100

20

8.0

7. BOLLIKI-SULEIMANDE-II6,500

39

20.5

8. CHASHMA-JHELUM

21,700

63

118.9

9. TAUNSA-PANJNAD

12,000

38

22.5

Cont/29BARRAGESBARRAGE

RIVER

FLOOD OF RECORD (CUSECS)

DESIGN FLOOD (CUSECS)

LENGTH OF BARRAGE (FEET)

1. SIDHNAI

RAVI

167,000

167,000

712

2. MAILSI SIPHON

SUTLEJ

427,000

429,000

1601

3. QADIRABAD

CHENAB

912,000

900,000

3373

4. RASUL

JHELUM

876,000

850,000

3209

5. CHASHMA

INDUS

1176,000

950,000

3556

6. MARALA

CHENAB

1023,000

1100,000

4472

REPLACEMENT WORKSCont/310

STORAGE RESERVOIRSSTORAGE

RIVER

GROSS STORAGE CAPACITY (MILLION ACRE FEET)1. MANGLA

JHELUM

4.674

2. CHASHMA

INDUS

0.4973. TARBELA

INDUS

8.192REPLACEMENT WORKS11SCOPE OF TREATY Rights and Obligations of Parties Agricultural Uses on Western Rivers Hydroelectric Works Storage Works Settlement of Differences and Disputes Modification of Treaty12 EASTERN AND WESTERN RIVERSEastern Rivers Ravi Sutlej BeasWestern Rivers Indus Jhelum Chenab13PROVISIONS REGARDING WESTERN RIVERS (INDUS, JHELUM AND CHENAB) (1)Pakistan shall receive for unrestricted use all waters of Western Rivers(2)India shall not interfere with the waters of Western Rivers except for following uses:(a) Domestic Use(b) Non-Consumptive use(c) Agricultural Use (limited)(d) Generation of Hydro-electric Power(e) Storage Works (limited)14INDIAS APPROACH TO TREATY OBLIGATIONS Being a winner, India response was positiveOfficers of combined Punjab had good working relationsAfter 1965 and 1971 war political environment shadowed technical issues.Intends dilution of Treaty provision15PAKISTANS APPROACH TO TREATY OBLIGATIONS Basis of the Treaty was a conflict between two nationsThe Treaty was a trade of Western & Eastern RiversBeing lower riparian needs protection of the TreatyConsider the Western rivers as a life line16Baglihar Dam Issue17PROVISIONS REGARDING WESTERN RIVERS (INDUS, JHELUM AND CHENAB) (1)PAKISTAN SHALL RECEIVE FOR UNRESTRICTED USE ALL WATERS OF WESTERN RIVERS(2)INDIA SHALL NOT INTERFERE WITH THE WATERS OF WESTERN RIVERS EXCEPT FOR FOLLOWING USES:(A) DOMESTIC USE(B) NON-CONSUMPTIVE USE(C) AGRICULTURAL USE (LIMITED)(D) GENERATION OF HYDRO-ELECTRIC POWER(E) STORAGE WORKS (LIMITED)18FreeboardPondageLevel of Power IntakeLevel and Size of Spillway GatesFEATURES OF THE DAM QUESTIONED19OUTCOME/DECISION BY NEUTRAL EXPERTFreeboardIndias application of design criteria was wrong. Reduced freeboard by 33% (i.e. from 4.5 m to 3.0 m).Level of Power IntakeIndia wrongly designed and located the power intake. Raised it by 3 m. PondageReduced pondage from 37.722 MCM to 32.56 MCM.SpillwayIndias analysis is incorrect: not representative of reality and is illusory. NE suggested no change by invoking international practice and the state of the art. 20CURRENT STATUSIt was observed that all the changes in design as determined by the Neutral Expert have been incorporated.Decision in favor of INDIAThe Permanent Indus Commission recently undertook the Tour of Inspection to the site of Baglihar Hydroelectric Plant in order to verify the incorporation in the design of the Project the determination of the Neutral Expert.21Wular BarrageWular Lake barrage disrupts the flow of water into the Jhelum River, which flows into Pakistan because the capacity of the Wular Lake barrage is 3.0MAF while according to the proviso of an Indus water treaty, to construct an incidental storage capacity the design has to be examined and approved by the Pakistan on one hand and the storage capacity does not exceed 0.1 MAF of water22Pakistans worry Wular Lake is situated in an Indian occupied Jummu and Kashmir and The River Jhelum flows into the lakeAccording to Indus water treaty India has right to use the water of the Sutlej, the Beas and the Ravi before the point where the river enters into Pakistan whilst the Pakistan has the right over the Jhelum, the Chenab and the Indus river. Pakistans main worry was the barrage on that site could jeopardize and effectively damage the three canal system consisting of Upper Jhelum Canal, Upper Chenab Canal and Lower Bari Doab Canal

23Kishanganga HEP24Kishanganga Hydroelectric PlantAt Jhelum River basin Bandipore in Jammu and KashmirIndia and will have an installed capacity of 330 MWConstruction on the project began in 2007 and is expected to be complete in 2016Construction on the dam was halted though by the Hague's Permanent Court of Arbitration in October 2011 due to Pakistan's protest of its effect on the flow of the Kishanganga River ,called the Neelum River in PakistanIn February 2013, the Hague ruled that India could divert a minimum amount of water for power generation25ContThe thought provoking point is why India initiates all projects on the water the rights of which have been given to the Pakistan India should think that dying cat can strike out the big dog

26Nature of Dispute of WaterInitial failure of Boundary Commission Committee BThe river water sharing was made an issue by the partition plan Indus Water Treaty- Lost three riversInterpretation of clauses of IWTControl of WaterStorageFlowUsageDiversion of flowWater as War toolLong last issue since 1947Every settlement is after 3rd party interference Water adds to the importance of Kashmir 27River system for Pakistan Pakistani dependence is many fold: 1) The foremost is Pakistani agricultural dependence. 2) The dams constructed en-route the rivers are the largest source of water supply for irrigation 3) The river water is used for hydroelectric power generation 4) The water is used for drinking. 5) Less importance is that the river water is used as source of sweet water fish in Pakistan.

28

2929Importance of WaterLife line of Agriculture and Agriculture is life line of EconomyWater Issue has two dimensionsInternational- Non Availability of Water may hamper the SurvivalDispute with India and Emerging dispute with AfghanistanInternal Dispute-May hamper the national IntegrationDistribution of WaterTotal Availability 147 MAF usage 102, Wastage 32Silting of Mangla and Terbela (20-25%)Decrease in Table-Water (75 Meters)Largest Canals Irrigation System dependant on water from Rivers30Important issue to understandRabi Winter- October to MarchKhraif-Summer-April to SeptemberMangla gets water from Jehlum-like eastern rivers is an Early riverTerbela-Indus- is later riverKharif sowing season starts early in SindhSindh gets water from Terbela so Sindh cant get water for early Kharif so Sindh ask water from ManglaWhen Sindh needs water from Mangla its a time to fill Mangla for Punjab-for Rabi about 4 MAF,When Sindh needs water for Kharif sowing31As W.H. Auden says:Thousands have lived without love, not one without water.

32