Upload
trinhlien
View
217
Download
2
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Hydro-diplomacy to Address the Transboundary Water Issues
between India & Pakistan
By: Ashfaq Mahmood
3 June 2014
2
Scope of Presenta�on
Background of Indus Waters Treaty Water Issues Between Pakistan and India Natural Factors-‐-‐-‐-‐Climate Change Hydro-‐diplomacy to Address Water Issues Ins�tu�onal arrangement for Hydrodiplomacy PCIW-‐-‐-‐Capacity Building
3
Historical Perspective -- Indus Waters Treaty
4
1. In 1947, division of the sub-continent amidst one of the bloodiest riots in the world (killing, migration, loss of property, misery). Tensions and Mistrust
2. Out of 20 basins, only Indus basin, partially, fell in Pakistan. Upstream control structures on Ravi, Beas and Sutlej fell in Indian Territory. The boundary commission assumed that the existing arrangements will continue.
3. India stopped water flowing to Pakistan on 1 April 1948 affecting 1.7 mAcre of land, millions of people and immediate slaughter of thousands of animals.
4. Restored through interim agreement on payment-- time bomb was ticking
5. Two sides locked horns:
i. Pakistan’’s Stand based on international principles:
a. Existing (Historical) uses be protected
b. Additional water to be divided according to future irrigation potential and population etc.
ii. India’’s Stand: Upper riparian has the prior right. Sovereignty over water flowing through Indian or Indian held territory.
Se�lement of Dispute
5
1. Dispute settlement under the aegis of World Bank:
a) Lilienthal’’s Article : ““Another ““Korea ”” in the Making?”” in Collier Magazine in 1951
b) Eugene Black’’s Proposal
2. Initial effort was for co-operative use (contemplating diversion of some water from Chenab to Sutlej while Sutlej continue to meet the needs of lower riparian (Pakistan). However, ultimately the principle of division of waters was adopted. IWT signed in 1960.
3. For Pakistan: Western Rivers, Indus, Jhelum and Chenab. For India: Eastern Rivers, Ravi, Sutlej and Beas.
Basic Principles of Indus Waters Treaty
Division of Waters: (a) Fixing and delimiting the rights and obligation, (b) most complete and satisfactory utilization of waters in (c) cooperative spirit
Eastern Rivers: Unrestricted use for India except Limited Pakistan Agri use.
Western Rivers: 1. Unrestricted use for Pakistan and India under obligation to let flow all the waters and not permit any interference with the waters of Western Rivers EXCEPT for following uses:
(A) Domestic use (B) Non-consumptive use (C) Agricultural use (limited)
(D) Run of River Hydropower Projects , as per design criteria in IWT
(E) Storage works (limited)
3. India to inform Pakistan 6 months in advance of construction of Power Plant
4. Formation of Permanent Commission
5 Dispute Resolution: Commission (for question), N.E. (for Point of Difference on engineering matters), CoA (for Dispute---legal matters)
7
INDUS BASIN REPLACEMENT WORKS
8
Link Canals (9 No) Barrages (6 No) Storage (3 No)
Trimmu-Sidhnai Sidhnai on Ravi Mangla
Sidhnai-Mailsi Mailsi Siphon on Sutlej Chashma
Mailsi-Bahawal Qadirabad on Chenab Tarbela
Rasul-Qadirabad Rasul on Jhelum
Qadirabad-Balloki Chashma on Indus
L.C.C Feeder Marala on Chenab
Balloki-Sulemanki-II
Chashma-Jhelum
Taunsa-Panjnad
Trust -‐-‐-‐The Fundamental Issue Pakistan Side Apprehensions:
India wants to interfere and a�ain more control and storage on the waters of the Western Rivers under the garb of, most complete and sa�sfactory u�liza�on of waters, tech design of projects and opera�onal requirements.
Indian Mindset(upper riparian) : i. India is right -‐-‐ Project Designs are Treaty compliant. Pakistan
objects for the sake of objec�ng. ii. India can start projects unilaterally (Disregard to Pakistan’’s
objec�ons) iii. India knows which data to share. iv. Bilateral dispute resolu�on rather than a neutral party
. Both Sides spread misinforma�on, make provoca�ve statements
. Both Sides adherence to posi�onal stances, arrogance.
10
11
Baglihar Dam on River CHENAB
RIVER
RIVER
RIVE
R
DULHASTI H/E PLANT
SALAL H/E PLANT(345 MW + 345 MW)
(450 MW + 450 MW)
(390 MW + 390 MW)
HEADWORK PAK INDIAN H/E PLANT
RIVER
CHANDRA
JAMMU I N D I A
LINE OF CONTROLCANAL
RIVER
M.R
LIN
K
P A K I S T A N
B.R.
B.D
U.C.
C
LEGEND
UDHAMPUR
PERMNAGAR
BENZWAR
OCCUPIED JAMMU & KASHMIR
BAGLIHAR H/E PLANT
LINE OFCONTROL
MARALAHEADWORKS
RIASIAUJ
CHENAB
TAWI
AKHNOORKHAD
KANTHANDODA
RAMBAN
BHAG
A
KILLAR
SISS
U N
.BILI
NS N
.
SISSU
BHUT.N
CHENABKISHTWAR ARTHAL
RIVE
R
N
UPSTREAM ELEVATION OF BAGLIHAR
18
0 5
710.5
2015105 3025
RIGHT BANK
NORTH POINT
747.653
PROPOSED ROCK PROFILE
EXISTING ROCK PROFILE
18 17 1717 17 12.522.5 17 781.055
DAM TOP EL 844.50
8
164,000 A.F
EXISTING NASRI BAPASS RCAD
55 121255828.00
EL.821
EXISTING GROUND LEVEL
797.34
CHUTE SPILLWAYS
17 11171114.5
12
844.50
STEEL PLATFORM SLUICE SPILLWAYS18
UPSTREAM ELEVATION OF DAMNOTE:-1- ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN MILLIMETRES AND LEVELS ARE IN METRES2 DIMENSIONS ARE NOT TO BE MEASURED BUT READ.
714.03
EXISTING GROUND LEVEL
728.38
742.73
LEFT BANK784.18
770.63
757.63
780.00
838.50 231A 17
ROAD1 2
d4
FPL 840
3 54 6 7
d3CUM STAI CASE GENERATOR ROOM d2 ELEVATOR CUM STAIRCASE
POWER INTAKE
(EL: 818 M)
AUXILIARY SPILLWAY
816.00
EL. 808
816.90
6.0
11
TOWER 10.5 X 8.5
9 10853.40
12 13
832.50EL.837.0
1717
18A
12.0 M X 10.0 X 4.0 M
1514 16
ROOM 12.5X8.0X4.0
d1
17 18
10.5
336.492CONTROL ROOM
EXISTING RCAD
FPL 840
GRAND PLAN : PROJECTS ON THE JHELUM
URI H/E (480 MW)
(105 MW) URI - II
PUNCH
RIVER
(240 MW)
UNDER CONSTRUCTION COMPLETED PROPOSED NALLAH LINE OF CONTROL
LEGEND RIVER
WULLAR LAKE
SRINAGAR
DAGWAN N. LIDDAR R.
WULLAR BARRAGE
NEELUM CONTROL
POHRU RIVER
(9 MW) MAHORA H/E L.JHELUM
OF (330 MW)
RIVER
MADMATI N.
ERIN N.
RIVER
KISHENGANGA PROJECT
NAUSARI MUZAFFARABAD NEELUM JHELUM
H/E PROJECT (969 MW)
POWER HOUSE
POWER HOUSE
URI H/E (480 MW)
Kishanganga HEP on JHELUM RIVER
1. India allowed to Divert Water, as they were adjudged to be ahead of Pakistan. (Comment: Pakistan’’s Case was not presented well due to institutional disharmony !)
2. India to ensure minimum flow of 9 Cumecs (317 cusecs) at all times. (net loss of about 10 % of hydroelectricity generation at NJ)
3. Draw Down Below DSL not permissible as sediment flushing is not an unforeseen emergency. (Pakistan Vindicated. India cannot justify construction of orifice spillways on Western Rivers in future).
Foot Note: KHEP design be modified. Case to N.E under study
Decision of Court of Arbitra�on (CoA)
8 14
INDEX PLAN OF WULLAR BARRAGE
EL. (FT.)
AREA (ACRES
)
VOL. (A.F.)
5167 14172 -
61500
168500 422500
5170 22874
5174 32365
5180 48031
DESIGN RES. LEVEL
5178.2 42809 328,000 15
Issues-‐-‐Points of View on Wullar Barrage and Storage (Tulbul Naviga�on) Project
INDIA (1) Naviga�onal control structure not a barrage. (2) No man made storage (3) Non-‐consump�ve use. (4) The Project is techno economically feasible . PAKISTAN (1) The structure is that of a barrage with storage. (2) It will become a man-‐made storage of 0.395 bcm (0.324 MAF).
No storage is allowed on the main stem of river Jhelum except for that incidental to the barrage 0.01234 bcm (0.01 MAF).
(3) The Treaty forbids India from any interference, control or restric�on in the flow of Western Rivers.
(4) Project feasibility not jus�fied (naviga�on with modern boats possible, Wullar Srinagar winter water data not suppor�ve and other means more economic)
16
LOCATION OF PROJECTS ON RIVER INDUS
CHUTAK44 MW
RIVER
BAZGO0.3 MW
SHYOK
KHARDUNG0.2 MW
HUNDER NOBRA0.4 MW
ACTUAL
NIMO BAZGO45 MW
KARGIL H/E3.75 MW
SUMOOR NOBRA0.1 MW
CONT
ROL
LEGEND
LINE OF CONTROL
NALLAH
RIVER
COMPLETEDUNDER CONSTRUCTION
HANU R.
TANGSTE R.
R.
OF
SHAKAR CHICKTAN0.84 MW
DRAS H/E0.075 MW
MATAYIN0.12 MW
LINE
DRAS
INDUS
STAKNA H/E3.24 MW
RIVERHAFTAL H/E2 MW
17
Other Issues
1. Sharing of Shortages: Dry year flow is less than half the wet year 2. Transboundary Aquifers:
§ Indus Basin losing 10 km3 per year § Water levels falling in Punjab, Haryana, Rajistan and Dehli by 0.3 m /Yr. § Subsidized electricity rates for tube-‐well pumping in India
3. Pollu�on of Rivers (discharge of industrial waste, chemicals/fer�lizers and domes�c effluent)
4. Watershed Management 5. Apprehensions of water the�s—telemetry. 6. Reservoir Opera�on and filling 7. Environmental Flows in Eastern Rivers 8. Basha Dam
18
Effects of Climate Change Shrinking Glaciers Glaciers in the Pamir and Hindu Kush mountains ) shrunk by 30 % in the last half century Rising temperatures/global warming will result in at least 10% reduc�on in precipita�on in the next 50 Years. Increased summer flows in shorter �me spans accentua�ng floods in next few years. It will be followed by shortages in the long run. Greater Frequency of floods . Poverty, food and electricity prices, urban migra�on affec�ng millions of people on the cards. At present severe drought at least once in 10-‐15 years. This frequency will increase.
19
Hydro-‐diplomacy Why Hydro-‐diplomacy?
To make a paradigm shi� from repe��ve ac�on—reac�on approach, posi�onal fixa�ons, blaming, sloganeering, mispercep�ons, �me consuming dispute se�lement to :
i. Bring coopera�on at the centre stage. ii. Maximize benefits for the people connected with water. iii. Se�le principles of future engagements
Concept: Integrate mul�ple perspec�ves within the ambit of the IWT(different perspec�ves: hydrologists, engineers, poli�cians, economists, sociologists, environmentalists, and people connected with water)
Approaches: Bilateral Third party, neutral broker Mul�lateral and donors Interna�onal poli�cal maneuvering Track II diplomacy 20
Framework of Water Coopera�on
1. Coopera�on within the ambit of IWT 2. Se�ng the stage: Build Confidence and Trust
i. No emo�ve statements ii. No poli�cal mileage iii. Educate and regulate media iv. Propagate benefits of water coopera�on
3. Approach : step by step—Rela�on building and joint studies first
21
Avenues of Coopera�on: i. Improve data sharing, telemetry ii. Climate change studies and measures iii. Watershed management iv. Transboundary aquifers studies and management v. Water pollu�on studies and management vi. Sharing knowledge and experiences in water management vii. Mechanisms of monitoring compliance with IWT viii. Exploring mechanisms for avoiding repe��ve issues
a) Engineering ma�ers: Design of infrastructure b) Legal ma�ers: Interpreta�on of IWT c) Unilateral start d) Data
ix. Exploring further avenues of coopera�on with mutual consent
22
Drivers of Coopera�on
Primary Drivers: – Permanent Indus Commission – Governments
Secondary Drivers – Media – Thinkers, opinion makers, – NGOs, Civil Society – Research , Academic and other water ins�tu�ons
23
Permanent Indus Commission (PIC) Pakistan & India to create permanent posts of Commissioners and appoint Engineers—competent in hydrology/ water use as Govt’’s Rep. The two Commissioners together form PIC. Purpose and Func�ons:
1. Coopera�ve implementa�on of IWT and promote coopera�on 2. To serve as regular communica�on channel 3. To make efforts to resolve ques�ons interpreta�on/applica�on/
breaches of IWT 4. Hold at least once a year mee�ng 5. Inspec�on tours once every 5 years or as requested by either
Commissioner 6. Submit annual report to the two governments.
Note: Mismatch of qualifica�ons with func�ons 24
Deficiencies of PCIW
i. Very lean organiza�on with engineering focus ii. Lack of func�onal classifica�ons iii. Low salaries iv. Career suffoca�on v. Lack on skills in communica�on , hydro diplomacy
and promo�on of coopera�on vi. Lack of opportuni�es for widening and deepening
knowledge.
25
Capacity Building of PCIW Organize PCIW along func�onal lines with increased manpower. Improve salaries Improve career development prospects within PCIW and opportuni�es in other organiza�ons.
The post of Commissioner should be tenure based (3 Yr) preferably on deputa�on.
Develop knowledge base and skill set-‐-‐-‐ hydro engineering, management, climate change, ground water, environments, water laws, sociology, economics, diplomacy and communica�on.
Advisory panel of experts Decent and IT enabled state of the art office, digi�za�on of record. Provide adequate funds.
26
Complimentary Support
Set up water chair, HEC to provide scholarships, promote scholarship in various water related disciplines Support and outsource to specialized consultants, legal experts and other consultants Patronage of the Government with a cell focused only on promo�ng coopera�on with finances.
27
Conclusion
Coopera�on be brought on the centre stage Build mutual trust and rela�onships by bringing the stake holders together Restructure strengthen and support PCIW Promote scholarship in all water related disciplines. Allocate funds for ac�vi�es for promo�ng Coopera�on
28
Main Features of TOR of Study
Collect, review and analyse the data and informa�on to document: – opportuni�es for water diplomacy to accomplish water coopera�on in addressing trans-‐boundary water issues
– trans-‐boundary water issues related to Indus Water Treaty (with India) and opportuni�es for water coopera�on in sharing benefits
– trans-‐boundary water issues related to Kabul River basin and opportuni�es for water coopera�on between Afghanistan and Pakistan
Development of the capacity of PCIW in water diplomacy and to facilitate the IWC to ini�ate the dialogues among the stakeholders
30