(India cheated Pakistan on framing wrong definitions of technical terms in the IWT but Pakistan foolishly remained ignorant)
Preamble of Indus Waters Treaty.
In spite of wrong meanings and interpretations given to the technical definitions of terms used in the Indus Waters Treaty, the Preamble of the Treaty provides that “the water rights and obligations of each in relation to the other concerning the use of these waters cannot be altered”. Unfortunately, the technical definitions mentioned in Annexture D, from ( c ) to ( g ) are totally altered and are not used in the sense provided in the terms used internationally in dams and reservoirs engineering. The wrong definitions given in the IWT to these terms convey different meanings than the recognized technical meanings of terms. This is a trick to create unrestricted storage on all rivers because of wrong definitions. Pakistan foolishly remained ignorant for not pointing out wrong meanings given to the technical terms in Annexure D. Wrong definitions makes the Treaty unjust, inequitable and partial. It requires correction.
Wrong meanings given to the terms are; Pondage, Full Pondage Level, Surcharge Storage, Operating Pool and Run-of the-river. The fact is that in this Treaty we are only concerned with the Gross Storage, Dead Storage, Live Storage and run-of-the-river in building dams. Whatever India has done to cheat Pakistan, water rights of Pakistan cannot be usurped and India cannot create more than 4.19 maf of storage water. India has so far created about 48 maf of Gross Storage and is creating more by building another 9 dams.
Pakistan water rights are further confirmed and guaranteed under Article XI (3) that, the rights and obligations of each party under the Treaty shall remain unaffected by any provision contained in or anything arising out of the execution of any agreement. Under these provisions, the wrong definitions of terms can be ignored as water rights of Pakistan cannot be changed or reduced and storage more than 4.19 maf cannot be created. Wrong definitions make the Treaty unjust and ineffective. What India has done is aggression on the water rights of Pakistan. By creating huge illegal storage, in the name of Pondage, Pondage Level, Surcharge, operating Pool and run-of-the-river India cheated Pakistan. Also, it further complicated Kashmir issue.
In the context of the above two basic and clear provisions on water rights, the water rights of Pakistan in no form can be usurped and diverted by India simply by twisting definitions giving them wrong meanings to illegally create extra storage. The definitions in Annexure D of the IWT of Pondage, Full Pondage level, the Surcharge Storage, Operating Pool, and run-of-river plant are all totally changed, wrong, and made ridiculous to cheat the other party of its water rights. The jugglery of words cannot allow India to store more water than the allowable storage of 4.19 maf. The definitions given in Annexture D are no where used in the sense as used in the Agreement of the Treaty. These wrong definitions need replacement by correct definitions limiting the terms to only four, namely Gross Storage, Dead Storage, Live Storage and run-of-the-river. The other terms used in the Treaty are for bad intention. The definitions of terms given in Annexure D are discussed below highlighting their wrong meanings to create unlimited storage. It will be seen how cleverly facts are distorted, violating the Treaty. All this is planned to stop Rabi supplies to Pakistan to destroy economically and subject its people to famine. Creating this situation is creating cause for war.
Pondage. Annexture D ( c ).
Please see the definition of Pondage in the dictionary. Pondage means small quantity of standing water where generally buffalos bathe. It does not mean Live Storage of any quantity as adopted in the definition of Pondage in the Treaty. Thus Pondage never means as “Live storage of only sufficient magnitude to meet fluctuations in the discharge of the turbines arising from variations in the daily and weekly loads of plant.
The definition in the Treaty means, that India can create any amount of storage to run the turbines to their designed installed power generation capability. On run-of-the-river flow, installed power generation is not possible unless huge storage is created for it. The Treaty does not allow this Live Storage under the definition of run-of-the-river. Pondage does not mean run-of-the river. Run-of-the-river does not mean creating any amount of storage. It only means a hydro-electric plant that develops power without Live Storage. Pondage is therefore no live storage.
Full Pondage Level. Annexture D (d).
This is again a concocted definition like of Pondage coined for the Treaty to create more storage. In this, Treaty Full Pondage Level means maximum storage created by each dam as per its design with no restrictions on design to create any storage. The wrong definitions given in the Treaty for Pondage and Pondage Level means no restriction on the design to create any amount of storage in millions of acres feet (maf).
These definitions clearly amount to befooling, cheating and depriving the water rights of the other party and befooling all those who participated in the Treaty. Full Pondage Level in the Treaty means any amount of storage created without restrictions. This definition is not only wrong but illegal and ridiculous. It shows bad intention. These definitions allow creating any amount of storage on our Western Rivers allocated to Pakistan.
India is only allowed to create 4.19 maf of water in the Treaty and no more. Therefore these wrong definitions are not applicable. This is how India cheated Pakistan by depriving its water rights by building 32 dams, illegally created 48 maf of Gross storage, that includes 10 maf of Dead Storage and 38 maf of Live storage, against the allowable storage of 4.19 maf of water. This dangerous ability acquired by India will totally block Rabi flows to Pakistan during the critical period of growing. This will render the Indus Basin Canal Irrigation System seasonal or non-perennial creating famine conditions.
India diverted perennial water that irrigated Punjab of Pakistan. In replacement to this, India contributed on a small scale to build Tarbela Dam and Mangla Dam on Pakistani rivers to create time-based storage with limited life span. Time-limited storage flow of water cannot be equated to the perennial flow or all time flow. This is yet another point of inequality showing injustice that needs rectification. Pakistan got no equivalent perennial water, whereas, it gave perennial water to India. Surprisingly, the huge Live storage created by India is through the wrong definitions given the name of pondage, pondage level, Surcharge Storage, Operating Pool and run-of-the-river. Standing water in small quantity in Pond and Pool is wrongly considered as unrestricted Live Storage.
Annexture D (e) Surcharge Storage.
The Treaty defines Surcharge Storage as uncontrollable Storage occupying space above the Full Pondage Level. This actually means floodwater. The use of word floodwater is avoided. Pondage Level is ridiculously termed as Live Storage as per design with no restrictions. Surcharge Storage is given the meanings as more storage than the Live designed Storage. It means Floodwater and is given the name of Surcharge Storage. Under this definition India can store even the floodwater. This is all trickery of words, and wrong meanings given to all definitions with the intention to cheat Pakistan who trusted India. Wrong meanings given to all these technical definitions require the Treaty to be modified under Article XII (3) to set right all these flaws to make it just and equitable. These definitions are over lapping each other and are confusing. This Treaty is only concerned with terms of Gross Storage, Dead Storage, Live Storage and run-of-the-river. It is a matter of grief that no engineer in Pakistan could catch this hidden trick.
Annexture D (f) Operating Pool.
Operating Pool in the Treaty is defined as the storage created between the Dead Storage Level and Full Pondage Level. This means any amount of Live Storage provided in the design of the dam according to the will of India with no restrictions.
It is clear that all definitions provided in this Treaty are wrong, distorted and changed than their original meanings. These definitions provide free hand to India to create any storage, to do anything it likes in any manner it likes. This Treaty gives India complete control over the flow of our rivers, this is why India has created colossal storage capacity. This is the reason that India built 32 mega dams creating 48 maf of Gross Storage and about 38 maf of Live Storage in occupied Kashmir with the intention to hold Rabi supplies of about 38 maf to Pakistan during the growing season. India will use water as an unusual weapon of silent war to destroy Pakistan.
Annexture D (g) Run-of-river Plant.
It is only the run-of-the-River whose definition is correctly defined but attached unusual conditions to its definition, making it clearly unfair and ridiculous. The run-of-the-river is defined in the Treaty as no use of Live Storage involved in generating power. But in the Treaty, this definition is twisted with bad intention by adding ”except Pondage and surcharge storage. Why? This destroyed the sense and the meaning of run-of-the-river in the definition. These definitions coined by India enable India to create any amount of storage on a river without restrictions. The meaning of the run-of-river is distorted and changed. The allowable power generation in the Treaty is based on run-of-the-river with no Live Storage in support but India created 38 maf of Live Storage so far.
Under these self coined definitions by India, there are no restrictions on India to build any number of dams creating any amount of storage without any restrictions. This is against the spirit of the Treaty and its Preamble. Unjust and inequitable Treaty can be the potential source of war. This direly needs to modify the Treaty as provided in its Article XII (3) to make it just and equitable and to maintain long time peace in the region. India is not allowed under the Treaty to create more storage than 4.19 maf under any conditions. Refer to Article XI (3).
India gains Political objectives by using Treaty to destroy Pakistan economically
Pakistan trusted India and signed the Treaty with good intention, aiming peace and good relations with India. So far Pakistan did not realize to scrutinize the definitions given in the Treaty trusting India that it will not create more storage than the allowable of 4.19 maf. But surprisingly it came across the report made by the US Senator John Kerry to the US Senate Committee on Foreign Relations fearing water war between India and Pakistan. The title of the report is “Avoiding water wars: Water Scarcity…”. The excerpt from the report is quoted as:
“that India has acquired the ability to store enough water to limit the supply of water to Pakistan at critical moment in the growing season”.
John Kerry fears as India has created conditions for water war by stopping 38 maf of Pakistan’s Live storage of water from its own rivers, the Indus, the Jehlum and the Chenab because India is in illegal and forceful occupation of the occupied Kashmir the source of water of Pakistani rivers originating in occupied Kashmir. India will use water as a weapon of war in the near future and as a lethal weapon of mass destruction. This will create hunger, famine, and death as water will be used as a weapon for genocide against Pakistan.
How to ensure water rights to Pakistan for its existence and avoid water war (nuclear war).
· It is suggested that Pakistan should get perennial water in place of perennial water diverted by India. This will only be possible that India release that water which irrigated Punjab of Pakistan in 1947. Change of boundary on partition cannot usurp water rights. This will be the easiest solution. Alternatively, India should build storage dams on perennial basis for Pakistan for getting perennial supplies all the time.
· The best solution is that India should vacate occupied Kashmir the source of water to Pakistan
· The Treaty should be modified with correct definitions as internationally used removing all drawbacks. The trust of Pakistan should not be betrayed by India as it can lead to nuclear war in the near future that must be avoided at all cost.
· Pakistan will never surrender its water rights for the survival of its people. Therefore Pakistan should immediately take up the water issue with India at Ministers level to resolve the matter. Kashmir is already under dispute for the last 62 years. The water issue and the IWT would make the Kashmir issue more serious and compel Pakistan against its wishes for water war for its survival in self defense as correctly predicted and reported by John Kerry to the US Senate. The best and permanent solution and a step to achieve perpetual peace between India and Pakistan would be to hand over Kashmir to Kashmiri that is the origin and the source of Pakistani rivers. At the same time, partition that had sown the seed of war by handing over our hydrological region of Kashmir to India should return Kashmir to Pakistan for everlasting peace in the region. Peace is priceless as it is the foundation of rapid prosperity. Perpetual fear of war be avoided.
· I suggest the matter of rapid silting of reservoirs and of the definitions in Annexture D of the Treaty besides creating 48 maf of gross storage against the allowable storage of 4.19 maf be taken up with India bringing these points to their notice and if need be approach the Court of arbitration on these points. A competent lawyer must get the assistance of competent water resource engineer. The issues created due to unjust Treaty may also be brought it to the notice of the Security Council as India wants to subjugate Pakistan by snatching its bread that can cause genocide. A step to avoid nuclear war lie in solving the root cause of the problems.
Copy to
Secretary water and Power Government of Pakistan Islamabad
Minister for Water and Power Government of Pakistan Islamabad
Minister for Foreign Affairs, Government of Pakistan, Islamabad
Kamal Majid ullah Special Assistant to the Prime Minister on water Cabinet Division, Islamabad
Secretary, Pakistan Engineering Congress, PEC Building (4th Floor) 97-A/D1, Liberty Market,
Gulberg III, LAHORE.
It is brought to the notice of the Secretary Engineering Congress that the matter of the Indus Waters Treaty has become extremely serious as India has created 48 maf of gross storage depriving Pakistan of its Rabi water supplies of about 38 maf of water. This is because of distorting the definitions of the technical terms given in Annexure –D of the Treaty. The definitions are tactfully altered by India to create unlimited storage on Pakistani rivers against the allowable of 4.19 maf.
As reported by Senator John Kerry to the US Senate, India has acquired the ability to completely stop Rabi supplies to Pakistan. This will turn the Canal Irrigation System seasonal or non-perennial. I send this paper to the Secretary Pakistan Engineering Congress-the large body of very competent and highly experienced engineers to examine the definitions given in Annexture D of the Indus Waters Treaty 1960.
I want the opinion of the Congress expertise on this paper. If they agree with my views I would then request the Congress to advise the Government that the definitions are wrong and Pakistan is cheated by India.
I thank Engr Akhtar Abbas Khawaja, the Secretary of the PEC who kindly acknowledged my previous paper in letter No.PEC/P-4/2012 January 30, 2012 titled Indus Basin Water Security in jeopardy and send it for evaluation.
No comments:
Post a Comment