The people of the region blame the treaty for their underdevelopment
The treaty has also had a detrimental impact on the UT’s potential for agriculture and power generation. Representative Photo: iStock. The demand for water resources has increased over the past decades due to dwindling water supplies, rising population, urbanisation and inadequate water management in developing countries. Increased demand and scarcity of this vital resource have sparked a desire to control water resources, creating a breeding ground for conflict.
Also read: Here is why India has given notice to Pakistan for amendment of the Indus Waters Treaty
When economies are primarily based on agriculture, disputes over water use between states can become very serious. However, one of the few instances of a significant international river basin conflict being resolved in South Asia is the Indus Water Treaty (IWT), signed by India and Pakistan in 1960.
The three eastern tributaries (Sutlej, Beas, and Ravi) and three western rivers (Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab) comprise the Indus River System. Pakistan is primarily responsible for managing the waters of the western rivers with a mean flow of 80 million acre feet (MAF). At the same time, India has been assigned the eastern tributaries with a mean flow of 33 MAF, according to IWT.
But, according to the people in the region, the treaty, though executed in the country’s best interests, has prevented Jammu and Kashmir from using their own water resources, significantly impacting the UT’s growth. As a result, IWT seems to be struggling to gain support in the region.
The three western rivers allocated to Pakistan flow through Jammu and Kashmir. The people of the region blame the treaty for their underdevelopment as it has restricted the use of water from these rivers.
Jammu and Kashmir’s economy is mainly dependent on agriculture. Nearly 70 per cent of the people here depend on agriculture for their income, directly or indirectly.
The Union territory’s (UT) irrigation system has merely improved over the years, according to Digest of Statistics, J&K, 2020-21. In 1960-1961, the UT could irrigate 274,000 hectares (ha) of agricultural land. But in 2020–2021, it could only irrigate 318,890 ha, a marginal increase of 16 per cent over more than six decades.
In Kashmir, the primary irrigation method, canal irrigation, has seen a dismal development. The area irrigated by canals was 256,000 ha in 1960-1961, and it grew by less than four per cent to 265,930 ha. Additionally, the net sown area grew just by 19 per cent, from 614,000 ha in 1955-1956 to 736,000 ha in 2020-21.
The region’s hydropower growth is another issue. When fully realised, the considerable hydropower potential in the UT will give its economy a powerful boost.
The potential hydropower capacity is 20,000 megawatts (MW), of which 16,475 MW have been determined to be commercially viable. Of the total potential, only 3,263.46 MW, or 19.80 per cent, have been used so far.
In Jammu and Kashmir, there is huge untapped hydropower potential that could help the region meet its rising energy needs. At the core of the Kashmiri discourse on the power shortage is the distribution of water resources agreed to between India and Pakistan through the instrumentality of the IWT.
The argument made in the documents of the government of Jammu and Kashmir is: Of the estimated potential of 20,000 MW (identified potential being 16,480 MW) of the Indus River Basin, a large percentage cannot be harnessed for the benefit of the state as IWT only allows for run-of-the-river projects that do not affect the riparian rights of Pakistan.
As a result of being denied the opportunity to completely utilise the hydropower potential of its own rivers, the Kashmir region sees the IWT as a significant loss for it.
In addition to setbacks in agriculture and hydropower, a study published in 2005 by the Sir Rattan Tata Trust in Mumbai and the International Water Management Institute (IWMI) in Colombo claimed the treaty had caused J&k to lag behind by an estimated Rs 6,500 crore annually. The treaty has also had a detrimental impact on the UT’s potential for agriculture and power generation, according to the study.
Following the subdued disapproval of the IWT, Kashmiris formally started opposing the division of their water resources between India and Pakistan in 2002, with the Jammu and Kashmir legislative assembly passing a resolution to seek the termination of this treaty.
Since then, the IWT has become a regular feature of debates and discussions in the assembly. Along with the abrogation of the treaty, the demand has been put forward to quantify the losses incurred to Jammu and Kashmir due to it. Such an assessment can aid the UT in seeking compensation. Consequently, the government said that it started the process of quantifying the losses.
This indicates the widespread resentment among the residents of Jammu and Kashmir over the existence of IWT. The resentment is due to the perception that the treaty has not been beneficial for the UT and has resulted in a loss of water resources, which could have been used for irrigation and power generation.
As the issue of IWT is again in the spotlight due to India’s appeal to Pakistan to modify it, the people of Jammu and Kashmir eagerly expect policymakers to pay attention to their concerns.
Rahul M Lad is a research scholar at the Department of Geography, Savitribai Phule Pune University.
Ravindra G Jaybhaye is a professor at the Department of Geography, Savitribai Phule Pune University.
Views expressed are the authors’ own and don’t necessarily reflect those of Down To Earth
We are a voice to you; you have been a support to us. Together we build journalism that is independent, credible and fearless. You can further help us by making a donation. This will mean a lot for our ability to bring you news, perspectives and analysis from the ground so that we can make change together.
.png)
Comments are moderated and will be published only after the site moderator’s approval. Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name. Selected comments may also be used in the ‘Letters’ section of the Down To Earth print edition.