2024-10-01 00:56:23
New Delhi:Clouds of crisis are looming over the Indus Water Treaty signed between India and Pakistan in 1960. India had earlier this month sent a fourth notice to Pakistan to review the treaty. Pakistan has rejected the last three notices and this is pointing towards a serious problem. If no positive response is received from Pakistan this time, the treaty itself may be in danger. Both the countries had created a process to resolve disputes in this agreement. But both the countries have different opinions regarding this process. Now the differences between the two countries regarding this agreement have increased even more. Pakistan says that if there is any concern, it should be discussed between the Indus Water Commissioners of the two countries. India says that this system of commissioners is a result of the Indus Water Treaty. It does not have the right to review the treaty. This has to be done through diplomatic talks with the government. There is a deadlock between the two countries on this issue.
How did the dispute arise, could the treaty be in jeopardy?
Now how did the matter reach here? The reason for this dispute is regarding Article 9 of the treaty. This mandates a three-tier process – first, through bilateral discussions between the Indus Commissioners. Second, if matters cannot be resolved by the commissioners, the appointment of a neutral expert. and finally, a court of arbitration appointed by the World Bank in consultation with both parties.
The problem is that today there are three different interpretations of this provision which have emerged in the ongoing dispute over the Ratle and Kishanganga hydroelectric projects in Jammu and Kashmir. India preferred a neutral expert to resolve seven issues emanating from the Kishanganga and Ratle projects. But Pakistan approached the World Bank for a court of arbitration. India boycotted the Court of Arbitration process. Now due to this the treaty may be in danger.
Can Pakistan keep the matter pending?
India immediately boycotted the arbitration court process and instead asked for a neutral expert. But the point is that as per the treaty, the decision of the CoA (Court of Arbitration) is binding and can affect future projects. The CoA’s partial decision on the Kishanganga project in 2012 is a good example of this. Unlike some other treaties, the Indus Treaty does not stipulate any fixed time for review of the provisions based on changed climate and other circumstances.
Thus, having boycotted the CoA process this time, India is unlikely to respect any decision. This automatically puts the treaty at risk. As it stands, it has practically rendered Article 9 of the Treaty inoperative. This is why India wants a review. Pakistan knows that as long as it keeps India tied to treaty processes, it can delay India’s plans to build hydroelectric projects on the Jhelum, Chenab and Indus.