news details |
|
|
| PDP’s campaign misconceived’ | | Seeking abrogation of IWT as good as seeking independence- Experts | |
Sikander Khan
Early Times Report
Jammu, Dec 26: The peoples’ democratic party (PDP) has plans to launch a state-wide agitation against militarization and exploitation of state’s water resources by India and Pakistan. The campaign against militarization may evoke some response but the other part of the campaign, political analysts believe, is misconceived. By talking about water resources, the PDP is indirectly seeking abrogation of Indus Water Treaty (IWT). The PDP knows that is not possible.
The National Conference government, according to Times of India report (July 17, 2002) even submitted a memorandum urging New Delhi to abrogate the treaty in the best interests of the people of the state. However, the memorandum was ignored for political reasons. The treaty invoked heated discussions in the legislative assembly during the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP)-Congress rule. As the debate continues political commentators believe seeking abrogation of IWT is as good as seeking independence.
Can the IWT be abrogated? Honouring the IWT has become a compulsion for New Delhi. In any case, legally speaking, it is virtually impossible for India to abrogate the treaty. Article XII (4) states that 'provisions of this treaty shall continue in force until terminated by a duly ratified treaty concluded for that purpose between the two Governments.'
The treaty does not provide an exit clause for India per se. Article 54 of Protocol I (1977) to the Geneva Convention (1949) prohibits any measures that could result in the starvation of people. It specifically refers to water resources and irrigation works. Abrogation is bound to incite reactions from the World Bank and the countries that were party to the treaty and have provided funds.
Therefore, despite the demand of abrogation, no policy maker in New Delhi is ever likely to even contemplate this move. This is the reason India did not seek unilateral abrogation of the treaty in the wars of 1965, 1971 and 1999; therefore, India is not likely to consider abrogation in the event of any future war as well.
The Treaty was signed at Karachi by Field Marshal Muhammad Ayub Khan, the then President of Pakistan, Jawaharlal Nehru, the then Indian Prime Minister and World Bank on 19th September, 1960.
According to article 11 of the treaty, Pakistan has to receive, for unrestricted use, the waters of western rivers (Indus, Jehlum, and Chenab) and India is under an obligation to let flow all the waters of these rivers without harnessing it by constructing dams.
Noted columnist ML Kak the state suffers losses to the tune of 6000 Cr annually because of IWT. The total losses, therefore, can be safely pegged at 24, 36000 Cr. (Tribune, May 1, 2001).
Shall the state seek abrogation of IWT? Seeking abrogation can be a good political slogan but it will not work. It is as good as seeking independence. Well known Valley based political commentator, Dr Sheikh Showkat Husain, in one of his articles in a local English daily writes: “If we ask for exclusive rights over waters of Ravi as a compensation for losses that occurred to the state as a result of Indus Water Treaty, it can be a worthwhile and sustainable compensation. Ravi constitutes the border between Jammu Kashmir and Punjab. Exclusive right of utilization of its water will in great way enhance water resources of the state. Apart from utilizing these waters for electricity generation they can help in complete transformation of Kathua and Jammu districts in terms of agricultural production.”
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
