INTEGRATED MAINS AND PRELIMS MENTORSHIP (IMPM) 2025 Daily KEY
| Exclusive for Subscribers Daily: Indus Waters Treaty (IWT),
Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) and Cloudburst, Unified Pension Scheme (UPS), Archaeological Survey of India (ASI), Same Sex Marriage for the UPSC Exam? Why are topics like Illegal migrants and India-EU FTA important for both preliminary and main exams? Discover more insights in the UPSC Exam Notes for September 20, 2024
|
For Preliminary Examination: Current events of national and international Significance
For Mains Examination: GS II - International Relations
Context:
Having previously asked for a review, modification, and renegotiation of the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), India put the agreement, which had survived India-Pakistan tensions for 65 years, in abeyance after the terrorist attack in Pahalgam in April
Read about:
Indus Waters Treaty (IWT)
Eastern rivers and Western rivers
Key takeaways:
- India, which had earlier called for a review, modification, and even renegotiation of the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), suspended the pact after the April terrorist attack in Pahalgam.
- The treaty, which had endured Indo-Pak hostilities for more than six decades, now finds itself in a fragile state.
- Going ahead, the question of sharing river waters across the border is likely to become an equally contentious issue alongside terrorism and Jammu & Kashmir.
- Debates on the IWT have often been charged with sentiment rather than grounded in facts. In this context, a recent book by Uttam Kumar Sinha, senior fellow at the Manohar Parrikar Institute of Defence Studies and Analyses and a noted expert on the IWT, provides clarity.
- The Treaty allocated nearly 80% of the waters of the Indus system’s six rivers to Pakistan, a division that has caused dissatisfaction in India in recent years. As Sinha points out, the agreement was shaped less by volume calculations and more by geographical and natural factors such as terrain and river flow.
- The two countries entered the Treaty with differing motives. For Jawaharlal Nehru, it was a step toward ensuring peaceful coexistence, a gesture of goodwill that he believed could anchor regional stability.
- He viewed water disputes as secondary to India’s development priorities and was willing to go further with Pakistan on this matter than on Kashmir. Critics, however, felt Nehru’s concessions were excessive.
- While Nehru described it as “purchasing peace,” External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar recently argued it was instead “purchasing appeasement.” Pakistan, meanwhile, understood the strategic importance of upper riparian control and recognized its vulnerability as the lower riparian state.
- Interestingly, despite the seemingly favorable 80:20 distribution, Pakistani leaders have avoided celebrating the arrangement. Acknowledging victory would undermine their longstanding narrative of victimhood. Over time, Pakistan too has remained dissatisfied, albeit for reasons different from India’s.
- From a needs-based perspective, the division was not inherently unfair. India received more than it had originally sought—besides full rights over the eastern rivers (Ravi, Beas, Sutlej), it also gained limited rights on the western rivers (Indus, Jhelum, Chenab).
- Yet, India has underutilized these rights, partly because Pakistan has used the Treaty provisions to delay or block Indian projects in Jammu & Kashmir.
- Remarkably, the IWT has endured through four wars, countless terrorist incidents, and recurring diplomatic crises, often being hailed as a model of transboundary water management.
- Much of its success lies in India’s role as the upper riparian, which carries the responsibility of maintaining flows and sharing hydrological data. The downstream state, Pakistan, wields no such responsibility. Analysts question whether the Treaty would have survived if the positions were reversed.
- Today, Pakistan continues to exploit Treaty mechanisms to obstruct India’s legitimate projects. India, however, is determined that any renegotiation will remain a bilateral matter, without external mediation such as the World Bank, which facilitated the original deal in 1960.
- This raises concerns in Pakistan, whi