Question of 'stewardship of water resources' in Kashmir
http://www.gaash-online.com/articles/46/1/Question-of-stewardship-of-water-resources-in-Kashmir.html
Dr. Syed Nazir Gilani
Dr. Syed Nazir Gilani is a jurist. He is secretary general of JKCHR-NGO in special consultative status with the United Nations. He is an expert in Peace Keeping/Humanitarian Operations and Election Monitoring Missions. By Dr. Syed Nazir Gilani
Published on 05/14/2006
The most important of all would be the principal share of the people of Jammu and Kashmir in the 'stewardship of water resources' in any part of Kashmir. If Indus Water Treaty has to stay - it needs to incorporate the right of the people of Kashmir in the management of water uses and water-related activities under the treaty. We have to evaluate the manner and extent which is due to the people of Kashmir in the exercise of the stewardship role for their water resources at Mangla, Baghlihar and Diamir.
Question of 'stewardship of water resources' in Kashmir
The most important of all would be the principal share of the people of Jammu and Kashmir in the 'stewardship of water resources' in any part of Kashmir. If Indus Water Treaty has to stay - it needs to incorporate the right of the people of Kashmir in the management of water uses and water-related activities under the treaty. We have to evaluate the manner and extent which is due to the people of Kashmir in the exercise of the stewardship role for their water resources at Mangla, Baghlihar and Diamir.
The much quoted prediction in 1995 of Ismail Serageldin, vice president of the World Bank, remains on track that 'if the wars of this century were fought over oil, the wars of the next century will be fought over water'. Signs are that these wars would be fought locally, nationally, regionally and would ultimately transform into a global war.
Water in Eastern culture is seen as sacred and this culture treats its provision as a duty for the preservation of life. In contrast the West and its associates conform to a culture where water is seen as a commodity and its ownership and trade as a fundamental corporate right.
Water in our culture is given from earthen water pots as a free gift to the thirsty. Hindus have Jal Mandirs (water temples) - part of an ancient tradition of setting up Piyaos, free water stands in public areas. This is a common practice among Muslims as well.
Obviously a culture of commodification has to be at war with diverse cultures of sharing, of receiving and giving water as a free gift. Therefore water wars are cultural wars and global wars. An economic fascism is out to destroy people's right to their water resources.
It is much more important when disputed and trust territories among other resources have this 'liquid gold', brutally ravaged. The embedded natural resource of 'liquid gold' in the State of Jammu and Kashmir is being exploited at Mangla, Baghlihar and Diamir in all the three administrations on either side of LOC.
It is interesting to point out that on 21 August 1957 the Government of India complained to the United Nations that Pakistan was about to build a 'Mangla Dam Project' in the disputed territory under its (Pakistan's) control. The Indian complaint further added that the 'execution of Mangla Dam Project by the Government of Pakistan was a further instance of Pakistan's consolidating its authority over the Indian territory of Jammu and Kashmir and of the exploitation of the territory to the disadvantage of the people of the State and for the benefit of the people of Pakistan. The complaint added that Pakistan's action was in violation of the Council's Resolution of 17 January 1948 and of the assurances given to India by the Chairman of UNCIP.
India had a case because it had undertaken through a bilateral agreement with the government of Kashmir to protect 'life', 'property' and 'honour' of the people of Kashmir. Property included the territorial integrity and its embedded resources.
India reversed its earlier position and entered into a water treaty, on the waters of Kashmir, with Pakistan in April 1960. The Indus System of Rivers comprises three Eastern Rivers (the Sutlej, the Beas and the Ravi) and three Western Rivers, (the Indus, the Jhelum and the Chenab). Under the Treaty, the waters of the Eastern Rivers (the Indus, the Jhelum and the Chenab) stand allocated to India and those of Western Rivers largely to Pakistan.
The Treaty fixed and delimited the rights and obligations of India and Pakistan in relation to each other, concerning the use of the waters of the Indus System of Rivers.
1960 Indus Water Treaty was brokered by the World Bank. By concluding The Indus Water Treaty with India, the Government of Pakistan has in practice accepted the sovereignty of India over the Water Resource and the Habitat. She has added one more example to her chequered record of continually nudge passing the Jurisprudence of the Rights Movement and the Embedded Interest of the People of Jammu and Kashmir, in safe guarding the interests of her people in Pakistan.
The use in Indus Water Treaty have not been aligned on a principled, fair and just basis. It does not recognise the interests of the affected people (Kashmir) and has failed to develop a mechanism to include those interests in water allocation decision
Under the Indus Water Treaty the Government of India on her part has on the one hand breached the trust embedded in the instrument of accession (a disputed bilateral agreement) and on the other has exposed her confused stand on Kashmir question. Under the Indus Water Treaty the Government of India reversed her stated position on Kashmir. India cannot trade a natural resource of Kashmir with Pakistan or vice versa Pakistan's trust obligations, too restrain it from violating any resource in its trust jurisdiction.
Water dispute at Mangla, Baghlihar and Diamir has agitated the interest of the people in their natural resource. They feel being driven to economic insecurity, cultural sub ordination and ecological dispossession. Water exploitation is fast spreading as a 'virus of hate'.
The various Governments of Pakistan have continued to use the Rights Movement of Kashmir for their own domestic interests and to keep India pressured by exploiting heavy Muslim numericals. Pakistan's policy on the civil and political life of the people living in the three administrations of Jammu and Kashmir has been self-serving and full of double standards. It has used the polity of one administration to engineer its own advantage in the other.
The Government of Pakistan has used the political habitat of Srinagar, Muzaffarabad and Gilgit on an adhoc basis. In this regard a deceit on the question of Mangla Dam needs a mention. Pakistan assured the United Nations on 3 October 1957 that "the Mangla Dam project was being carried out co-operatively with the Azad Kashmir authorities. It informed the UN that the Project would greatly strengthen the economy of the Azad Kashmir area and would in no way adversely affect the existing interests".
In order to blanket her self-serving interest in the Mangla Dam Pakistan resorted to a pointed compromise with India and informed the UN that - "India had carried out a number of projects on its side of the cease-fire-line. If India's action could not be deemed to aggravate the situation in terms of the Resolution of 17 January 1948, Pakistan failed to understand how the development of a project in the Azad Kashmir area could be described as a violation of that Resolution".
We all know that the construction of the Dam was resisted by the people of Mirpur and that they were unwilling to allow the submerging of their homes and hearths and history under the Dam for a non Kashmiri interest. It is a well documented fact that brute force was used to quell the popular dissent and bribery was used to silence the leaders.
It is obvious that a political psychology in Pakistan that was anti-Kashmir in 1957 (a second time after the Stand Still Agreement) could not be hoped, to all of a sudden cure its leper spots in 1960 under Indus water Treaty and in 2006 in her decision to move to build a dam in Diamir.
Pakistan has no regard for the benefit of the people of Jammu and Kashmir if Tulbul-Wullar Project on Jhelum and Baghlihar on Chenab are completed. The people of Jammu and Kashmir desperately need the power generation to light their dark nights and dark lanes. They need power to expand the industrial base and shrug off their dependence on other States of India.
The governments of Kashmir at Srinagar have made a strong case in favour of Baghlihar project. We appreciate this pro Kashmir interest in making an appeal to Pakistan to become facilitator in the economic progress of the state by not objecting to the various projects started on the state's own resources.
It is rightly pointed out that "Jammu and Kashmir faces electricity crisis, particularly during the winter season. As of now the state has to depend on other states to meet its power needs. Projects like Tulbul-Wullar barrage on Jhelum and Baghlihar project on Chenab are essential for improving the economic condition of the people of the state. These projects would help people to become economically self sufficient.
We are not averse to the welfare of the people of Pakistan or the people of India. Our argument for our subscription of the interest in Mangla, Baghlihar and Diamir disputes is based on the Jurisprudence of the Habitat and the Water Resources embedded in it. We shall be arguing a corresponding and reciprocal benefit of compensation due to the people of Kashmir.
We would argue the principal interest of the People of Jammu and Kashmir in the Indus Water Treaty, Mangla, and Diamir. Kashmiri interest is incremented and guaranteed by our bilateral agreement with the Government of India and Pakistan's "assumed responsibilities in Azad Kashmir" and its responsibilities under "Karachi Agreement on Gilgit and Baltistan".
World Bank has made an error at core in not taking any regard of the Jurisprudence of the Kashmir dispute and of a use of its resources without assuring a corresponding benefit for the Kashmiri people. We would wish to argue that water resources are not unlimited and always available. It is a genuine argument that the Indus Water Treaty does not maximise in equity and in fairness the benefits accrued from the use of water and at the same time it has failed to preserve and protect water resources and the environment.
The Kashmir specific benefit of industrial and economic development, health, sanitation and agriculture and others are missing at core. The legal framework has to recognise the use and firmly establish priorities.
The most important of all would be the principal share of the people of Jammu and Kashmir in the 'stewardship of water resources' in any part of Kashmir. If Indus Water Treaty has to stay - it needs to incorporate the right of the people of Kashmir in the management of water uses and water-related activities under the treaty. We have to evaluate the manner and extent which is due to the people of Kashmir in the exercise of the stewardship role for their water resources at Mangla, Baghlihar and Diamir.
People of Kashmir need to go universal on the question of their embedded natural resources, in particular, water, the 'liquid gold'. We have international instruments available. The United Nations General Assembly adopted resolution A/RES/47/193 of 22 December 1992 by which 22 March of each year was declared World Day for Water, to be observed starting in 1993, in conformity with the recommendations of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) contained in Chapter 18 (Fresh Water Resources) of Agenda 21. States were invited to devote the Day, as appropriate in the national context, to concrete activities such as the promotion of public awareness through the publication and diffusion of documentaries and the organization of conferences, round tables, seminars and expositions related to the conservation and development of water resources and the implementation of the recommendations of Agenda 21.
Water is essential for life. Water is crucial for sustainable development, including the preservation of our natural environment and the alleviation of poverty and hunger. Water is indispensable for human health and well-being.
Indigenous peoples from all corners of the globe continue to struggle for acknowledgement and recognition of their unique visions of water, both at home and in national, regional, and international forums. But almost without exception, their voices remain obscured by a mainstream discourse rooted in the conception of water as a mere commodity. We have to join them.
If we do not network and start empowering to ourselves in taking over the 'stewardship of water resources' we shall run the risk to be left by the wayside despite our very real needs for more secure and sustainable livelihoods. Second, and of greater concern, the impoverishment of Kashmiri peoples and their leaders.
Water sources that sustain our multiple uses and livelihood strategies are often taken away in order to provide drinking water to urban areas and metropolis. There is a real need to involve all the three peoples directly in development processes, whether at local, national or global levels.
We should demand the inclusion in our school curriculum the subject of 'Water and the Peoples right to their natural resource in disputed territories and advocate a revision of the existing arrangements on Mangla, Baghlihar and Diamir. Any future movement in regard to the use of Kashmiri waters should fully embrace the peoples' knowledge, values, land tenure, customary management, social arrangements and rights pertaining to water.
The much quoted prediction in 1995 of Ismail Serageldin, vice president of the World Bank, remains on track that 'if the wars of this century were fought over oil, the wars of the next century will be fought over water'. Signs are that these wars would be fought locally, nationally, regionally and would ultimately transform into a global war.
Water in Eastern culture is seen as sacred and this culture treats its provision as a duty for the preservation of life. In contrast the West and its associates conform to a culture where water is seen as a commodity and its ownership and trade as a fundamental corporate right.
Water in our culture is given from earthen water pots as a free gift to the thirsty. Hindus have Jal Mandirs (water temples) - part of an ancient tradition of setting up Piyaos, free water stands in public areas. This is a common practice among Muslims as well.
Obviously a culture of commodification has to be at war with diverse cultures of sharing, of receiving and giving water as a free gift. Therefore water wars are cultural wars and global wars. An economic fascism is out to destroy people's right to their water resources.
It is much more important when disputed and trust territories among other resources have this 'liquid gold', brutally ravaged. The embedded natural resource of 'liquid gold' in the State of Jammu and Kashmir is being exploited at Mangla, Baghlihar and Diamir in all the three administrations on either side of LOC.
It is interesting to point out that on 21 August 1957 the Government of India complained to the United Nations that Pakistan was about to build a 'Mangla Dam Project' in the disputed territory under its (Pakistan's) control. The Indian complaint further added that the 'execution of Mangla Dam Project by the Government of Pakistan was a further instance of Pakistan's consolidating its authority over the Indian territory of Jammu and Kashmir and of the exploitation of the territory to the disadvantage of the people of the State and for the benefit of the people of Pakistan. The complaint added that Pakistan's action was in violation of the Council's Resolution of 17 January 1948 and of the assurances given to India by the Chairman of UNCIP.
India had a case because it had undertaken through a bilateral agreement with the government of Kashmir to protect 'life', 'property' and 'honour' of the people of Kashmir. Property included the territorial integrity and its embedded resources.
India reversed its earlier position and entered into a water treaty, on the waters of Kashmir, with Pakistan in April 1960. The Indus System of Rivers comprises three Eastern Rivers (the Sutlej, the Beas and the Ravi) and three Western Rivers, (the Indus, the Jhelum and the Chenab). Under the Treaty, the waters of the Eastern Rivers (the Indus, the Jhelum and the Chenab) stand allocated to India and those of Western Rivers largely to Pakistan.
The Treaty fixed and delimited the rights and obligations of India and Pakistan in relation to each other, concerning the use of the waters of the Indus System of Rivers.
1960 Indus Water Treaty was brokered by the World Bank. By concluding The Indus Water Treaty with India, the Government of Pakistan has in practice accepted the sovereignty of India over the Water Resource and the Habitat. She has added one more example to her chequered record of continually nudge passing the Jurisprudence of the Rights Movement and the Embedded Interest of the People of Jammu and Kashmir, in safe guarding the interests of her people in Pakistan.
The use in Indus Water Treaty have not been aligned on a principled, fair and just basis. It does not recognise the interests of the affected people (Kashmir) and has failed to develop a mechanism to include those interests in water allocation decision
Under the Indus Water Treaty the Government of India on her part has on the one hand breached the trust embedded in the instrument of accession (a disputed bilateral agreement) and on the other has exposed her confused stand on Kashmir question. Under the Indus Water Treaty the Government of India reversed her stated position on Kashmir. India cannot trade a natural resource of Kashmir with Pakistan or vice versa Pakistan's trust obligations, too restrain it from violating any resource in its trust jurisdiction.
Water dispute at Mangla, Baghlihar and Diamir has agitated the interest of the people in their natural resource. They feel being driven to economic insecurity, cultural sub ordination and ecological dispossession. Water exploitation is fast spreading as a 'virus of hate'.
The various Governments of Pakistan have continued to use the Rights Movement of Kashmir for their own domestic interests and to keep India pressured by exploiting heavy Muslim numericals. Pakistan's policy on the civil and political life of the people living in the three administrations of Jammu and Kashmir has been self-serving and full of double standards. It has used the polity of one administration to engineer its own advantage in the other.
The Government of Pakistan has used the political habitat of Srinagar, Muzaffarabad and Gilgit on an adhoc basis. In this regard a deceit on the question of Mangla Dam needs a mention. Pakistan assured the United Nations on 3 October 1957 that "the Mangla Dam project was being carried out co-operatively with the Azad Kashmir authorities. It informed the UN that the Project would greatly strengthen the economy of the Azad Kashmir area and would in no way adversely affect the existing interests".
In order to blanket her self-serving interest in the Mangla Dam Pakistan resorted to a pointed compromise with India and informed the UN that - "India had carried out a number of projects on its side of the cease-fire-line. If India's action could not be deemed to aggravate the situation in terms of the Resolution of 17 January 1948, Pakistan failed to understand how the development of a project in the Azad Kashmir area could be described as a violation of that Resolution".
We all know that the construction of the Dam was resisted by the people of Mirpur and that they were unwilling to allow the submerging of their homes and hearths and history under the Dam for a non Kashmiri interest. It is a well documented fact that brute force was used to quell the popular dissent and bribery was used to silence the leaders.
It is obvious that a political psychology in Pakistan that was anti-Kashmir in 1957 (a second time after the Stand Still Agreement) could not be hoped, to all of a sudden cure its leper spots in 1960 under Indus water Treaty and in 2006 in her decision to move to build a dam in Diamir.
Pakistan has no regard for the benefit of the people of Jammu and Kashmir if Tulbul-Wullar Project on Jhelum and Baghlihar on Chenab are completed. The people of Jammu and Kashmir desperately need the power generation to light their dark nights and dark lanes. They need power to expand the industrial base and shrug off their dependence on other States of India.
The governments of Kashmir at Srinagar have made a strong case in favour of Baghlihar project. We appreciate this pro Kashmir interest in making an appeal to Pakistan to become facilitator in the economic progress of the state by not objecting to the various projects started on the state's own resources.
It is rightly pointed out that "Jammu and Kashmir faces electricity crisis, particularly during the winter season. As of now the state has to depend on other states to meet its power needs. Projects like Tulbul-Wullar barrage on Jhelum and Baghlihar project on Chenab are essential for improving the economic condition of the people of the state. These projects would help people to become economically self sufficient.
We are not averse to the welfare of the people of Pakistan or the people of India. Our argument for our subscription of the interest in Mangla, Baghlihar and Diamir disputes is based on the Jurisprudence of the Habitat and the Water Resources embedded in it. We shall be arguing a corresponding and reciprocal benefit of compensation due to the people of Kashmir.
We would argue the principal interest of the People of Jammu and Kashmir in the Indus Water Treaty, Mangla, and Diamir. Kashmiri interest is incremented and guaranteed by our bilateral agreement with the Government of India and Pakistan's "assumed responsibilities in Azad Kashmir" and its responsibilities under "Karachi Agreement on Gilgit and Baltistan".
World Bank has made an error at core in not taking any regard of the Jurisprudence of the Kashmir dispute and of a use of its resources without assuring a corresponding benefit for the Kashmiri people. We would wish to argue that water resources are not unlimited and always available. It is a genuine argument that the Indus Water Treaty does not maximise in equity and in fairness the benefits accrued from the use of water and at the same time it has failed to preserve and protect water resources and the environment.
The Kashmir specific benefit of industrial and economic development, health, sanitation and agriculture and others are missing at core. The legal framework has to recognise the use and firmly establish priorities.
The most important of all would be the principal share of the people of Jammu and Kashmir in the 'stewardship of water resources' in any part of Kashmir. If Indus Water Treaty has to stay - it needs to incorporate the right of the people of Kashmir in the management of water uses and water-related activities under the treaty. We have to evaluate the manner and extent which is due to the people of Kashmir in the exercise of the stewardship role for their water resources at Mangla, Baghlihar and Diamir.
People of Kashmir need to go universal on the question of their embedded natural resources, in particular, water, the 'liquid gold'. We have international instruments available. The United Nations General Assembly adopted resolution A/RES/47/193 of 22 December 1992 by which 22 March of each year was declared World Day for Water, to be observed starting in 1993, in conformity with the recommendations of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) contained in Chapter 18 (Fresh Water Resources) of Agenda 21. States were invited to devote the Day, as appropriate in the national context, to concrete activities such as the promotion of public awareness through the publication and diffusion of documentaries and the organization of conferences, round tables, seminars and expositions related to the conservation and development of water resources and the implementation of the recommendations of Agenda 21.
Water is essential for life. Water is crucial for sustainable development, including the preservation of our natural environment and the alleviation of poverty and hunger. Water is indispensable for human health and well-being.
Indigenous peoples from all corners of the globe continue to struggle for acknowledgement and recognition of their unique visions of water, both at home and in national, regional, and international forums. But almost without exception, their voices remain obscured by a mainstream discourse rooted in the conception of water as a mere commodity. We have to join them.
If we do not network and start empowering to ourselves in taking over the 'stewardship of water resources' we shall run the risk to be left by the wayside despite our very real needs for more secure and sustainable livelihoods. Second, and of greater concern, the impoverishment of Kashmiri peoples and their leaders.
Water sources that sustain our multiple uses and livelihood strategies are often taken away in order to provide drinking water to urban areas and metropolis. There is a real need to involve all the three peoples directly in development processes, whether at local, national or global levels.
We should demand the inclusion in our school curriculum the subject of 'Water and the Peoples right to their natural resource in disputed territories and advocate a revision of the existing arrangements on Mangla, Baghlihar and Diamir. Any future movement in regard to the use of Kashmiri waters should fully embrace the peoples' knowledge, values, land tenure, customary management, social arrangements and rights pertaining to water.