This age necessitates conflict resolution through peaceful means while focusing upon economic uplift and improving the social sector development. But unfortunately it seems that India and Pakistan, nuclear arch rivals, have yet to learn this lesson.
“When the history of the 21st century is written........the outstanding event of this century will be that two-thirds of the world’s people awakened to the fact that a better life was possible for them.” This statement by renowned expert on International Relations, Mr. Hoffman, is an excellent commentary upon the massive shifts in global trends in 21st century, which is an age of positive-sum economic competition. This age necessitates conflict resolution through peaceful means while focusing upon economic uplift and improving the social sector development. But unfortunately it seems that India and Pakistan, nuclear arch rivals, have yet to learn this lesson because they have failed to resolve number of moderate intensity conflicts besides the high intensity Kashmir dispute that is a perpetual source of rift between both the countries. Details of these conflicts are as follow:
1. Sir Creek
2. Siachin Glacier
3. Salal, Wuller, Baglihar and Kishenganga Projects
Sir Creek: The demarcation of the line in Sir Creek, at the western terminus of the Pakistan-India boundary in the Rann of Kutch, has remained unresolved since 1969. Most of the dispute was resolved in 1969 but the 100 km stretch of sir Creek remained out of the ambit of discussion mainly because this boundary between the state of Kutch and the Province of Sindh was already delimited by a resolution of the British Indian Government in 1914. The contemporary maps also testify Sir Creek to be a part of Sindh. Unfortunately, neither side contested that fact before the tribunal at that time. Though the creek has little military value, it holds immense economic gain. Much of the region is rich in oil and gas below the sea bed, and control over the creek would have a huge bearing on the energy potential of each nation. Later, eyeing on these maritime resources, India claimed first that Sir Creek was on the Indian side, and that the boundary should run in the middle of the creek because it was a navigable channel. Also, once the boundaries are defined, it would help in determining the maritime boundaries which are drawn as an extension of onshore reference points. Maritime boundaries also help in determining the limits of Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs) and continental shelves. EEZs extend to 200 nautical miles (370 km) and can be subjected to commercial exploitation. Pakistan resorted to negotiations to resolve the conflict but India attached the precondition that it would first complete an air survey of the region. The surveyor generals of both the countries met in 1989 but failed to reach an agreement mainly because of India’s rejection of the maps drawn in 1914. Since 1969, there have been eight rounds of talks between the two nations, without a breakthrough. Steps to resolve the dispute include:
1. Allocation
2. Delimitation
3. Demarcation
4. Administration
Since neither side has conceded ground, India has proposed that the maritime boundary could be demarcated first, as per the provisions of Technical Aspects of Law of Sea (TALOS). However, Pakistan has staunchly refused the proposal on the grounds that the dispute should be resolved first since using Sir Creek as a justification India would enhance its own EEZ at the cost of squeezing Pakistan’s EEZ. Pakistan has also proposed that the two sides go in for international arbitration, which India has flatly refused. India maintains that all bilateral disputes should be resolved without the intervention of third-parties.
This conflict is causing dearly to the fishermen of both sides living astride the creek since the coastguards of India and Pakistan regularly arrest them, charging them of trespassing their respective territory. Outrageously, in 2003, India shot down an unarmed Pakistani aircraft in the area, killing all its crew & passengers.
An early and peaceful resolution of these disputes will not only improve our bilateral relations rather it will establish a solid foundation that will eventually pave the way for resolution of Kashmir Dispute.
Siachin Glacier: This conflict is basically a direct fall out of Kashmir dispute and is therefore regarded as ‘a conflict within a conflict’. Located in the eastern Karakoram range in the Himalaya Mountains, at 70 km (43 mi) long, it is the longest glacier in the Karakoram and second-longest in the world's non-polar areas. The glacier's region is the highest battleground on earth, where India and Pakistan have fought intermittently since April 1984. Both countries are maintaining permanent military presence in the region at a height of over 6,000 metres (20,000 ft). The site is one of the most eminent examples of mountain warfare.
Both the countries wants to disengage from the expensive military outposts but India is intransigent in asserting that Pakistan must first officially recognize the present position as actual Line of Control, a demand that Pakistan can never accept. According to a CNN report, “India controls these breathless heights at an estimated cost of up to $1 million a day and is reluctant to back off for fear Pakistan might walk in.”
Salal, Wuller, Baglihar and Kishanganga Projects: The Indus Waters Treaty of 1960 allows for the construction of run-of-the-river power plants but forbids the construction of dams on the western rivers in excess of prescribed limits and India is obliged by this treaty to provide relevant data to Pakistan if it plans projects that interfere with the flow of the rivers. Pakistan, if finds any project objectionable, has the right to raise the issue in the permanent Indus Commission. In case if the objections are still unresolved, the matter can be taken up at the level of Governments. If dissatisfaction still persists, either side can refer the dispute to the World Bank for the appointment of a neutral expert whose verdict is binding on both parties. Four such issues have arisen since 1960.
Salal Dam: The first question arose when India decided to build a dam at Salal on River Chenab. After Pakistan raised objections, India agreed to reduce the height of the dam to allay Pakistan’s apprehensions.
Wullar Barrage: Another question arose in 1980s, when India started building a barrage at the mouth of Wullar Lake for storage purpose. Pakistani experts found its design 33% excess of prescribed limits and raised the issue in 1985 but no progress was made except that India halted the work on the project in 1987. India wanted Pakistan to join in to share the benefit of the project but since for Pakistan, the sanctity of the Indus Water Treaty was vital therefore it decided not to tinker with its provisions lest it would provide India with a pretext in future to exploit such issues in future.
Baglihar Dam, is a run-of-the-river power project on the Chenab River in the southern Doda district of the Indian administered state of Jammu and Kashmir. This project was conceived in 1992, approved in 1996 and construction began in 1999. Pakistan found this mega project to be far in excess of the prescribed limits that would enable India to manipulate the flow of river in a way that could chock the agriculture of Pakistan either by withholding the supply of water or inundating the land by instantaneously opening the flood gates. After failure of several rounds of anfractuous negotiations at various levels, the matter was ultimately referred to World Bank which appointed Professor Raymond Lafitte, a Swiss civil engineer, for adjudication. Lafitte declared his final verdict on February 12, 2007, in which he upheld some minor objections of Pakistan but he rejected Pakistani key objection that any dam constructed by India should be strictly run-of-the-mill.
The 330 Mega Watt Kishanganga dam is located about 160-km upstream Muzzafarabad and involved diversion of Kishanganga (called Neelum in Pakistan) to a tributary named Bunar Madumati Nullah of Jhelum River through a 22-km tunnel. Its power house will be constructed near Bunkot in Indian held Kashmir and the water will be re-routed into the river Jhelum through Wullar Lake. This diversion will change the course of river Neelum by around 100-km, which will finally join river Jhelum through Wullar lake near Bandipur town of Baramula district in Indian held Kashmir. Presently, Neelam and Jhelum rivers join each other near Muzaffarabad at Domail. As a consequence of this 100-km diversion of the Neelum River, Pakistan’s Neelum Valley is likely to dry up and become a desert.
Both the countries wants to disengage from the expensive military outposts but India is intransigent in asserting that Pakistan must first officially recognize the present position as actual Line of Control, a demand that Pakistan can never accept. According to a CNN report, “India controls these breathless heights at an estimated cost of up to $1 million a day and is reluctant to back off for fear Pakistan might walk in.”
Salal, Wuller, Baglihar and Kishanganga Projects: The Indus Waters Treaty of 1960 allows for the construction of run-of-the-river power plants but forbids the construction of dams on the western rivers in excess of prescribed limits and India is obliged by this treaty to provide relevant data to Pakistan if it plans projects that interfere with the flow of the rivers. Pakistan, if finds any project objectionable, has the right to raise the issue in the permanent Indus Commission. In case if the objections are still unresolved, the matter can be taken up at the level of Governments. If dissatisfaction still persists, either side can refer the dispute to the World Bank for the appointment of a neutral expert whose verdict is binding on both parties. Four such issues have arisen since 1960.
Salal Dam: The first question arose when India decided to build a dam at Salal on River Chenab. After Pakistan raised objections, India agreed to reduce the height of the dam to allay Pakistan’s apprehensions.
Wullar Barrage: Another question arose in 1980s, when India started building a barrage at the mouth of Wullar Lake for storage purpose. Pakistani experts found its design 33% excess of prescribed limits and raised the issue in 1985 but no progress was made except that India halted the work on the project in 1987. India wanted Pakistan to join in to share the benefit of the project but since for Pakistan, the sanctity of the Indus Water Treaty was vital therefore it decided not to tinker with its provisions lest it would provide India with a pretext in future to exploit such issues in future.
Baglihar Dam, is a run-of-the-river power project on the Chenab River in the southern Doda district of the Indian administered state of Jammu and Kashmir. This project was conceived in 1992, approved in 1996 and construction began in 1999. Pakistan found this mega project to be far in excess of the prescribed limits that would enable India to manipulate the flow of river in a way that could chock the agriculture of Pakistan either by withholding the supply of water or inundating the land by instantaneously opening the flood gates. After failure of several rounds of anfractuous negotiations at various levels, the matter was ultimately referred to World Bank which appointed Professor Raymond Lafitte, a Swiss civil engineer, for adjudication. Lafitte declared his final verdict on February 12, 2007, in which he upheld some minor objections of Pakistan but he rejected Pakistani key objection that any dam constructed by India should be strictly run-of-the-mill.The 330 Mega Watt Kishanganga dam is located about 160-km upstream Muzzafarabad and involved diversion of Kishanganga (called Neelum in Pakistan) to a tributary named Bunar Madumati Nullah of Jhelum River through a 22-km tunnel. Its power house will be constructed near Bunkot in Indian held Kashmir and the water will be re-routed into the river Jhelum through Wullar Lake. This diversion will change the course of river Neelum by around 100-km, which will finally join river Jhelum through Wullar lake near Bandipur town of Baramula district in Indian held Kashmir. Presently, Neelam and Jhelum rivers join each other near Muzaffarabad at Domail. As a consequence of this 100-km diversion of the Neelum River, Pakistan’s Neelum Valley is likely to dry up and become a desert.
Both the countries, especially India, must understand that keeping these conflicts in cold corner would only serve the purpose of non-state Militant outfits and the ‘Hawks’ on both sides of the divide.
A silver note is that Water sharing from common international rivers is nothing new all around the world. According to a UN survey, out of 200 international rivers, 70 per cent of them are being shared by two countries. There are about 1228 water sharing treaties that were signed in the last 50 years.
Conclusion: An early and peaceful resolution of these disputes will not only improve our bilateral relations rather it will establish a solid foundation that will eventually pave the way for resolution of Kashmir Dispute. Both the countries, especially India, must understand that keeping these conflicts in cold corner would only serve the purpose of non-state Militant outfits and the ‘Hawks’ on both sides of the divide. Therefore instead of serving narrow-nationalism and in order to divert our resources towards social sector improvement and economic well being of general populace an early peaceful solution to these conflicts is a prerequisite.
Conclusion: An early and peaceful resolution of these disputes will not only improve our bilateral relations rather it will establish a solid foundation that will eventually pave the way for resolution of Kashmir Dispute. Both the countries, especially India, must understand that keeping these conflicts in cold corner would only serve the purpose of non-state Militant outfits and the ‘Hawks’ on both sides of the divide. Therefore instead of serving narrow-nationalism and in order to divert our resources towards social sector improvement and economic well being of general populace an early peaceful solution to these conflicts is a prerequisite.
No comments:
Post a Comment