INDIA HAS MAINTAINED THAT SUSPENSION OF WORK IS HARMING THE INTERESTS OF J&K PEOPLE AND ALSO DEPRIVING THE PEOPLE OF PAKISTAN OF IRRIGATION AND POWER BENEFITS THAT MAY ACCRUE FROM REGULATED WATER RELEASE
The recent focus on the Indus Waters Treaty should provide an impetus to other associated ventures in Jammu and Kashmir that have remained stalled, not necessarily in the interest of India. One such project is the Tulbul Navigation Project, a ‘navigation lockcum-control structure’ at the mouth of the Wullar Lake, a large freshwater lake in Bandipore district of J&K. The Jhelum feeds the lake basin. Depending on the season, the lake size varies from 30 to 260 sq km. Small streams such as the Harbuji, Arrah, Erin, Pohru and Bandipur flow into it.
The Jhelum was traditionally used for navigation and floating timber. However, during winter months from October to March, the flow of water in the river greatly reduced, leading to shallow waters and emergence of sand bars, obstructing navigation, especially between Sopore and Baramulla, a 22-km stretch. The onset of spring with rainfall and melting of snow from the surrounding mountains led to an increase in the discharge, often causing flooding. The rising demand of the local population to overcome the problem of navigation during winters led to the conception of the Tulbul project in the early ’80s to control the Jhelum floodwaters within the banks of the Wullar.
According to the original Indian plan, the barrage — as a control structure — was expected to be 133.8 metre (439 feet) in length and 12.19 metre (40 feet) in width, and was to have a maximum storage capacity of .3 million acre-feet of water. The aim was to regulate the release of water from the natural storage in the lake to maintain a minimum draught of 1.37 metre (4.5 feet) in the river up to Baramulla during the lean winter months. This was to ensure round-the-year navigation from Anantnag to Srinagar to Baramulla. It was perceived that as floodwaters receded, the control structure at the lake’s exit would retard the rapid emptying and depletion of water through October to March. This would in turn reduce downstream silt flows, which would be to the advantage of both the Uri project in India and the Mangla project in Pakistan and augment their power output.
PROJECT STALLED SINCE 1987
Construction of the Tulbul barrage commenced in 1984 but was stopped three years later when Pakistan objected to the project that it perceived to violate the Indus Waters Treaty 1960. Since 1987, there has been an ongoing dispute between the two countries over the project. India’s plea is that the Jhelum provides an important means of transport for goods and people. To sustain navigation throughout the year, a minimum depth of water is needed. India has made it clear that the project is not meant for storing water or increasing the size of the lake. On the other hand, Pakistan contests it as a ‘storage project’ and charges India with violation of the provisions under the treaty. In response, India has maintained that suspension of work is harming the interests of J&K people and also depriving the people of Pakistan of irrigation and power benefits that may accrue from regulated water release.
As a policy, post Shimla Agreement 1972, India wanted to resolve the issue bilaterally without mediation. Several rounds of talks have been held, but the issue has remained unresolved. This is despite the fact that the treaty permits India limited storage of water of the Western rivers — a general storage capacity of 5-lakh acre-feet on the various channels of the Jhelum (excluding Jhelum Main) and 10,000 acre-feet on the Jhelum Main itself. Pakistan’s objections during discussions basically stem from the apprehension that such a project may damage or disrupt its triple-canal project — Upper Jhelum Canal, Upper Chenab Canal and Lower Bari Doab Canal — and a fear that the stored water could be used as a weapon by India during hostilities.
Taking serious cognisance of Pakistan’s inimical policy towards India, it is felt that time is now ripe to exercise full rights on the Western rivers according to the treaty and revive this project. Moreover, it is in our national interest to ensure that the work on the project is resumed without further loss of time for the ‘economic and social benefit’. We must continue to maintain that the regulating structure is permitted under the Indus Waters Treaty for the nonconsumptive use of navigation. Experts feel that the real benefit of the project will go to the energy sector because a better discharge during lean season will add to the unutilised capacities of the downstream projects: Uri-1, Uri-2 and Lower Jhelum.
It must be emphasised that this is a navigation project, and the hype created by Pakistan is truly misplaced. If the project is helpful for India for both navigation and curtailment of flooding, there is no denying the fact that it would be equally beneficial to Pakistan, a point it seems to be overlooking. As in the event of severe floods in India and Pakistan in 2010 and 2014, acceptance of such a project would go a long way in helping both the countries protect themselves against floods and drought. Our endeavour should be to highlight a win-win solution.
PUNJAB SYL RELATED AND PRE-ELECTION NEWS
CLICK TO OPEN BLOG
