Interesting, I've been reading about the same in my university this sem below is copy paste of IWT (sort of summary of the whole thing)
Tulbul Navigation Project (Wular Barrage)
It was signed in 1960 by Ayub Khan and Nehru. Most of the rivers were flowing through India and then going to Pakistan. Pak was raising this issue that India can stop such flow. From 1948 to 1960, this issue was raised in international fora since India had comparative advantage over the water.
Conditions of this treaty
1. Rights
the eastern flowing rivers were allotted to India and western flowing to Pakistan. lower riparian states would have exclusive rights over the rivers. right of navigation, irrigation, drink and to use for infrastructure purposes. The upper riparian would have limited rights, they can use the water for navigation, agriculture and drinking purposes but they cannot build large infrastructures which can affect the water flow.
1. Six Rivers
Beas, Rabi, Sutlej: these are eastern flowing means that they flow towards India. All these rivers were allotted to India.
Chenab, Jhelum, Indus: these are western flowing as they flow towards Pakistan.
2. Compensation
since most of the controlling stations remained in India, India was supposed to give 100 crores as part of the compensation to Pakistan. World bank came forward to pay this many to Pakistan and India would need to pay this back to world bank. In that way, the world bank is also a party to this treaty.
3. Information
Both the countries would have to exchange the data regarding any project or construction on this river.
Conflict Resolution: Multi-Tier
1. Bottom Level
Indus commission was formed, this would comprise of various commissioners of both the countries and incase of dispute, they would meet and try to resolve the issues. They even have the task to observe the regular flow of water and data collection, preservation and exchange.
2. Government Level: Three Levels
• First it will go foreign secretaries, they will meet and try to resolve the issue
• If they fail, it would go to foreign ministers
• If they fail, it will go to the summit level where the prime ministers would meet and try to resolve, if they even fail, it would go to next stage
3. Neutral expert
two respective government would inform the world bank about the issue or the aggrieved party can take the issue to the world bank who would appoint a neutral expert. They are generally from the Scandinavian countries. They would go to the site of the dispute and prepare a report, and based upon this report, they can exercise two options:
• Opine this issue as a difference. If the world bank considers it as difference, then neutral expert’s judgment would be final and binding on the parties.
• It can declare it as a dispute, which is more serious. If world bank terms it as a dispute, neutral member’s role ends here and the matter go to the next level
4. International arbitration
It could go to ICJ and the judgment of the court of arbitration would be binding on the parties.
Controversies
1. Tulbul Navigation Project/Wular Barrage
this issue is of 1984. It is at the Wular Lake on Jhelum River which was allotted to Pakistan.
India’s Justifications: it wants to start this project of the purpose of navigation as it wanted to bring the apples from Baramula to Srinagar and as the treaty prescribe that upper riparian country can use it for navigation, the project is justified.
Pakistan’s objection: the river was allotted to Pakistan so India cannot initiate such project.
Due to this project, flow of water would reduce. If the flow of water in Jhelum would reduce, it would affect the generation of electricity in Mangla dam. Jhelum is an important tributary of Indus, so if the water in Jhelum reduces, it would reduce the water in Indus which would affect the agriculture activities in the Sindh region. It would also affect the agriculture activities in Pakistani Punjab.
Negotiations began from 1987 which went for 4 years.
In 1991, India agreed to forgo its right and India withdrew from construction of this project. It was held that it would be taken again in further negotiation. But it has not been raised and therefore it has remained unsolved. India has not constructed this Barrage.
2. Baglihar Hydroelectric Project
This project is on the Chenab River, which was allotted to Pakistan. India started working on this project in 1992 and the capacity of this project is 450 MW. For this, we require a large dam which can generate that much of electricity.
Immediately pak put its objections on that: India has violated the Indus water treaty because it does not allow large scale project which can affect the flow of the water; Since Chenab is an important river of Punjab and if the flow of water in this river would go down, it would affect the agricultural activity in Punjab; Since Chenab is an important tributary of Indus and therefore if Indus’s water go down, it would affect the agriculture; Through this large dam, India could cause floods in Pakistan because if the gates are opened, water would go with high intensity.
The negotiations begun and everything failed. In 2005, this issue went to the international arbitrators at world bank. As a result, it appointed a neutral expert, who visited this site for almost 2 years and made the assessment as to how much water flows in different parts of the year and in 2007 they gave the award and termed it issue as difference. Therefore, it become a final and binding award. The award was in favor of India, it declared that India has not violated the Indus water treaty because as per the Indus water treaty, water can be used for the navigation as well as other purposes. Secondly, it only suggested that height of this dam should be reduced by 1.5 meter and the poundage capacity (the submerged area and the area around the dam) should be reduced by 13%. Baglihar dam had the capacity of 37.5 million acres. So, this capacity was to be reduced by 13%. Rest the award provided that India should go ahead with the project.
How it was possible to win this battle despite the Tulbul loss?
Sediment management: India learnt the lessons from the earlier instances and with the advanced technology they controlled the life of the dam. If sediments start accumulating sediments in the dam, it reduces the life of the dam. When there is a proper sediment management, it ensures the steady flow of water. India provided a good management of this. Optimal level of water is continuously flowing: arbitrators.
3. Kishanganga Dam
it started in river Jhelum allotted to Pakistan. When the baglihar award was given, India started constructing this project, i.e. in 2007. This was of 330 MW. Kishanganga is a tributary of Jhelum, when Kishanganga enter Pakistan, it is called neelum river. On neelum, pak was also constructing a dam. All the above objections were raised in Kishanganga project as well.
In 2010, after negations, the matter went to world bank and the neutral experts termed it as dispute. It went to Hague’s permanent court of arbitration. In 2011, experts of the court went to sites of both the rivers, and they instructed India that India should stop the construction of this project. So, India halted the construction in 2011. From 2011 to 2013 no work took place. During this period, the experts were continuously observing the circumstances.
In feb 2013, they gave the partial award. It says that India has not violated the treaty and therefore it can go ahead with the construction of the dam. The final award came in December 2013. It completely annulled all the objections of the Pakistan and it only instructed that India should maintain a flow of water of 9 meter cubic per second and this was much much lower than what they were asking. Pakistan was asking for 100 meter cubic per second. From 2013 to 2017, the construction continued.
The reason of victory was same as the experts has seen the sediment management and it had not interfered with the flow of water. This was made possible due to the technology that India received from Japan and other countries. Experts even found that such dam is not affecting the neelum project.
In this award, there is a condition that any of the party can approach the court of arbitration again only after 7 years for the review of the award.
Now India is going for large scale projects on all the western flowing rivers. 6 to 7 dams are being constructed. Pak cannot do so as the water content in those rivers is less and therefore it would not be in favor of pak to start the construction of dams.
Ramaswani Aiyer’s research was very instrumental because he briefed the advocates who argued in hague and supplied the government with his effective research.
