Experts Debate: Can Water Be a Tool of Warfare?
When Samuel Taylor Coleridge wrote in his poem 'The Rime of the Ancient Mariner', 'Water is everywhere', he probably did not even know that one day these words would prove to be prophetic and in the coming time, water would be used as a weapon between countries, but this is the reality today and the situation is getting worse day by day. A recent example of this is the growing tension between India and Pakistan, in which India has taken steps to stop the water of rivers going to Pakistan.
One of the first steps taken by the Indian government after the terrorist attack in Pahalgam was to review the Indus Waters Treaty signed between India and Pakistan in 1960. The treaty governs the sharing of waters of six rivers between the two countries. Technical aspects aside, it simply means depriving Pakistan of water supply. Or at least that's the message the Indian government has tried to convey to its countrymen and people across the border.
This is not an empty threat. The decision to suspend the treaty has caused serious damage to Pakistan and will have not only immediate but long-term consequences. However, the truth is that it is not as easy as it sounds. The question arises – can India really stop giving water to Pakistan or is it just a rhetoric? Can any country use water as a weapon? To what extent will this water war affect Pakistan? What is India's immediate strategy and long-term plan?
Two experts Dr. Uttam Sinha and Prof. Anjal Prakash gave their views on all these aspects and explained this 'water war' in a broader context. Dr. Sinha is an author and expert on transboundary water issues. His major works include Indus Basin Unintercepted, Indus Water Treaty and Trial by Water: India-Pakistan Relationship.
Professor Anjal Prakash's area of work is water and climate change. He has worked closely with the government at various levels and has been in favour of using water as a strategic tool. However, the two experts differed on the issue of 'making water a weapon'. While Dr. Sinha was uncomfortable with this terminology, Prof. Prakash appeared in support of it.
Dr. Sinha believes that restructuring of water is possible. India has not rattled the treaty, but merely suspended it, which is intended to signal to Pakistan and the world that India's tolerance limit has been over. In the past, India did not politicise the treaty but there was no scope for restraint after the Pahalgam incident. India has not completely cut off water supply, but has created a strategic pressure by using the provisions of the treaty such as flushing of dams or not giving information to Pakistan.
In contrast, Professor Anjal Prakash advocates the use of water as a strategic tool, especially in the context that Pakistan has "made terrorism a part of its state policy". "The time has come for us to use water as a strategic weapon, that is, to control a part of it and use it for our own benefit. ”
They also say that the Indus Waters Treaty is an "unjust treaty" for India "It is an unequal treaty, which was signed at the expense of India's own state like Jammu and Kashmir. The state sought the waters of the Indus for years but was never allowed to use it. This water has been going to the part of Pakistan which supports terrorism. In 2023, I called for a rethink of the treaty and stated clearly that India must be prepared to use water as a weapon. Is the suspension of the treaty an economic setback for Pakistan?
Dr. Sinha agrees, saying, "Since the Indus basin is the lifeline of Pakistan, which supplies water for 80% of the country's agricultural needs, temporary disruption in water flow can affect irrigation schedules and also hamper hydropower generation." ”
According to Professor Anjal Prakash, Pakistan may face energy crisis in the near future. "30 per cent of Pakistan's energy comes from the hydropower sector. If the flow decreases or the flow is abnormal, it will be difficult for them to generate hydropower and this may become a matter of concern for Pakistan. ”
Pro. Prakash also admits that it is not practical to stop water at the moment. We don't have any such infrastructure at the moment but not sharing information is a step that will have an immediate impact," he said. In the next three to five years, there are plans to create infrastructure to divert the flow of water, and of course renegotiation of the treaty, although I don't see that happening in the near future.
Dr. Sinha also acknowledges that "the impact cannot be instantaneous", but stresses that India must use its water resources judiciously for its own benefit and that of its people, which has not happened in the past. Some practical challenges, such as difficult geographical conditions and the high seismic vulnerability of the region, may pose obstacles for India.
Pro. Prakash suggests that India should develop a series of small dams instead of one large dam to make implementation more feasible and safer. Both experts agree that the way forward is to renegotiate and renegotiate the treaty. The impasse is that India wants a bilateral settlement, while Pakistan will insist on third-party mediation. There is no denying that the Modi government has hit Pakistan on its most sensitive nerve – by restricting water supply.
In reality, its full impact may not be as it is being made out to be, but it is by no means an empty threat. If India were to partially divert the flow of water, stop sharing information and keep up pressure on its enemy country, then this step would definitely prove to be worthwhile and put Pakistan in a state of crisis.