With The Cauvery Issue Getting Out Of Hand, Here Are The Major Disputes India Faces Currently

With almost 40 buses torched and one person dead in clashes between police and protesters in Karnataka's capital, Bengaluru, over the release of water from the Cauvery to Tamil Nadu, the prophecy of future wars to be fought over water doesn't look all that superfluous.

AFP

Cauvery isn't the only water dispute getting uglier. India has scores of water disputes between its states and its neighbours that can get bloody in the times to come.

Cauvery dispute

The Cauvery dispute between the South Indian states of Karnataka and Tamil Nadu pertains to the issue of re-sharing of waters that are already being fully utilised. Between 1968 and 1990, 26 meetings were held at the ministerial level but no consensus could be reached. Even now, the issue still remains unresolved. The Cauvery Water Dispute tribunal was constituted on June 2, 1990 under the ISWD Act, 1956.

PTI

The two major arguments from both the states are:

The government of Tamil Nadu says that since Karnataka was constructing the Kabini, Hemavathi, Harangi, Swarnavathi dams on the river Cauvery and was expanding the ayacuts (irrigation works), Karnataka was unilaterally diminishing the supply of waters to Tamil Nadu. Tamil Nadu also says that Karnataka has failed to implement terms of the 1892 and 1924 Agreements relating to the use, distribution and control of the Cauvery waters. Tamil Nadu asserts that the entitlements of the 1924 Agreement are permanent. But Karnataka questions the agreement of 1924 and asks that the Cauvery water issue be viewed from an angle that emphasises equity and regional balance in future sharing arrangements.

Krishna-Godavari water dispute

The Krishna-Godavari water dispute is among the states of Maharashtra, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh (AP), Madhya Pradesh (MP), and Orissa and hasn't been resolved till date.

Almati Dam/Wikipedia

On the one hand, both Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh are the lower riparian states on the river Krishna, whereas Maharashtra, from where the river originates, is the upper riparian state. The dispute was mainly about the inter-state utilisation of untapped surplus water. The Krishna Tribunal which was constituted in 1973 did try to solve the issue and thus relied on the principle of ※equitable apportionment§ for the actual allocation of the water. But till now the issue is still unsolved.

Narmada dispute

Narmada River Dispute put the riparian states of Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra and Gujarat as well as the non-riparian state of Rajasthan, a potential beneficiary of irrigation water, in opposition to one another. The dispute started soon after Independence when attempts were made to harness the waters of the Narmada. Central Waterways, Irrigation and Navigation Commission (CWINC) identified several storage schemes, and in 1948, the Khosla Committee prioritised the proposals and named Tawa, Bargi, Punasa and Bharuch projects. But the bifurcation of Bombay state into Maharashtra and Gujarat created problems.

AFP

Gujarat wanted to raise the height of the dam at Navagam to maximise storage benefits but Maharashtra and Madhya Pradesh feared that construction of large dams in Gujarat would flood their territories without irrigation benefits.

In 1969, the Narmada Water Dispute Tribunal (NWDT) was set up by the government. The conflict lasted ten years before an agreement was reached. The main obstacle to a compromise was the height of the Sardar Sarovar Dam which was to overshadow or drown three projects and large parts of land in Maharashtra and Madhya Pradesh, if implemented.

The issue ended in 1970 with Gujarat abiding by the terms with MP and Maharashtra.

Ravi-Beas dispute

Punjab and Haryana, the main agricultural surplus states, providing large quantities of grain for the rest of India, are the main parties in this dispute. The present dispute is mainly between Punjab and Haryana about Ravi-Beas water and started with the reorganisation of Punjab in November 1966. This was when Punjab and Haryana were carved out of erstwhile Punjab. Haryana laid claim to over 4.8 out of 7.2 million acre foot (MAF) (which was the entitlement of the composite Punjab State), on the principle of equitable distribution. The new State of Punjab, on the other hand, conceded nothing to Haryana, mainly on the plea that Haryana was not a riparian State.

Punjabrise.com/Bhakra dam

But an aggrieved Punjab moved the Supreme Court against the statutory decision. Haryana, on the other hand, moved the same court for compelling Punjab to implement it. In the meantime, chief ministers of the three states of Punjab, Haryana and Rajasthan arrived at an agreement on 31st December, 1981, and agreed upon a few terms. Punjab, whose share was 4.2 MAF apart from Haryana's 3.5 MAF, would continue to use Rajasthan's share until Rajasthan was able to utilise its full share. It was also stipulated that Punjab would complete the Satluj Yamuna Link Canal (SYL) canal within a period of two years. The suits pending in the Supreme Court were withdrawn, and Punjab issued a white paper on 23rd April, 1982, hailing the Agreement, which had resulted in an increase of 1.32 MAF of waters to Punjab over the allocation made by the Central Government (the allocation to Haryana remaining unchanged).

But in November 1985, the Punjab Legislative Assembly passed a resolution, repudiating the Agreement of 31st December,1981, and declaring the white paper to be redundant.

The issue is pending ever since, despite the tribunal being constituted in 1986.

Pakistan-India water dispute

The water dispute between Pakistan and India began during the early 1960s. Pakistan claims that India violated the Indus Water treaty signed in 1955 which earmarks the understanding of water usage of six main rivers of the region by India and Pakistan.

Six rivers, that is the Chenab, Indus, Beas, Sutlej, Ravi and Jhelum, flow to Pakistan from India. This treaty divided three rivers for use by each country, and India had the Beas, Sutlej and Ravi. Pakistan had access to the Jhelum, Chenab and Indus. During the 1990s, India constructed a hydro-electric plant in Doda district along Chenab River. This river is one of the tributaries of the Indus River and was designated by the Indus Treaty for use by Pakistan. Pakistan called it violation of Indus water treaty and accused India of deliberately trying to sabotage Pakistan's agrarian economy by blocking its share of water.

Baglihar Dam/Wikipedia

India, however, has consistently maintained that the design will continue to supply Pakistan the 43 million acre feet every day, as it is supposed to do under the treaty, and as it has done right through, even when the two countries were at war. Construction of Kishanganga began in 2007, but was halted in 2011 because Pakistan went to the Permanent Court of Arbitration and said the Kishanganga project would adversely affect the Neelum Jhelum hydropower project it planned on the same river. The Pakistani government said its project had been on the boards since 1989, long before the Kishanganga project was conceived, though it had been able to raise the money to start work.

In February 2013, the arbitration court gave an interim ruling that India could divert a minimum amount of water for power generation, and work on the Kishanganga project was resumed. The court confirmed its ruling in December 2013. But the political deadlock over this issue still continues and like all other issues between the two countries, this one is also likely to remain unsolved.

India-Bangladesh water dispute

Although India and Bangladesh share 54 big, small and minor rivers and other water bodies between them, the two countries have many unresolved water issues. Despite setting up a Joint River Commission for water management as early as 1972, tensions between the countries on how to share resources came to a head in a dispute over the Teesta River. Apart from Teesta, Ganges which flows to Bangladesh and ends up in the Bay of Bengal is also a bone of contention for the two countries.

TheHindu

Although in 1996, India and Bangladesh signed a bilateral treaty that established a 30-year water-sharing arrangement between the two countries. But much hasn't changed even after this pact. The Teesta 每 which has its source in Sikkim 每 flows through the northern part of West Bengal in India before entering Bangladesh, where after coursing through about 45km of irrigable land, merges with the Brahmaputra River (or Jamuna when it enters Bangladesh). In 1983, an ad-hoc water sharing agreement was reached between India and Bangladesh, whereby both countries were allocated 39% and 36% of the water flow respectively. The new bilateral treaty expands upon this agreement by proposing an equal allocation of the Teesta River.

However, in 2011, the deal failed when CM of West Bengal, Mamata Banerjee, refused to approve the treaty, fearing that the loss of higher volume of water to the lower riparian would cause the state water to become scarce especially in the summers. Bangladesh, in retaliation, warned India of spoiling the bilateral ties if Teesta pact is breached. The issue is pending till date despite PM Narendra Modi promising a fair solution to the issue through negotiations.