By Naveed Tajammal

Nehru and Ayub Khan Signing the Treaty on 16th Sept 1960 at Karachi

So this Swami fellow now wants us, to stop agitating for our water rights, and divert our energies on building a net work of pipes & sprinklers while the foxland (Indians) continue building their water storage dams, 62 only on Chenab alone, besides the Indus and Jhelum ones. The best part is that as Indians, now claim to be the largest equipment sellers of the drip system,  this swami now suggests that we buy the same from the Indians, first they strangulate us then give us remedies. Evil intentions are foremost in any Indian led suggestion, as is seen in the retrospective, if we study the sequence of events which lead to INDUS WATER TREATY 1960.

On 1st April 1948 they shut down our waters, the Indus water treaty is back dated to 1st April 1960, as per the date fixed for the cessation of water supply in Ravi, Beas and Sutlej, in the IWT it is 1st April 1970, which was later extended to 31st march 1973, 0000hrs, or the eve of 1st April 1973.

NEHRU the wise Brahman had pre-planned the IWT issue before hand, about 7 years before the actual signing of this treaty, Nehru, hired the services of a German lawyer by the name of, professor F.J.BERBER who at that time was the sole expert on water related issues, and author of a book, ”Rivers in international law”, and this German remained a servant of GOI (govt. of India) till and after the signing of the IWT, later he joined, Munich university, but continued, to be a standing consultant on water related issues, to GOI.

To give the IWT a impartial look, the World Bank is roped in, as a co-signatory, to the treaty, the third party, when comes the Wullhar barrage issue in 1984, the same BANK is quite, when comes the Baglihar dam issue in 2005,the BANK  delegates a expert, a director from Brazil, to supervise the proceedings, who on the behest of GOI, states, after giving favourable judgment to Indians, that WORLD BANK is not a GUARANTOR’, and why was he here for hearing remains a question mark.

  India's Dangerous Water Game An Invitation to Nuclear War

INDIANS indeed are stealing our waters, where no further dams can be built on any river, Indians are busy tunneling, they have bored the Indus, Jhelum and Sutlej and diverted the waters to lower lands, we have lost Ravi, Beas and Sutlej, they have set up a new link system now the surplus flood waters will not reach our NILLI BAR, to recharge our ground waters, a yearly happening. all the waters of our six rivers are as pre planned to be diverted to eastern lands of India and the south, a massive network of canals have been dug out, with head-works well laid out, not happy with this, the Indians are busy with the DAM on the KABUL RIVER TOO, at KAMA.

Our foolish editors, gullible idiots that they are, publish these distorted

articles under ”Aman ki asha”.

Editor’s Note:

The paper of Swaminathan is placed below for the benefit of the readers that was published in a Pakistani English Newspaper.

Checking the Indus Waters Dispute

Tuesday, April 13, 2010
Swaminathan S Anklesaria Aiya
Politicians and Islamic outfits in Pakistan accuse India of stealing upstream Indus system waters, threatening Pakistan’s very existence. More sober Pakistanis complain that numerous new Indian projects on the Jhelum and Chenab will create substantial live storage even in run-of-the-river hydel dams. This will enable India to drastically reduce flows to Pakistan during the crucial sowing season, something that actually happened for a couple of days when the Baglihar reservoir was filled by India after dam completion.

India accuses Pakistan of hysteria, saying there is really no issue since India has always observed the Indus Waters Treaty dividing the waters of the Indus and Punjab rivers between the two countries. Pakistan may suffer from water scarcity but so does India.

Inter-state fights over water in India are humungous — Punjab vs Haryana, Karnataka vs Tamil Nadu, and Andhra Pradesh vs Maharashtra. Water raises passions, and farmers in all states claim they are being robbed of water, without going into the rather complex facts. Pakistan is no different, say Indian experts, so let’s shrug aside Pakistani rhetoric.

  Lebanon: Imam Musa Sadr

What this debate misses is that dam-based canal irrigation is an obsolete, wasteful 19th century technology that cannot meet 21st century needs. It must be replaced by sprinkler and drip irrigation, distributed through pressurised plastic pipes. This approach has enabled Israel to irrigate the desert. It can enable India and Pakistan to triple the irrigated area with their existing water resources, escaping water scarcity. Drip and sprinkler irrigation systems are expensive. They use a lot of power for pumping. But they greatly improve yields too. Israel’s agriculture is highly competitive.

Canals are hugely wasteful of both land and water, something well-captured in Tushaar Shah’s book ‘Taming the Anarchy’. Up to 7 per cent of the command area of a conventional irrigation project is taken up by canals, and this no longer makes sense when land is worth lakhs per acre. In the Narmada command area, farmers have refused to give up their land to build distributaries from the main Narmada canal, so only a small portion of the irrigation potential is actually used today.

Traditionally, the South Asian farmers have levelled their land and flooded it with irrigation water. Rice is typically grown in standing water. This entails enormous water losses through evaporation in canals and flooded fields. This mattered little in the 19th century when land and water were relatively abundant. It matters hugely today. Piped water greatly economises the use of both land and water.

Instead of canals, we can transport water through underground pipes that leave the land above free for cultivation. Indeed, the downhill flow of water through massive pipes can run turbines, generating electricity for pumping the water to the surface where required.

The canal system makes farmers prisoners of the water releases decided by canal headquarters. If canal water is released to a village section say once a month, farmers can grow only those crops suited to this irrigation schedule. This was acceptable in the 19th century when farms were large and grew the same crop, and technology and markets for unconventional crops were scarce.

  Need for balanced civil-military relations

But today farmers want to diversify into a wide diversity of crops, and for this they need water on demand. This is why they have gone in a huge way for tube well irrigation. This gives them water on demand, enabling them to grow what they like. India’s green revolution was based overwhelmingly on tube well irrigation: the Bhakra Dam contributed hardly anything to it, save that Bhakra canal waters leaked into the ground and helped recharge underground aquifers. The same was true of the green revolution in Pakistan too.

This does not cease to make water an emotive issue. Punjab and Haryana fight bitterly over canal water although 80 per cent of their irrigation is based on tube wells. Punjab has refused to let the Sutlej-Yamuna Link be completed. Yet not even this has saved the state from water scarcity, since excessive tube well pumping is emptying aquifers. The same thing is happening in Punjab.

Gujarat has shown the way out of this water crisis. It has gone in a big way for drip and sprinkler irrigation. It has been rewarded with an astounding agricultural growth rate of 9 per cent despite being a semi-arid state. Jain Irrigation has become one of the biggest producers of drip and sprinkler equipment in the world, and other corporate rivals are coming up fast.

Like Gujarat, India and Pakistan need to replace canal-based irrigation with pipe-based irrigation. India has world-class technology and equipment that it can share with Pakistan. Such co-operation cannot end controversies over Indus water sharing. But it can take the sting out of them.

Naveed Tajammal is a historian with a special focus on Indus Civilisation and the Muslim World. He is a regular writer of

Naveed Tajammal

Opinion Maker and a Member Board of Advisors. He writes for English publications and delivers lectures on Indus history.