In October 2002 the Indian Supreme Court directed the Government of India to link major rivers of India to overcome droughts and floods. This was in response to the public interest litigation's filed by amicus curiae based on the speech of the President of India urging the union to start the project.
The court issued notice to all the states and the union territories. Only two affidavits were filed, one by the Union of India and the other by Tamil Nadu.
According to Sayed Naqvi, counsel for the Centre appearing before the Supreme Court, river networking has been taken up by the government with utmost priority and that it has already taken up work in rivers BETWA and Parvati in Madiha Pradesh and Utter Pradesh.
The proposal for inter-linking of rivers was first mooted in 19th century by Sir Arthur Cotton primarily for promoting inland navigation. Dr K.L. Rao later revived the idea in 1972. Focus shifted from navigation to the issue of water scarcity in the south.
In 1977 Captain Dastur, a pilot by profession proposed construction of two canals named as Garland Canal which envisaged 4,200 km Himalayan Canal and twice as long Southern Garland Canal. The two were to be connected through pipelines passing by Patna and Delhi.
The project consists of 30 river links, 14 on the Himalayan Rivers and 16 on the peninsular south. The project involves storage of flood/monsoon water in order to make it feasible.
The important links are four including Brahamputra with Ganges, Subarnarekaha and Mahanadi with Brahamputra so as to irrigate Aasam, West Bengal, Bihar, Jharkhand and Orissa.
In 1980, National Water Development Agency (NWDA) was established to carry out two studies, which has two components, viz Himalayan and Peninsula rivers. The whole scheme is at a conceptual stage and according to Ramswamy Iyer, it is not a single project but a concept that consists of some 20 or 30 different projects. NWDA has to survey and investigate possible storage size and interconnecting links.
There are two action plans. Under action plan-I, the schedule for implementation is ten years from the start. It is stipulated that work will start in 2007 and completed in 2016.
Under action plan-II, two committees have been set up to go into the financial aspects of the project. Both the committees are to work concurrently.
NWDA has jointly with the Ministry of Water Resources conducted feasibility studies on six of the thirty possible river links the last few decades. It is reported to have completed water balance studies of 137 basins/sub-basins and prepared pre-feasibility studies of 30 links.
A task force has been set up by the government of India on December 13, 2002 with Suresh Prabhu as the Chairperson with the following terms:
1. To provide guidance on norms of up-raising of individual projects in respect of economic liability, socio-economic impacts, environmental impacts and preparation of re-settlement plans;
2. Devise suitable mechanisms for bringing about a speedy consensus among the states;
3. Privatise the different projects components for preparation of detailed project reports and implementation;
4. Propose suitable organisational structures for implementing the projects;
5. Consider various funding, modalities; and
6. Consider international dimensions that may be involved in some components of the project.
A full-fledged cost benefit analyses will follow feasibility studies and detailed project reports. It is however claimed that phenomenal economic and socio cultural benefits will accrue, like:
1. Agricultural production will increase by 100% in the next five years;
2. 35 million hectares will be added to the command area to the current 90 million hectares;
3. Losses of crops worth Rs 250b will be saved by preventing drought and floods;
4. Savings in foreign exchange of Rs 30b per annum will accrue because of cost effective alternative navigation and reduced import of oil;
5. The country will further be bound together.
6. Employment to 1 million people will be provided in next 10 years; and
7. Additional water line defence will be provided along the western and north-western borders.
There are sceptics, who doubt the viability of the scheme or the seriousness on the part of India. They suspect that it is an election stunt and will not go beyond the laying of foundation stone. After 24 years since the project started they are nowhere near the completion. But there are those who are afraid of India's seriousness.
Once the government conducts studies, like it did on Kalabagh in Pakistan without involving the stakeholders in a discussion, then a vested interest is created in going ahead with its execution.
Narmada is another example of similar approach of a government to mega projects. Narmada is still incomplete.
The question is if there is enough water to sustain the idea? Except for the Brahamputra basin in the north-east, there is no surplus water. The scheme is predicated on the assumption that there is surplus water in the rivers that could be diverted to the deficit rivers. Dr Ainun Nishat, Country representative of IUCN in Bangladesh, in his brilliant exposition at the recent Conference in August 2004 brought out with the help of data that dry deltas in Bangladesh bring forth very poignantly an affirmation of the claim by the critics of the proposal that not much water is left to flow into the sea.
Those who are building a superstructure over a pipe dream either do not understand or have a sinister agenda hidden from public view. The sea level has risen on an average from 4 to 8 inches in the last hundred years'.
Receding snow lines of the Himalayas is another development, which cannot be overlooked. The glacier mass showed a negative trend since the middle of last century signalling sharp reduction in flow into the rivers in the next thirty years.
Himalayan glaciers could disappear by 2035 according to some researchers. There is no scientific database on climate pattern and discharge pattern in the Himalayas.
Pakistan is facing its gravest crisis with its existing dams almost empty and its present and future crops in jeopardy. In depth studies of glacier hydrology is in order.
The claim that water flows into the sea is no longer true. India has highly uneven water availability.
In Pakistan and India diversions on the mighty Indus and its tributaries have reduced water outflows into the sea by 80% destroying deltaic mangroves which once stretched over 250,000 hectares and were spawning grounds for coastal fisheries. In Philippines, rights to environment have been included as fundamental rights.
Engineering a geomorphologic feature changes both the object and the process and thus triggers a chain of developments that persists long after the intervention is over.
The system takes its own time to settle into a new equilibrium. This on a generational time scale is very much longer than the executive decisions. The natural level of all water on earth being the sea, the river unlike a canal augments its flow along its path. Such a project will invite the Law of Unintended Consequences.
Secondly the project will involve submergence of forestland, habitations and wild life. How good is the prevailing use of irrigation water? 70% of river water is wasted before its delivery into the fields. High intensity use for sugar cane and rice further compounds the problem. It faces floods and droughts at the same time.
According to a recent report it has nearly exhausted underground water reservoirs by pumping water for irrigation to achieve a mirage of food self-sufficiency. The proposed project is thought to be the only solution to overcome the problem.
PART II Obtaining the consent of the states within the union will prove yet another insurmountable difficulty. The states have full authority over water and yet the center can intervene by taking steps to interfere with their plans for use of the water.
Ironically the states where the rivers are located are the most undeveloped parts of the country. East Punjab followed Kerala in opposing the project. Punjab and Haryana are still fighting over Sutlej's water.
The annual discharge of the system is 1350 billion cubic meters with a total drainage area of 1.75 million Sq kms. Brahamputra contributes 700 BCM, Ganges 500 and Meghna 150.
Tamil Nadu supports the project whereas Andhra Pradesh supports it conditionally. Kerala Legislative Assembly has passed a unanimous resolution against the link on August 6, 2003.
Gujrat has objections because Daman Ganga-Pinjal River Linking Project, one of the 30 interstate projects, located in Gujrat will be adversely affected. There are two out of thirty proposals that fall in Gujrat.
West Bengal is worried. It is demanding adequate funds from the center to combat post Farrakha problem causing floods and erosion. Assam is opposed to the project and is of the view that while remaining within the constitution, the Centre must evolve a consensus of the states.
A Board or an ordinary bill in parliament cannot supersede the constitutional provisions.
One opinion suggests that Bihar should not oppose linking of Brahamputra because there is sufficient water to meet the needs of the south. However, Nepal will have to be excluded from the plans.
Bihar after spending over Rs 19b on flood control in the flood prone area is worse off with floods affecting almost three times the area (from 2.5m hectares to 6.9m). Bihar also fears that India will reap benefits at its cost.
Aware of the threat posed by this gigantic project and the challenges faced by the region on account of population growth, food scarcity, Third South Asia Water Forum (SAWAF-III) was held in Dhaka.
Brahamputra and Jamuna Basins account for 65% of surface water in Bangladesh. In all 80% of the surface water comes through these two rivers originating in Himalayas and passing through Nepal, Bhutan and India. Bangladesh inter alia decided to endorse the principle of "more crop for each drop" of water so as to increase water efficiency, to decrease non-structural options, to evolve cost effective technologies including rain water harvesting as well as re-cycling of effluent and for action to use water as a source of peace and prosperity rather than a source of discord.
The Institution of Engineers, Bangladesh (IEB), and Bangladesh Water Partnership (BWP) had organised seminar on March 10, 2003 in Dhaka. The recent August conference was a follow up and may yet have played a critical role in alerting the concerned citizens of the region to the serious consequences the scheme seems to present to the ecology and the future of our generations.
The Bangladesh People's Initiative against River Linking (BPIRL) in collaboration with the South Asian Solidarity for Rivers and Peoples (SARP) took another bold step in organising the South Asian consultation on River Linking Project (21-22 August 2004), so as to focus on the implications of the proposal on linking the two large rivers in the subcontinent.
THEME OF THE CONFERENCE WAS: Towards Fair, Equitable and Sustainable Utilisation of Trans boundary Waters The main objectives of the conference were:
To share evaluate and highlight peoples' concerns around the project.
-- To review existing legal regimes of trans-boundary river and water sharing.
-- To assist social, economic, political and environmental impact; and
-- To draw a common regional position.
Bringing Bangladesh on board may be far more difficult for India, particularly after India Bangladesh Treaty of December 1996 on the sharing of Ganges waters. Farrakha Barrage completed in 1975 has been a significant source of friction between India and Bangladesh.
The Barrage allows India to divert the Ganges water into Hoogly River through a feeder canal. A decline of 51% flow of water is claimed to have been experienced by Bangladesh after Farrakha. Under an ad-hoc arrangement reached in 1983, pending scientific studies, 39% of the dry season flow was to be allocated to India, 36% to Bangladesh and the remaining to continue to be unallocated.
Treaty protects the flows at Farrakha and any storage upstream of Farrakha will be in breach of that Treaty.
Ganges and Brahamputra are international waters and their historic uses cannot be overlooked. Para 3 of the Preamble of the Treaty requires the two countries to make optimum utilisation of the water resources of their region for the mutual benefits of the people of the two countries.
Article IX of the Treaty enshrines the principle "Guided by the principles of equity, fairness and no harm to either party both the Governments agreed to conclude water sharing Treaties/Agreements with regard to other common rivers". According to Bangladesh, its share in Farrakha is fixed at 35,000 cusecs if availability of water is 75,000 cusecs.
In case water exceeds, India will get 40,000 cusecs and Bangladesh the balance. The water sharing arrangement was to be reviewed by the two governments at five years' interval or earlier, but so far no such review has taken place. Bangladesh took up the issue of inter-linking project in the Joint River Commission.
According to Hafiz Uddin Ahmad, Minister for Water Resources, India was reluctant to discuss it for being outside the scope of the JRC. Bangladesh persisted and the discussion went on for 13 hours, but at the end of the day nothing happened.
The marathon discussion was dismissed in a single line signifying nothing. There are prospects with the new government in place in New Delhi that some meeting of minds may take place.
There are alternatives available to the proposed millennium folly such as decentralised water harvesting, non-conventional energy sources and conservation strategies. A former Indian Prime Minister while addressing state irrigation Ministers in 1986 had this to say: "since 1951, 246 big surface irrigation project have been initiated. Only 66 out of these have been completed. 181 are still under construction.
For 16 years, we have poured out money. The people have got nothing back, no irrigation, no water, no increase in production, no help in their daily life".
The river linking project is in fact a river privatisation project. Projects that have already been planned or executed are being shown as new projects under the scheme. India seems to be re-making its geography so that water flows where it never did.
PART III Complexity of governance involves centralisation with decision making scattered around different Ministries and departments. Water bureaucracy is complex, diverse and dynamic. Its layers are not only contradictory but also overwhelming.
Whenever a civil engineer sees water, he wants to pour concrete into it. In India water falls within the jurisdiction of five Ministries, and then water is a provincial subject under the Constitution. Each department is driven by its own parochial interest.
Centralised system of governance is politically driven where quantity supersedes quality and holds the key to creating an illusion of action.
Following measures may contribute far more to achieving efficiency than pursuing the mirage of inter-linking water:
1. Lining the canals and channels to protect water for evaporation and sewerage;
2. Building watershed at suitable sites;
3. Management and desalting of bonds, tanks, lakes and reservoirs;
4. Recycling and treatment of sewage water and industrial effluent.
5. Treatment of seawater along the cost for sustaining mangroves.
Assuming an average price of Rs 100, 000 per acre, the potential is to create 90m additional owners of 1 acre each of arable land.
The benefits are claimed to be in perpetuity with adequate water resources of more than 1000 cu. M. per capita per annum for the next 10,000 years. Annual production will increase from 200 m. tonne to 400 m. tonne and make India an agricultural export nation. Does the comparative advantage of India lie in being an agricultural country? Or does it lie elsewhere, like in science, technology and services?
There is need for a regional treaty that forces each country to honour its ecological obligations towards the great oceans.
The combined population of the region is about 600 million. If India thinks that it that it can exploit its upper riparian position and its size, so might China, which has reportedly drawn its own plans to divert rivers originating in Tibet including Brahamaputra.
While India plans to complete the project by 2013, China plans to do so by 2009. An estimated 90% of the Tibetan rivers flow downstream to India, Bangladesh, Nepal and Bhutan. Both India and Bangladesh are at the mercy of China which could for its own interest withhold water for irrigation and power during dry season and release water during the flood season. Bangladesh experts brought the issue to the attention of Indian journalists.
All the rivers flow into Bay of Bengal. All these countries have abiding interest in the sustainability of the system in order to ensure livelihood of people, who depend on agriculture as well as to protect ecology, environment and wild life for present or future collaboration necessary to evolve common goal of survival.
Ganges is reported to be the most polluted river mostly because it is held sacred by Hindus who burn their dead bodies on the river banks and dump the remains into the river at times half burnt.
The effort is not going to be easy but each country has to be prepared to make sacrifices and suffer the perceived loss involved in an agreement. Equity and understanding of the others' point of view are crucial to any settlement, tentative or permanent.
Another option is that a public interest petition is filed by any of the concerned citizens of India requesting review of Supreme Court order, which may in its own wisdom possibly review its own order suo moto in the regions' interest.
THERE ARE HURDLES THAT INDIA MUST CROSS BEFORE ESTABLISHING FEASIBILITY: LIKE:
1. External financing in view of huge external debt may not be forthcoming. The private sector sees a distinct road for itself in the proposed mega project having experience the privatisation of Sheonath River in Chattisgarh.
2. As per the constitution water is a state subject, but no project can be undertaken without following the planning process, which would land any proposal before the central government.
3. Whether there will be political will to inter Link River is an open question. A proposal was made to constitute a Commission on the lines of Finance Commission to examine the project.
4. Tamil Nadu has already completed Mekkara dam, which is to be used in the proposed link even though Kerala is opposed to the project.
Then there is the international law and treaties. United Nations Convention on the Law of Non-Navigational Uses of International Watercourses although not ratified could provide a basis to proceed.
The Convention was adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations in 1997. Watercourse has been defined as a system of surface waters and ground waters forming a unitary whole and normally flowing into a common terminus.
The Convention was based on the principles and recommendations adopted by the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development of 1992 in the Rio Declaration and Agenda 21.
It expressed the conviction that a framework Convention will ensure the utilisation, development, conservation, management and protection of international watercourses and the promotion of the optimal and sustainable utilisation thereof for present and future generations'
Nothing in the Convention shall affect the rights or obligation of the Watercourse state arising from agreements in force on the date on which that State became a party to the Convention.
THERE ARE 37 ARTICLES TO THE CONVENTION: The Articles in the Convention relate to subjects like watercourse agreements, equitable and reasonable utilisation participation, factors relevant to equitable and reasonable utilisation, obligation not to cause significant harm, general obligation to co-operate and settlement of disputes etc.
The Convention shall enter into force following ratification of 35th Instrument. So far the Convention not been ratified and has attracted perhaps no more than 16 signatures and 11 ratification's. 103 nations including Bangladesh had voted in favour. Surprisingly India and Pakistan were on the same side and were amongst 27 nations that had abstained in voting.
Times have changed. Water is under pressure. Dams and mega - projects are known to disrupt the existing pattern of water use. Where people depend on fish, flood plains or deltas for their livelihood, big dams can cause great havoc. Watershed eco-systems suffer and fragmentation of aquatic and terrestrial eco-systems cause growing threat to the ecological integrity is one of the many factors impacting on the change in climate.
The growing rate of extraction of fresh water has put enormous pressure on aquifers. Sedimentation causes the dams to lose storage capacity at an estimated rate of 05-1% per annum. In the next 25 to 50 years, 25% of the existing storage will have been lost mostly in the developing countries.
In three Asian countries, China, India and Pakistan, the water table is sinking at the alarming rate of 1 to 2 meters a year. Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Egypt and Israel are the most water stressed countries. Pakistan is close to Germany in being less stressed.
Today most of the countries are focusing their attention on management of existing water resources including the dams.
The effort involves rehabilitation, renovation and optimisation. Demand side management and improvement of efficiency of the existing supply are receiving greater attention.
There are bound to be difficulties for the countries of the region along the way. But inaction is not an option. If the waters in the basin are sufficient to justify an equitable and just sharing of waters and the social, economic, political and environmental impact of such structural intervention on common river systems is manageable, then the project cannot be dismissed off hand as being unfeasible.
It will require cooler heads in the spirit of give-and-take for the stakeholders in all the countries of the region to grapple with hard choices. The outcome may yet produce a win-win situation for everybody.
Growing population in all the countries of the region, which they have failed to control imposes and obligation on their leaders to do something substantial to avert the looming disaster of famines and poverty.
Forming a common front against India as being the largest country in the region will be a self-defeating strategy. In the ultimate analysis it is the might that is always right.
After all Pakistan did the unthinkable of bartering away three of her six rivers for the sake of peace and amity in the largest part of the sub-continent. The important thing to note is that the intervention of the World Bank proved crucial to the culmination of the effort in the signing of the treaty.