After three days of intensive discussions in New Delhi, Pakistan-India talks on the controversial Baglihar dam have come to what cautious diplomatic sources have described as an "inconclusive" end, though a more appropriate description would be failure. The two sides are reported to continue to have a wide gap in their perceptions on several crucial points concerning the construction of the dam that, India maintains, is merely a hydro-electric project.
However, citing the terms of the Indus Basin Water Treaty that govern the distribution of river waters between the two countries, Pakistan has been objecting to the dam construction, saying its design specifications impinge on Pakistan's water rights.
After the latest "inconclusive" discussions, India has proposed further talks on the issue. That seems to be a reasonable course to pursue but for the fact that the country has continued to go on with construction activity on the project. Even though its official deadline for the completion of the dam is December 2007, New Delhi has been indicating that the project could become operational as early as December of the current year.
That looks like an improbable deadline in view of the fact that the country is yet to give a satisfactory response to Pakistan's objections to the project design, unless, of course, it intends to ignore them. Hence, while India has proposed continuation of talks on the subject, Pakistan has rightly taken the position that this would depend on a complete stoppage of work on the dam.
As per the World Bank guaranteed Indus Basin Treaty, the river Chenab, on which India is now busy building the dam in occupied Jammu and Kashmir territory, is one of the three rivers over which Pakistan has water rights.
The treaty is nearly 45 years old, and despite the two major wars and some smaller ones that the two countries have fought during this time, they have continued to honour its terms and conditions. Not once did either side feel the need to invoke the treaty's clause that provides for international arbitration in the event of an altercation.
It is indeed unfortunate that India should have chosen the present time, when the two countries are engaged in a serious peace process, and are taking a number of confidence building measures (CBMs) to push that process forward, to create such mistrust as has been generated by the failure of the negotiations on the Baglihar dam.
The least it needs to do by way of an important CBM is to stop work on the project as long as the two sides do not find an amicable solution of the issue.
Pakistan has yet to make a final decision as to whether it would be useful to go for further bilateral discussions even if India keeps on constructing the dam, or it needs to request international arbitration as per the Indus Treaty.
In case it decides to take the latter course, that should not reflect negatively on the over all peace process. International arbitration, in the event of failure of bilateral negotiations, is a perfectly civilised course for nations to take. It, in fact, would not be the first time for this country to seek an international institution's arbitration to settle a dispute with India.
It may be recalled that it had taken its case regarding the Rann of Katchh to the International Court of Justice, and received a favourable judgement. Given that it has genuine objections to the Indian dam plan, it is quite likely that it will win its present case too.
It needs to make a quick decision though. For if India goes on building the project at the current speed, it may also want to defy the international arbitration authority's judgement. After all, there have been some noises in that country, suggesting that it should not feel constrained by the Indus Treaty in building the Baglihar dam.