India didn't give away water: Ex-envoy Raghavan defends IWT on technical basis

New Delhi, Sep 4 (PTI) The Indus Waters Treaty is an "engineering treaty" rather than a political one, says former high commissioner to Pakistan TCA Raghavan who cautions that applying "street-level common sense" to such a technically complex river water agreement can lead to mistakes.

Speaking at a discussion on the recently-released book "Trial by Water: Indus Basin and India-Pakistan Relations" by Uttam Kumar Sinha on Wednesday, Raghavan remarked on the irony of claims that India is "giving away all our water to Pakistan" at a time of severe flooding, when the focus is actually on evacuating as much water downstream as possible.

"The treaty did not give anything. You have to remember that geography and gravity are the key factors here. The piece of paper does not make the water go into the Arabian Sea. It is the natural curvature of the earth. So whatever you do, you are intervening with that natural curvature. And you are trying to maximize advantage for your country.

"Now, we live in an environment, especially in India, where the passions associated with the Indus Waters Treaty make discussions somewhat surprising," Raghavan noted.

Under the 1960 Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) with Pakistan, which India has kept in abeyance in response to the Pahalgam terror attack, the eastern rivers -- Ravi, Beas, and Sutlej -- are designated for India's unrestricted use.

The western rivers -- Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab -- are allocated to Pakistan, but India is permitted to use them for certain non-consumptive purposes such as navigation, flood management, domestic and agricultural use, and hydroelectric power generation.

The former diplomat, who served as India's High Commissioner to Pakistan from June 6, 2013 until his retirement on December 31, 2015, also emphasized how Indian engineers were primarily focused on the eastern rivers due to the development needs of East Punjab and Rajasthan, and how not giving this a high priority could have been "suicidal".

"The point is that if we now change the goalposts and say that the eastern rivers are unimportant and it's the western rivers which are the key, we're not really doing justice to the treaty and understanding the engineering nature of the treaty. It's important to now that the IWT an engineering treaty," he added.

To buttress his point, the 69-year-old also quoted a section from the book, "Trial by Water: Indus Basin and India-Pakistan Relations", which underscored his point on misplaced criticism of India giving away too much of water to Pakistan.

"The other criticism that India conceded too much water to Pakistan is largely determined by overarching anti-Pakistan sentiments and overlooks the fact that the Indus Waters Treaty was, in many respects, a resolution of ongoing disagreements since 1947. As Nehru, defending the treaty said, 'We purchased a settlement, if you like; we purchased peace'." "Foremost, the Indian negotiators were far from compromising and suggesting otherwise unfairly neglects to acknowledge their nationalist approach," said Raghavan, quoting the book, published by Penguin Random House India.

Author Sinha supported Raghavan's view when he explained that the perceived unfairness of the treaty often arises from a "political presentation" -- the common belief that the Indus basin was divided so that 80 percent of the water went to Pakistan and only 20 percent to India.

However, he emphasized that the technical reality tells a different story - and this, he argued, is where the treaty was misunderstood.

"Engineers never really considered the basin's full demarcation down to the lowest level; they focused mainly on river demarcation. At that time, the Eastern rivers were critically important for India, especially given the country's developmental needs," added Sinha, who has also authored "Indus Basin Uninterrupted" in 2021.

But these sentiments were not shared by the co-panelist, former deputy National Security Adviser Arvind Gupta, who described the treaty as fundamentally "unfair", as it granted Pakistan considerable leverage over India.

Gupta even claimed that Jawaharlal Nehru was "desperate" to get the treaty signed -- whether for good or bad reasons -- and was "ready to compromise" as well.

"The treaty was simply not fair, and so, at some point, it was destined to fail - and it has failed. Through its technical provisions, the treaty gave Pakistan significant leverage over India, which they used, misused, and misapplied in various ways. They consistently put pressure on India and delayed project after project," he remarked. PTI MG ZMN