Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah’s statement not to share the waters of the Indus, Jhelum and Chenab rivers with Punjab, Haryana and Rajasthan has created a political storm. Umar used to say that first our state’s needs, then someone else’s turn.” This statement has stung political leaders in Punjab, who had opposed Umar by calling water a ‘national asset’. But the question is whether this rhetoric on a sensitive issue like water really speaks of the rights of the states, or is it nationalist politics under which Punjab’s waters have been stolen. Umar’s stand seems justified from the perspective of riparian theory, but how practical it is according to the central policy of the Modi government is a matter for consideration.
Political parties in Punjab, especially the ‘Aam Aadmi Party’ and the Akali Dal, have rejected Umar’s statement outright and raised the issue of Punjab’s right to water. AAP’s Neel Garg said that the water of the Indus is a ‘national asset’ and Punjab has an equal right to it. Akali Dal’s Daljit Singh Cheema also advised Umar to speak with restraint, reminding him that Punjab has always made a significant contribution to the country’s security and food supply. But the question is, do the arguments these parties from Punjab are making rest on the principles of riparian law? According to the riparian law, the right to water belongs to the areas through which the river passes. The Indus, Jhelum and Chenab do not flow through some parts of Punjab, so how strong is Punjab’s claim?
According to the principle of riparian law, the area which is on the banks of the river has the first right to use the water. Omar Abdullah’s statement is based on this principle, because the main source of the Indus, Jhelum and Chenab is in Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh. Omar says that the local needs of Jammu and Kashmir should be given priority. This seems logical in principle, but according to the national structure of India, this stand becomes controversial. Because the central government is keen on grabbing the waters of the states by force. Omar’s stand challenges the arrangements of centralization.
On the other hand, in this case, the parties from Punjab The arguments being used by the Centre are also in favour of a centralisation structure that violates the riparian principle. Just as the Central Government forcibly gave 70% of Punjab’s water to non-riparian states (Rajasthan, Haryana), similarly, the claim on the water of Indus-Jhelum-Chenab is also based on the same ‘national property’ argument. Punjab’s political leaders should have supported Omar Abdullah’s stand and demanded a stop to the plunder of Punjab’s water on the basis of the riparian principle. But instead, they are making statements in favour of the Centre’s extortionate policy, which goes against the long-term interests of Punjab. This is political dishonesty, which only advances vote politics by ignoring the natural rights of Punjab.
The role of the Central Government is the most important in this entire dispute. The Indus Water Treaty, which was signed between India and Pakistan in 1960 with the mediation of the World Bank, was annulled The recent dispute between India and Pakistan led to the Centre planning to divide the waters of Indus, Jhelum and Chenab among other states of India. But it does not specify the share of Punjab, Haryana and Rajasthan.
The issue of abrogating the Indus Waters Treaty is also a matter of dispute at the international level. This treaty was brokered by the World Bank, and unilaterally abrogating it would be against international law. If India tries to completely stop the flow of Indus, Jhelum and Chenab waters by abrogating the treaty, Pakistan will have the option of approaching the World Bank or the International Court of Justice. Moreover, Pakistan is also a part of the Indus Basin, and according to the riparian principle, it also has a right to the water. It will not be easy for India to do so.
Omar Abdullah’s stand on this issue is based on territorial rights and riparian principles, but it challenges central policies. Punjab’s political parties should Fight the battle for rights on a principled and legal basis, rather than taking a policy stand on this issue.
