Water conflict between Pakistan and India: Implications to regional peace and security

Pakistan and India are water stressed countries and the seed of water conflict between the two has been sowed by the Punjab boundary commission at the time of Partition. Trans-boundary water treaties have played a significant role in resolving the water disputes though the mechanism of conflict resolution varies and structurally fails to address the future problems that may arise. Indus Water Treaty (IWT) has been examined as an efficacious Model of conflict resolution and induced cooperation from 1960s to 1980s. Pakistan claimed that India is violating IWT by building dams and diverting waters of Western Rivers flowing from India to Pakistan. Therefore, the research attempts to answer the following questions. What is the cumulative effect of Indian dams being constructed on the Western Rivers? Can India Unilaterally withdraw the treaty? What would be the implications if India violates the treaty? Holistic content analysis of qualitative method and conflict theory has been used to investigate the water conflict between Pakistan and India. The key findings are that violation of treaty by India is perceived as security threat by Pakistan and also increase its economic concerns. The tension between the two neighbours over water sharing can lead to water war which poses serious threats to regional peace and security.

Socio-hydrological modeling of the tradeoff between flood control and hydropower provided by the Columbia River Treaty

The Columbia River Treaty (CRT) signed between the United States and Canada in 1961 is known as one of the most successful transboundary water treaties. Under continued cooperation, both countries equitably share collective responsibilities of reservoir operations, and flood control and hydropower benefits from treaty dams. As the balance of benefits is the key factor of cooperation, future cooperation could be challenged by external social and environmental factors which were not originally anticipated, or change in the social preferences of the two actors. To understand the robustness of cooperation dynamics we address two research questions – i) How does social and environmental change influence cooperation dynamics? and ii) How do social preferences influence the probability of cooperation for both actors? We analyzed infrastructural, hydrological, economic, social, and environmental data to inform the development of a socio-hydrological system dynamics model. The model simulates the dynamics of flood control and hydropower benefit sharing as a function of the probability to cooperate, which in turn is affected by the share of benefits. The model is used to evaluate scenarios that represent environmental and institutional change, and changes in political characteristics based on social preferences. Our findings show that stronger institutional capacity ensures equitable sharing of benefits over the long term. Under current CRT, the utility of cooperation is always higher for Canada than non-cooperation which is in contrast to the U.S. The probability to cooperate for each country is lowest when they are self-interested but fluctuates in other social preferences scenarios.

The Indus and Mekong River Basins: Cooperation, and Dispute

The Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) and the Agreement on the Cooperation for the Sustainable Development of the Mekong River Basin are two of the most important transboundary water treaties signed between member states that have a history of disputes and wars. Due to the character of these relationships, often other bilateral issues impinge on water-related issues. In the case of India and Pakistan, voices to scrap the IWT in both countries are made chiefly because of their day-to-day bitter relationships. The treaty nevertheless remains in effect. The Mekong River Basin countries have had sour relationships in the past, and even after the agreement was signed in 1995 some political differences and disputes between them have remained. In both the Indus and Mekong basins, China is an important upper riparian. This article discusses the IWT and Agreement among the Mekong basin countries and examines the convergences and divergences between the two. It then analyses the role of China, as an upper basin to Indus and Mekong.

Pitfalls in transboundary Indus Water Treaty: a perspective to prevent unattended threats to the global security

Water treaties have played an important role in peaceful resolution of water-related conflicts. Although the mode of negotiation to resolve water-related conflicts may vary from treaty to treaty, a number of structural falls make them unprepared for the future needs. The Indus water treaty is perhaps quoted as the most successful water-sharing mechanism in the recent times. Against all odds, the treaty has fulfilled its job descriptions of being a mechanism providing a moderately reliable framework for the peaceful resolution of water-related conflicts. However, the climate change is quickly eroding that trust. The water-sharing mechanism lacks guidelines to cater the issues related to climate change and basin sustainability which require integrated approach for their addressal. But the structural inflexibility does not encourage the riparian to collaborate and build mutual trust for common good. The riparian countries, within the framework of treaty, attempt to elevate their national interests by deliberately refusing to comply with the treaty clauses in letter and spirit, and even manipulate data to deprive the competing riparian of water. We propose and argue on the need of adopting structurally sound forum for solving water conflicts which will assist in comprehensive policy-making to ensure the sustainability of transboundary water resources. The forum will also provide an opportunity for the riparian to work together towards confidence-building through sharing of real-time hydrological data and further scientific analysis based on that. Conclusively, the shortcomings of the present conflict-resolution method are addressed by encouraging riparian to collaborate at various levels.

On quasi-constitutional treaties

Through analysis of North American water treaties, this article specifies criteria for determining the quasi-constitutionality of freshwater treaties in order to determine if some of them have quasi-constitutional standing. These criteria, temporal, substantive, and contextual, are applied to treaties found in the Transboundary Freshwater Dispute Database at Oregon State University (TFDD). Of 74 agreements (with 50 years standard duration), only six agreements meet or come close to meeting the quasi-constitutional standard, not counting the North American treaties. We conclude that while quasi-constitutional treaties are rare among the more than 600 in the TFDD, they reinforce international water law and strengthen social cohesion among the contracting states. They also highlight the importance of both substantive and contextual conditions in consolidating support for such treaties.

The Legal Principle of Reciprocity and China’s Water Treaty Practice

The legal principle of reciprocity plays a strong role in the law of international watercourses in both bilateral and multilateral contexts. China, primarily an upstream state, shares transboundary rivers with 14 neighbouring states. These shared rivers are governed by a variety of treaties and soft law documents, with China preferring to take a bilateral approach. Building on previous research, this article aims to elaborate on the role that reciprocity has played in the development, maintenance and interpretation of the law of international watercourses and then applies this to China’s transboundary water treaties. For these purposes, this analysis focuses on China’s approach to sovereignty on its transboundary waters and the substantive, procedural and dispute settlement rules of China’s transboundary treaties, as well as future developments, including the influence of the concept of ‘common interests’ on China’s practices. There have been significant developments in China’s transboundary water cooperation, as transboundary waters are increasingly important for China’s development. The article concludes with the example of the China-led Lancang-Mekong Cooperation Mechanism, highlighting its reciprocal characteristics and pathways for future development.

Shared Watercourses and Water Security in South Asia: Challenges of Negotiating and Enforcing Treaties

Shared water resources have influenced South Asia’s geography and history, as well as riparians’ responses to the challenges of utilizing, managing, and protecting such resources. Because of scarcity, population growth, and climate change impacts on all the riparians, national calls for water security have become louder. Consequently, collaboration among the nations of South Asia for ensuring equitable sharing of such water resources has not been optimal. While most countries do not have reliable systems for data generation, those possessing some hydrological data consider them state secrets, restricting their exchange. Even when treaty obligations exist, data-sharing practices are ad hoc, and the range of information shared is limited. Thus, negotiating new transboundary water treaties amongst South Asia’s riparian countries has become a daunting task, and enforcing existing ones remains a real challenge.

Conjunctive management of surface and groundwater in transboundary watercourses: a first assessment

Cooperative management of transboundary river basins is widely recognized as important. Emphasis on joint management of shared aquifers has also grown in recent years. Perhaps surprisingly, despite abundant focus on transboundary surface water and growing focus on shared groundwater, there is scant focus on their intersection. To address this knowledge limitation, this article reviews experiences in transboundary water treaties oriented toward different water sources, in order to: (i) understand how transboundary water institutions vary according to the water source to which they are oriented, (ii) gauge the nature and strength of conjunctive transboundary water management treaties, and (iii) identify ways to enhance conjunctive water management in transboundary contexts. The results reveal the existence of more than 50 treaties that make mention of both water sources. Nonetheless, only eight treaties devote ‘substantive’ focus to both surface and groundwater. Review of treaty contents reveals that their focus is on ‘softer’ issues related to institutional development. Moving forward, the reality that the evolution of conjunctive treaties is relatively nascent, and that scope of such treaties is still limited to institutional issues, may indicate large untapped potential – it may be time to outline pathways toward practical implementation of conjunctive water management in transboundary contexts.