Between IWT and NSG

In the aftermath of tensions since the Uri episode Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has threatened to stop honouring the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) and block the flow of water into Pakistan. Islamabad has made it clear that revocation of the IWT would be taken as an act of war. On the other hand, one could see a discernable big powers’ pressure on smaller countries to pave the way for exemptions for India in the process of admission to Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG). Seen together, the developments though seemingly unrelated appear ominous. Indeed, strategic stability in South Asia would be undermined if India is allowed exemption while Pakistan’s application for treating it at par with India for admission in the NSG is ignored. And this would embolden India to risk using the weapon of water to pressurise Pakistan into giving up its claim on Kashmir.

Already India and Pakistan have approached the World Bank (WB) with their arguments against and in favour of the two dams being constructed by India on the Chenab River. The WB has called on both countries to consider alternative ways to resolve their disagreements as according to the Bank the arbitration as desired by Pakistan and the Indian desire for a ‘neutral expert’ to resolve the issue were creating a risk of contradictory outcomes “that could potentially endanger the Treaty.” World Bank President Jim Yong Kim has asked the two to resolve the conflict mutually and within the bounds of the IWT. He considers this as an opportunity for the two countries to begin to resolve the issue in an amicable manner and in line with the spirit of the treaty. We do share the concern of the WB and its President over the anticipated adverse outcome of the different courses the two countries had chosen for the resolution of their disagreements. Pakistan has objected to the construction of the two hydropower projects fearing disruption in downstream water-flows denying the right amount of irrigation water at the right time to Pakistani farmers. Islamabad has never refused bilateral negotiations on issues that beset the two countries but India has consistently refused, especially since the advent of the Modi government, to conduct itself civilly in bilateral matters and has tried to embarrass Islamabad at multilateral moots by directing at it undignified affronts. So, in our opinion the best course would be for the WB to either persuade India to return to bilateral negotiations or fulfill the Bank’s own obligations without fear or favour, being the third signatory of the treaty.

On the other hand, the NSG stands at crossroads as it considers membership for non-NPT states. An even-handed and non-discriminatory approach by the NSG at this juncture would be of far-reaching significance for strategic stability in South Asia and global non-proliferation efforts. Unfortunately, in bilateral context, Pakistan and India seem to be moving backwards, which is not a good sign as the latter was upping the ante through risky claims of surgical strikes, besides attempting to violate Pakistan’s maritime boundary. Relations between India and Pakistan have been at the lowest point since the 2008 Mumbai attack. Nuclear rhetoric and nuclear signalling had also occurred and one saw little chance of progress towards ending the stalemate unless both made compromises. There is an urgent need to lower the rhetoric, effectively implement ceasefire, observance of restraint by media, speedy completion of trials of Mumbai and Pathankot suspects, India preventing excesses by security forces in Kashmir, Pakistan extending the scope of its counter-terrorism operations, reiteration by Delhi of its interest in seeking peaceful resolution to the Kashmir issue, and start of a back-channel dialogue or direct talks, especially a conversation between intelligence agencies of the two countries.

Published in The Express Tribune, December 15^th, 2016.

Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.