Daily Times

There are around 300 freshwater basins in the world straddling international borders and nearly all neighbours in the international system share a river and wherever an upstream/downstream basin configuration exists among nations the risk of conflict is enhanced.

In order, to develop any long term and sustainable hydro based power system the structural variables impact the distribution of power capabilities; which pervade the facets of transnational water conflicts establishing and regulating usage, cooperation as well as transitory hydro power projects. Simply put, where a state is the weaker player treaties are imposed and the traditional arrangement of water distribution and water rights between riparian states is shadowed by the prevalence of power through relative economic might which has replaced brute military strength of the past decades. Any terms of an inherently one sided water distribution rights treaty however complex can be skirted through resorting to the condition of voluntary cooperation citing internationally known precedent of the Danube River case arising from a water dispute between Hungary and Slovakia.

The Danube River is a European water artery traversing almost 2700 km with a drainage basin of 817,000 km with around 90 million inhabitants and on which 17 European countries rely to varying extent on the river and any water dispute can be wasteful. The population in the Danube Basin comprises almost 15 percent of Europe’s population with a significant economic, social and environmental value supporting tourism, industry, agriculture, improved flood control, power generation and a growing digitally based service industry. The Danube wetlands comprising of 57,000 acres are the largest in Europe with an inland delta.

The Gabcikovo hydropower Project was launched to dam a section of the Danube River and subsequent diversion of water to channels. In the year 1989, Hungary terminated its 1977, treaty with Czechoslovakia designed for construction of the Gabcikovo dam citing environmental concerns yet Slovakia continued construction and diverted the Danube into a canal inside its territory. Hungary highlighted three environmental concerns with the first being irreparable damage of an ecologically and agriculturally rich region of Hungary, threat to the water table and pollution in the water distribution system and approached the International Court of Justice.

The population in the Danube Basin comprises almost 15 percent of Europe’s population with a significant economic, social and environmental value supporting tourism, industry, agriculture, improved flood control, power generation and a growing digitally based service industry. The Danube wetlands comprising of 57,000 acres are the largest in Europe with an inland delta

In Pakistan the rivers are glacial fed and rich in silt which limit the life of dams. In the subcontinent water scarcity arises on account of a surge in population whereas in Europe concerns are more related to quality of life as well as industrial application accompanied by consistent energy supplies. Floods routinely wreak havoc in Pakistan leading to near famine conditions.

The European Commission was an effective mediator between Slovakia and Hungary due to a resilient motivation of both parties to the dispute to connect with political and economic organizations and anticipated benefits of acquiring NATO or EU membership. The European Union’s sole motive was to ensure stability and avoiding of any social or economic turmoil in Europe.  Cooperation was extracted by the European Union and the International Court of Justice confirming a postulate that international multilateral organizations such as the World Bank are efficacious third party interventions

Another durable and long term outcome of this imposed settlement was establishment of a monitoring system instituted by both countries along a 70 km shared run of the river cited as the most elaborate in the world incorporating an understanding by national experts for enabling monitoring parameters and identifying sites. Pakistan can explore the possibility of justifying the pollution of its waterways, environmental degradation and flood control and telemetry mechanism deficiencies to rescind or re negotiate the Indus Water Basin Treaty through the aegis of international multilateral organizations such as the World Bank and International Court of Justice and relying upon the precedent of the Danube River. What worked for Hungary should work for Pakistan. At stake here is the quality of life of millions of inhabitants of the Indus Basin and also loss of life and economic sustenance of these inhabitants. We have co-riparian countries with which we share catchment areas namely India, China and Afghanistan and with the first we can initiate renegotiation to safeguard our water rights. On the other hand, with the other two countries instead of entering into any treaty which may again be disadvantageous due to relative economic might we may ink a doctrine with the support of the international multilateral organizations which will ensure that Pakistan can presently and for decades to come, withdraw its due and legitimate share of water. The more the international multilateral organizations are involved with of course their funding the more will be regional stability and economic growth and success for Pakistan.

Razeen Ahmed has done Bachelor’s from London School of Economics and Political Science. Nadir Mumtaz reviewed the article

Published in Daily Times, October 27^th 2018.