The dams issue
Rashed Rahman
So long as Chief
Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Mian Saqib Nisar confined himself to launching a fund
raising campaign to build the Diamer-Bhasha and Mohmand Dams, sceptics and
critics were inclined to view the effort as a well intentioned but quixotic
effort to raise the billions of rupees required for the two projects. But on
September 15, 2018, during the hearing of a mineral water case, the CJP came
out with the startling remark that anyone opposing the building of dams could be
hauled up for treason under Article 6! On the same day, on another occasion,
the CJP announced he would make efforts to build the controversial Kalabagh Dam
after the two dams mentioned above.
To say that
these two statements, separately and taken together, caused consternation would
be to put it mildly. On the eve of his retirement, the CJP is trying to leave
behind a noteworthy legacy. However, there are several levels on which his
genuine efforts for building dams have raised eyebrows and questions.
First and
foremost, it is the executive’s responsibility to build dams and find the
resources for the task. However, Prime Minister Imran Khan has lent his
government’s support and even name to the dams fund initiated by the CJP. So
any possible conflict on separation of powers seems unlikely.
Second, the dams
fund has so far raised Rs 3.3 billion, of which expatriate Pakistanis have
contributed Rs 181 million and the rest has come from individuals and institutions
within the country. Though a considerable sum, the amount collected so far
appears a drop in the ocean compared with the minimum Rs 1,400 billion required
for the Diamer-Bhasha Dam alone. Of this amount, land acquisition requires Rs
101 billion, the dam Rs 471 billion and the powerhouse Rs 751 billion. Experts
say the minimum starting target in 2019 is Rs 30-40 billion. That appears a
tall order. Perhaps even more sobering, the experts say average cost overruns
of dams internationally is estimated at 96 percent of initial estimated cost. On
large dams, the cost overruns can be 30-500 percent higher. Timeframe overruns
on average are 44 percent (implying further rise in costs because of inflation).
The
Diamer-Bhasha Dam also does not inspire confidence amongst the experts because
of concerns surrounding its location in a seismically active area. The World
Bank and other potential international finance institutions are wary of the
project because of the ‘disputed’ nature of the area linked to the continuing
tensions over Kashmir.
The literature
on big dams indicates experience has depreciated the cost-benefit ratio of such
dams. In the case of the Indus Basin rivers, the huge quantity of silt they
bring down is a damper on the shelf life of any dam. The literature points to
the costs incurred by big dams on human habitations and the natural environment
as another negative factor. Given our own experience of Tarbela and Mangla,
these reservations are not without merit.
Do these
arguments negate the case for dams? Perhaps not entirely. Pakistan is already engaged
in building smaller dams that do not have the same disadvantages. But even more
important, while not entirely abandoning big dams, Pakistan needs equal if not
greater attention to the manner in which we use our presently available water
resources. Of the total water available, 95 percent is used for agriculture,
with the traditional flood irrigation holding sway. This is wasteful and even,
in some areas, responsible for spreading waterlogging and salinity, which
swallows up thousands of acres of agricultural land every year. Drip and
sprinkler irrigation, combined with the lining of our canals and waterways is
estimated to save water equivalent to two-three times the capacity of the
proposed Kalabagh Dam.
CJP Saqib
Nisar’s resurrecting the Kalabagh Dam project has aroused the usual cast of objectors,
ranging from lower riparian Sindhi nationalists to upper riparian Pashtun
nationalists. They object to the dam for opposite reasons. Sindh complains of
being done out of its water share by upper riparian Punjab over many years. In
fact these complaints date back to colonial times in the 19th
century, when the development of the canal colonies in Punjab diverted the
natural flow of rivers upstream for expanded agricultural purposes. Sindh also
complains of bad faith by Punjab in, for example, converting the seasonal flood
Chashma-Jehlum Link Canal into a perennial one.
To deal with
this permanent quarrel between upper and lower riparian provinces, the then
Nawaz Sharif government achieved a consensus Water Accord in 1991 setting out
the provinces’ respective water shares. The Accord laid down a minimal flow of
10 MAF per year below Kotri pending further studies to examine how much water
flow was required to stave off seawater intrusion in the Indus Delta and along
the coastal areas of Sindh. Unfortunately, those studies were never carried
out. The irrigation bureaucracy has got around the provisional 10 MAF flow
south of Kotri by releasing this amount or even more during the surplus
monsoon/flood season, leaving the Indus bed south of Kotri a sandy waste for
most of the rest of the year. This has had devastating effects in the Indus
Delta and along the Sindh coast. The flora and fauna, marine and other life and
the mangrove forests of the delta have been dealt a grievous blow. Intruding
seawater has ruined the rich agriculture of Badin, Thatta and other areas along
the coast.
Khyber
Pakhtunkhwa’s objection to the Kalabagh Dam is based not on too little but too
much water becoming available. The lake behind the dam, Pashtuns fear, will
drown precious agricultural land (apart from displacing the local populace) and
result in massive waterlogging and salinity in the province with limited
acreage available for agriculture.
Balochistan’s
interests in this matter are linked to Sindh’s, since it receives its share of
the river waters from canals originating in Sindh. The three provincial
Assemblies of Sindh, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Balochistan have unanimously passed
resolutions against the Kalabagh Dam. Though constitutionally not binding,
these resolutions reflect the breadth of opposition to the Kalabagh Dam in
three provinces (Punjab stands out as the exception).
Now if we take
the CPJ’s statement about the application of Article 6 to all those who oppose
the building of dams seriously, not only would former prime minster Khaqan
Abbasi and former leader of the opposition Khursheed Shah be hauled up, the
members of the three provincial Assemblies of the past that passed the resolutions
would also be indicted!
Dams may be
needed. Water management, preventing wastage and rational pricing is needed
even more. But to paint opponents of one or the other dam as traitors is a
stretch too far.
rashed-rahman.blogspot.com
No comments:
Post a Comment