Latest news with #Kishanganga
India Today
2 days ago
- Politics
- India Today
A month into India-Pakistan ceasefire, Uri on LoC declares: ‘Bunkers a necessity now'
Broken walls, shattered windowpanes, damaged rooftops, tattered floor covers, broken utensils, ripped blankets, torn books, hollowed out wardrobes and suitcases—these sum up the scene in shelling-hit Gingal village of Uri in north Kashmir, some 16 km from the Line of Control (LoC) with amidst the ruins of her two-storied home, destroyed in the long-range artillery fire by Pakistan on the night of May 9, 39-year-old Misra Begum is still unable to reconcile with the loss. 'We're homeless now; our valuables of an entire lifetime are gone. My husband is a labourer; how will we build a new one (home)?' says Begum, recounting to INDIA TODAY the family's relentless struggles over the years to put together their over a month now, Begum, her husband and children—13-year-old son and seven-year-old daughter—have been staying at a relative's home nearby. Their devastated home symbolises the carnage caused by long-range shelling in the village of around 750 households between May 8 and 10, when Pakistan responded to India's Operation the vicinity, retired armyman Mohammad Naseer's home has been left with broken windows and holes in the roof. Some 300 metres away, a tw0-storied house has had its left wing, comprising four of the total eight rooms, damaged completely. 'The shelling shook our bodies; it felt like our ears were being torn apart. Had we not gathered in the kitchen, which is on the other side of the house, we would've been dead,' says 38-year-old Zahida Banoo, holding her two children. Her husband works in the Jammu and Kashmir like thousands of others in Uri, had fled her home to safer places when intense shelling by Pakistan wreaked havoc on the villages of Gangil, Lagama, Gharkote, Salamabad, Paranpilla, Bandi, Lagama and Dachi, among others. She returned after spending a week at her sister's home in Baramulla and another at a rented house in which hosts the head office of National Hydroelectric Power Corporation (NHPC), overlooking the 480 MW Uri-I power project on the Jhelum river flowing beneath into Pakistan, was perhaps the worst hit. Some 30-40 artillery shells, as per locals, landed in the village. Four homes were completely damaged and another 87 partially. The highly-guarded NHPC office, spanning over six acres, was also hit by shells—the damages caused to its residential buildings.'Windowpanes broke. There was fear all over; we hid inside bunkers,' informs E. Srinivas, deputy general manager at the NHPC installations near the LoC were put on high alert during the India-Pakistan offensive, owing to a potential threat from Islamabad in the backdrop of New Delhi suspending the Indus Waters Treaty after the terror attack in Pahalgam on April though, says Uri-I, the 240 MW Uri-II and 330 MW Kishanganga projects were fully secured and power generation was Naseer, a 33-year-old woman, shudders at the mention of 'war'. The four-day horror, May 7 to May 10, has left her with nightmares. She blames the media for the war hysteria at the cost of people's lives. 'Take us out of Uri and engage in the war, as much as you can. It looks easy from inside newsrooms; if you've the guts, exchange places with us,' she says, fighting been a month since the post-Operation Sindoor ceasefire with Pakistan, yet the residents of Uri grapple with fear and uncertainty. In recent years, the border villages here have had travellers trooping in, thanks to the tourism push by the government. Now, it has all come to a standstill.'The bullet has no eye to distinguish or differentiate. The deadly shells have damaged our buildings and left us all with lifelong trauma. We have lost sleep,' says Hafiz Zahid Hussain, a Bihar-origin moulvi at Gingal's mosque for the past 32 recall past wars between India and Pakistan, but say the use of long-range artillery this time and the damage it caused is unprecedented. According to an official assessment by the district administration of Baramulla, Uri tehsil suffered damage to 513 buildings—60 homes and five cowsheds were razed to the ground while 436 homes and 12 cowsheds were partially Karnah, in north Kashmir's Kupwara, over 100 buildings were damaged. Overall, in Jammu and Kashmir, Poonch in Jammu suffered the most, with thousands of structures reported to have been damaged. Of the 21 lives lost, 16 were in Poonch conflict has also triggered a bunker crisis in the border areas. Except for a few places like Salamabad and Gharkote, the villages in Uri are largely without bunkers, making them vulnerable to Ali, a resident of Paranpilla village, plans to construct a bunker in his farmland by taking advantage of its terraced design. 'We'll dig through the height of this land from tomorrow and concretise the hole, followed by cementing,' says Ali, sitting in his farmland by a flowing serenity of the surroundings belies the complexity of the situation. 'Bunkers are a necessity now,' decides to India Today Magazine
New Indian Express
30-04-2025
- Politics
- New Indian Express
Rivers that connect and divide
For over six decades, the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) has been hailed as a triumph of diplomacy and resilience—surviving wars, terrorism, and deep political hostility between India and Pakistan. Brokered by the World Bank and signed in 1960, the treaty allocated control of the eastern rivers of the Indus system (Ravi, Beas, Sutlej) to India and the western rivers (Indus, Jhelum, Chenab) to Pakistan, while permitting limited Indian use of the western rivers for non-consumptive purposes such as hydroelectric generation, navigation and irrigation. The original intent of the treaty was to reduce friction over vital water resources, enabling peaceful coexistence. However, Pakistan was the first to use the treaty less as a means of cooperation, and more as a tool of obstruction and diplomatic warfare. Repeated challenges to India's legitimate hydroelectric projects—such as Kishanganga and Ratle—have been filed at international forums, causing delays, inflating project costs, and undermining India's development agenda, particularly in Jammu and Kashmir. Further, Pakistan's simultaneous pursuit of neutral expert intervention and appeals to the Court of Arbitration violated the graded dispute resolution mechanism explicitly outlined in the treaty. Such actions not only breach procedural integrity, but also reveal Islamabad's tactic of leveraging the treaty as a political instrument rather than honoring it as a mechanism for peaceful resolution As the upper riparian, India could have modulated Pakistan's water availability right after 1965 and certainly after the 1971 war, putting economic and political pressure on Islamabad. As a responsible nation taking a humane stance, India did not exercise this option despite the extreme events. However, this stance could not last forever. Based on Pakistan's own patterns of using IWT as a strategic tool, India has increasingly signaled its use of the treaty as a lever to pressure Pakistan to cease cross-border terrorism and other destabilising activities. After the 2016 Uri attack and the 2019 Pulwama attack, the Indian leadership and think tanks discussed re-evaluating the IWT. In January 2023, India issued a notice to Pakistan seeking modification of the treaty under Article XII. Post the inhuman targeting of unarmed civilians at Pahalgam, India's move to suspend the IWT is a logical next step in the country's long-term interest. It is aligned with its broader foreign policy doctrine that demands reciprocity in international arrangements. The precipitate action marks an important shift in India's strategic posture: moving from passive tolerance to active rebalancing. India will move to maximise the use of eastern rivers and expedite hydropower projects on the western rivers as part of a strategy to impose indirect, but significant, strategic costs on Pakistan without crossing into open military conflict. The economic and social consequences would be severe for Pakistan. Over 80 percent of Pakistan's irrigated land depends on waters from the Indus system. The economies of Punjab and Sindh, Pakistan's agricultural heartlands, rely almost entirely on the consistent flow of these rivers for crops like wheat, rice, sugarcane and cotton. Any disruption would likely precipitate acute food insecurity, a sharp decline in agricultural exports such as basmati rice and mangoes, and energy shortages, given that hydropower constitutes 25-30 percent of Pakistan's electricity generation. The stresses would ripple across Pakistan's economy, exacerbating inflation, widening the current account deficit, and fostering social unrest, particularly in already fragile provinces like Sindh and Balochistan. In short, Pakistan's water, food and energy securities are intricately tied to the continued functioning of the IWT, making Islamabad significantly vulnerable. Should India stay the course, Pakistan would undoubtedly mount a vigorous international response. It could appeal to the World Bank, the treaty's guarantor, or invoke international water norms by approaching the International Court of Justice. Islamabad would likely raise the issue in the UN General Assembly and Human Rights Council, alleging humanitarian violations, and galvanise diplomatic support from friendly nations such as China and Turkey. A parallel global media campaign could portray India's actions as an aggression against a vulnerable population's right to water. However, while these actions might generate diplomatic noise, they would not easily compel India to reverse course, especially if New Delhi remains within the legal limits of permissible action under the treaty. There is a large scope of actions that India can take to decrease the current water flows, while remaining compliant with the otherwise suspended treaty, India's signaling of potential suspension is not merely an act of retaliation. It reflects a broader assertiveness in India's foreign policy—a willingness to revisit outdated arrangements where strategic asymmetries have grown too wide. While the signal from India is clear, the country will act with a sense of responsibility as a major Asian power that shares other multi-country riparian river systems like the Brahmaputra and the Ganga. India's optimal strategy lies in maximal legal utilisation of its entitlements under the treaty. New Delhi must expedite all permissible run-of-the-river hydroelectric projects, fully use its share of the eastern river waters, build storage structures within treaty limits, and simultaneously engage in proactive diplomacy to frame its actions globally as a rightful rebalancing. The global narrative must be shifted to equity, adaptation to climate realities, and modernisation of a treaty that is outdated, and was misused by Pakistan as strategic leverage. The IWT was a product of its time—an ingenious solution for a newly-partitioned subcontinent facing immense political and humanitarian upheaval. Yet, today's realities—geopolitical, climatic and strategic—demand fresh approaches. India's recent moves, while called aggressive in some quarters, represent a necessary and prudent recalibration driven by imperatives of national security, economic development, and environmental stewardship. Ultimately, the water of the Indus will continue to flow—but whether they will symbolise cooperation or conflict depends on Pakistan's willingness to shed the ghosts of the past, and engage with India in light of the realities of today, for the sake of a better tomorrow. (Views are personal) Davinder Sandhu Co-founder and Chair at Primus Partners; former advisor to World Bank Executive Director for India, and Director, Prime Minister's Office
India Today
29-04-2025
- Politics
- India Today
Battle Cry: Pakistan Panics As India Holds Indus Waters Treaty
8:17 India has announced holding the Indus Waters Treaty in abeyance, issuing an ultimatum to Pakistan to stop terrorism. Pakistan is panicking, fearing water scarcity. The move doesn't mean blocking water flow, but cooperation under the treaty is on hold. India retains rights to work on projects like Kishanganga and Ratle. Pakistan's claim of this being an 'act of war' is seen as saber-rattling, as India has repeatedly warned Pakistan since the Uri and Pulwama attacks.
News18
26-04-2025
- Politics
- News18
Post-Indus Treaty Era Begins: How India Plans to Use Kishanganga, Ratle And Pakal Dul As Geostrategic Tools
The combined hydrological effect of these projects gives India a strong geopolitical signaling and strategic calculus to corner Pakistan in the aftermath of Pahalgam Putting the Indus Waters Treaty in cold storage gives India the opportunity to fast-track and leverage its hydroelectric projects like Kishanganga, Ratle and Pakal Dul in Jammu and Kashmir, and not use them just as energy initiatives but also as levers of strategic pressure. Pakistan is clearly rattled, and worried. The Pakistan government has termed the move an 'act of war', while PPP leader Bilawal Bhutto has threatened that 'either our water or their (India's) blood will flow in the Sindhu (Indus)". Top government sources say the psychological impact of India's move is hence already showing, with Pakistan political class under pressure from their population on the impending implication of water flow of western rivers being regulated by India. For a start, India now need not bother about Pakistan's objections on interactional forums to the Kishanganga, Ratle and Pakal Dul hydroelectric projects. The combined hydrological effect of these projects gives India a strong geopolitical signaling and strategic calculus to corner Pakistan. The Pakistan-sponsored terror strike on civilians in Pahalgam has changed the rules of the game with India making Pakistan civilians pay for the misadventures of their Army. India had already diverted water from the Jhelum via a 23 km tunnel through the Kishanganga Project that was inaugurated by PM Narendra Modi in 2018 in Bandipora. On the same day, Modi laid the foundation stone of the Pakal Dul Power Project, the largest hydro power project in J&K with 1000 MW capacity, and J&K's first storage project. The Pakul Dul at 167 m of height gives India the element of actual control of water, not just usage. It will be ready by mid-2026. The other big bother for Pakistan is the 850 MW Ratle Hydro Electric Project in Jammu & Kashmir, especially since last year when a major milestone has been achieved here with the diversion of Chenab river through diversion tunnels at Drabshalla in Kishtwar district. The river diversion has enabled isolation of dam area at river bed for starting the critical activity of excavation and construction of the dam. India can now proceed with the dam despite Pakistan's design objections related to the spillway height and drawdown levels of the project. Modi government approved the Ratle project in 2021 at Rs 5,282 crore. The last time that India and Pakistan teams had met for annual Indus Water Treaty talks was last year in June when a Pakistani delegation travelled to India and visited Kishtwar to see various dam sites. Pakistan continued to object to the Kishanganga, Ratle and Pakal Dul hydroelectric plants by India, saying that it violates the provisions of the treaty. But the Indus Waters Treaty, signed between then Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru and former Pakistan President Ayub Khan in 1960 with the World Bank as a signatory to the pact, is now history.
Time of India
25-04-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
India mulls Indus Waters Treaty dispute exit, seeks legal view
India, having announced the suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), is now seeking legal counsel on exiting the ongoing World Bank-mediated dispute resolution process over the Kishanganga and Ratle hydroelectric projects in Jammu & Kashmir, ET has learnt. #Pahalgam Terrorist Attack India pulled the plug on IWT when Pakistanis are fighting over water What makes this India-Pakistan standoff more dangerous than past ones The problem of Pakistan couldn't have come at a worse time for D-St According to sources, the Ministry of Jal Shakti has approached the Attorney General of India to explore legal mechanisms and options that would allow India to exit the resolution framework under the 1960 treaty, brokered by the World Bank. A key question under consideration is whether India needs to formally notify the World Bank of its decision to suspend the IWT, or if communicating the decision solely to the 'Neutral Expert'-who is currently examining the India-Pakistan dispute-would suffice. Since this is the only active IWT dispute resolution process, and the primary trigger behind India's call to revise the treaty, New Delhi may opt to notify just the Neutral Expert. Such a move would effectively halt the ongoing Kishanganga-Ratle mechanism and place the IWT in a state of suspension. Neutral Expert: Michel Lino The Neutral Expert in question is Michel Lino, President of the International Commission on Large Dams (ICOLD). He was appointed by the World Bank in 2022 under Article IX and Annexure F of the IWT, following objections raised by Pakistan over India's 330 MW Kishanganga project on the Jhelum in Gurez valley and the 850 MW Ratle project on the Chenab. Lino conducted multiple meetings and site visits over two years, and in January 2025, declared he was "competent" to adjudicate the dispute-an outcome welcomed by India. However, with India now aiming to exit the process, the Neutral Expert mechanism may also be paused, despite India already responding to Pakistan's queries, with no new objections raised by Islamabad since. India Cites 'Fundamental Change' Clause India has started invoking international legal doctrines to justify its position. In a letter sent on April 24 to Pakistan, India cited a "fundamental change of circumstances" as the basis for suspending the IWT. This argument leans on the principle of rebus sic stantibus under Article 62 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, which allows a country to withdraw from a treaty due to unforeseen, fundamental changes. Water Resources Secretary Debashree Mukherjee's communication to her Pakistani counterpart, Syed Ali Murtaza, emphasized that India has repeatedly requested modifications to the IWT in light of significant demographic shifts, clean energy needs, and other altered assumptions underlying water sharing under the treaty. Treaty Structure and Points of Contention Since 2022, India has formally sought renegotiation of the IWT, triggered by the World Bank's handling of the Kishanganga-Ratle dispute. Article IX of the IWT lays out a multi-tiered resolution system-starting with the Permanent Indus Waters Commission, escalating to a Neutral Expert, and finally, a Court of Arbitration.
