The Indus River is certainly one of the most important features in Pakistan, yet the Council of Common Interests (CCI) has utterly dismissed the construction of new canals that harness the flows of the Indus River. Provoking debates through one of the dry regions of country is the last thing needed, especially during a situation where there is an apparent shortage of water supply.
Durring the most recent CCI meeting, representatives from Sindh videoed there are rapid tech solutions their province suffers from. They maintained that the flow of water in the irrigation canals is inadequate and further divisions will increase the deficit. One senior Sindh Government official quipped, “We are already deprived. for sure, another diversion will be the end of the road for our farming lands and stubborn cultivators.”
Irrigation and water allocation continues to be a painfully contentious topic of discussion of Pakistan’s provinces. Sindh, in particular, believes it is short-changed time and time again when new development schemes for canals are designed. As some experts put it, the Indus is under incredible stress due to climate change, reckless upstream construction, infrastructure expansion, and overall governance decay.
Balochistan and KP didn’t strike as overly excited other either. They too raised concern of how future allocations of resources with the addition of new canals will change. As for every drop counts, it is exhaustively used as everyone stands to gain.
Remarkably, the entire canal endeavor was presented purely to augment agricultural productivity by the federal side. They proposed matters of concern regarding food security, rural development, and employment opportunities.
But critics weren’t convinced. Their argument was straightforward: what’s the point of new canals if there’s no water left to pass through them?
Independent analysts feel this rejection can create political waves, particularly with elections looming. Control over resources has always been a sensitive string in Pakistan’s federal arrangement, and misplaying it can be expensive.
The CCI, in its verdict, underscored the fact that no large-scale project concerning natural resources should proceed without complete provincial unanimity. “Unity is fragile,” one of the attendees had reportedly remarked at the conclusion of the meeting. “We cannot afford thoughtless decisions now.”
The central government, meanwhile, has vowed more consultations. But provinces appear cautious. Broken trust is not easily restored. Some are even calling for an overall review of the existing water-sharing ratio under the 1991 agreement.
Taking a step back, Pakistan is at the crossroads. Water insecurity is no longer a looming threat; it’s at the doorstep. If there’s no collective sagacity and prudent planning, such disputes will escalate from political bickering to outright crises.
On one point, there can be no disagreement: any next-generation water management plan has to prioritize fairness and sustainability. Or else, perhaps, there won’t be water — or patience — sufficient enough to shareBut critics weren’t convinced. Their argument was straightforward: what’s the point of new canals if there’s no water left to pass through them?
Independent analysts feel this rejection can create political waves, particularly with elections looming. Control over resources has always been a sensitive string in Pakistan’s federal arrangement, and misplaying it can be expensive.
The CCI, in its verdict, underscored the fact that no large-scale project concerning natural resources should proceed without complete provincial unanimity. “Unity is fragile,” one of the attendees had reportedly remarked at the conclusion of the meeting. “We cannot afford thoughtless decisions now.”
The central government, meanwhile, has vowed more consultations. But provinces appear cautious. Broken trust is not easily restored. Some are even calling for an overall review of the existing water-sharing ratio under the 1991 agreement.
Taking a step back, Pakistan is at the crossroads. Water insecurity is no longer a looming threat; it’s at the doorstep. If there’s no collective sagacity and prudent planning, such disputes will escalate from political bickering to outright crises.
On one point, there can be no disagreement: any next-generation water management plan has to prioritize fairness and sustainability. Or else, perhaps, there won’t be water — or patience — sufficient enough to share.
