Subject: Bilateral Relations

PYQ Relevance:Q) Present an account of the Indus Water Treaty and examine its ecological, economic and political implications in the context of changing bilateral relations. (UPSC CSE 2016) Q) With reference to the Indus river system, of the following four rivers, three of them pour into one of them which join the Indus direct. Among the following, which one is such river that joins the Indus direct? ​(UPSC CSE 2021) a) Chenab ​b) Jhelum ​c) Ravi ​ d) Sutlej

Mentor’s Comment: The Indus Water Treaty was signed in 1960 after extensive negotiations facilitated by the World Bank. It has successfully governed water sharing between India and Pakistan for over six decades, surviving numerous conflicts between the two nations.

The IWT has survived multiple conflicts between India and Pakistan, including three wars and ongoing military tensions. Pakistan has consistently raised objections to hydropower projects initiated by India, particularly the Kishanganga and Ratle river developments, claiming they violate the treaty’s provisions.

However, recent tensions have prompted India to reconsider its obligations under this long-standing agreement. Today’s editorial discusses several critical aspects related to India’s recent formal notice to Pakistan regarding the treaty.

_

Let’s learn!

Why in the News?

Indian Government has issued a formal notice to Pakistan requesting modifications to the Indus Water Treaty, citing “fundamental and unforeseen changes“.

Overview of the IWT and Recent Developments: The Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), signed in 1960 between India and Pakistan, governs the allocation and management of water resources from the Indus River system. This treaty allows India unrestricted use of the eastern rivers (Sutlej, Beas, and Ravi) while allocating the western rivers (Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab) primarily to Pakistan. However, recent tensions have prompted India to formally request modifications to the treaty, raising significant geopolitical implications.

What prompted India to seek modifications to the Indus Waters Treaty?

• Demographic Changes: Increasing population pressures necessitate greater water resource management.
• Environmental Issues: The need for sustainable practices and clean energy development to meet emission targets.
• Security Concerns: The impact of persistent cross-border terrorism on water management and treaty implementation.
• Disputes over Hydropower Projects: Tensions have arisen over India’s hydroelectric projects on rivers like Kishanganga and Ratle, which Pakistan claims violate the treaty. India believes these projects comply with the agreement.
• Perceived Imbalance: India feels the treaty disproportionately favors Pakistan, which receives about 80% of the Indus river system’s water, while India manages only 20%. This perceived imbalance has led to calls for a fairer distribution of resources.

How does the proposed modification process work under the treaty?

India has issued a formal notice to Pakistan that requires a reassessment of the treaty’s obligations as follows:

• According to Article XII (3), any modifications to the treaty must be made through a duly ratified treaty concluded between the two governments.
• Once a formal notice is issued, Pakistan has a specified period (typically three months) to respond to the request for renegotiation. The outcome of this response will determine the next steps in the modification process.
• If Pakistan agrees to negotiate, both countries will enter discussions aimed at revising the treaty. This process is expected to address various concerns raised by India, including demographic changes, environmental issues, and security threats.
• If Pakistan does not accept India’s proposal for modification, India retains the option to call for the termination of the treaty, although this would likely escalate tensions further.

The IWT also includes a graded Dispute Resolution Mechanism, which operates at three levels: Level 1: Initial discussions occur at the level of the Permanent Indus Commission (PIC), where both parties can clarify any questions regarding planned projects. Level 2: If differences remain unresolved, they escalate to involve a Neutral Expert, who provides technical advice. Level 3: Finally, if disputes persist, they can be taken to a Court of Arbitration for binding resolution.

What implications could this modification have for India-Pakistan relations?

• Diplomatic Strain and Increased Tensions: Pakistan may view India’s request as a threat to its water rights, leading to escalated tensions and potential conflicts over water resources.
  • The process of negotiating modifications could be challenging due to historical mistrust, making it hard for both countries to reach a consensus.
• Water Scarcity Concerns: Modifying the treaty could either improve or worsen water security for both nations. Pakistan, which relies heavily on the Indus system, may feel particularly vulnerable, increasing the risk of conflict.
• Geopolitical Ramifications: Changes to the treaty might destabilize the region, potentially leading to increased militarization or conflict, especially given both countries’ nuclear capabilities.
• International Involvement: The World Bank and other international bodies may need to intervene if negotiations fail, complicating the situation and potentially drawing in other regional powers.

Way Forward: India’s request for modifications to the Indus Waters Treaty signals a significant shift in its approach to water resource management with Pakistan. As both countries face mounting pressures from changing demographics, environmental challenges, and security concerns, the future of this treaty may hinge on their willingness to engage in constructive dialogue and negotiate terms that reflect current realities.

https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/what-is-indus-waters-treaty-between-india-pakistan/article65075002.ece

PYQ Relevance: Q) What do you understand by ‘The String of Pearls’? How does it impact India? Briefly outline the steps taken by India to counter this. (UPSC CSE 2013) Q) Explain the formation of thousands of islands in the Indonesian and Philippines archipelagos. (UPSC CSE 2014) Q) Project ‘Mausam’ is considered a unique foreign policy initiative of the Indian government to improve relationships with its neighbors. Does the project have a strategic dimension? Discuss (UPSC CSE 2015) Q) Why is India considered as a subcontinent? Elaborate your answer. (UPSC CSE 2021)

Mentor’s Comment: The Chagos Archipelago consists of 58 islands and is located approximately 500 km south of the Maldives in the Indian Ocean.  The French were the first to colonize Mauritius along with the Chagos Islands in 1715.  In the late 18th century, the French brought in slave labor from Africa and India to work in newly established coconut plantations. However, the UK took control of the region in 1814 after the fall of France’s Napoleon Bonaparte.  

Today’s editorial by Mohamed Nasheed emphasizes the importance of the United Kingdom’s approach to its colonial legacy in the Indian Ocean, particularly concerning the Chagos Archipelago. It highlights the need for sustainable marine conservation and collaborative governance as Britain prepares to relinquish control over these islands.

_

Let’s learn!

Why in the News?

On October 9, 2024, the UK agreed to cede sovereignty of the Chagos Archipelago to Mauritius, while retaining sovereign rights over Diego Garcia for military purposes. The deal is historic as it recognizes Mauritius’s claims over the archipelago, which has been contested since the 1980s.

Historical background of Chagos Archipelago:

• Historically, these islands were part of the Maldives until their detachment by the UK in 1965 to establish the British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT).
• This move was made to facilitate a military base for the United States on Diego Garcia, leading to the expulsion of the indigenous Chagossians.
• The ICJ had previously ruled in 2019 that the UK’s detachment of Chagos from Mauritius was illegal and called for an end to British colonial administration in the area.
• This ruling added pressure on the UK to negotiate a resolution with Mauritius

Key highlights of the agreement:

• Resettlement of Chagossians: Mauritius can now resettle people on the Chagos Archipelago, except Diego Garcia, where Britain evicted 2,000 islanders for a US naval base. The deal grants Mauritius full sovereignty over the archipelago except Diego Garcia island. 
• Establishment of the Trust Fund: The UK has also promised to create a new trust fund for the benefit of the people of Chagos. 

Other major Initiatives taken and Collaborations needed:

• Sovereignty and Decolonization: The sovereignty of the Chagos Islands has been a contentious issue, with historical ties to both Mauritius and the Maldives.
  • The UK has agreed to transfer sovereignty of the Chagos Islands to Mauritius while securing military rights over Diego Garcia for an initial period of 99 years.
• Marine Conservation Efforts: Britain’s decision to place the entire Chagos Archipelago under protected status, emphasizing its significance for marine conservation is commendable.
  • The Maldives employs sustainable fishing techniques that minimize bycatch, contrasting with industrial fishing practices that threaten fish stocks.
• Collaborative Future: As part of the decolonization process, it is crucial for island nations in the Indian Ocean—Maldives, Mauritius, Seychelles, and Sri Lanka—to collaborate on maintaining the protected status of Chagos.
  • Britain needs to learn from its past mistakes in decolonization, particularly regarding India’s Partition in 1947, which had severe human costs.

How did the historical conflicts between the UK and France influence the sovereignty of the Chagos Islands?

• The Chagos Islands were initially part of French colonial territory, known as Isle de France, where they established coconut plantations using enslaved African labor in the 18th century.
• Following the defeat of Napoleon in 1814, the Treaty of Paris ceded Mauritius and its dependencies, including the Chagos Islands, to Britain. This marked the beginning of British administration over these territories.

• In 1965, during preparations for Mauritian independence, the UK separated the Chagos Archipelago from Mauritius to create the British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT). This move was motivated by strategic interests, particularly to establish a military base on Diego Garcia.
• The UK forcibly removed the indigenous Chagossians to facilitate military operations, which has been condemned as a violation of human rights.
• Despite the ICJ decision, pressure, and legal challenges, the UK maintained its claims over the islands due to their strategic military importance, particularly Diego Garcia.

Conclusion: A respectful and collaborative exit strategy is needed for the UK from its Indian Ocean territories. It advocates for joint efforts among regional nations to ensure that marine conservation is prioritized while addressing historical grievances related to colonialism.