Indus Water Treaty: Discussion, News & Updates

[M. Sarmad]

It's flow becomes 3+ MAF during 4 months of summer glacier melting + monsoon flood season. Tunnel can drain more than 1 MAF in 4 months of May-Aug alone.

Again, that’s peak flow confusion... "3+ MAF in 4 months" is flood-season volume, not usable, divertible supply... Rivers don't run as harvestable tanks...

Turning that into " over 1 MAF can be drained" assumes near continuous max diversion with no sediment, safety, or ecological limits....something no real Himalayan diversion system operates at.

 

[M. Sarmad]

As for Indus water treaty, it's not the same anymore. With the capability to store or to divert partially increases over Time , Pakistan will receive less water accordingly, it's a long process and it will be gradual , you will not even realise it and will get used to less water.

"If wishes were horses, Tejas would fly"

If gradual "silent reduction" of a treaty bound river system were that easy, it would've already rewritten hydrology textbooks....

Nice theory though... just not how physics, storage limits, or the Indus system actually work...

 

[GatlingGunZ]

That is still textbook conversion, not irrigation reality.... "2 MAF = 1.5 million acres wheat deprived" assumes water is uniformly available, perfectly deliverable, and fully efficient at farm level, none of which is true in the Indus system...

Crop water demand is not met from a single source.... it’s a mix of canal supply, rainfall, losses, and groundwater... So there is no direct "missing MAF = missing acres" linear equation....

And pushing it further to "even more via borewells" just shifts the argument again, from river allocation to groundwater depletion, without changing the basic point..... : water systems don't translate into clean acreage arithmetic...

Oh indeed, it will not have arithmetic effect but compounding multiplier effect. Drying aquifers, small farmers dependent on canals taking debts for gensets and borewells. Or opting out of particular crop seaons.

Again, that’s peak flow confusion... "3+ MAF in 4 months" is flood-season volume, not usable, divertible supply... Rivers don't run as harvestable tanks...

Turning that into " over 1 MAF can be drained" assumes near continuous max diversion with no sediment, safety, or ecological limits....something no real Himalayan diversion system operates at.

Oh no.. silting..
not something a desilting basin can't solve. It's already included in the project.

Tunnel max capacity is 3.3MAF means 1.1 MAF for 4 months. It has desilting basin ahead of the tunnel, so 0.8-0.9 MAF can be extracted inspite of losses during desilting process

 

[Big_Strong_Brother_India]

Pakistan has always behaved as a petty & bad faith actor, exploiting every available mechanism to obstruct and delay Indian projects even on waters that are unambiguously India's under the Indus Waters treaty...... Rather than honoring the spirit of cooperation as enshrined in IWT, it has repeatedly resorted to procedural roadblocks and obstructionist tactics to undermine India's legitimate rights over it's own waters. Whole moto of Pakistan is damage India anyway possible. The real deeper reason why Pakistan has repeatedly behave this way is well understood by Indian establishment. It may have taken India longer than to recognize & respond to this patterns, but as the saying goes, "Der aaye, durust aaye." The days of endless concessions and one sided generosity are over. No more free lunches or in this case, free water for Pakistan going forward.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Indus Waters Treaty: Asymmetric obligations, unequal concessions and Pakistan’s weaponisation (Part 1) — P.K Saxena

MAY 9 — The Indus River System comprises six major rivers — the Indus, Chenab, Jhelum, Ravi, Beas and Sutlej — flowing through the territories of both India and Pakistan....

www.malaymail.com

 

[M. Sarmad]

indeed, it will not have arithmetic effect ..

Good, you finally understand this basic point...

Tunnel max capacity is 3.3MAF means 1.1 MAF for 4 months. It has desilting basin ahead of the tunnel, so 0.8-0.9 MAF can be extracted inspite of losses during desilting process

First, where exactly is this "3.3 MAF tunnel capacity” coming from? ... There is no publicly verified design discharge or even confirmed tunnel specification to justify turning it into precise MAF claims...

Everything after that is assumption stacked on assumption...

Second, converting any annual number into neat monthly extraction ignores basic hydrology....glacial rivers are highly seasonal, not evenly divisible flows...

Third, "desilting basin solves it" isn’t a switch you turn on... sediment loads are variable and operational limits still cap continuous diversion...


In short, it’s not engineering reality, just stacked assumptions presented as precision...

That’s not hydrology, it’s spreadsheet logic imposed on a chaotic river system.