A full-fledged cost benefit analysis will follow the feasibility studies and detailed project reports. It is, however, claimed that phenomenal economic and socio cultural benefits will accrue, like:

There are sceptics who doubt the viability of the scheme or even the seriousness on the part of India. They suspect that it was an election stunt and will not go beyond the laying of foundation stone. With the new government in place one has not heard of it so loudly. 24 years after the project emerged on the public scene, it is nowhere near completion. But there are those who are afraid of India's seriousness. Once the government conducts studies, like it did on the Kalabagh Dam in Pakistan, without involving the stakeholders in a discussion, then a vested interest is created in going ahead with its execution. Narmada is another example of the same approach. Consequently, the dam is still incomplete.

The question remains whether there is enough water to sustain the idea. Except for the Brahmaputra basin in the northeast, there is no surplus water anywhere. The scheme is predicated on the assumption that there is surplus water in the rivers that could be diverted to the deficit rivers. Dr Ainun Nishat, Country representative of IUCN in Bangladesh, in his brilliant exposition at the August Conference in 2004, brought out -- with the help of data -- that dry deltas in Bangladesh bring forth (very poignantly) an affirmation of the claim by the critics of the proposal that not much water is left to flow into the sea. Those who are building a super-structure over a pipe dream either do not understand or have a sinister agenda hidden from public view.

The receding snow lines of the Himalayas are another development which cannot be overlooked. The glacier mass showed a negative trend since the middle of the last century, signalling a sharp reduction in flow into the rivers in the next 30 years. Himalayan glaciers could disappear by the year 2035 according to some researchers. There is no scientific database on climate pattern and discharge pattern in the Himalayas. Pakistan is facing its gravest crisis with its existing dams almost empty and its present and future crops in jeopardy. In-depth studies of glacier hydrology is in order. The claim that water flows into the sea is no longer true. India has highly uneven water availability. In Pakistan and India diversions on the mighty Indus and its tributaries have reduced water outflows into the sea by 80 per cent; destroying deltaic mangroves that once stretched over 250,000 hectares and were spawning grounds for coastal fisheries. In Philippines, rights to environment have been included as fundamental rights.

Engineering a geo-morphologic feature changes both the object and the process and thus triggers a chain of developments that persist long after the intervention is over. The system takes its own time to settle into a new equilibrium. This on a generational time scale is much longer than the executive decisions. The natural level of all water on earth being the sea, the river -- unlike a canal -- augments its flow along its path. Such a project will invite the Law of Unintended Consequences. Moreover the project will involve submergence of forestland, habitations and wild life. How good is the prevailing use of irrigation water? 70 per cent of river water is wasted before its delivery into the fields. High intensity use for sugar cane and rice further compounds the problem. The region faces floods and droughts at the same time.

Obtaining the consent of the states within the Union of India will prove an almost insurmountable hurdle. The states have full authority over water and yet the Centre can intervene by taking steps to interfere with their plans for use of the water. Ironically the states where the rivers are located are the most undeveloped parts of the country. East Punjab followed Kerala in opposing the project. Punjab and Haryana are still fighting over the Sutlej water. The annual discharge of the system is 1350 billion cubic meters with a total drainage area of 1.75 million sq. kms Brahmaputara contributes 700 BCM, Ganges 500 and Meghna 150.

Tamil Nadu supports the project completely, whereas Andhra Pradesh supports it conditionally. Tamil Nadu has already completed the Mekkara Dam, which is to be used in the proposed link even though Kerala is opposed to the project. Kerala Legislative Assembly has passed a unanimous resolution against the link on August 6, 2003. Gujarat has objections because Daman Ganga-Pinjal River Linking Project, one of the 30 interstate projects, located in Gujarat will be adversely affected. There are two out of thirty proposals that fall in Gujarat.

West Bengal is worried. It is demanding adequate funds from the centre to combat post Farakka problem causing floods and erosion. Assam is opposed to the project and is of the view that while remaining within the constitution, the Centre must evolve a consensus of the states. A board or an ordinary bill in parliament cannot supersede the constitutional provisions. One opinion suggests that Bihar should not oppose linking of Brahmaputra because there is sufficient water to meet the needs of the south. However, Nepal will have to be excluded from the plans. Bihar, after spending over Rs.19b on flood control in the flood prone area, is worse off with floods affecting almost three times the area (from 2.5m hectares to 6.9m). Bihar also fears that India will reap benefits at its cost.

Bringing the countries of the region, particularly Bangladesh, on board may be far more difficult for India, especially after the India-Bangladesh Treaty of December 1996 on the sharing of the Ganges waters. Farakka Barrage, completed in 1975, has been a significant source of friction between India and Bangladesh, much before the latter's creation. The Barrage allows India to divert the Ganges water into Hoogly River through a feeder canal. A decline of 51 per cent flow of water is claimed to have been experienced by Bangladesh after Farakka. Under an ad-hoc arrangement reached in 1983, pending scientific studies, 39 per cent of the dry season flow was to be allocated to India, 36 per cent to Bangladesh and the remaining to continue to be unallocated.

The 1996 Treaty protects the flows at Farakka and any storage upstream of Farakka will be in breach of that Treaty. Ganges and Brahmapatra are international waters and their historic use cannot be overlooked. Para 3 of the Preamble of the Treaty requires the two countries to make optimum utilisation of the water resources of their region for the mutual benefits of the people of the two countries. Article IX of the Treaty enshrines the principle -- 'Guided by the principles of equity, fairness and no harm to either party both the Governments agreed to conclude water sharing Treaties/Agreements with regard to other common rivers'.

According to Bangladesh, its share in Farakka is fixed at 35,000 cusecs, if availability of water is 75,000 cusecs. In case water exceeds, India will get 40,000 cusecs and Bangladesh the balance. The water sharing arrangement was to be reviewed by the two governments at five years interval or earlier, but so far no such review has taken place. Bangladesh took up the issue of the interlinking project at the Joint River Commission. According to Mr. Hafiz Uddin Ahmad, Bangladesh Minister for Water Resources, India was reluctant even to discuss it, calling it outside the scope of the Joint River Commission (JRC). Bangladesh persisted and the discussion continued for 13 hours, but at the end of the day it was not even minuted. The marathon discussion was dismissed in a single line signifying, nothing. However, there may be some meeting of minds with the new government in place in New Delhi.

There are alternatives available to the proposed millennium folly such as decentralised water harvesting, non-conventional energy sources and conservation strategies. A former Indian Prime Minister, while addressing state irrigation ministers in 1986, had this to say: 'Since 1951, 246 big surface irrigation project(s) have been initiated. Only 66 out of these have been completed. 181 are still under construction. For 16 years, we have poured out money. The people have got nothing back, no irrigation, no water, no increase in production, no help in their daily life'. The river linking project is in fact a river privatisation project. Projects that have already been planned or executed are being shown as new projects under the scheme. India seems to be re-making its geography so that water flows where it previously never did.

There is need for a regional treaty that forces each country to honour its ecological obligations towards the great oceans. The combined population of the region is about 600 million. If India thinks that it can exploit its upper riparian position and its size, China, which has reportedly drawn its own plans to divert rivers originating in Tibet -- including Brahmaputra, may follow suit. While India plans to complete the project by the year 2013, China plans to do so by 2009. An estimated 90 per cent of the Tibetan rivers flow downstream to India, Bangladesh, Nepal and Bhutan. Both India and Bangladesh are at the mercy of China which could for its own interest withhold water for irrigation and power during dry season and release water during the flood season. Bangladesh experts brought the issue to the attention of Indian journalists.

All the rivers flow into the Bay of Bengal. All these countries have abiding interest in the sustainability of the system in order to ensure livelihood of people, who depend on agriculture as well as to protect ecology, environment and wild life for present or future collaboration necessary to evolve common goal of survival. Ganges is reported to be the most polluted river. The effort is not going to be easy but each country has to be prepared to make sacrifices and suffer the perceived loss involved in an agreement. Equity and understanding of the other's point of view are crucial to any settlement, tentative or permanent.

Another option is that a public interest petition is filed by any concerned citizen of India requesting review of Supreme Court order, which may possibly review its own order suo moto in the region's interest. There are other hurdles that India must cross before establishing feasibility such as:

There is also the role of international law and treaties. United Nations Convention on the Law of Non-Navigational Uses of International Watercourses, although not ratified, could provide a basis to proceed. The Convention was adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations in 1997. Watercourse has been defined as a system of surface waters and ground waters forming a unitary whole and normally flowing into a common terminus. The Convention was based on the principles and recommendations adopted by the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development of 1992 in the Rio Declaration and Agenda 21. It expressed the conviction that a framework Convention will ensure the utilisation, development, conservation, management and protection of international watercourses and the promotion of the optimal and sustainable utilisation thereof for present and future generations.

Nothing in the Convention shall affect the rights or obligation of the Watercourse state arising from agreements in force on the date on which that State became a party to the Convention.

There are 37 Articles to the Convention. The Articles in the Convention relate to subjects like watercourse agreements, equitable and reasonable utilisation participation, factors relevant to equitable and reasonable utilisation, obligation not to cause significant harm, general obligation to cooperate and settlement of disputes, etc. The Convention shall enter into force following ratification of 35th Instrument. So far the Convention has attracted perhaps no more than 16 signatures and 11 ratifications. 103 nations including Bangladesh had voted in favour. Surprisingly India and Pakistan were on the same side and were amongst 27 nations that had abstained from voting.

Times have changed; the demand for water is growing. Dams and megaprojects are known to disrupt the existing pattern of water use. Where people depend on fish, flood plains or deltas for their livelihood, big dams can wreak great havoc. Watershed eco-systems suffer and fragmentation of aquatic and terrestrial eco systems cause growing threat to the ecological integrity is one of the many factors impacting on the change in climate.

The growing rate of extraction of fresh water has put enormous pressure on aquifers. Sedimentation causes the dams to lose storage capacity at an estimated rate of 05-1 per cent per annum. In the next 25 to 50 years, 25 per cent of the existing storage will have been lost mostly in the developing countries. In three Asian countries -- China, India and Pakistan -- the water table is sinking at the alarming rate of 1 to 2 metres a year. Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Egypt and Israel are the most water stressed countries. Pakistan is close to Germany in being less stressed.

Today most of the countries are focusing their attention on management of existing water resources including the dams. The effort involves rehabilitation, renovation and optimisation. Demand side management and improvement of efficiency of the existing supply are receiving greater attention.

There are bound to be difficulties for the countries of the region along the way. However, inaction is not an option. If the waters in the basin are sufficient to justify an equitable and just sharing of waters and the social, economic, political and environmental impact of such structural intervention on common river systems is manageable, then the project cannot be dismissed as being unfeasible. It will require cooler heads in the spirit of give and take for the stakeholders in all the countries of the region to grapple with hard choices. The outcome may yet produce a win-win situation for everybody. The growing population of all the countries of the region, which they have failed to control, imposes an obligation on their leaders to do something substantial to avert the looming disaster of famine and poverty.
Forming a common front against India as being the largest country in the region will be a self-defeating strategy. After all Pakistan did the unthinkable of bartering away three of its six rivers for the sake of peace and amity in the largest part of the subcontinent. The important thing to note is that the intervention of the World Bank proved crucial to the culmination of the effort in the signing of the Treaty.

(Syed Shahid Husain has served as Secretary, Water and Power in the Government of Pakistan and as Chief Secretary, Balochistan. Mr. Husain may be contacted at sshusain@hotmail.com)

Bibliography

• Indus Water Treaty 1960.
• Professor Hap Dunning , 'Water Law', in Water Resource Management, fourth edition.
• 'Riparian Rights Case Summaries', Environment Probe.
• Islam M. Faisal, 'Managing International Rivers in the Ganges-Brahmaputra-Meghna (GBM)'.
• Jayanta Bandyopadhyay and Shama Perveen on Doubts over the scientific validity of the justifications for the proposed inter linking of rivers in India.
• Mostafa Kamal Majumdar, 'River Linking and the Environment'.
• Dr. Sudhirendar Sharma, 'Interlinking Rivers , Whose Concern is it Anyway?'.
• Dr. Asif Nazrul, The RLP and International Law
• Dr. Uma Shankari, Interlinking Rivers, Contradictions and Confrontations, A Report on the electronic debate (riverlink@yahoogroups.com)