An aquatic aggression
Amjed Jaaved

WITHOUT any notice to Pakistan, India has closed flow of river Chenab to Pakistan. Even before the blockade, Pakistan was receiving just 23,000 cusecs of water a day while the requirement was 35,000 cusecs a day. Now, the flow of water has been reduced to a trickle. Pakistan was already in throes of severe water shortage. India’s intransigence will make water and power shortage even more gruesome for people of Pakistan. The unilateral decision could adversely affect the Kharif crops, particularly cotton and sugarcane, which were in maturity stage and require final watering, besides sowing of Rabi crops, particularly wheat, early next month.
There has been a phenomenal growth in demand for wheat. Last year, the country achieved a record production of more than 23 million tons. Yet, the government had to import more than two million tons of wheat to bridge demand-supply gap. Further imports of wheat in future years would worsen Pakistan’ foreign-exchange reserves position.
In the past, also, India has been using the river waters as an aqua bomb against Pakistan. India’s tactics include releasing flood water or choking water-flow without previous notice to Pakistan. To use water as an aqua bomb, India has built multiple barrages and dams, even on rivers that were awarded to Pakistan under the Indus Water treaty (IWT). During the 1965 War, India desisted from violating the IWT. But, the Treay is now in tatters. She has repeatedly broken it to reduce the water flow to Pakistan or increase water flow to India. Lt Gen (Retd) Hameed Gul has alleged that India has constructed more than 62 dams and hydro-electric projects on rivers allocated to Pakistan. As a result, there is a veritable fear that considerable area of Pakistan would be converted in to a desert.
Is India’s desire to block water arteries to Pakistan outcome of her childish impulses or well planned? As reflected by writings of India’s strategic thinkers, India’s current attitude is well planned. Sisir Gupta, Major General Afsir Karim, and Colonel (GD Bakshi are spearheading India’s campaign to justify water warfare with Pakistan. Brigadier Joshi, in his book War in the 21s Century (Lancers Publishers, 1998) has even justified scrapping of Indus Basin Water Treaty. To justify scrapping of the treaty, Joshi has twisted, arguments expounded in Stephen C. McCaffrey’s The Laws of International Water Courses: Non-Navigational Uses (Oxford University Press).
Some Indian historians also have argued that India should set aside moral values and engage in all-out unabashed warfare with Pakistan. The historians draw justification for the immoral warfare (Koota Yuddha) from the Ramayanas and the Mahabharata wars. Keynote of Krishna’s military philosophy was that end justifies the means (vide Major General Rajendra Nath’s Military Leadership in India: Vedic Period to Indo-Pak Wars).
Writers like Joshi quote from Michel Walzer’s Just and Unjust War (Princeton University Press, Princeton), Robert W. Tucker’s The Just War (Harper and Row, New York, 1956) to justify koota yuddha (using non-military and quasi-military means) against Pakistan.
In ancient India, Brihaspati’s and Krishna’s school of warfare justified Koota Yuddha (all-out warfare). Brihaspati ridiculed Bhishma’s concept of chivalry in Dharma Yuddha (just war). Brihaspati argued for mercilessness, surprise and deception. He suggested that the king should never trust the enemy or spare his life, no matter how old or virtuous he may be. Truth may often have to be sacrificed in pursuit of victory (Karma Parva). Opportunity once wasted never returns (Shanti Parva).
Pakistan should try to look into dark recesses of Indian mind. India believes that just one per cent reduction in flow of water to Pakistan could play havoc with Pakistan’s agriculture. True, India is wedded to Chanakya’s 2,500-year-old doctrines: (a) Matsy nyaya, that is `way of the fish’ (big fish eats the small one), and (b) Mandal (interrelationships), ‘all neighbouring countries are actual or potential enemies’.
India appears to be bent upon scrapping Indus Basin Water Treaty. She wants it to be replaced, under Article XII (4), with another more advantageous treaty. Pakistan should seriously examine and be prepared to counter India’s following arguments for revocation of the Treaty: (a) The treaty affords more food security to Pakistan than to India. (b) It has outlived its usefulness and merits scraping in view of prolonged non-resolution of Kashmir dispute. (c) It is an impediment to optimal utilisation of power potential of the Indian-occupied Kashmir. Several problems, now confronted, were not visualised when the treaty was signed. The state has overall hydro-electric potential of about 5000 MW. But, eighty per cent of the state’s power requirement of 6000 million units comes from outside the state. The state produces only 870 million units.
India’s additional arguments are: (a) The Pakistani Indus Commission vets all Indian projects and puts conditionalities that are patently disadvantageous. In case of the Salal Hydro-Electric Project, Pakistan objected to the use of under-sluices. This led to very heavy siltation in the reservoir. (d) With the exponential rise in the state’s population, clean drinking water is becoming an increasingly precious resource. (e) Abrogation of a treaty in national interest (like scrapping of Anti-ballistic Missile Treaty by the USA) is justified. (f) Harmon Doctrine (12 December 1895) postulates: ‘The fundamental principle of international law is the absolute sovereignty of every nation against all others, within its own territory’. India’s main argument is that the Chenab alone has a potential of 4000 MW. But, as per the IWT, its overall storage is restricted to 2,097 million cubic meters. This limit is inadequate to sustain the growing power needs of the region. As of now, the IHK is able to use only some 830 MW of hydro -electric power as opposed to its potential of 5000 MW.
India’s arguments are spurious. Its selfish perception of the water resources is repugnant to international-law principles relating to riparian rights of downstream states. Pakistan needs to be prepared for tough negotiation with its arch foe in coming years.

A debacle to fictitious Indian therapy in Kashmir
Dr. Raja Muhammad Khan

IN ALL eventualities, the road to durable peace in South Asia lies in the final settlement of the Kashmir dispute, the longest unresolved issue on the agenda of the United Nations Security Council. After years of unswerving persuasion by Pakistan, on the sidelines of 12th SAARC Summit, held in Islamabad in January 2004 both countries agreed to move forward on Kashmir dispute through peaceful negotiations. This understanding was followed by a reiteration from the succeeding Congress dominated United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government. Upon growth of enough confidence between two nuclear rivals, Pakistan proposed a number of measures and a framework for the resolution of Kashmir dispute; without having compromised the principle stand of right of self determination as given in the United Nations resolutions. Unfortunately, except for initial and a few occasional affirmative statements, there have been no significant forward movement towards the resolution of the dispute from Indian side in tangible terms as yet.
The peace overture started with the unilateral ceasefire by Pakistan in November 2003, was quite efficiently utilized by India to fence its border all along the LoC in a record period of two years; which otherwise could not have been possible owing to Kashmiris insurgency. In order to give peace a chance, Kashmiris too ceased their armed struggle along Pakistani ceasefire. Indeed to gain time, India has been wavering a formal response to Pakistani flexibility eversince the start of the peace process. The time so gained was made use of by India for fictitious therapy to the wounds of Kashmiris through adherent campaigns like Operations Sadebhavana. The operation was envisioned by General Arjun Ray, with the dictum to level out the grievances of all those Kashmiri masses that fell prey (over 90,000 Kashmiris have been killed) to Indian brutalities eversince the start of indigenous mass movement of Kashmiris in 1989/90. But factually the strategy was aimed at improving the image of its trigger-happy security forces on one hand and to show the international community and Pakistan that; Kashmir issue stands resolved as a result of its compensatory actions.
To its bad luck, in the midst of completing its long term surreptitious agenda in Occupied Kashmir, India has been confronted with yet another Kashmiri upsurge, once it allotted 800 kanals of forest land to Shri Amarnat Shirine Board in complete violation of State’s Subject Laws of Jammu and Kashmir. Under the strong protests of kashmiri Muslims the state government cancelled the allotment, but subsequently had to step down owing to its failure to control the situation. Finding this as an apt moment, Hindus of Jammu with the backing of extremists Hindu organizations like RSS, BJP and thousands of Hindus from neighbouring Indian states caused economic obstruction for the Muslims of the Vale of Kashmir. For weeks; they did not allow even essential commodities, food supplies and even life saving medicines to be transported to Valley people by blocking Srinagar - Jammu Highway. Fruit growers were debarred from transporting their products to Indian markets through Jammu, which were wasted subsequently.
Once the peaceful traders protested against this inhuman act of Hindu minority, they were fired upon, resultantly killing dozens of innocent Kashmiris including APHC leader Sheikh Abdul Aziz. This was infact beginning of a new act of state sponsored terrorism by Indian security forces; which they unleashed on helpless Kashmiri masses, who were demanding nothing else but their legal right to cease their economic blockade or else opening of alternative routes of trade from Srinagar to Muzaffarabad. Instead of fulfilling their legal demands; the land has once again been allotted to the administration of Hindu Shrine by Hindu Governor.
Infact, the current phase of Indian atrocities have divulged the true face of its compensatory strategy through operation Sadebhavana. This indeed is the initiation of another attempt of changing the demography of the state by providing indirect / covert legality to Hindu population to settle in the Valley for ultimate change of its demographic structure. Otherwise this Hindus Shrine has existed for centuries and Muslims have been taking care of Hindu pilgrims during their Yatra. What special need was realized at this particular time to make such an illegal allotment? Infact this is replication of history. A similar exercise was undertaken and completed by Indian government in Jammu, once Indian forces invaded Kashmir in October 1947. Through a phased programme; Muslim masses were forced to migrate and Hindu from other Indian provinces/ states were inhabited there. It is pertinent to point out that in 1941 (last census of united Kashmir), Muslims constituted 62 % of the population in Jammu whereas, now they are less than 37 % of total population.
Astoundingly, the international community and human rights organizations have shown stony silence over this bloodshed of Kashmiris caused by naked terrorism of Indian state forces. World body (UN) must realize that time has come to give a full stop to Indian brutalities or else there would be a restart of armed struggle in Kashmir once again, as evidently highlighted by Chairman APHC, Mir Waiz Umar Farooq and other Kashmiri leaders including Mr. Omar Abdullah, head of National Conference. With over 700,000 security forcers deployed and fencing all along, this time India had no grounds for censuring Pakistan of any infiltration into Occupied Kashmir.
Apart from mass resistance against Indian intent of making demographic changes through illegal allotment of State’s land; the future of the current Kashmiris uprising can also be accredited to the overtiredness of their patience for resolution of Kashmir as a result of inconclusive Indo-Pak negotiations eversince the start of peace process, primarily because of Indian stubborn approach.




The financial hike
Fidel Castro Ruz

THERE is no waste in today’s afternoon news: “Bush cancelled all his activities.  He intended to travel to Alabama and Florida to participate in electoral fundraisers.” “He said on Thursday that he was worried about the financial markets and the US economy…”
“Markets have plummeted” –cables continue to read-, “the government was forced to nationalize the giant insurance company American International Group (AIG); and the Federal Reserve, in a coordinated action with other central banks, have injected 180 billion dollars into the financial markets.” “The president reaffirmed that his government is taking aggressive and extraordinary measures ‘to appease the markets.’”
“Authorities all over Asia are seeking to stop the devaluation of their currencies, stock exchanges and securities, to avoid the Wall Street crisis to affect the region.” “President of Brazil, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva blamed today the international financial crisis on speculation, and admitted he was worried about a possible risk of a recession in the United States. “He also felt sorry about the situation facing the big banks in the United States, which in the past criticized Brazil and other emerging countries, and questioned the international financial system.
“There is a crisis in the United States, a very strong crisis that has caused extraordinary unrest in the biggest economy of the world”, he said. “It is not that we are not worried.  The United States is the world’s biggest economy and major importer.” He concluded by saying:  “I see with certain sadness that important banks, very important banks, which had spent their whole life giving advise about Brazil and about what we should or should not do, are now bankrupt or have entered into bankruptcy.”
The hurricane winds of the financial Ike are also threatening all “provinces” of the world.  The weather forecast is uncertain; people have been speaking about it for weeks now, and gusts of more than 200 kilometres per hour are already being felt. As Rubiera would say, its devastating power squares from one category into the next. It is very difficult to closely follow and understand the very high figures of fresh money injected into the world’s economy.  Those are huge volumes of paper money leading inevitably to a decline in its value and purchasing power.
The increase in prices is inevitable in consumption societies and also disastrous for the emerging countries, as was pointed out by Lula da Silva.  If the biggest importer in the world stops to import, this will affect the rest; if it goes out ready to face competition, this will affect all other producers. The big banks from the developed countries emulate and try to establish coordinations with the banks of the United States.  If the US banks go into bankruptcy, the developed countries banks will go into bankruptcy too, and they will devour each other.
Fiscal heavens are thriving; peoples are suffering.  Could humankind’s well-being be guaranteed this way?