Sindh vs. Punjab

While the strategic canal initiative could benefit arid lands, it faces significant challenges. Pakistan is already struggling with a water crisis, with per capita groundwater availability decreasing over the years. Data from reputable sources show that river water availability has declined since 2005, with significant drops in river flows. According to Sindh’s Agriculture Minister, Jam Khan Shoro, there is a stark difference in water flows between the pre-climate change era (1976-1998) and the post-climate change era (1999-2023), with flows significantly decreasing.

With climate change, Pakistan’s water availability will take a nosedive in the coming decades. The World Bank has warned that glacial melt will reduce it. While there may be more water in the short term, it will likely decrease significantly over time. Building canals without considering the long-term status of the Indus River is seen as a dangerous mistake.

The Cholistan Canal was initially designed as a non-perennial canal meant to flow only during flood seasons. However, Punjab intends to operate it as a perennial canal, keeping it functional throughout the year through “departmental adjustments.”

While these new canals promise to irrigate barren lands, they risk turning Sindh’s fertile lands into deserts. Although IRSA claims that water is sufficient for six new canals, there is evidence of severe water shortages downstream in the Indus Delta. The World Bank recommends releasing 8.6 MAF of water to sustain the Indus Delta, but releases have been far below this level. Consequently, the Indus Delta is on the verge of collapse, which would seriously affect local communities and biodiversity.

In addition to harming the Indus Delta, the Arabian Sea has steadily encroached upon southern Sindh’s fertile land due to the lack of water flow downstream of the Kotri Barrage. Research indicates that sea intrusion has submerged over 4 million acres of agricultural and non-agricultural land of Sindh’s coastal area and erased historic places like Ketti Bunder from the map.

Aside from affecting Sindh’s agriculture, if the IRSA Act is amended, it will likely exacerbate tensions between Sindh and Punjab and strain Sindh-Balochistan relations. As water levels diminish in Sindh, the province may be compelled to reduce Balochistan’s water share, affecting agriculture and livelihoods in both provinces.

Principally, the lower riparian has the right to a river’s water. The upper riparian can never initiate projects unilaterally without resolving the concerns of the lower riparian. However, Sindh is being sidelined in this case, which does not bode well for the country’s future. This will fuel resentment among the people of the lower riparian against the upper riparian.

This project is even more controversial because the government aims to build these canals to attract foreign investors. Transforming fertile lands into deserts to lure foreign investment is widely criticized as a misguided approach.

With a projected cost exceeding 200 billion rupees for the canals, the project could strain Pakistan’s financial resources, leading to increased public debt. If the project fails to yield the expected economic benefits, as is likely, it could burden future generations with debt without corresponding returns.

One of the main arguments behind the construction of the canals is water conversion. Civil society members in Sindh argue that if the government is so committed to saving and utilizing water, why can it not think of schemes to turn barren land in Sindh into farmland? They suggest that the government consider the barren lands of Kachho and Thar.

The project’s success hinges on diverting water from Sindh and Balochistan. While this may benefit Punjab, it would likely be disastrous for the lower provinces, making the project a highly contentious issue. Hence, the federal government must heed Sindh’s concerns and halt such controversial projects.