By Advait Moharir
Water sharing has always been a major issue in Inter-State politics in India.
Since independence, multiple States have sparred over sharing river water. This feud arises due to popular reasons, like agriculture and irrigation and the consequent political mileage gained out of them.
This issue was reignited by AAP MP Bhagwant Mann when he said that AAP would not let Punjabs river water flow to Haryana. He was referring to the expected commencement of the Satluj Yamuna Link(SYL) canal project. The reason he cited was the lack of extra water in Punjab.
A historical overview of the dispute
[su_pullquote]The roots of the conflict can be traced to the reorganisation of Punjab and the formation of Haryana in 1966. The issue of distribution of Indus water with Pakistan was resolved via the Indus Water Agreement.[/su_pullquote]
The roots of the conflict can be traced to the reorganisation of Punjab and the formation of Haryana in 1966. The issue of distribution of Indus water with Pakistan was resolved via the Indus Water Agreement. This allowed India unrestricted access to waters of Ravi, Beas and Satluj. However, there was a disagreement among Punjab and Haryana over the distribution of water from the Ravi-Beas river systems. The Union Government had to intervene, and via an executive order during the Emergency, ordered that the water would be divided approximately equally among the two.
To make full use of the water, the Yamuna-Satluj Link Canal was proposed. The proposal was met with great opposition from most of Punjabs political parties, including the Akali Dal.
The Yamuna-Satluj Link Canal was proposed which was met with great opposition from most of Punjabs political parties | Picture Courtesy – Live LawThe construction, however, was started and Haryana, under CM Devi Lal completed its part of the canal construction by 1980. After the INC came to power in 1981, an agreement was reached wherein Punjabs share was increased, while Haryanas remained the same. Punjab started construction thereafter.
However, the Punjab Accord in 1982 between Rajiv Gandhi and Longowal mandated setting up of a tribunal to investigate claims over river water. Further, the 1981 agreement was rejected when the Akali Dal came into power. However, the tribunal upheld the construction over successive years and ordered the Punjab government to complete its part, which it started in 1990 under the Akali government.
Reasons behind the deadlock
Punjab was averse to the idea of the canal, and the agreement was upheld only by the Congress government in Punjab or was mandated by the court. Further obstructions happened when an engineer was shot dead in Punjab. The issue stalled the project completion, which was restarted only in 1999.
The reason why Punjab is opposing the agreement is that the fertiliser overuse during the Green Revolution has led to most farmers using high-yield water intensive crops.
The farmers are caught in a vicious cycle wherein the fertilisers have reduced the soil fertility and more fertilisers have to be used to generate maximum output from the infertile soil. This requires extremely high water usage, and thus there is an increased demand.
The biggest roadblock, however, came in 2004. The Union Government decided to hand the project to Central Public Works Department (CPWD), to speed up the construction. The Congress government under Capt. Amarinder Singh responded by passing the Punjab Termination of Agreements Act, 2004 which abrogated all river water agreements with the neighbouring states. This brought all work to a standstill, and resulted in the case being referred to the Supreme Court via a Presidential reference.
Current scenario and the way ahead
The Court began the hearing in 2016. Meanwhile, the Punjab Assembly passed a law to return the land taken from owners for building the canal. The Court had to intervene again, ordering Punjab to maintain status quo, and eventually, it declared the 2004 law as invalid and ordered the government to go ahead with canal construction.
Punjab government needs to abide by the Court order to ease the tension, to start with | Picture Courtesy – Scroll[su_pullquote align=”right”]The Punjab government needs to abide by the Court order to ease the tension, to start with. Simultaneously, it has to take appropriate steps to resolve the water shortage.[/su_pullquote]
Protests happened recently as the INLD in Haryana demanded a completion of the project and held huge protest marches near the borders, threatening that its workers would cross the border and start constructing the canal. While INLD is using the issue for its own political revival, it is clear that new solutions have to be explored. The Punjab government needs to abide by the Court order to ease the tension, to start with. Simultaneously, it has to take appropriate steps to resolve the water shortage. It can request the Union Government for aid until the project is completed. It also needs to explore structural long-term solutions.
A shift to organic farming is a dire necessity, as the current method of farming is sucking up precious resources and yet not helping. The fate of farmers from two states is at stake and thus, political maturity from both sides is required.