The pride and glory of India,
the iconic Silicon Valley which won laurels for the country is now straddling
through chaos, anarchy, mindless destruction of public property. The 124 year
long, unsettled dispute of the Cauvery waters is taking a toll on the peace and
harmony of two South Indian States- Karnataka and Tamilnadu. The simmering
differences between the neighboring states over the past century have
notoriously turned them into sparring partners. The inept handling of the
crisis by the State Government, rumor mongering by the political fringe
elements have inadvertently exacerbated the worst ever clashes between the
states. Following the Supreme Court’s directive to Karnataka of releasing
15,000 cusecs water a day till September 15th, the current clashes
have erupted in Bengaluru. As the clashes escalated curfew was imposed in few
areas of the city to bring situation under control. Meanwhile, retaliatory
clashes were reported across parts of Tamilnadu too.
History
Cauvery water dispute which is
largely a case of water sharing between the lower riparian state, Tamilnadu and
the upstream state, Karnataka, dates back to the events in the 19th
century. Cauvery river system includes the tributaries of Hemavati, Kabini, Tunga,
Bhadra, Bhavani, Amarvati and others. The states which benefit through its flow
include Karnataka, Tamilnadu, Kerala and Union Territory of Puducherry. Under
the British administration, Princely State of Mysore and the Presidency of
Madras signed an agreement in 1892 over the sharing of Cauvery river waters
when the later raised objections over proposed plans of construction of new
irrigation project across Cauvery by Mysore. The issue began to gain heat when
Dewan of Mysore the eminent engineer Dr. M. Visvesvarayya intensified efforts
to build Krishna Sagar Dam in Mysore district. Cognizant of the massive storing
capacity of the proposed dam, worried over the prospect of facing water crisis,
Madras government appealed to Secretary of State for intervention. In 1914, the
arbitrator delivered award in favor of Mysore causing great discomfiture to
Madras Presidency. To bring matters to conciliation, British administration
prevailed on both parties to forge an agreement in 1924. As per the agreement,
Mysore is obligated not to construct any new irrigation dams on Cauvery or its
tributaries without prior consent of Madras. Madras on the other hand shouldn’t
object except to protect its prescriptive rights. It was also decided to review
the clauses of agreement only after 50 years i.e in 1974. But unfortunately the
agreement was not reviewed.
The dispute took a new logical
turn when Princely State of Mysore ceased to exist and was subsumed under the
state of Karnataka. Coorg, region the birth place of Cauvery not party to 1924
became an integral part of Karnataka and Kerala which was not a party to the
agreement became a party to agreement. Other crucial dimensions of the dispute
are that Cauvery originates in Kodagu, Karnataka and by default the principal
claimant over its water flows. But the crux of the issue lies in the fact that
the rivers flows in biggest areas in Tamilnadu with several thousands of acres
of land under paddy cultivation.
Cauvery Conflicts
By 1960’s violent clashes
erupted in both states when Tamilnadu built reservoirs on the Amaravathi and
the Bhavani rivers following which Karnataka decided to raise the reservoir
potential of the Hemavathi reservoir to 34 TMC (thousand million cubic feet)
and also pitched for construction of four more dams across Kambadakadi,
Yagachi, Lakshmana Thirtha and the Sagab Doddakere to generate an additional
potential of 10 TMC. Karnataka supported its argument citing the clauses of XIV
of 1924 whereby if Madras builds dams over tributaries of Cauvery the Amaravathi,
the Bhavani or the Noyal flowing through Tamilnadu, Karnataka will be entitled
to build reservoirs of capacity not exceeding 60 % of the reservoirs
constructed by Tamilnadu. Karnataka also believed that its control over the
Cauvery waters would be lost if it fails to generate and impound the 44 TMC
water. With parties failing to reach an agreement over the interpretation of
clauses and Tamilnadu turning down the requests of Karnataka to make changes in
the agreement, warring parties took the matter to Supreme Court.
In 1970, Cauvery Fact Finding
Committee found that Tamilnadu’s irrigated lands have increased from 14,40,000
acres to 25,80,000 acres and that of Karnataka were 6,80,000 acres causing
increased demand of water by Tamilnadu. Central Government’s study found out
that utilization of Cauvery waters by Tamilnadu was 489 TMC as against
Karnataka’s 177 TMC.
Setting Up of Tribunal
In 1986 Tamilnadu made a formal
request to Central Government to set up a tribunal to resolve the dispute under
the Interstate Water Disputes Act (ISWD Act), 1956. After much trials and
tribulations, following Supreme Courts intervention, Cauvery Water Disputes
Tribunal (CWDT) was appointed in 1990 with both states failing to reaching an
agreement. In 1991, an interim order was issued by Supreme Court directing
release of 205 TMC of waters to Tamilnadu annually. This resulted in eruption
of clashes in Karnataka which basically targeted the hapless Tamilians settled
in Karnataka. This eventually triggered violence in Tamilnadu as well. Thus
Cauvery waters issue remained as a bone of contention between both states.
Tribunal Award of 2007
Nearly after a gap of 16 year
following intense discussions and deliberations by experts, Cauvery Tribunal
delivered final order in 2007 based on the “50% dependability on Monsoons”.
Experts calculated that 740 TMC of water would be available annually and
accordingly waters were divided among four parties. It allocated 419 TMC to
Tamilnadu, 270 TMC to Karnataka, 30 TMC to Kerala, 7 TMC to Puducherry and
remaining 14 TMC for environmental purposes (including 4 TMC factored for the
“inevitable escapages into the sea”. Supreme Court directed Karnataka to
supply 192 TMC to Tamilnadu.
As per the tribunal, Tamilnadu
is entitled for 419 TMC, if Karnataka supplies 192 TMC, how is it managing to
get rest of the water? Precisely this is where Tamilnadu has a major advantage
over Karnataka. Way back in 10th century, Chola Kings have developed
a robust water infrastructure in the region by building reservoirs and check
dams paving way for meticulous utilization of Cauvery waters. These catchment
areas contribute to as much as 227 TMC. As opposed to historical pre-eminence
of Tamilnadu, Karnataka had first irrigation dam built across Cauvery waters in
the form of K R Sagar dam only in 1934. Kerala, on the other hand because of
its unique geographical position contributes more waters (51 TMC) while
utilizing only 30 TMC. Tamilnadu by way of historical advantage and
prescriptive rights clearly enjoys greater benefits than Karnataka. Due to its
over reliance on Cauvery waters, and being a lower riparian state often at
mercy of the upstream state, Tamilnadu takes a belligerent position. Karnataka
opines that 1924 agreement was unjust wherein Tamilnadu was using almost 80% of
waters, against Karnataka’s 16%. Hence as an upstream, Karnataka wanted to
assert its primacy over Cauvery waters prompting it to defy Supreme Courts at
times leading to violent clashes. Though of time Karnataka managed to bring
more areas under irrigation increasing it to 15 lakh acres even now it clearly
lacks the infrastructure needed to derive benefits of surplus water.
By and large parties to Cauvery
water issue remained dissatisfied with 2007 water award and aggrieved parties
Karnataka, Tamilnadu and Kerala filed special petitions in Supreme Court. Even
otherwise experts also believed that the award failed to provide convincing
answers to issues like water distribution during a failed monsoon year. These
and certain incipient discrepancies have potentially flared up the rivalries
leading to frequent conflicts between the states. For example, the award failed
to take into account ample amounts of ground water resources of Tamilnadu as
against none in Karnataka. Similarly, the issue of water sharing during the
four months of peak agriculture season needs to be reviewed. While award may work reasonably well during a
good monsoon year, a failed monsoon might create a havoc. Till now every
distressed year witnessed intense conflicts between the states- 2002, 2003,
2012 and now in 2016 the amount of violence was unprecedented.
Implementation of Water Award
Ever since the award of the
tribunal it was observed that Tamilnadu received more than prescribed amounts
of water from Karnataka except for the year 2012. Failure of the tribunal in
arriving at proportionate distribution of waters in a distress year has
complicated the situation. Moreover, water crisis and serious adversities could
have been mitigated had both states displayed some sense of responsibility in
reaching a negotiable agreement during distress years. Indeed, the recent
episodes of contemptible violence and targeted attacks could have been averted
had the political parties refrained from issuing parochial statements. Had the
leaders invested their political energies in reaching a consensual agreement
over water distribution instead of fomenting animosities, issue could have been
resolved peacefully. Every distress year had many lessons to offer. Experts
agreed that current patterns of water usage have been most uneconomical and
wasteful. The way ahead should be adoption of better water management
practices, modern methods of agriculture and downsizing the cultivation of
water intensive crops. With both states tipped to bank on urbanization for
rapid economic development, pressure on limited water resources is bound to
increase. To scale down uneconomical use of water, state government must step
in to introduce best water management practices to avert plausible water
crisis. Various parts of India faced the brunt of severe water crisis before
the onset of monsoon this year. In particular reservoirs of South India had
abysmally low levels of water. Though an active South West Monsoon brought some
cheer, meteorological reports indicate that Karnataka received 17% less than
normal rainfall (594mm against 718mm), Tamilnadu had normal rainfall. Moreover,
since rainfall was intermittent and uncertain water levels were lower than the
previous year. As per Central Water Commission data, Cauvery water catchment
area of Karnataka has 46% less than normal levels, was declared as agriculture
drought. While Supreme Court modified order asking Karnataka to release 20%
less water, 12,000 cusecs for eight days, it argued that water levels in the reservoirs
are barely enough to meet the drinking water requirements of the region.
Finally complying to Court’s decision started sharing water on Tuesday night.
Meanwhile, Centre should expedite the process of constituting the Cauvery
Management Board to find a long term amicable solution to both parties. Further
it must explore ways of harnessing 2000 TMC of Cauvery waters, (four times the
water requirements of both states) joining the Arabian Sea to tide the water
crisis.
Implications of Water Stress
Water, described as the oil of the 21st
Century or the Blue Gold is becoming increasingly scarce. Indiscriminate human
activity, seamless population explosion aggravated the water stress. The arrival of Anthropocene hastened global
warming and climate change resulting in erratic rainfall and snowfall patterns,
increased evaporation putting enormous stress on the precious fresh water
resources. While the fear of water wars may appear to be far outstretched, but
the recent crisis in Syria, fomenting tensions between nations in South East
Asia, insecurity of the Arabian Peninsula are undeniably triggered by the
looming water crisis. Indeed, the IS managed to extend its stranglehold in Iraq
by commandeering the hydroelectric dams, irrigation canals reservoirs and water
infrastructure. Similarly, Yemen slipped into internal chaos due to water
scarcity. In light of impending water crisis, the fermenting interstate
conflict over Cauvery waters is of grave importance for it is a manifestation
of severe water stress faced by the South Indian States.
The political parochial war of
words and instigation had already accrued losses of over Rs 25,000 Crores to
Karnataka besides severely denting the image of India and Bengaluru in particular.
Sporadic protests have not only disrupted the normal lives but earned a
disrepute for India reckoned as the fastest growing economy currently. Ideally,
the political dispensations instead of seeking remedial measures for interstate
water feuds from Courts should try to seek solution through consensus. While
sharing of waters prescribed by legal entities assures distribution of
resources, accurate measure of rainfall received and harvested is variable.
Hence an amicable political solution can alone resolve these interstate water
disputes.
@ Copyrights reserved.
No comments:
Post a Comment