Pakistan escalates, targets Kiru, Kwar and other Chenab hydel projects

Even as India steps up construction of J&K hydel projects, the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) on Tuesday concluded critical hearings on the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), with Pakistan targeting key projects that are not before the World Bank arbitration institutions.

In its January 19 memorial to PCA, Pakistan inserted the 624 MW Kiru hydel project off Chenab in Kishtwar as a 'case study' and has termed India's claims on water storage entitlement at Kiru 'wildly exaggerated'.

Soon after, in a February 2 PCA hearing, the Pakistani counsel pointed to how India is now proposing 'quite generous allocations of pondage' for its larger plants and referred to Baglihar, Due Hasti, Kiru and Kwar - all key to India's plans for increasing power generation in J&K. The counsel suggested that India may be "gaming the system" - with respect to these larger plants - and this may have 'a large impact downstream on Pakistan'.


The counsels alleged that India has 'deliberately set out to maximise pondage to hurt Pakistan'. On February 3, Pakistan stated that India's HEP construction programme on the western rivers is 'immense', was maximising pondage on projects above 300 MW, particularly off Chenab, and alleged it was doing so 'without worrying about what you agreed in the treaty'.

India has been actively fast-tracking construction across J&K projects amid IWT abeyance - aiming to reduce 3-4 months for the 1,000 MW Pakal Dul and 624 MW Kiru projects lined up for commissioning by 2026 besides the 37.5 MW Parnai and 540 MW Kwar projects targeting 2027.

However, neither the design or pondage issues of these are before PCA or neutral expert in any way. Though PCA is essentially dealing with pondage and design issues pertaining to Kishanganga and Ratle projects, Pakistan has gradually begun to insert in examples of other HEPs India has been pursuing - over questions of pondage and now environmental flow.

In its 81-page note, Pakistan has an entire section dedicated to the Kiru 'case study', questioning India's pondage share claims and has sought that 'environmental flow' provisions be accounted for in calculating pondage to 'prevent significant harm to the environment'.

Pakistan has held that pondage can only stay in the range of 3.36 Mm3 to a maximum of 7.72 Mm3 and "India's claim that it is entitled to a 20.22 Mm3 Operating Pool in the case of Kiru HEP is exaggerated".

It has added that while Pakistan does not ask the court to reach any conclusion with regard to the Kiru HEP, it has sought that these concerns must be taken into account for the calculation of maximum pondage for run of the river or Annexure D 3 hydel plants. It has held that the limited data shared by India on pondage and projections 'as demonstrated...with respect to Kiru HEP, is not acceptable'.

Even as India has boycotted all PCA and now even neutral expert proceedings on IWT, Pakistan has upped the ante on several fronts.