Upreti, Trilochan, International Watercourses Law and Its Application ...

62 / International Watercourses Law and Its Application in South Asia Development and Codification of International Watercourses Law / 63with the World Bank (WB), United Nations DevelopmentProgramme and other bilateral donors assisting these efforts. 1142.7.4 The Indus Water Allocation Treaty, 1960 India-PakistanThis dispute was inherited from the time of unified India.However, the Indus treaty was concluded between the tworival states after the conflict over the consumptive use of waterof the Indus basin. This treaty was to resolve the problemscreated after the temporary interruption of water to Pakistanafter the partition of India. The main elements of theagreement were: 115 All the waters of the eastern rivers, theSultej, Beas, and the Ravi are made available for theunrestricted use of India and the western rivers the Indus,Jhelum and Chenab are made available for the unrestricted useof Pakistan.The canal structures had fallen in Indian Territory leavingPakistan without such an irrigation network. In order to enablePakistan to construct a huge irrigation network, Indiacontributed £ 62,000,000 and a substantial amount of moneywas provided from the World Bank, USA, UK, Germany andAustralia to construct facilities inside Pakistan. The principlesadopted to settle this complex dispute, i.e. reasonable andequitable utilisation of the waters, to the satisfaction of bothstates, has major significance in the development of this areaand the preservation of peace and security. However, actualallocations of the waters were 80 % to Pakistan and 20 % toIndia. It was not an equal but equitable division, and it has beenseverely criticised in India on the ground of inequality andfavour to Pakistan. 116 From the viewpoint of needs (Pakistan’shuge population relying on the waters of these rivers) and prioruse (Pakistan’s use was greater than India) and the otherconsiderations spelled out in Article 6 of the UNCIW, thisdivision of the rivers has been regarded as equitable. The ruleof equitable utilisation dictated this resolution. It is worthmentioning that the treaty refused to take account of the‘drainage basin’ or ‘watercourse’ concept considering thewhole Indus a unit. Rather the rivers were divided between twostates. In recent months, in Jammu and Kashmir, an Indian statelegislature adopted a proposal to repudiate the treaty and askedthe federal government to negotiate it again, safeguardingIndian interests which were ignored earlier. 117 However, theresolution is regarded as one of the praiseworthy assignmentscarried out by the World Bank in such a complex water issue.2.7. 5 The Columbia River Treaty, 1961 USA-CanadaThe treaty primarily covered power development and floodcontrol aspects of the Columbia River Basin. Of the principlesestablished by this treaty, 118 some of them are regarded as thebasic foundation of IWL in regard to the co-operative and jointdevelopment of a shared river for mutual benefit. However, it isstated in the treaty that it would not be construed a precedent ora general principle of law. Rather, they thought that thesespecial arrangements cover the peculiar circumstances in theColumbia River basin between the two states.In spite of the above, this treaty succeeded in enunciating somemilestone principles, norms and criteria for the equitable andreasonable utilisation of IWC. Particularly, the idea ofdownstream benefits was first developed and recognised, costs114 J. Brunnee & S. J. Toope, “The Changing Nile Basin Regime: DoesLaw Matter ?” (2002) in 42 HILJ, pp. 105-159.115 419 UNTS, p. 100; also see R. K. Baxter, "The Indus Basin" in A.Garretson, et. al (eds), The Law of International Drainage Basins, NewYork: Oceana Pub., 1967, pp. 443-478.116 Supra note 22, pp. 280-285.117 Supra note 41, p. 3.118 Supra note 36, pp. 76-78; also see C. B. Bourne, “The Columbia RiverControversy” (1959) in 37 CBR, pp. 444-472. Generally, the benefitsaccrued from the works upstream are called ‘downstream benefits’.