Trying to walk on water

The source of the problem

Benjamin Franklin once said: "When the well is dry we know the worth of water." In Pakistan we see the worth of water before the wells even run dry. We see it when the canals do not have water, when farmers wait to plant their crops and when provinces argue about whether the water is being shared fairly.

This year the same old argument is back. It is more intense than before.

Reports say that Sindh did not have water during the important Kharif season. The water flow at the dams decreased a lot and the people in charge of the province, the farmers and the water experts were worried about what this would do to the crops and the people who live in the rural areas. In June it was said that Sindh’s water shortage went from 22 percent to 39 percent in a few weeks and the Kotri Barrage had a big decrease in the water flowing downstream.

For people in Sindh these numbers are not just numbers. They mean that the farmers have to wait to plant their crops, they will have to take on more debt and they will be more unsure about their future. Agriculture is a part of Sindh’s economy and it supports millions of people directly and indirectly. When there is not enough water during the critical time for planting crops it affects a lot of people.

The problem is not just about water.

It is about trust.

The Water Apportionment Accord of 1991 was supposed to be a way to share the water of the Indus Basin among the provinces of Pakistan. It was also supposed to make sure that the provinces trusted each other to manage the water shortages and surpluses.. More than 30 years later the provinces are still arguing, which means that they do not trust each other.

Water scarcity does not cause tension by itself. It is the distrust that causes the tension.

When the provinces do not trust the people in charge of managing the water, every decision becomes a problem. Every time the canals are operated it becomes a controversy. Every time there is a water shortage it is seen as proof of bias.

The Indus River has sustained civilizations for millennia. It should not become a source of permanent distrust within the federation. For Pakistan, the ultimate question is no longer how much water is available. It is whether the institutions entrusted with managing that water can still command the confidence of those whose lives depend upon it.

This is especially true in Sindh, which is at the end of the Indus River. Anything that happens upstream affects Sindh. When the water flow decreases it affects not just the irrigation but also the drinking water, the groundwater, the fish and the environment of the Indus Delta.

We can already see the effects on the environment. Researchers have said that a big part of the Indus Delta is being affected by seawater because of the decreasing freshwater flow. Many communities have seen their fertile land disappear. The mangrove forests and the people who live along the coast are under a lot of pressure.

For Sindh water is not an economic issue. It is also a social and cultural issue.

The Indus River is a part of Sindh’s history and identity. People have been living along its banks for thousands of years. The river helped create one of the first urban civilizations of the world and it still supports millions of people today. It is no surprise that the arguments about water are emotional and go beyond technical discussions.

We need to look at this problem in an honest way.

The usual way of talking about Sindh’s water problems is to blame the IRSA, Punjab and the federal government.. More and more people in Sindh are asking their own leaders some tough questions.

This change in the way people think deserves our attention.

The Pakistan People's Party has governed Sindh continuously since 2008. During much of this period, it has also exercised considerable influence within the federal political structure. The party has held key constitutional offices, maintained substantial parliamentary representation, and remained an important stakeholder in national decision-making.

This reality complicates the traditional narrative of perpetual victimhood.

If Sindh's concerns regarding water allocations are as serious as provincial leaders repeatedly assert, why do meaningful political interventions often emerge only after shortages have already disrupted agricultural activity? Why do protest letters frequently appear in June when concerns regarding water availability are evident months earlier? Why do annual expressions of outrage rarely translate into institutional reforms capable of preventing future crises?

These questions are not partisan. They are questions of governance. These are not questions. They are questions about governance.

Some people say that Sindh's water politics is about reacting to problems, not preventing them. The warnings come in April, the shortages happen in May. The politicians start talking about it in June.. By then it is already too late.

The farmers who are waiting for water cannot get back the time they lost because of a press conference. The crops do not grow because of resolutions. The agricultural calendar does not stop for meetings.

There is a Sindhi proverb that one should not begin repairing the roof after the monsoon has arrived. Yet this is precisely how water disputes are too often managed. The response comes after the crisis, not before it.

This does not mean that the federal institutions are not responsible. Transparency is necessary. The data about water allocation should be available to the public. It should be correct. It should be communicated in real time. The mechanisms for sharing water shortages should be fair and trustworthy. The decisions that affect millions of people should not be based just on technical correctness but also on political legitimacy.

The problem becomes more urgent when we think about climate change.

Pakistan is one of the countries that will be most affected by climate change. The glaciers are melting, the rain is unpredictable, there are droughts and the temperatures are rising. All of this puts a lot of pressure on the Indus Basin. At the same time the population is growing and the demand for water is increasing.

The truth is that disputes about water may become more frequent in the future.

In this situation it is very important that the institutions are credible.

The water disputes cannot be solved by blaming each other. They cannot be solved by talking about them every season. We need to invest in water conservation, we need to modernize the irrigation infrastructure, we need governance and we need the provinces to work together.

Importantly we need accountability at every level.

Sindh deserves to have a share of water. It deserves transparency from the IRSA. It deserves policies that protect the environment of the Indus Delta and the people who depend on it.

Sindh also deserves leaders who will be judged by what they do not just by what they say.

After 20 years of being in power the question is not whether there is a problem. The problem is clear. The question is what the leaders have done to solve it.

The sad thing about Sindh's water crisis is that everyone is blaming someone. The federal institutions say it is a problem. The provinces say it is because of withdrawals. The political parties talk about it. Committees meet. Resolutions are passed. Letters are exchanged.

The shortages continue.

The Indus River has sustained civilizations for millennia. It should not become a source of permanent distrust within the federation. For Pakistan, the ultimate question is no longer how much water is available. It is whether the institutions entrusted with managing that water can still command the confidence of those whose lives depend upon it.

Until we can trust these institutions Sindh's water crisis will continue to be a crisis of governance, trust and political foresight not a water shortage.