Sat Sari Akal from Pakistan!

As a native of Pakistan – I am excited to have a sagacious leader at the helm of affairs next door. Especially as our countries have a history of bitter relations having fought three wars since our independence from Britain in 1947. We both claim the Himalayan region of Kashmir, which is divided between us.

Mr. Prime Minister, I feel it’s about time that we both re-visit the concept of ‘sous rature’, (a term usually translated as ‘under erasure)’ in our bilateral discussions. I am proposing a sous rature for Kashmir – because the conflict is inadequately represented thus far as a territorial issue. Since this is an important issue, I propose we keep it legible yet cross it out. And, going forward use a more accurate term; water conflict.

Water is linked to the crises of climate change, energy and food supplies, and in our case, a territorial dispute. Unless Kashmir’s link with water is addressed and resolved, these other crises may intensify leading to further political insecurity and conflict at various levels.

It is abundantly clear to most educated Pakistanis that the Kashmir dispute cannot be resolved until every Pakistani citizen is assured access to water – today, tomorrow and for times to come. I am hoping that in your second term you will demonstrate the courage expected of a ‘fair’ regional power and not insist on building dams that will deprive Pakistani farmers of vital water supplies.

Mr. Prime Minister, I am hoping that you will address the critical issue of the Tulbul Navigation project on Wular Lake in the Indian-controlled portion of Kashmir. I am sure you are aware of our position that this dam will disrupt the flow of water into the Jhelum River, which flows into Pakistan. This dam clearly violates the Indus Water Treaty of 1960. You must know that the World Bank-mediated 1960 Indus Water Treaty stipulates that we share the Indus River and its five tributaries – the Jhelum, Chenab, Ravi, Beas and Sutlej. Under the treaty, we received exclusive use of waters from the Indus and its westward flowing tributaries, the Jhelum and Chenab, while the Ravi, Beas and Sutlej rivers were allocated for your country’s use.

Mr. Prime Minister in your haste to win this second term you have withheld millions of cubic feet of water upstream on the Chenab in Indian-administered Kashmir, and you are storing it in the massive Baglihar dam in order to produce hydro-electricity. Mr. Prime Minister you know it is in breach of the 1960 treaty. I know you decided to stop entertaining this discussion after the Mumbai attacks- but why are you punishing the poor farmers of Pakistan for the crimes committed by a few mercenaries?

We have heard your position that India has a right to ‘’run-of-the-river’’ projects but ask 10 independent scientists and they will confirm that the Baglihar dam reduces the flow of water to Pakistan in violation of the 1960 treaty. Come down to Pakistan and bring those World Bank appointed experts who had cleared the Baglihar project so they can understand the implication of their decision as well. If these experts are not blind- I am sure they will notice that the levels of both the river and groundwater have fallen substantially. Indeed, from our side this doesn’t even look like a river anymore; it is more like a puddle.

Mr. Prime Minister I don’t want to bore you with details, but the 1960 treaty guaranteed us 55,000 cusecs of water. Yet, this year we have received between 13,000 cusecs during the winter and a maximum of 29,000 cusecs during summer.

We have also heard the Indian argument for the Wular dam; that you will make a shallow 12 mile stretch of the river in order to ease “navigation” during the dry summer months. And that this is allowed under the 1960 treaty.

Let’s be honest Mr. Prime Minister- this is an open attempt to store water and control how much will be allowed to flow to Pakistan. It may not happen overnight – but there are no guarantees that you will continue to win elections in India for next 30-40 years.

Mr. Prime Minister- you may ignore this appeal but at least pay attention to more than 20 different UN bodies who have warned that the world may be perilously close to its first water war. Take these dam projects off the table and you will win the hearts and minds of Pakistanis. Moreover, you will bring the two nations closer to a more peaceful and prosperous coexistence.

Congratulations are due to you again, Mr. Singh. After waiting anxiously for nearly three hours outside the conference room in Sharm el Shaikh when we finally received the joint statement, I thought it was a moment for Pakistani Prime Minister to establish himself as a regional leader. And, I was wrong.

By taking a considerable leap of faith, you have positioned yourself to be recorded in South Asian history as Sane Singh. What appeared to both Indian and Pakistani journalists as you ceding too much ground to the Pakistani Prime Minister was actually reflection of your grander goals. We were (both Indians and Pakistani) particularly fixated on a line saying that the peace process should no longer be linked to Pakistan’s progress in cracking down on militancy. A Pakistani colleague called it a ’diplomatic coup’ for Pakistan. Thumping his chest he told his TV channel that Pakistan had come out a victor. Must admit, I made the same mistake. When my anchor asked why India was playing on the ’back foot’, I implied that India was under tremendous international pressure to forge peace and reduce tension with Pakistan.

You can’t blame us. De-coupling of terrorism from bilateral talks was a reversal of India’s position since the Mumbai attack.

My Indian counterparts were angered by the inclusion of a reference to Pakistan’s southwestern province of Baluchistan, where Pakistan says India’s intelligence service is supporting a separatist insurgency. In the past India had always denied that, and resisted making the issue part of the two countries’ dialogue.

I watched your speech to the Indian parliament during a heated two-day debate on recent foreign policy issues. I know you watered down some parts of the joint statement, but you stood by the basic position that India needs to talk to Pakistan directly: admitting that the only alternative is another war.

I am glad that you were firm on your Baluchistan position: if you have nothing to hide why not put this out on the table as well. If India is not interfering in Baluchistan we will soon put this behind us.

I know you will not win the favor of  Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) but you have won my support. And, as long as you stick to the peace process you will continue to win hearts and minds of many Pakistanis like myself.

Mr. Singh- I know I speak for many like minded Pakistanis when I say: Justice and fairness should be the first and foremost priority of any future dialogue. I can assure you that majority of Pakistani people are willing to reciprocate.

I know Mr. Singh that your domestic critics will remain unconvinced: I saw that BJP walked out of Parliament in protest over the Baluchistan issue. But you have been blessed with an opportunity of historic proportion. Your opponents are still in disarray after their dismal performance in this year’s election, whereas Congress now has an even stronger mandate and greater control over its coalition.

Mr. Singh, successful leaders are not afraid of taking unpopular positions. So even if it seems unpopular at present you should press ahead and resume composite dialogue with Pakistan.

In my past pleadings to you, I have proposed a “sous rature” for Kashmir – because the conflict is inadequately represented thus far as a territorial issue. Since this is an important issue, I propose we keep it legible yet cross it out. And, going forward use a more accurate term; water conflict.

Water is linked to the crises of climate change, energy and food supplies, and in our case, a territorial dispute. Unless Kashmir’s link with water is addressed and resolved, these other crises may intensify leading to further political insecurity and conflict at various levels.

It is abundantly clear to most educated Pakistanis that the Kashmir dispute cannot be resolved until every Pakistani citizen is assured access to water – today, tomorrow and for times to come.

You have demonstrated the courage and wisdom I expected from our sagacious neighbor and I hoping you will drop the idea of  building dams that deprive Pakistani farmers of vital water supplies. Please resume the composite dialogue and address the critical issue of the Tulbul Navigation project on Wular Lake in the Indian-controlled portion of Kashmir.

I know Mr. Singh you have taken a considerable risk to repair the relationship and for that you deserve credit. Hats off to, Sir!

Now let’s address the water crises right away.