Model Answer
0 min readIntroduction
The Brahmaputra river, known as the Yarlung Tsangpo in Tibet and Jamuna in Bangladesh, is a vital water resource for all three countries. Growing concerns over China’s dam-building activities on the Tibetan plateau, particularly the Grand Zangbo Hydropower Project, have heightened anxieties in India regarding potential water scarcity. While India has existing water treaties with Nepal (1996 Mahakali Treaty) and Bangladesh (1996 Ganges Water Treaty), a similar agreement with China remains elusive. The question of whether India should pursue such a treaty is complex, demanding a careful assessment of geopolitical realities and hydrological considerations.
Current Situation & Existing Framework
Currently, there is no formal treaty between India and China regarding the Brahmaputra. A Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) on sharing hydrological information was signed in 2013, but it lacks legally binding commitments. China maintains that its projects are run-of-the-river and do not significantly impact downstream flows. However, India remains skeptical, citing a lack of transparency and the potential for large-scale water diversion projects.
Arguments in Favour of a Treaty
- Enhanced Water Security: A treaty could provide India with assurances regarding minimum water flows, mitigating the risk of water scarcity, especially during the dry season.
- Dispute Resolution Mechanism: A formal agreement would establish a mechanism for resolving disputes related to water sharing and dam construction.
- Increased Transparency: A treaty could mandate China to share more detailed hydrological data and provide advance notification of any major projects.
- Regional Cooperation: A successful treaty could foster greater trust and cooperation between India and China on other transboundary issues.
Arguments Against a Treaty
- Asymmetry in Power Dynamics: The significant power imbalance between India and China could lead to an unfavorable treaty for India. China’s upstream position gives it considerable leverage.
- China’s Past Record: China’s reluctance to enter into comprehensive water-sharing treaties with other countries raises doubts about its willingness to genuinely cooperate.
- Verification Challenges: Ensuring compliance with a treaty would be difficult due to the remoteness and inaccessibility of the Tibetan plateau.
- Potential for Political Leverage: China might use the treaty as a tool to exert political pressure on India.
Comparison with Existing Treaties
| Country | Treaty | Key Features |
|---|---|---|
| Nepal | Mahakali Treaty (1996) | Joint development of Mahakali River, water sharing, power generation. |
| Bangladesh | Ganges Water Treaty (1996) | Guaranteed water sharing during the dry season, joint monitoring of river flows. |
| China (Proposed) | Brahmaputra Treaty (Hypothetical) | Potential for hydrological data sharing, dispute resolution, minimum flow guarantees. (Currently non-existent) |
Alternative Approaches
Instead of a comprehensive treaty, India could explore alternative approaches such as strengthening the existing MoU, promoting scientific cooperation on hydrological research, and engaging in Track II diplomacy to build trust and understanding. Focusing on data sharing and joint monitoring could be a pragmatic first step.
Conclusion
While a comprehensive water-sharing treaty with China on the Brahmaputra would ideally provide India with greater water security and a mechanism for dispute resolution, the current geopolitical realities and China’s reluctance to enter into binding agreements make it a challenging prospect. A phased approach, prioritizing data sharing, scientific cooperation, and confidence-building measures, may be more realistic and beneficial in the short to medium term. India must simultaneously invest in water conservation and management strategies to enhance its resilience to potential water stress.
Answer Length
This is a comprehensive model answer for learning purposes and may exceed the word limit. In the exam, always adhere to the prescribed word count.