Author: admin

In the wake of the Pakistan-sponsored terrorist attack in Pahalgam, India intensified its strategic response, not only diplomatically and militarily but also hydrologically — by suspending the Indus Water Treaty (IWT) which governs sharing of water flowing to Pakistan from the Indus river system. Pakistan, which depends largely on water flowing from India for its agricultural production, has warned that India blocking the water flowing to Pakistan will be considered an act of war. However, undeterred by Pakistan’s threats, India is preparing another water shock for Pakistan.

The Indian government is set to revive the long-stalled Tulbul Navigation Project in Jammu & Kashmir, PTI has reported based on information from sources. A detailed project report (DPR) for the Tulbul project is being prepared and is expected to take about a year to complete. This move, which comes amid the suspension of the IWT, underscores a significant policy shift: leveraging water resources as a means of strategic assertion.

Also Read | Pakistan will be starved of water and India will never restore Indus water treaty, says Amit ShahWhat is the Tulbul Navigation Project?
The Tulbul Navigation Project (TNP) is a controlled storage facility on the Jhelum River near Sopore in the Kashmir Valley. Originally conceived in 1984, the project aimed to construct a 439-foot long and 40-foot wide navigation lock-cum-control structure at the mouth of the Wular Lake, one of the largest freshwater lakes in Asia.

The purpose of the project was to ensure navigability of the Jhelum River during lean seasons by regulating outflows from the Wular Lake. By storing around 300,000 acre-feet of water, the project was designed to maintain a minimum draught of 4.5 feet, enabling barge traffic between Baramulla and Srinagar. This would not only facilitate inland water transport, but also improve irrigation and generate potential for hydropower optimization downstream.

The Central government had started work on this project in 1984, but stopped it a year later following Pakistan’s strong objections. Pakistan in 1986 took the issue to the Indus Waters Commission, following which the project was abandoned in 1987.The work was restarted in 2010, with the then irrigation minister of J&K, Taj Mohideen, stating that Article 9 of IWT permitted such projects meant for non-consumptive use. In 2012, unidentified terrorists lobbed a grenade towards a bund raised by the workers for the project. In 2016, Taj claimed that the Omar-led NC-Congress (2008-2014) govt had completed almost 80 per cent of the project after redesigning it with a total estimated cost of Rs 50 crore, in contrast to the original project designed in 1980s at Rs 500 crore. He accused the PDP-BJP (2015-2018) govt of abandoning the project. Taj argued that water storage in the Wullar barrage would significantly benefit the downstream power projects by sustaining electricity generation during the winter months, when they see a sharp decline in output.

Also Read | India slams Pakistan’s ‘charade’ on Kishenganga, Ratle dams; trashes ‘illegal’ Court of Arbitration’s new ruling

How Tulbul project can benefit India, and why Pakistan opposes it
Under the IWT, India was allocated the eastern rivers (Ravi, Beas and Sutlej), while the western rivers (Indus, Jhelum and Chenab) were allocated to Pakistan, with limited rights for India. India is allowed to use water from the western rivers for non-consumptive purposes like navigation, power generation and limited storage. The Tulbul Project aligns with these permissible uses. By regulating flows, India can maximize its share of water under the treaty, avoiding wastage of its rights while improving water availability during lean periods.

In the context of cross-border terrorism and Pakistan’s continued hostility, the project serves as a pressure point. Water, historically viewed as a cooperative resource, is now being reconsidered as a tool of strategic diplomacy. The resumption of Tulbul sends a strong signal that India will no longer remain passive while its treaty rights are undermined or while Pakistan continues to support non-state actors across the border.

The Jhelum river route was historically a vital trade artery. Reviving this navigation route will boost local commerce, create jobs and improve connectivity in the Kashmir Valley. Given the government’s broader push for inland waterways, this project fits into a national strategy of reducing dependence on road transport and improving logistics efficiency. Though Tulbul itself is not a hydropower project, its ability to regulate water flow can support downstream hydropower generation at projects like Uri-I and Uri-II. It can help stabilize water flow, enhance efficiency and reduce flood damage risks in the valley.

Pakistan has consistently objected to the Tulbul Navigation Project since its inception, and construction was halted in 1987 due to Islamabad’s protests. The core of Pakistan’s opposition lies in the perceived violation of the IWT provisions. Pakistan argues that the storage capacity of 300,000 acre-feet gives India the ability to manipulate water flows during critical periods, especially during the sowing season in Pakistan’s Punjab province. While India views the project as permissible under the IWT (which allows non-consumptive use including navigation), Pakistan sees it as an attempt to store water in violation of the treaty’s constraints on India’s use of the western rivers.

India’s revival of the Tulbul Project can be seen in light of a broader reassessment of the IWT, which has long been criticized within India for being overly generous. In suspending the treaty after the Pahalgam attack, India is signaling a willingness to challenge long-standing conventions that no longer serve its security or developmental interests. This policy shift is also likely influenced by China’s assertive use of water in the Brahmaputra basin. India now seems to be shedding its past restraint and adopting a more realist doctrine on transboundary rivers.

However, this move also raises the stakes in the ongoing India-Pakistan tensions. Pakistan has already warned that any attempt to block or manipulate water flows would be considered an “act of war”.

The Kashmir politics over Tulbul
The Tulbul project has been a contentious issue in J&K. After suspension of the IWT, local politics is simmering over the Tulbul project. In May, J&K Chief Minister Omar Abdullah and former CM Mehbooba Mufti engaged in a war of words over reinstating the Tulbul Navigation Project. The argument started after Abdullah suggested a possible resumption of construction at the Tulbul Navigation Barrage on Wullar Lake, considering the suspension of the IWT. “The Wular lake in North Kashmir. The civil works you see in the video is the Tulbul Navigation Barrage. It was started in the early 1980s but had to be abandoned under pressure from Pakistan citing the Indus Water Treaty. Now that the IWT has been ‘temporarily suspended’ I wonder if we will be able to resume the project,” Abdullah posted on his personal X handle.

Taking to X, Mufti replied to Abdullah’s post: “At a time when both nations have just stepped back from the brink of war—with Jammu and Kashmir once again paying the highest price through loss of innocent lives, destruction, and suffering—such provocative statements are deeply irresponsible.” She stressed that J&K residents need tranquillity and constancy, rather than political actions that could heighten tensions. “Weaponizing water—a source of life—is not only inhumane, but it also threatens to internationalize an issue that must remain strictly bilateral,” she noted.

Replying to Mufti’s remarks, Abdullah wrote, “Actually what is unfortunate is that with your blind lust to try to score cheap publicity points & please some people sitting across the border, you refuse to acknowledge that the IWT has been one of the biggest historic betrayals of the interests of the people of J&K. I have always opposed this treaty & I will continue to do so. Opposing a blatantly unfair treaty is in no way, shape, size or form warmongering, it’s about correcting a historic injustice that denied the people of J&K the right to use our water for ourselves.”

(With agency and TOI inputs)