The idea of interlinking rivers was first mooted in 1858 by British irrigation engineer Sir Arthur Cotton, who came up with ambitious proposals to connect all major rivers of India with interlinking canals. Post independence, in 1972, the then irrigation Minister Dr. K.L.Rao proffered a “Ganga-Cauvery” link canal and subsequently in 1977 Captain Dinshaw J. Dastur, a former airline pilot, proposed a “National Garland Canal” scheme. But both ideas were not found to be techno-economically feasible for implementation. Thereafter in August 1980, the Ministry of Irrigation formulated the “National Perspectives for Water Development” and established a National Water Development Agency (NWDA) as a Government of India Society under the Ministry of Water Resources.
The idea was to study river basin-wise surpluses and deficits, apart from exploring the possibilities for storages and links for transfer of water. NWDA technocrats, accordingly, initiated the design for interlinking of rivers to transfer excess water from the regions receiving a lot of rainfall to drought-prone zones. The project however remained in a dormant state until President Dr. A.P.J.Abdul Kalam, declared in his 2002 pre-Independence Day address to the nation that interlinking of rivers was inescapable if India had to solve her flood and drought problems. Taking a cue from this, the Supreme Court, in response to a petition, directed the government to finalise a plan for interlinking rivers by 2003 and execute it by 2016. A Task Force was constituted to look into NWDA’s plan for 30 high-capacity river-linking canals – 14 Himalayan and 16 Peninsular – with a total length of 14,900 km, costing Rs.5.6-lakh-crores.
Internal Security Dimension
While the momentum for river interlinking gained ground, its internal security dimension was never considered minutely, despite the fact that a sizable portion of the proposed projects falls in traditional insurgency hit areas. It seems, the successes in fettering home-bred insurgencies made the policymakers overconfident, thus forgetting conveniently that India is a land of million mutinies. A 2009 International Water Management Institute study estimated half a million-displacement due to river-interlinking, which, in fact, is a conservative assessment. The fact is, there will be subterranean disgruntlement due to sentimental reasons of losing native lands and properties, and traditional livelihood in addition to inevitable gaps in compensation process. And the strategic impact will be massive with almost the whole of India sitting on a powder keg waiting to be lit by the adversaries. Sadly, the future generation will reap what is being sowed today. Most importantly, the mind-boggling estimated cost for the complete river interlinking project in India is currently pegged at Rs. 8.5 lakh crore, which can potentially rise to around Rs. 21.9 lakh crore due to technical adjustments and inflation. Though spread over a period of time, these are non-returnable, fiscally imprudent expenditure with gigantic human and environmental costs. An analysis of 103 years of weather data (1901-2004) done by researchers from Mumbai and Chennai IIT reveals that there is just not enough water in the surplus basins to interlink rivers across India. Therefore, in an era of climate uncertainty, India simply took a gamble for a deceptively attractive idea, conceived in a different time, to try and mitigate flood and drought simultaneously.
Think Outside the Box
On interlinking of rivers, Arjun Thapan – eminent water expert and formerly chair of UNESCO’s International Hydrological Programme Advisory Board – takes a very different but pragmatic view which contradicts the popular one that it is necessary, though may not be easy, to transfer surplus water from one basin to another where shortages prevail. “Shortages are the function of inefficiency, both in terms of water source development and abstraction, and in its usage,” says Thapan. He explains that India’s irrigation efficiencies are among the lowest globally. Non-revenue waters in urban centres are at an all-time high. The industries sector is a profligate user of water and fossil fuel-based power plants that dominate the country’s energy mix still consume substantial quantities of water. “And you will note that there is no regulation of water use. Demand management is absent. Groundwater anarchy continues unabated” – Thapan laments, adding “the issue, therefore, is bringing additional water from a currently surplus basin without optimising the efficient abstraction and use of available water in the receiving basin will only perpetuate the inefficiencies and it will not be long before a water crisis emerges again.”
The eminent water expert also suggests how important it is to note that current analysis of river flows, precipitation and flood scenarios – all of which are used to determine seasonal and non-seasonal surpluses – are hugely susceptible to climate impacts. While climate forecast models are a great deal more accurate today than they were a decade ago, we are continuing to see climate forecasts go awry and water crises persist globally. As somebody famously said “If climate change is linked to a shark, then water is its teeth”. It is hardly wise to play with a shark; it would be a lot wiser to make efficient use of the teeth.