Damming the Indus: 'hordes' of Chinese tourists will pour in to visit the 'last paradise on earth'

My article Damming the Indus: 'hordes' of Chinese tourists will pour in to visit the 'last paradise on earth' appeared in Mail Today/Mail Online

Here is the link...

On the occasion of the opening of the One Belt One Road (OBOR) forum in Beijing, President Xi Jinping urged countries across the globe to join hands with China in pursuit of globalisation: 'We have no intention to form a small group detrimental to stability. What we hope to create is a big family of harmonious co-existence.'
India has some doubts about the 'big family'. Take the example of the China- Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), an OBOR's offshoot; it crosses Gilgit- Baltistan (GB), considered by India an integral part of Jammu & Kashmir.
Not only has China pushed Islamabad to make GB a fifth province of Pakistan, but according to CNN-News18.com, 'Information and interviews exclusively accessed by CNN-News18 showed that the land was procured mostly by force by Pakistani generals for the CPEC and those resisting are either killed off or incarcerated without a trial.'
Pakistan's Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif (L) shakes hands with China's President Xi Jinping, ahead of the Belt and Road Forum, in Beijing on May 13, 2017
Pakistan's Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif (L) shakes hands with China's President Xi Jinping, ahead of the Belt and Road Forum, in Beijing on May 13, 2017
Wajahat Hasan, chairman of the Gilgit-Baltistan Thinkers Forum, told the same channel: 'Thousands had their land snatched and occupied by the military authorities and their agencies.
'Under this black draconian rule, nobody can raise their voices against the CPEC.'

Issue Another worrying issue: when Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif visited China to attend the forum, a memorandum of understanding (MoU) was signed to fund and build five mega hydroelectric power (HEP) projects.
The Pakistani press spoke of an Indus cascade of dams, two of them costing $27 billion (`17,000 crore), being located in GB.
The Pakistani newspaper, The Express Tribune, had earlier claimed that Pakistan and China would develop the North Indus River Cascade with an investment of $50 billion (`32,000 crore) to generate up to 40,000 MW hydro power.
According to Pakistan's Water and Power Development Authority (WAPDA), the Indus cascade will start from GB to reach the existing Tarbela dam downstream, not far from Islamabad.
At the MoU-signing ceremony, Nawaz Sharif affirmed: 'Development of the North Indus Cascade is a major focus of my government and the construction of Diamer-Basha Dam is the single most important initiative in this regard.'
He added, 'Water and food security are of paramount importance for Pakistan keeping in view the challenges posed by climate change.'
A 7,100 MW HEP project will be built at Bunji on the way to Skardu, the capital of Baltistan.
Though described by WAPDA as a run-of-the-river (RoR) project, it is clearly not one, as it will have a 22- km-long reservoir which will inundate 12- km of the road between Gilgit and Skardu.
The next dam is the Diamer-Basha HEP with a potential of 4,500 MW. The Diamer-Basha reservoir will submerge some 104 km of the Karakoram Highway and displace about 30,000 people, admits the WAPDA.
It will cost $15 billion(`965 crore). Both projects follow the Karakoram Highway in GB. Joydeep Gupta, a water expert, explained in a news portal: 'The Diamer- Basha dam is being promoted by WAPDA as a sediment trap and therefore good for downstream hydropower projects. But the same sediment — mainly silt — rejuvenates the soil downstream every year and has been the main reason why agriculture has been sustained in the Indus valley for millennia.'
But this does not bother the Pakistan politicians.

Projects
The other projects (the 4,320 MW Dasu HEP, the 2,200 MW Patan HEP, the 4,000 MW Thakot HEP using four headrace tunnels to divert waters and generate electricity) are located in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province.
A 'lost' Saraswati river in the making? It has now been scientifically proved that big dams are not sustainable for several reasons; the first one being the amount of silt retained behind the dam, which stops nourishing downstream areas.
Interestingly, there is a movement in the United States to progressively decommission all large dams, which 'kills' the river, with many species of fishes unable to migrate upstream.
Another important factor is the strong 'dam lobby' in China which smells the billion dollars; it has been active since the time of Premier Li Peng and his mega Three Gorges dam.
Nepal too seems to have fallen prey to this lobby. Nepal's ministry of energy recently signed an MoU with China Gezhouba Group Corporation (CGGC) for the development of a 1,200 MW Budhigandaki HEP, which will be the biggest hydro project in Nepal.
The agreement was signed at the prime minister's residence, with the Chinese Ambassador to Nepal in attendance.
The dam will be built under the 'engineering, procurement, construction and finance' model. It means that CGGC will help arrange soft or commercial loans from China.

Warning
Already in August 2010, warning bells have been ringing in the corridors of South Block in Delhi.
The well-informed journalist, Selig Harrison, then wrote in The New York Times that according to 'a variety of foreign intelligence sources, Pakistani journalists and Pakistani human rights workers', two important new developments in Gilgit-Baltistan were taking place: 'a simmering rebellion against Pakistani rule and the influx of an estimated 7,000 to 11,000 soldiers of the People's Liberation Army'.
Tomorrow, tens of thousands of Chinese workers (17,000 for the Daimer-Basha HEP only) will come to GB; a decade or so later, when the work is completed, many will 'buy' land from Pakistan and settle for good in the area.
Further, China is bound to develop GB as a 'special' tourist destination (once the basic infrastructure is in place for the dams) and ultimately hordes of Chinese tourists will pour in to visit the 'last paradise on earth'.
How will India react? The time has perhaps come to think about this. Does Delhi want a China Town in Skardu or Gilgit? One of the solutions is to renegotiate the Indus-Water Treaty, signed in 1960 between India and Pakistan. With the latest developments, it seems completely outdated today.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/indiahome/indianews/article-4591970/Damming-Indus-hordes-Chinese-tourists-visit.html#ixzz4jkNB4trV
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

How can we trust China?

My article How can we trust China? appeared in The Statesman.

Here is the lnk...

On Christmas Day, The New York Times reported: “Within a few days, water that has travelled more than 800 miles for two weeks in one of the world’s most ambitious, and controversial, engineering projects is expected to begin flowing through Beijing faucets.”
The objective of the scheme is to bring water from the upper reaches of the Han river, a tributary of the Yangtze, through the central route of the South-to-North Water Diversion project, the second of three routes planned to transfer water from China’s wet south to the dry north. Once fully functional, the Central Diversion is expected to provide a third of the capital’s water needs.
The project is estimated at $ 80 billion, says Xinhua, adding: “The completi on of the water sche me mar ked major prog ress in the na ti on’s enormo us south-to-nor th water diversion project, the largest of its kind in the world.”
The official news agency boasts: “It is ano ther engineering achi evement by the Chi ne se,” quoting the Beijing-Hangzhou Grand Canal, the wor l d’s longest man-made river, opened in the 13th century for transporting grain.
The pros and the cons of the present project will continue to be debated in the months and years to come; in the meanwhile, some researchers in China have thought of another smaller ‘pilot’ project Rs to divert the Indus river towards Xinjiang. A detailed report on the scheme is posted by a blogger on the website ScienceNet.cn
Beijing will argue that this new project is merely the product of the fertile brain of some freelance scientists, and that it has ‘nothing to do with the government’.
You may ask, what is this ScienceNet.cn? According to Wikipedia: “ScienceNet.cn is a science virtual community and science blog,” launched by Science Times Media Group (STMG) and supported by the Chinese Academy of Scienc es, the Chinese Academy of Engineering, and the National Natural Science Foundation of China “with the mission of establishing a global Chinese science community.”
Since January 2007, more than 5,000 scientists and graduate students have posted their papers on ScienceNet. Its editorial board claims that it has been ranking first among Chinese science websites.
The blogger quotes Chinese researchers who argue that the other planned ‘diversions’ require extremely complicated construction plans, large investments, long building periods and face a lot of engineering problems due to the complexity of the issues involved (I would add, and ‘displacing millions of people’). It makes these projects difficult to undertake, while a small-scale one, with low investment and quickly realizable, could be an ideal pilot project.
The ‘researchers’ propose to add a South-Western segment to the Western Diversion Route (not yet started), which is the third part of the South-to-North Water Diversion project. It would involve the diversion of the waters from the Indus river in Western Tibet (before it enters Ladakh) towards the Tarim Basin in Xinjiang. According to the authors, the scheme would meet the requirements of a ‘pilot’ scheme.
In summary, the ‘scientists’ explain that the water diversion project referred to in their paper could be called “the South Western section of Western Route Project”; wa ter could be taken from the Tibetan Plateau in the West and brought by gravity to the Tarim Basin in Xinjiang. The text describes the preliminary survey of the South-Western part of the Western Route Project. The size of the diversion programme and a brief description of China’s north-west after the transfer of the Indus’ water, are given. The main conclusion is that the diversion will help maintain long-term stability in Xinjiang. The paper explains why and sugges ts deepening the research before an early implementation of the South-Western section.
According to the ‘resear chers’, the diversion of the Ind us could bring ten benefits to China:

1. It could increase the total amount of water resources in the Tarim Basin, which is located in the hinterland of Taklima kan Desert and suffers from important sand dune mobility. In this highly arid region, which re ceives low precipitations, wa ter is extremely valuable.
2. The diversion could increase the local hydropower capacity. Water would flow from the high Qinghai-Tibet plateau, at an elevation of over 3,000 [in fact 4,000] meters and at the receiving end, water would be at only 1,500 meters above sea level.
3. Once this section is completed, the water could create an oasis in the desert. The Western section would transform an entire region into an oasis; it would further bring a great return on the investment.
4. Once the project is fully implemented, the total amount of water resources locally available could greatly increase; it could provide a substantial increase in the amo unt of hydroelectric power; the desert could become an oasis, it could improve the ecological environment, which in turn could promote local economic development of the region and the living standards of the local people.
5. According to some scientific hypotheses, the water brought by the diversion could also increase precipitations in the region.
6. The research says that the new oasis could in turn ‘curb global warming’ [sic]. If the global warming argument is indeed correct, say the ‘scientists’, the South-Western section could increase the rainfall in China; this counter-measure could help curb global warming for the entire humanity; this is why the diversion project must be able to get the global support and backing of most countries (what about India?). China can then get a substantial increase in the local precipitation; the desert in the north-west (Xinjiang) would disappear; the desert would become an oasis which would be able to grow food and have power plants; humans would be able to reduce the need for fossil fuels; after additional diversion, the oasis would absorb large amounts of greenhouse gases each year, thus it would achieve the goal of curbing global warming. What an argument!
   But that is not all:
7. It could contribute to China’s food and energy security. After the diversion, the desert turned-oasis could increase the country’s arable land for China to contribute to world food security.
8. The western development could make a significant contribution by reducing regional disparities. China’s population distribution is unbalanced; the development gap between China and western regions and other regions is too large; it has been extremely detrimental to the country’s development.
   And now the cherry on the cake:
9. The diversion could strengthen China’s actual control of Aksai Chin, and help to resolve the territorial dispute. The Sino-Indian border has not been formally delimited in the Aksai Chin and Pangong Lake areas; there are some territorial disputes (with India). The water diversion project, through Aksai Chin, could help the actual control of this region; the implementation of the project could also help to resolve the territorial dispute (with India).
10. Finally, the project could promote national unity and maintain long-term stability of Xinjiang. This, according to the authors, is the main benefit of the South-Western section  the long-term stability of Xinjiang.

This ‘easy’ pilot project does not, of course, take into account what the neighbours (including China’s all-weather friend, Pakistan) would have to say. That may not make the pilot project so simple after all!
The question is, while Beijing is very quick to remove internet content which contests its rule, why is such a crazy and highly objectionable project allowed to be posted on a semi-government website?
Similarly, the website of the Yellow River Conservancy Commission of China’s Ministry of Water Resources has a 50-page report on the diversion of the Brahmaputra, and though Beijing denies any bad intention, the project remains on the ‘official’ website.
How can we trust China?

China’s dam dreams, India’s water worries

My article China’s dam dreams, India’s water worries appeared in the Edit Page of The Pioneer today. 

Here is the link...

As a lower riparian country, Delhi has often taken up the issue of launching the first unit of the run-of-river hydropower plant with Beijing, which has repeatedly assured India that no such project is on the cards

It took some 16 days of talk in Lima, Peru, for the international delegates to approve a framework for setting national pledges to be submitted to the conference in Paris next year. Environmental groups say that the deal was a bad compromise, as divisions between rich and poor countries over how to fulfil carbon-emission pledges persist. This is very ominous for the planet in 2015.
As the new year approaches, let us take a look at some other issues related to climate change and water in the subcontinent and beyond, particularly on the Tibetan plateau.
A few days ago, Xinhua spoke of the ‘domino effect on water supply’, after a comprehensive study into China’s glacial ice shows an average a 244 sq km of glaciers disappearing every year; the news agency added: “China’s glaciers have retreated by 18 per cent over the past half century”. The Chinese glaciologists “warn of ‘chain effects’ that could have an impact on water supplies in the country’s western regions” …and India, one should add.
The figures come from the survey of China’s glaciers conducted by the Chinese Academy of Sciences, which found that, “China had 48,571 glaciers in its western provinces, including Xinjiang, the Tibetan region as well as Qinghai, Sichuan and Gansu provinces (also part of the Tibetan plateau).” This is not encouraging news. Despite a shortage of water in the long-term, China nevertheless continues to dam rivers originating from the third pole (as Tibet is known in environmental parlance).
In November, the Indian Press reverberated with anxiety on the launching of the first unit of the run-of-river hydropower plant at Zangmu on the Yarlung Tsangpo, (which becomes the Siang and later the Brahmaputra). Xinhua announced: “Tibet’s largest hydropower station became partly operational, harnessing the rich water resources of the Yarlung Zangbo (Tsangpo) River to develop the electricity-strapped region.”
The power plant (costing $1.5 billion) is located at 3,300 meters above sea level; once completed, it will have a height of 116 metres for a length of 390 meter; it is 19 meter wide at the top and 76 meter wide at the bottom.
Other generating units are due for completion in 2015. Xinhua asserted that the entire project, which “straddles the middle reaches of the roaring Yarlung Tsangpo River, will have a total installed capacity of 510 megawatts upon completion”.
Liu Xiaoming, an official of the State Grid’s Tibet Electric Power Co affirmed: “The hydropower station will solve Tibet’s power shortage, especially in the winter.” But what about the environment? And what about India downstream?
Lobsang Gyaltsen, the head of the Tibetan Government in Lhasa affirmed: “The region has strived to protect the environment throughout construction. The hydro-plant is a good example of clean energy development.”
Mr Gyaltsen is probably not aware that run-of-river plants are not today considered ‘clean’ anymore, as the life of the river between the ‘intake’ of the diversion and the power station downstream gets badly affected. The Indian Government has even admitted that the run-of-river plants exacerbated the outcome of the disastrous floods in Uttarakhand last year.
Zangmu, the only hydro-power plant on the Yarlung Tsangpo, once completed, would probably be acceptable to India, but China plans to have a cascade of five other dams along the river at Jia Cha, Lengda, Zhongda, Jie Xu and Lang Chen.
In April 2013, the Indian Inter-Ministerial Expert Group on Brahmaputra stated: “Jia Cha could be the next hydroelectric project on the mainstream of Brahmaputra river. It may be followed by hydroelectric projects at Lengda, Zhongda, Langzhen, where dam related peripheral infrastructural activity (including four new bridges) has gathered speed.”
More frightening is the possibility of a mega-dam on the Great Bend of the Yarlung Tsangpo, the IMEG warned: “China is carrying out series of cascading run-of-river projects in the middle reaches of Brahmaputra, the same may be replicated in the Great Bend Area as a viable alternative to a single mega project.”
For China, it probably makes sense, technically and economically. The opening of the tunnel to Metok, near the Indian border, in November 2013 is another part of the gigantic puzzle; it may have been the turning point for the proposed mega project.  As a lower riparian country, India is rightly worried. Delhi has often taken up the issue with Beijing which has repeatedly assured India that no such project is on the cards.
In the meantime, India should carefully and scientifically monitor, not only the flow of the Siang, but also the quality of the waters. Article 12 of the ‘Implementation Plan’ signed in June between Indian and China for providing ‘Hydrological Information of the Yarlung Tsangpo/Brahmaputra river in flood season by China to India’ says that “after mutual consultation through diplomatic channel, the parties may dispatch hydrological experts to each other’s country to conduct study tour”.
Why can’t Delhi ask Beijing’s permission to send a team of hydrological experts to visit the dam and get some clarity on what is going on? Another worrying event is the launching of a new electricity grid linking the Tibet Autonomous Region to Sichuan Province. The ceremony was presided over by Yu Zhengsheng, the member of the Standing Committee of the Politburo.
Xinhua reported that the $1.08 billion project, linking Chamdo in the Tibet Autonomous Region to Garze in Sichuan Province, aims at “putting an end to the electricity shortages of the 5,00,000 residents of the Chamdo region and ease power strain in Tibet as a whole”.
Why does Tibet require so much electricity, if Tibet produces its own? Could this investment be used to build the mega-dam? Another alarming news! Some Chinese researchers have thought of a smaller ‘pilot’ project: To divert the Indus river towards Xinjiang. The project is posted on sciencenet.cn, a science blog launched by Science Times Media Group and supported amongst others by the Chinese Academy of Sciences. The blogger quotes some Chinese researchers who argue that the big planned ‘diversions’ require large investments, long construction periods and face a lot of engineering problems. They suggest a ‘small-scale’ scheme, with low investment, which could be quickly realisable.
They would add a western segment to the western diversion route, by diverting waters from the Indus river, north of Ladakh to the Tarim Basin in Xinjiang. This would meet, according to them, the requirements of a ‘pilot’ scheme.
The blog mentions some preliminary survey, the size of the diversion and describes today-parched Xinjiang after the water transfer. Their main conclusion is that the diversion will help maintaining long-term stability in Xinjiang; it also suggests some more surveys. This ‘easy’ pilot project does not, of course, take into account what the neighbours (including China’s all-weather friend, Pakistan) will have to say.
All this does not bode well for 2015.