H2O (two molecules of hydrogen and a single molecule of oxygen) is not merely the scientific nomenclature of the most precious liquid on our planet called ‘Water’, but it is also quintessentially termed as ‘Life’ as well as ‘Lifeblood’ of a living being, especially in the human habitat (hamlet/village/region/nation), for survival along with a plethora of other needs.
That’s why, most of the human civilizations have historically and geographically got carved out on the banks of rivers, rivulets, brooks or streams or a perennial water resource.
Be it the ancient Roman Civilization on river Tiber, Mesopotamian on the rivers of Tigris and Euphrates, Egyptian along the lower reaches of the Nile river, Hwang Ho Valley Civilization of China or our own Indus Valley or Gangetic Valley Civilizations of ancient Dravidian and Aryan (Vedic) cultures.
Pertinent to note that, the most common water uses include: drinking and household needs, agriculture & irrigation, industry & commerce, generating thermo/hydro electricity& energy and last but not least – recreation.
Nevertheless, a million-dollar question is being raised on the allegedly insufficient ‘water security’ for which the states in our federal democracy are reportedly marred by, if we go by the several instances of water-sharing disputes being encountered.
Some of the nagging cases in point are: the Kaveri (Cauvery) River Water Dispute between our two Indian states of Tamil Nadu and Karnataka for an equitable sharing of water, Polavaram Dam project dispute among the three adjoining Indian states of Andhra Pradesh, Odisha and Chhattisgarh, Mahanadi water-sharing conflict between the neighbouring states of Odisha and Chhattisgarh, and above all the unresolved Teesta River dispute between India and Bangladesh.
As per reports, Teesta is a 414 km long river flowing through the Indian states of West Bengal, Sikkim before flowing into the Bay of Bengal through Bangladesh. It is the fourth transboundary river shared between India and Bangladesh after the Ganges (river Ganga), Brahmaputra and Meghna river systems.
While Bangladesh is demanding a lion’s share from the Teesta river water distribution, the river is claimed to be the lifeline of North Bengal and half a dozen of the districts of West Bengal are dependent on the waters of Teesta.
Given such a sweet-and-sour scenario, the experts now vehemently bat for ‘water federalism’ in which they reportedly advocate for the exigency of working in tandem with the State Governments steered by the Union (Central) Government so that the ‘interstate river water disputes’ could be amicably settled for once and all.
Religious thrust on ‘Water Governance’ and ‘Water Management’ has become a need of hour so that a robust ‘national water security’ is evolved out that could transform into tangible outcomes in terms of socio-economic and cultural benefits for both the public exchequer as well as general public.
Thus, the national discourse on ‘Water Federalism’ initiated by the Centre for Policy Research (CPR) last year has reportedly rendered strong recommendations for an immaculate improvement in the Centre-States camaraderie in our federal structure of governance in a bid to aptly achieve long-term developmental benefits.
We know that most of the wars have been fought over ‘land’ because owning or invading land being the apple of discord/bone of contention among individuals and kingdoms/rulers, while it is being repeatedly warned, “The wars of the future will be fought over water.”
This ‘water wars thesis’ is often referred to keeping in view the growing water scarcity that could drive and ignite violent conflicts between communities, localities, states and nations.
Such a prognostic prophecy of Armageddon (a catastrophic conflict likely to devastate the world or the human race) for water sharing/scarcity needs to be preempted.