Conflicts are never easily explained. The Cauvery row is something that has been dragging on across centuries from the late 19th century to the second decade of the 21st century without a solution - political, judicial, moral or scientific. To imagine then that to invest conflicts with violence is going to solve them is so foolish as to be obvious to everyone. Disagreements over sharing of water will never go away - and not only national. All upper riparian states are necessarily first and aggressive claimants as we know from our experience with China over the Brahmaputra or India itself with the Ganga as Bangladesh would vouch.
It may have appeared too fanciful when it was first said that the next World War would be fought over water, but the prophecy may be nearer its Nostradamus moment. Technologies are too expensive right now but one day man would conquer sea water to the extent of ridding it of its salts and in a modern form of alchemy convert Blue Gold into White Gold and make it usable and potable at a much lesser cost than desalination plants are doing at the moment. Maybe that day, Tamil Nadu, with its 700-kms coastline would not be too bothered by the aggravations over the sharing of river water.
Amid this latest bout of confrontations over an unsolvable problem of equitable river water sharing, Tamil Nadu stood out for the manner in which it conducted itself peacefully in marking its protest over events. Chennai was exemplary in there being no coercion in enforcing the bandh while it was more total in the Cauvery Delta where the feelings must run high over the Samba season waiting for irrigation water. There too the show of solidarity seemed spontaneous rather than forced, or maybe fear kept people indoors while the bandh hours waned.
Chennai was normal enough for offices to work, indicating there was a sensible approach to an issue that is at a tipping point after the incidents of bus burning in Bengaluru. The top court strictures may have helped harden the State’s official stand in not supporting this show of solidarity with the cause of the farmers, who people may have forgotten are the worst affected in not getting water for their food crops. It is a different issue that Tamil Nadu farmers must go off the water intensive crops like rice and sugarcane, but then the support price for rice and the corporate demand for sugarcane byproducts make these crops far better propositions for the farmers.
In the short term, no purpose might be served in looking for political or even solutions from the judiciary, however well based are the findings of the justice system based on expert inputs on water availability. The point is the dispute arises only in years of bad monsoons because in the event of nature being bountiful the upper riparian state has no way of holding more water than the four dams on this river can hold. In years of plenty, the only woes are those caused by flooding as the rivers swell and surge in feeding the lifeline for two major states, besides meeting the obligations to others with a legal and acceptable claim to a share.
The suggestion to nationalise all rivers is too fanciful; an impossibility in the political sense. No set of regional politicians would like to lose control over events because everything must seem to come from their largesse and it is far too late to seek such a remedy just to iron out the problem of one river. The rights of littoral states are well defined in international law although the global experience is conflicts abound there too and issues are piling up for arbitration.
The nearest nd best Indian example of river water sharing is of the Beas which is managed by the Bhakra-Beas Management Board.
The Cauvery somehow never lent itself to such a pat solution, maybe because it started out as a dispute between the British and the Mysore maharaja and the colonials were certain to have preferred the Madras Presidency over which they ruled than a princely state.
The scientific solution being spoken about hinges on more accurate measurement of inflows and outflows from all dams and also canals into ayacuts. Again this would have to be done by a central authority and to get the upper riparian state to agree to this would be a herculean task. Let’s just say that the prevailing wisdom, encumbered by regional pulls and prejudices, has no way of suggesting a real solution. Nature is the best provider and sometimes it even makes sense when people just stand in the dry bed of the Cauvery and pray.
