The Green Pakistan Initiative (GPI), recently launched by the Punjab government with the federal government’s backing, has been presented as a visionary step towards transforming the barren Cholistan region into fertile agricultural land. The stated goals of food security and economic upliftment through modernised farming techniques are indeed commendable. However, while such initiatives hold promise, they must be executed within the constitutional framework, ensuring equitable resource distribution and inter-provincial consensus—an aspect glaringly absent in this case.
The project’s central controversy stems from its reliance on the already overburdened Indus River to feed newly proposed canals in Punjab. Sindh, the lower riparian province, has consistently raised concerns over reduced water flows and the devastating impact such diversions have on its agriculture, drinking water supply, and the fragile Indus Delta ecosystem. The province is already suffering from acute water shortages, yet the federal and Punjab governments have moved forward with the project unilaterally, without addressing legitimate reservations or invoking constitutional mechanisms designed for precisely such disputes. This disregard for Sindh’s concerns is not just an administrative failure; it is an outright assault on the principles of federalism.
Pakistan’s Constitution provides clear guidelines to resolve inter-provincial conflicts over water distribution. Article 153 establishes the Council of Common Interests (CCI) to oversee and mediate such matters, ensuring no province is unfairly deprived of its rightful resources. Additionally, the 1991 Water Apportionment Accord explicitly delineates provincial water shares, a binding agreement that should have been the primary reference before initiating any new irrigation infrastructure. The Indus River System Authority (IRSA) is another institution tasked with regulating water distribution, yet it has been conspicuously sidelined in this matter, raising suspicions about undue influences and lopsided policymaking that favor Punjab at the expense of Sindh.
The selective application of constitutional provisions is deeply troubling. Whenever Sindh raises its voice against water mismanagement, it is either silenced through political maneuvering or made to believe that its grievances are exaggerated. This is not just a question of irrigation—it is a matter of survival. The people of Sindh, especially farmers and fishing communities, are facing an existential crisis due to depleting water resources. Yet, instead of addressing these concerns, the federal and Punjab governments continue to push forward with projects that deepen this crisis, disregarding established agreements and institutions meant to ensure equitable distribution.
A development initiative that disregards provincial rights and environmental sustainability is not progress—it is a regressive step that must be reconsidered before irreversible damage is done
It is perplexing that despite having a significant stake in the federal coalition, the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP)—which governs Sindh—has failed to effectively challenge this decision. The party currently holds key positions, including the President and Chairman Senate, yet it has not managed to prevent Punjab from proceeding unilaterally. This raises questions about political expediency and the prioritisation of power over provincial rights. If a major coalition partner cannot safeguard its own province’s fundamental interests, it casts doubt on its commitment to federalism and democratic governance. The silence of the PPP in this matter is not just disappointing—it is an outright betrayal of the people of Sindh.
The environmental repercussions of diverting more water from the Indus are severe. The Indus Delta, which sustains thousands of communities dependent on fishing and agriculture, is already witnessing rising salinity and coastal erosion due to diminishing freshwater inflows. Climate change exacerbates these threats, making water conservation and equitable distribution more critical than ever. Moreover, history has shown that unchecked upstream interventions lead to long-term ecological and economic consequences, as evident in the long-standing Kalabagh Dam controversy, which was shelved due to similar concerns. The construction of these canals under the Green Pakistan Initiative risks repeating the same historical mistakes.
Another deeply concerning aspect is the lack of transparency in the planning and execution of the project. The decision to allocate water resources to Punjab’s new canal network was made without engaging stakeholders from Sindh in meaningful consultations. This brazen disregard for inclusivity and fair governance creates further mistrust between provinces and erodes the very foundations of national unity. If one province is allowed to monopolise a shared resource without due process, it sets a dangerous precedent that could lead to heightened inter-provincial conflicts in the future.
The silence of institutions expected to ensure a balanced approach to national development is equally disconcerting. Decision-making on such critical matters should be steered by due process, not unilateral authority. If new projects are deemed necessary, they must be subjected to rigorous environmental assessments and inter-provincial negotiations. The constitutionally mandated forums exist for precisely this reason, yet they remain underutilised when it comes to addressing Sindh’s concerns. The question then arises: who truly benefits from such projects, and at whose cost?
Sindh’s agricultural economy, already crippled by years of neglect, is poised to suffer even further. Farmers who depend on the Indus for irrigation are watching their fields turn barren while the government diverts precious water to an entirely new region in Punjab. The justification that this initiative will promote national food security is paradoxical when it simultaneously pushes Sindh’s agricultural economy toward collapse. True food security can only be achieved when all provinces have equitable access to resources, not when one benefits at the direct cost of another.
While no one argues against progressive initiatives like GPI in principle, it is imperative that such efforts are pursued without deepening existing regional disparities. Sustainable development cannot come at the cost of constitutional violations and inter-provincial discord. The federal government, rather than remaining complicit, should immediately convene the CCI to address Sindh’s objections. The spirit of federation demands that development be a collective effort, not a province-specific privilege. Equitable growth requires dialogue, not unilateral decision-making that disregards legitimate provincial concerns.
Pakistan’s long-term stability hinges on adherence to constitutional norms and equitable governance. Ignoring legitimate concerns today will only exacerbate grievances, potentially leading to larger political and social ramifications. A development initiative that disregards provincial rights and environmental sustainability is not progress—it is a regressive step that must be reconsidered before irreversible damage is done. The question remains: Is this truly a Green Pakistan initiative, or is it merely a mirage, benefiting a select few while pushing others toward destitution?