​Testing governance: On the Sawalkote Hydroelectric Project

Testing Governance: The Sawalkote Hydroelectric Project 

Introduction

The renewed focus on the Sawalkote Hydroelectric Project (HEP) on the Chenab River coincides with India’s unilateral suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) following the Pahalgam terror attack. While the move carries strategic and geopolitical undertones, the editorial underscores that ecological and governance considerations must not be overshadowed by security rhetoric. The Sawalkote case exemplifies the complex intersection of national security, transboundary diplomacy, and environmental responsibility.

Background

The Sawalkote Project, planned as a 1.8-GW hydropower scheme, is being developed by NHPC Limited on the Chenab River in Jammu and Kashmir. The Chenab already hosts major hydropower projects such as Dulhasti, Baglihar, and Salal, creating a dense “bumper-to-bumper” hydropower corridor in an ecologically fragile Himalayan landscape.Despite being described as a “run-of-river” scheme, Sawalkote will create a reservoir of over 50,000 crore litres, making it functionally close to a storage dam. The project’s estimated cost has increased by ₹9,000 crore due to delays and inflation. Meanwhile, the rehabilitation budget constitutes barely 0.6% of total expenditure, even though nearly 1,500 families will be displaced and 847 hectares of forest land will be diverted.

Strategic and Diplomatic Dimensions

The timing of the project aligns with India’s assertion of full rights over the western rivers following its suspension of the IWT (1960). By invoking strategic autonomy, India has sought to remove procedural constraints on projects such as Sawalkote and the Wullar Barrage.However, this unilateral approach may come at a diplomatic cost:

• It risks undermining India’s credibility as a responsible riparian state that upholds treaty-based norms.
• Pakistan has already questioned the legality of the suspension, which could invite third-party scrutiny — precisely what India has historically sought to avoid.
• The editorial stresses that strategic assertion must coexist with ecological restraint. Pursuing large-scale infrastructure without cumulative environmental assessment could weaken India’s moral standing in advocating for rule-based transboundary water governance globally.

Environmental and Governance Concerns

The Chenab basin’s saturation with multiple projects amplifies the risk of cumulative environmental impacts:

• Increased sediment load and slope instability, typical of Himalayan terrain, could lead to long-term degradation.
• The lack of comprehensive carrying capacity studies undermines the scientific basis of decision-making.
• NHPC’s track record in Himalayan projects reveals frequent cost overruns and time delays, indicating persistent governance challenges in project execution.

The editorial critiques the Ministries of Power and Home Affairs for prioritizing strategic value over environmental due diligence. It warns that bypassing ecological assessments under the pretext of national security weakens governance integrity.

Policy Recommendations

1. Integrated Basin Management: The government must commission cumulative impact assessments and develop a regional sediment management protocol for all Chenab projects.
2. Transparency and Data Sharing: Institutionalising hydrological data transparency, possibly through regional or multilateral platforms, could transform monitoring from a perceived security threat into a confidence-building measure.
3. Rehabilitation and Livelihoods: Strengthening compensation, rehabilitation, and benefit-sharing mechanisms is essential to ensure that local populations are not marginalised by strategic infrastructure.
4. Balancing Security and Sustainability: The editorial emphasises that ecological stewardship and national security are not mutually exclusive — in fact, they reinforce each other in ensuring long-term regional stability.

Conclusion

The Sawalkote Hydroelectric Project is a litmus test for India’s environmental governance and its ability to reconcile strategic ambitions with ecological prudence. While asserting hydrological sovereignty may serve immediate national security goals, long-term sustainability depends on transparent, scientifically grounded decision-making. As the editorial concludes, national security and ecological responsibility are not opposing forces — they strengthen each other when pursued through accountable governance.

Updated - October 14, 2025 1:25 am | The Hindu