In the arid expanses of Pakistan, water has always been more than just a necessity; it is a matter of political significance, security, and identity. The Cholistan Canal, part of the Green Pakistan initiative, which was conceived to bring water to Sindh’s drought-stricken areas, has instead become a flashpoint for provincial tension. In April 2025, protests erupted across Sindh against the construction of this canal, escalating into what local media dubbed the Sindh Water Revolt. While the canal project was intended to address water shortages in southern Punjab, its implications for Sindh have ignited a constitutional and political conflict that threatens to destabilize the already fragile relations between the provinces and the central government. This article explores how the Cholistan Canal project, through its politicization, has deepened inter-provincial friction and placed water at the center of a constitutional debate about Pakistan's federal structure.

The Cholistan Canal: Origins and Intentions

The Cholistan Canal is an ambitious irrigation project under Pakistan's Green Pakistan initiative, designed to divert water from the Indus River to the Cholistan Desert in Punjab. Punjab's government has justified the project as vital for agricultural development in the southern regions, aiming to bolster food security and reduce reliance on international aid. The canal was also envisioned as a way to promote the Green Pakistan vision, which seeks to harness water for agricultural purposes, creating new opportunities for crop cultivation and development.

However, its construction has become a contentious issue. The canal, which was designed to serve southern Punjab, requires a significant diversion of water resources from the Indus River Basin, a shared water source between Punjab and Sindh. For Sindh, already reeling from the adverse effects of water mismanagement and reduced water share under the Indus Water Treaty, this has sparked serious concern over the depletion of their already scarce water resources.

Sindh’s Reaction: A Matter of Survival

Sindh’s vehement opposition to the Cholistan Canal is grounded in both constitutional concerns and the practical realities of water scarcity. According to the 1991 Water Accord, a landmark agreement between the provinces and the federal government, Sindh is entitled to a specific share of the water from the Indus River. The province argues that the construction of the Cholistan Canal, especially given its unilaterally approved design, violates the water accord and further diminishes their rightful share of water.

Sindh's political leadership, including the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP), has called the canal a direct violation of the constitutional agreement. They argue that the federal government has bypassed Sindh in the decision-making process, disregarding the principles of decentralization and federalism. Furthermore, with the canal's completion, Punjab would receive a significant amount of the river’s flow—at the expense of Sindh’s agricultural and industrial sectors, which are highly dependent on adequate water levels. Local farmers and activists have taken to the streets, holding protests, road blockages, and sit-ins, demanding that the canal be halted. Sindh’s farmers, who rely heavily on irrigation from the Indus River, fear that the new project will drain their fields and accelerate the desertification of already vulnerable areas.

The Political Dimensions: Sindh vs. Punjab and Federal Authority

The conflict surrounding the Cholistan Canal goes far beyond just water. It is a reflection of the growing political polarization between Sindh and Punjab, two of Pakistan’s most influential provinces. Punjab, with its majority share of Pakistan’s population, has historically exerted disproportionate political influence, while Sindh, despite being a significant contributor to the national economy, has often felt marginalized in the central decision-making process.  The PPP government in Sindh has framed the canal issue as an example of the centralization of power and the erosion of provincial autonomy. 

Sindh’s leadership has repeatedly accused the federal government, which has a strong alliance with Punjab’s ruling party, the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N), of favoring Punjab’s interests over the constitutional rights of other provinces. Federalism, as enshrined in Pakistan's Constitution of 1973, mandates that water distribution be equitably managed according to the needs of each province. For Sindh, the canal project’s perceived unilateral nature undermines the concept of mutual agreement and consultation, which was meant to govern all federal decisions.

Legal and Constitutional Conflict: The Indus Water Accord

At the heart of the debate is Pakistan’s 1991 Indus Water Accord, an agreement that defines the distribution of water among Punjab, Sindh, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, and Balochistan. The accord was designed to ensure fair and equitable distribution of the country’s most critical resource, with provisions to address seasonal variations and drought conditions.

Sindh argues that the construction of the Cholistan Canal violates the accord, as it is being constructed without proper consultation with all stakeholders, including Sindh’s representatives. They believe the federal government has breached the spirit of the accord by failing to consult provincial governments about the project’s potential impacts on their water share.

As the legal battle unfolds, Sindh’s political leaders have called on the Supreme Court of Pakistan to intervene and examine whether the federal government has overstepped its constitutional bounds by approving the project without the full consent of the affected provinces.

National Impact: A Divisive Issue for Pakistan

The Cholistan Canal controversy is not just a local issue for Sindh; it has implications for Pakistan’s national unity and the functioning of its federal system. If the federal government continues to side with Punjab on this matter, it risks exacerbating ethnic and political tensions between provinces, leading to a growing sense of alienation in Sindh. This could further fuel separatist sentiments and undermine the already fragile relationship between the central government and the provinces. Moreover, the canal’s completion could set a dangerous precedent for future projects that impact provincial resources. If provincial concerns are routinely ignored, it may lead to further instability in Pakistan’s already volatile political environment.

Conclusion: The Need for Dialogue and Fair Water Governance

The Cholistan Canal crisis is a test case for Pakistan’s constitutional governance. It highlights the urgency of revisiting water management frameworks, especially in the context of regional inequalities. As Pakistan faces mounting challenges related to climate change, population growth, and regional tensions, equitable water distribution becomes a fundamental issue for the country’s future stability. The solution lies not in unilateral decisions, but in a transparent, consultative process where all provinces are treated as equal partners. This can only be achieved through the strengthening of federalism and adherence to constitutional agreements like the Indus Water Accord. The resolution of the Cholistan Canal issue must involve compromise, legal safeguards, and a recommitment to fairness if Pakistan is to avoid the pitfalls of provincial discord over a resource that is critical to its survival.