Everything has suddenly become very complex. Dams have once again become a matter of life and death. It was not so six months back, nor a year back, nor even five. But vaguely I remember ten years back, and also twenty years back, the need for a dam at Kalabagh was just as suddenly a matter of life and death. After months of violent political disagreements, technical experts pontificating on merits and de-merits of each location and vested interests throwing in their prejudiced views, the hotly debated issue would die a quiet death, only to be resurrected some years later to tear the nation apart once more.

In the last few weeks, after years of hibernation, Kalabagh is alive again, generating serious discord in the land. Why now is not all that clear, but the die is cast. President Musharraf has declared two basic principles: A dam must be built at Kalabagh; and there must be a consensus. But there is no consensus today. Provincial Assemblies of Sind, Frontier and Baluchistan have repeatedly rejected the dam. More recently the vast majority of leaders of Sind and the Frontier have reaffirmed their categorical opposition. A consensus is not likely to emerge in the near future, no matter how strenuously the President lobbies for it. Of course a consensus is possible. But it will take a great deal of time, perhaps years, to achieve. It will also require sustained and steady lobbying over a long period of time, not the random once-a-decade bulldozing we have seen since the dam was first thought of. Nor unhelpful remarks of ministers who can only conceive of a consensus by threatening skeptical colleagues that if they don't come on board, they are dispensable. In their arrogance they do not understand that neither is consensus arrived at through strong-arm tactics nor are certain colleagues easily replaced. Particularly in the present political dispensation, with all its inherent weaknesses. Perhaps a totally new political alignment may well be the answer. After all, if indeed it is a matter of life and death, sacrificing the present very weak coalition for a more robust and credible one is a small price to pay. But that again will take time.

So where do we go from here? The President is firm on the need for enhancing water storage. He is publicly committed to building Kalabagh. And just as publicly committed to that very elusive consensus. The answer may well lie elsewhere. While continuing to work towards building a consensus on Kalabagh, without abandoning it, he may offer viable alternatives which overcome the two main objections of the dam's opponents—no dam on the Indus River and no flooding or waterlogging or population displacement in the Frontier. Some in government are convinced that all that can be achieved by building a reservoir at Akhoori.

Akhoori is one of several interesting alternatives. It is not only not on the Indus; it is not on any river. It is not in the Frontier but in the Punjab. It is in a sparsely populated area where dislocation of residents would be minimal. Akhoori is a depression on a relatively small Nulla about 30 miles North West of Islamabad. A low barrage can be built across the Nulla, creating a substantial storage area over a generally barren landscape. Although many of the objections of skeptics would have been overcome there surely will still be several genuine concerns which will need to be resolved. That leads to the next problem. Where would the water come from? And how does one get the water there, in the absence of a river? Not surprisingly a great deal of work has already been done to solve these problems. In fact that ultimate in bureaucratic jargon—a PC 1 for building the Akhoori storage---has already been made several years back. The PC 1 visualizes a canal from Tarbela to Akhoori, which would carry only the excess flood water from Tarbela (water which would otherwise be lost); store it safely at Akhoori and drop it back into the Indus when the river is dry.

The present deadlock over which dam should be built and when may well be solved by a three-pronged approach. Firstly, continue working towards a consensus and definitely build Kalabagh, but only when consensus is reached, thereby strengthening both inter-provincial harmony and democracy. Secondly, start work immediately on Bhasha, or any other dam upstream of Kalabagh where there is little opposition, although it will take a dozen years or more to build. And to fill the gap pending Kalabagh coming on stream, Akhoori can meet part of the water storage needs of the country. Surprisingly, with everyone concentrating on Kalabagh the simplest, least expensive and least controversial solutions are being totally ignored. Tarbela and Mangla are silting up and their capacity is reducing every year. A part of the problem has already been solved by raising Mangla and increasing its capacity. But how to stop future silting of both Mangla and Tarbela and how to remove their accumulated silt are problems which need an innovate approach. Silting can easily be avoided by installing sluicing gates during construction. Sluicing permits sediment to flow out of the dam along with water. Unfortunately these simple systems were not installed at Mangla and Tarbela when the dams were built. But they can be installed even now, thereby stopping the current silting, which is causing reduction in the capacity of the dams every year and which is why more storage is needed in the first place. The technology is there and the cost is not prohibitive.

As for the sediment which has accumulated in the dams already, that can be removed by dredging. Modern dredging in a lake is relatively simple and inexpensive, certainly far cheaper than building replacement dams. All across the globe dredging is done all the time. Ports are being deepend to cater for giant new container ships and tankers, as in Karachi. Dredging creates new ports like Gwadar. And dredging (with landfill) enables building of new islands as in Dubai, airports as in Japan and housing complexes as in Defence Karachi. Many ports like New York have solid rock beneath the surface which has to be dynamited and lifted out, which is expensive. But Tarbela and Mangla have partially loose rock and mainly sediment which is very easily and cheaply removed. Such sediment can be used to fill gullies and ditches, creating new alluvial soil, which can become excellent farmland where only barren terrain exists. The capital costs of dredging are minimal, involving only simple dumb barges with pumps and pipes, while running costs are primarily the cost of electricity to run the pumps. That is all. The storage capacity of the two dams can thus increase by almost the same amount as the total capacity of Kalabagh dam.

Why these two simple alternatives are not even being discussed today remains a mystery, as no one will be adversely effected, in Sind, the Frontier or Baluchistan while much of the storage problem will be resolved peacefully. Whether the President pushes ahead with Kalabagh without a consensus or goes for any of the several less divisive and cheaper options will have grave, long-term consequences, not only for the country's agriculture but also on its integrity. In the charged environment of today we must not take any decision without examining every option