Omar Abdullah’s statement on Tulbul project ‘irresponsible’: PDP

A day after a war of words broke out between Omar Abdullah and Mehbooba Mufti over the former's call to revive Tulbul Navigation Barrage project on Wullar Lake, the PDP on Saturday cautioned Jammu and Kashmir chief minister against advocating water conflict, saying such "provocations" only serve to inflame tensions.

"Omar Abdullah's remarks invoking the Tulbul Navigation Project and the control of water flow across the border are not just ill-timed but deeply irresponsible. At a moment when peace is fragile and the ceasefire is barely holding, such provocations only serve to inflame tensions," the PDP said in a statement.

“This is a sensitive period for our nation, and leaders must act with maturity, not opportunism,” it said, adding, “The 2002 Indus Water Treaty resolution in the J&K Legislative Council was moved by an NC MLC, not the PDP.”

The party also asserted that “calls to scrap the IWT by J&K Chief Minister Omar Abdullah are dangerous and short-sighted.”

“Our position is clear: We continue to demand fair compensation under the treaty to Jammu and Kashmir, but the IWT must not be used as a pretext for war rhetoric. Introducing contentious issues like the Tulbul Project or the abrogation of the IWT in today’s volatile climate only pushes both countries closer to further confrontation,” it added.

“Those in J&K advocating such positions are undermining our region’s stability, jeopardizing the lives of our people living in the border states who suffer most when conflict escalates, and, most importantly, India’s interests. Let there be no doubt, any attempt to stoke war will harm Kashmir more than anyone else,” it said.

“We demand peace, justice, and a future where Jammu & Kashmir is no longer made to pay the price of military attacks, drone attacks, and cross-border shelling,” it said.

The Tulbul Navigation project was conceived before militancy began in Kashmir, and work on it commenced in the 1980s. Pakistan had objected to it, claiming it contravened the IWT. The Indian side, however, pointed out that the structure was not a storage facility but a navigation aid.