By: Dr. Nasser Hussyn Bukhari
Analyst writes on Geopolitics, Global and National Issues in Pakistan
Published By: ANI News Agency
Rivers are the arteries of a nation's civilisation. They nourish its fields, sustain its economy and determine the destiny of generations. In Pakistan, the Indus is not merely a river; it is the lifeline of a predominantly agricultural society. Its waters represent food, livelihood, energy and national security. When an embankment protecting one of the country's most important water installations gives way, the incident cannot be dismissed as an ordinary engineering mishap. It is a warning that the foundations of national safety may be more fragile than we imagine. The recent breach at Tarbela Dam's Fifth Extension Project (T-5) demands an immediate, transparent and independent investigation.
Tarbela Dam is one of Pakistan's most strategic national assets. Its water storage and regulated releases are indispensable for irrigation, electricity generation and the stability of the Indus Basin. Agriculture, particularly wheat cultivation during the Rabi season and cotton production in Sindh, depends heavily on the effective management of this water. Millions of farmers, agricultural workers and families depend upon the reliability of this infrastructure. Any failure in its engineering, maintenance or operational management can have consequences extending far beyond the project site.
On November 9, 2026, a serious incident occurred at the Tarbela Fifth Extension Hydropower Project. Reports indicated that a protective bund or embankment gave way, allowing a substantial volume of water to enter the construction areas associated with Tunnel-5 and the under-construction powerhouse. An emergency was declared, construction activities were suspended and workers were evacuated. According to reports from the district administration, one worker was caught in the strong current but was rescued. WAPDA subsequently stated that the water entering the intake area had been drained and that the main tunnel, powerhouse structures, tailrace culvert and switchyard had not suffered the damage being reported on social media. These clarifications are important, but they do not diminish the seriousness of the incident.
The implications of such an incident must also be examined beyond Tarbela. The Indus carries the consequences of decisions taken at the dam towards downstream communities, eventually reaching the Attock region and beyond. A sudden increase in discharge can raise river levels, threaten riverbank settlements, expose agricultural land, damage temporary crossings and put people working near the river at risk. The stretch from Tarbela through the downstream river corridor towards Attock therefore requires continuous monitoring, reliable warnings and coordinated emergency arrangements.
Reports of increased water releases, including claims of discharge exceeding 150,000 cusecs, have understandably generated concern. However, the exact discharge figures and any specific damage to settlements, bridges, agricultural land or infrastructure between Tarbela and Attock must be independently verified. WAPDA and the district administrations should publish real-time discharge figures, river-level measurements and verified damage assessments. The absence of confirmed downstream destruction must not become an excuse for complacency. Equally, public concern should not be fuelled by unverified claims. The people living along the Indus deserve accurate information and timely protection.
The most troubling aspect of the incident is that it comes against the background of earlier engineering and construction problems at the Tarbela extension project. The previous cofferdam failure in 2025 and the subsequent investigation raised serious questions about design changes, technical supervision, contractual compliance and the responsibilities of the employer, consultant and contractor. The latest incident makes it imperative to examine whether lessons from earlier failures were properly implemented or merely recorded in official files.
The question of professional accountability must therefore occupy the centre of the investigation. It would be convenient to place the entire burden of responsibility on the WAPDA Chairman or a single government official. That approach would be neither fair nor sufficient. Major infrastructure projects involve several layers of professional responsibility: feasibility studies, geological assessments, engineering designs, independent reviews, construction supervision, quality assurance and final safety certification. Every institution and individual responsible for these functions must answer for their decisions.
Serious questions have also been raised regarding the role of the consultants, including Mott MacDonald, and the professional responsibilities associated with Engineer Waseem. Allegations concerning their involvement in previous and present incidents require examination against contracts, technical reports and documented decisions. No individual or consultancy should be declared guilty without evidence; equally, no professional should enjoy immunity from scrutiny because of an influential institutional position.
The Pakistan Engineering Council (PEC) has a particularly important responsibility in this matter. If its Chairman has any professional, institutional or personal connection that could create a conflict of interest, he should not influence the inquiry into matters involving that connection. The Ministry of Science and Technology must ensure the independence of the investigation. The Senior Vice Chairman PEC, rather than the Chairman or his nominee, should represent the Council on the inquiry committee. This would protect both the credibility of the investigation and the institutional integrity of PEC.
Furthermore, the PEC Governing Body must exercise its statutory authority. Any reported disagreement concerning the Chairman's decisions, professional registration or eligibility to continue in office should be addressed strictly under the law and through due process. The Governing Body cannot remain silent when questions concerning professional standards and institutional independence arise. Where is the Governing Body, and why is it not exercising its responsibility?
The inquiry must also examine the complete engineering record: the original and revised embankment designs, geological surveys, construction methodology, safety inspections, contractor performance, consultant recommendations, supervisory reports and decisions authorising changes. Independent international engineering experts should be included where necessary. The findings must be made public, and responsibility should be determined through evidence rather than political convenience or institutional influence.
Tarbela's importance extends beyond electricity production. It is central to Pakistan's food security, water management, economic stability and national resilience. A failure at this installation can affect farmers in Punjab and Sindh, communities along the Indus and the national economy. The country cannot afford a culture in which every engineering failure produces an inquiry, every inquiry identifies a few names, and the system continues without meaningful reform.
The breach of an embankment is ultimately a breach of public trust and national safety. Pakistan does not need scapegoats; it needs facts, institutional courage and enforceable accountability. WAPDA, the consultants, contractors, supervising engineers, approving authorities and every individual whose negligence or wrongful decision contributed to the loss must be held accountable according to the evidence and the law. Those responsible must face appropriate professional, administrative and legal consequences. The purpose must not be to protect an officeholder or punish a convenient individual, but to establish the truth, recover the public interest and prevent another disaster. Pakistan's water security cannot be left to institutional silence. Every drop lost, every rupee wasted and every safety failure must have an answer. No position is above accountability, and no national asset is expendable.
