India’s IWT move poses no immediate risk to water supply

Explainer

By News Desk

Ag Agencies

NEW DELHI/KARACHI: The Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), which has endured two wars and numerous diplomatic tensions between Pakistan and India, is now under threat from Narendra Modi’s Hindutva government.

The escalation follows a militant attack that claimed the lives of over two dozen Indian tourists in Indian Illegally Occupied Jammu and Kashmir (IIOJK). While New Delhi’s decision to suspend the accord may not immediately affect the flow of water to Pakistan — due to India’s limited storage capacity — it introduces uncertainty for Pakistan’s agricultural system, which relies heavily on the treaty’s water allocations.

India said on Wednesday it would immediately suspend the IWT with Pakistan as part of measures to downgrade diplomatic ties after the held Kashmir militant attack. The suspension means India can stop sharing crucial information and data on release of water from barrages/dams or on flooding, Indian officials said, adding that New Delhi will also not be obliged to release minimum amounts of water during the lean season.

Pakistan has warned that any attempt to stop or divert the flow of water belonging to Pakistan will be considered as an act of war. A statement from Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif’s office made it clear on Thursday that the IWT is a binding international agreement brokered by the World Bank and contains no provision for unilateral suspension. “Any attempt to stop or divert the flow of water belonging to Pakistan as per the Indus Waters Treaty, and the usurpation of the rights of lower riparian will be considered as an Act of War and responded with full force,” the statement said.

The use of the water is governed by the IWT, which was mediated by the World Bank and signed by Pakistan and India in September 1960 in Karachi, following nine years of negotiations. The agreement split the Indus and its tributaries between the two countries and regulated water sharing. India was granted the use of water from three eastern rivers—Sutlej, Beas and Ravi—while Pakistan was granted most of the three western rivers—Indus, Jhelum and Chenab.

There is no provision in the treaty for either country to unilaterally suspend or terminate the pact, which has clear dispute resolution systems.

Pakistan is heavily dependent on water from this river system for its hydropower and irrigation needs. Pakistan says India unfairly diverts water with the upstream construction of barrages and dams, a charge India denies.

Pakistan is concerned that India’s dams will cut flows on the river, which feeds 80 per cent of its irrigated agriculture. It has asked for a neutral expert and then an arbitration court to intervene in two recent hydropower projects.

India has accused Pakistan of dragging out the complaints process, and claims the construction of its Kishanganga and Ratle hydroelectric projects is allowed under the treaty. It has also sought modification of the pact to get around such delays.

Ghasharib Shaokat, the head of product at Pakistan Agriculture Research, called the treaty the backbone of the country’s agriculture sector. “It puts our agricultural future on shaky ground. If water flows become erratic, the entire system takes a hit—especially irrigation-dependent crops such as wheat, rice, and sugarcane,” Shaokat said. “Yields could drop. Costs could rise. Food prices would likely spike. And small-scale farmers, who already operate on thin margins, would bear the brunt of it.”Khalid Hussain Baath, chairman of a national farmers’ union in Pakistan, painted the move as an act of belligerence. “This is a true war,” Baath said from Lahore. “We already have a water shortage because of climate change. Low rainfall this year, and limited snow means that the water level is already 20-25 per cent lower than last year.” Under the IWT, both countries must exchange information on water flow, projects, and usage every year. The treaty established a permanent Indus Waters Commission. Between 2023–24, India expressed displeasure when Pakistan took their hydropower projects like the Kishanganga and Ratle dams to the Court of Arbitration for objections. India argued that Pakistan should have pursued technical consultations before resorting to arbitration.

India announced its intention to review the treaty while sending a diplomatic notice to Pakistan for negotiations to terminate or amend the agreement. The suspension discussion served as both a political signal and a means to apply diplomatic pressure. The treaty remains active because India has not withdrawn but now threatens to stop its execution.

As guarantor of the treaty, the World Bank has yet to give official recognition to India’s suspension of the agreement. Pakistan sought both the United Nations and World Bank intervention for assistance. The Court of Arbitration delivered a decision in 2024 that upheld Pakistan’s position by declaring India’s projects to be in breach of the Indus Waters Treaty.

The Indus Waters Commissions of both nations reconvened meetings after the ruling, showing a renewal of the treaty’s foundational principles. Key Points: The Indus Waters Treaty remains legally intact; India’s attempts at pressure and revision were diplomatic manoeuvres that were not acknowledged by the international community; the presence of the Court of Arbitration and the World Bank provides protection to the treaty; Pakistan must remain fully prepared on diplomatic, legal, and scientific fronts regarding the water issue.