“Water, like peace, flows only when nurtured with cooperation and trust. The Indus Waters Treaty, a symbol of shared responsibility, stands as a reminder that even in times of conflict, there is strength in collaboration, and hope in the collective management of resources.”

Introduction: The Importance of the Indus Waters Treaty

The Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), signed between India and Pakistan on September 19, 1960, is one of the most significant agreements in the field of international water law. Its importance transcends geopolitical conflicts, as it governs the distribution of water from the Indus River system, which is shared by both countries. This agreement, brokered by the World Bank, aims to ensure that both nations have equitable access to water resources while minimizing the risk of conflict. Over time, the treaty has proven to be a resilient framework for cooperation in an otherwise tense bilateral relationship.

The IWT allocates the waters of six rivers in the Indus Basin: three major rivers flow through Pakistan, and three flow through India. The treaty divides these rivers into two categories: the Eastern Rivers (Ravi, Beas, and Sutlej) allocated to India and the Western Rivers (Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab) allocated to Pakistan. India can use the water from the Western Rivers for non-consumptive purposes such as irrigation, hydropower generation, and other uses, but it cannot significantly interfere with the flow of these rivers to Pakistan. Despite political tensions, both countries have largely adhered to the treaty’s terms, using it as a stabilizing mechanism in the region.

However, the treaty has faced challenges over the years, including disputes over the construction of dams and hydropower projects on the rivers. In the last decade, the dynamics of the treaty have shifted as both countries have faced new realities, such as climate change, the rising need for water due to population growth, and the ongoing security concerns. In 2025, the treaty faced one of its most significant challenges, as tensions escalated due to a terrorist attack in Pahalgam, Kashmir, which led India to reconsider its commitment to the treaty. This attack brought into focus the interplay between security concerns and the shared management of water resources.

The History and Structure of the Indus Waters Treaty

The history of the Indus Waters Treaty dates back to the Partition of India in 1947, which created a new geopolitical reality. The British Raj’s division left unresolved issues regarding the distribution of the Indus River system, which runs through both India and Pakistan. The river system had been a critical resource for both nations, providing water for irrigation, drinking, and industry. The problem became particularly acute as both India and Pakistan struggled with how to share the water after the Partition.

Initially, both countries signed a Standstill Agreement in 1947 to allow for the continued flow of water, but this was short-lived due to escalating tensions. In 1948, India halted the flow of water to Pakistan in response to the Kashmir conflict. This move heightened the urgency for a resolution, and in 1951, the World Bank stepped in to mediate, eventually leading to the start of negotiations that culminated in the Indus Waters Treaty of 1960.

The treaty created a framework for managing the waters of the Indus Basin, providing clear and binding rules about water usage, dispute resolution, and the construction of new infrastructure. The Permanent Indus Commission (PIC), established under the treaty, serves as a mechanism for cooperation, information exchange, and resolving disputes. The treaty allows India to use the waters of the Eastern Rivers and a limited amount of the Western Rivers for specified uses, while Pakistan has the primary right to the waters of the Western Rivers.

The treaty also includeincludees provisions for dispute resolution. If there is a conflict, the countries can resolve it through neutral expert arbitration or a Court of Arbitration. While the treaty has generally been respected, there have been periodic disagreements over specific projects, such as India’s construction of dams on the Western Rivers. Nonetheless, the treaty has largely held up as an example of how two nations can cooperatively share water resources despite deep political and territorial tensions.

Challenges and Disputes: Hydropower Projects, Climate Change, and Political Tensions

Since its signing, the Indus Waters Treaty has faced several challenges. One of the primary sources of friction has been India’s construction of hydropower projects on the Western Rivers. These projects, such as the Baglihar Dam on the Chenab River and the Kishanganga Dam on the Jhelum River, have caused concern in Pakistan, which fears that they could reduce the flow of water into its territory. In these cases, Pakistan has raised objections, arguing that the dams violate the treaty’s provisions that limit India’s use of the Western Rivers. India, on the other hand, has defended these projects, citing the treaty’s allowance for non-consumptive uses, such as hydropower generation.

The disputes over hydropower projects have led to the involvement of neutral experts under the treaty’s dispute resolution mechanism. For example, in 2007, Pakistan took India to a neutral expert over the construction of the Baglihar Dam. The expert ruled in favor of India on most points, but Pakistan’s concerns about potential water shortages remained.

Another growing challenge to the treaty has been the impact of climate change on water availability. The Indus Basin is fed by snowmelt from glaciers in the Himalayas and the Tibetan Plateau, and shifting weather patterns are threatening to disrupt the flow of water. The increased frequency of extreme weather events, such as droughts and floods, poses a serious risk to both countries’ agricultural and industrial sectors, which depend heavily on the river system. These changes have added a layer of complexity to managing the waters of the Indus Basin, as both countries face the potential for reduced water availability.

Furthermore, the treaty has also been tested by political tensions between India and Pakistan. Over the years, the two countries have fought multiple wars, and diplomatic relations have often been strained. In 2016, after the Uri Attack in Kashmir, India accused Pakistan of sponsoring terrorism, leading to renewed calls within India for a review of the treaty. Although India did not formally withdraw from the IWT, the political climate has increasingly put the treaty’s future in question.

The 2025 Pahalgam Attack: A Turning Point in the Treaty’s Future

On April 25, 2025, a terrorist attack occurred in Pahalgam, Kashmir, where 26 people, including 25 Indian nationals and one Nepalese tourist, were killed in a coordinated assault by a Pakistan-based militant group. This attack marked a major escalation in tensions between India and Pakistan, as India accused Pakistan of supporting cross-border terrorism. The attack was carried out by the group Kashmir Resistance, which is believed to have links with various militant organizations operating from Pakistani soil.

In response to the attack, India took a decisive step by announcing the suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty. Indian officials argued that Pakistan’s alleged involvement in the attack undermined the treaty’s spirit of cooperation and trust, and thus India could no longer honor the treaty’s commitments. The suspension of the treaty was viewed as a drastic but symbolic measure, signaling India’s frustration with Pakistan’s alleged support for terrorism and its broader security concerns.

India’s decision to suspend the IWT has sent shockwaves through the international community, as the treaty had long been considered a stabilizing force between the two nuclear-armed neighbours’. Experts feared that disrupting the treaty could lead to broader regional instability, particularly in a context where both countries are already involved in a delicate balancing act regarding military and diplomatic relations.

On the other hand, Pakistan strongly condemned India’s move, warning that any interference with the flow of water from the Western Rivers would be considered an “act of war.” Pakistani officials emphasized that water resources are vital to the country’s agriculture and economic stability, and tampering with the water supply would have severe humanitarian consequences.

The suspension of the treaty has prompted calls for international mediation to prevent further escalation. However, as of now, the future of the Indus Waters Treaty remains uncertain, with both sides bracing for the consequences of this dramatic shift in their bilateral relations.

How will the suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty impact rural and urban life in Pakistan?”

The suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) would have significant and far-reaching consequences for both rural and urban life in Pakistan. This treaty, signed between India and Pakistan in 1960, governs the sharing of water resources from the Indus River system. The Western rivers—Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab—are allocated to Pakistan, while India controls the Eastern rivers. The treaty has been a cornerstone of water management for decades, providing stability and cooperation between the two nations. However, if this treaty were suspended, it would create a host of challenges, particularly for the millions of people in Pakistan who depend on the river system for agriculture, drinking water, and daily activities.

Impact on Rural Life:

1. Agricultural Crisis: Pakistan’s agriculture is heavily reliant on the water flowing through the Indus River system. The Punjab province, which accounts for a significant portion of Pakistan’s food production, would be particularly vulnerable. A disruption in the water supply would lead to immediate crop failure, affecting staple crops such as wheat, rice, and cotton. Farmers, especially smallholders, would be hit hardest, as they rely on irrigation from the Indus River for crop cultivation. The loss of water would lead to lower yields, resulting in food shortages and higher food prices across the country.
2. Economic Impact: Rural communities in Pakistan are highly dependent on agriculture for their livelihoods. A suspension of the treaty would cause massive economic hardship in rural areas, where agricultural work constitutes the majority of employment. The loss of income from agriculture would push millions of people deeper into poverty, forcing many to leave their homes in search of alternative sources of income. This could result in migration from rural areas to cities, creating new challenges for urban centers.
3. Livelihoods at Risk: Apart from farmers, other sectors in rural areas that depend on the river for their livelihoods, such as fisheries, would face dire consequences. The Indus Delta and other water-dependent ecosystems support communities involved in fishing, and a reduction in water flow would disrupt their ability to maintain their catch. This would lead to job losses in rural fishing industries and further economic instability.

Impact on Urban Life:

1. Water Scarcity in Cities: Urban areas in Pakistan, especially major cities like Karachi, Lahore, and Rawalpindi, rely heavily on water from the Indus River for drinking and domestic use. The suspension of the treaty would exacerbate water shortages, putting immense pressure on already strained urban water supply systems. In cities like Karachi, where water scarcity is a growing issue, any further reduction in water availability could lead to an acute crisis. Public health would be at risk, as dirty water and poor sanitation often lead to the spread of waterborne diseases, such as cholera and dysentery.
2. Overburdened Infrastructure: Pakistan’s urban areas already struggle with outdated and overburdened infrastructure. If the treaty were suspended and water sources reduced, urban water systems would not be able to meet the demand, leading to widespread water rationing and long water shortages in the daily lives of urban residents. This would also affect industrial sectors that rely on water for operations, possibly disrupting local economies. The increased competition for water resources could also lead to social unrest in urban areas.
3. Environmental Impact: Cities in Pakistan are home to diverse ecosystems that depend on water resources from the Indus River. The suspension of the treaty would not only harm agricultural and industrial sectors but also have a negative impact on local ecosystems in urban and peri-urban areas. Pollution levels in water bodies could increase, further degrading water quality and harming the environment. Wildlife and other aquatic species that rely on the river for sustenance would face the risk of extinction due to reduced water flow.

Social and Political Tensions:

The suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty would not only disrupt daily life but also escalate social and political tensions. Rural populations would protest against the lack of water, while urban areas would struggle with worsening water crises. Political movements and activism could grow as communities demand solutions and accountability from the government. The potential for cross-border tensions with India over the sharing of water resources would further add to the instability, deepening divisions between the two countries.

Conclusion: The Path Forward for the Indus Waters Treaty

The Indus Waters Treaty has been a remarkable achievement in international diplomacy, standing as one of the most enduring water-sharing agreements. However, as the 2025 Pahalgam attack demonstrates, regional security issues and the changing realities of climate change and population growth are putting unprecedented pressure on the treaty.

The future of the IWT will depend on the ability of both India and Pakistan to manage their differences, find new areas of cooperation, and address the growing challenges of water scarcity and geopolitical instability. While the treaty has weathered previous storms, the evolving political landscape may require it to adapt to new circumstances, ensuring that both nations continue to benefit from the shared resources of the Indus River system without compromising regional peace and stability.

.    .    .