After the recent attack occurred in Pahalgam, killing 28 innocent citizens just because of being a Hindu, India is ready to pause the Indus Water Treaty with Pakistan. Implications within the Realm of Conflict and Terrorism
The Indus Water Treaty (IWT) of 1960, between India and Pakistan, has been celebrated for decades as one of the most successful water-sharing arrangements in a troubled region. Facilitated by the World Bank, it was intended to allocate the waters of the Indus River system in a way that was equitable, satisfying both countries' needs while providing for harmonious existence despite strained political relations. Yet, in recent years, particularly against the threat of continued terrorist attacks and active hostilities, India is rethinking its policy towards the Treaty. The threat of suspending or reconsidering the Treaty has set off heated debates regarding legality, morality, and the destiny of India-Pakistan relations. This essay delves into the history of the Indus Water Treaty, the motivations for India's stand, and the larger implications of such an action.
The Indus Water Treaty: A Brief Overview
The Indus Water Treaty was confirmed following almost ten years of bargaining and negotiating. According to the Treaty, the three rivers in the western region (Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab) were earmarked for Pakistan, and the three rivers in the eastern sector (Ravi, Beas, and Sutlej) were reserved for India. Limited rights to harness the western rivers for purposes including irrigation, electricity generation, and transportation were granted to India, but with the condition that it would not change their course appreciably.
The Treaty has been extraordinarily strong. Even at the times of war, like the wars of 1965, 1971, and the Kargil War in 1999, the two nations continued to respect its provisions. The IWT remained a rare symbol of constancy amidst a normally volatile relationship, often referred to as "a Treaty of hope between two bitter rivals."
Why Is India Considering a Pause Now?
The demand to revisit or suspend the Treaty is based on increasing frustration in India about ongoing cross-border terrorism allegedly being sponsored by Pakistan. High-profile terrorist attacks, like the 2008 Mumbai terror attacks to the Pulwama attack in 2019, and persistent ceasefire violations along the Line of Control have sharpened demands for a more assertive and robust response in India. From India's point of view, the rationale is simple: why should it keep fulfilling a deal that favors Pakistan when Pakistan keeps damaging Indian interests through battles and terrorism? Water, being such a vital resource for Pakistan's economy and agriculture, becomes a powerful leverage.
Additionally, domestic political opinion is heavily in support of assertiveness. National security interests, popular anger following terror attacks, and the imperative to be strong regionally and internationally have all contributed to the perception that India needs to employ every available means, including water, to fight terrorism.
Legal and Diplomatic Dimensions
Although the political and emotional reasoning may appear reasonable, the diplomatic and legal realities are much more nuanced. Internationally, especially under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, unilaterally suspending or terminating a treaty is not easily done. There is no clause for suspension or termination of the Indus Water Treaty except with mutual consent.
If India were to unilaterally "suspend" or alter its commitments, it would risk international opposition, such as legal action at institutions like the International Court of Justice. In addition, the World Bank continues to remain the guarantor of the Treaty, and unilateral steps could put India on the wrong side of key international players.
Therefore, although the halt could seem like an act of strength, it could potentially destroy the hard-won image of India as a good global power that abides by international norms.
Consequences for Pakistan
For Pakistan, any interruption in the movement of Indus waters would have disastrous effects. Agriculture is the backbone of the economy of Pakistan, and the Indus basin irrigates almost 90% of its crops. Crops such as wheat, rice, and cotton are highly dependent on irrigation from the Indus system.
Water shortages may activate food insecurity, economic instability, and even social unrest. Pakistan's already volatile political system would be further challenged, with unanticipated results. Some experts speculate that such a step would likely drive Pakistan to further increase hostilities, potentially even militarily. Therefore, suspending the Treaty may impose tremendous pressure on Pakistan, but it is a two-edged sword; it may just as easily trigger more instability, and add to the problem for India too.
Strategic and Geopolitical Implications
India's relationship with Pakistan is not in a vacuum; it is shaped by broader geopolitical considerations. China's strategic interests in Pakistan via the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), the United States' strategic interests, and the concerns of Gulf nations all factor into the equation.
If India comes on too strong, it risks losing diplomatic capital, not just with the West but with those nations that wish to see stability in South Asia. Alternatively, a judiciously timed gesture — one that communicates India's displeasure without entirely breaching the Treaty can convey a powerful message without diplomatically isolating New Delhi.
In addition, any radical move could complicate India's domestic water management. Constructing dams or diverting waters on rivers such as the Chenab or Jhelum would involve huge investments, environmental approvals, and time, during which tensions might build up perilously.
The notion to suspend the Indus Water Treaty is a larger movement in Indian foreign policy from strategic restraint to assertive realism. That this anger and frustration are legitimate and understandable, but the stakes are immense and the consequences huge. Water is not merely an asset; it is a lifeline for millions on both sides of the divide.
Any choice to meddle with the Treaty has to be balanced against not only political advantage in the short term, but regional stability in the long term, humanitarian considerations, and India's reputation as a responsible international player. In a world where cooperation on the use of shared resources is becoming scarce, the Indus Water Treaty is a threadbare but important bridge, one that both nations need to preserve, even amid profound and hurtful differences.