The Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), signed in 1960, has long been regarded as one of the most enduring and successful transboundary water agreements in history. It has weathered numerous challenges, from wars to political instability, but its latest disruption by India marks a significant and potentially historic moment in the bilateral relationship between India and Pakistan. By unilaterally suspending its obligations under the IWT, India has raised a critical question about the future of the treaty and its role in ensuring water security for both nations.
The Core of the Indus Waters Treaty
To understand the implications of India’s recent move, it is important to revisit the essence of the Indus Waters Treaty. The IWT, brokered by the World Bank, divides the six rivers of the Indus Basin between India and Pakistan. India controls the three eastern rivers—Ravi, Beas, and Sutlej—while Pakistan has control over the three western rivers—Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab. These rivers are vital for both countries, with the western rivers providing nearly 80% of Pakistan’s water needs, crucial for agriculture, drinking, and industry.
The treaty permits India to use the western rivers for non-consumptive purposes like hydropower generation and limited irrigation but strictly prohibits any diversion of water that would affect Pakistan’s access to these rivers. This is where the treaty’s strength lies—its clear guidelines and enforceable constraints are designed to ensure that both countries have predictable access to water, which has helped prevent further conflicts over this vital resource.
Moreover, the treaty created a framework for resolving disputes through the Permanent Indus Commission (PIC), which consists of one commissioner from each country. The commission monitors the flow of water, exchanges information, and reviews projects related to the rivers. In cases of disagreements, the treaty provides a mechanism that includes neutral experts and even the International Court of Arbitration. These processes were used in the past to resolve issues surrounding India’s hydropower projects, such as the Baglihar and Kishanganga dams.
The IWT does not include provisions for unilateral suspension or modification. Article XII explicitly states that the treaty can only be amended by mutual agreement between both countries. There is no expiry date for the treaty, and the absence of a termination clause makes it a binding commitment, which has held firm for over six decades despite various tensions.
India’s Unilateral action
India’s recent announcement to place the Indus Waters Treaty “in abeyance” until Pakistan takes credible action against cross-border terrorism has raised alarms. This unilateral move directly contradicts the IWT’s procedural framework, which requires any modifications to the treaty to be mutually agreed upon and ratified by both parties. By suspending its obligations without Pakistan’s consent, India has breached the treaty’s provisions, particularly Article XII(3), which only allows modifications through duly ratified agreements.
This move is not just a political statement but a significant disruption of a decades-old framework that has been a source of stability in an otherwise volatile bilateral relationship. Water, unlike other areas of India-Pakistan relations, had remained a consistent and predictable issue, with both countries relying on the treaty for access to this vital resource. By undermining the treaty’s status, India is now casting uncertainty over this stability, raising the possibility of future conflicts or misunderstandings over water distribution.
The Consequences of Violation
India’s suspension of the IWT could have far-reaching consequences. First and foremost, it undermines the core principle of the treaty: that disputes should be resolved through dialogue, cooperation, and agreed-upon mechanisms. By acting unilaterally, India not only disregards the treaty’s letter but also its spirit of cooperation and mutual trust.
One of the most immediate consequences of India’s suspension is the potential for Pakistan to respond in kind. Pakistan has consistently maintained that any attempt to alter the status of the IWT is a violation of international law and a threat to its water security. In response, Pakistan could choose to suspend other bilateral agreements, including the Shimla Agreement, which governs the resolution of territorial disputes between the two countries. This could lead to a breakdown in diplomatic relations and a further escalation of tensions between the two nuclear-armed neighbors.
Furthermore, the impact on the local populations in both countries cannot be overstated. A disruption in the flow of water from the western rivers could lead to severe consequences for Pakistan’s agriculture, which relies heavily on the Indus River system. The livelihoods of millions of people could be jeopardized, potentially leading to food shortages and increased poverty. For India, the long-term consequences could include the loss of international credibility and a tarnished reputation as a responsible neighbor. The world will be closely watching how India handles this situation, and any failure to engage in constructive dialogue with Pakistan could lead to condemnation from the international community.
Hydrological Realities
While the political consequences of India’s suspension are profound, it is also important to address the hydrological realities at play. India, despite its upstream position on the western rivers, does not have the infrastructure to completely stop or divert the flow of water into Pakistan. The Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab are massive rivers, and India’s existing dams, such as the Baglihar and Kishanganga, are primarily designed for hydropower generation and have limited capacity for water storage. Even if India were to coordinate the release of water from these dams, the impact on Pakistan’s water supply would likely be minimal in the short term, especially during the high-flow season when snowmelt feeds these rivers.
Nevertheless, the uncertainty created by India’s suspension of the treaty will have a lasting impact on Pakistan’s water management systems. The predictability of water flows, which has been a cornerstone of Pakistan’s irrigation infrastructure, is now in question. This uncertainty could lead to increased tensions on the ground, with both countries jockeying for control over water resources and potentially engaging in unilateral actions that could escalate the situation further.
India’s decision to suspend the IWT is not just a political move; it represents a potentially historic shift in the way India and Pakistan manage their shared water resources. Water has long been a symbol of cooperation between the two countries, despite the many challenges they have faced. This suspension, however, threatens to unravel the framework that has kept water issues relatively predictable.
The Indus Waters Treaty was more than just a technical agreement; it was a symbol of cooperation between two countries with a tumultuous history. It served as a reminder that even in the most politically charged situations, there could be space for mutual benefit and collaboration. India’s suspension of the treaty marks a critical juncture in the relationship between the two countries, and it is yet to be seen how this will affect regional stability.
It has the potential to trigger a series of diplomatic and hydrological challenges for both countries, with far-reaching consequences for regional stability. If this action remains unchecked, it could set a dangerous precedent for the management of shared resources, and the treaty’s long-standing role as a pillar of cooperation could be forever altered. As the situation unfolds, the world will be watching closely to see how India and Pakistan navigate this unprecedented challenge.