The Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) is one of the most resilient and successful water-sharing agreements in the world, governing the distribution of the Indus River system between India and Pakistan. Signed in 1960, the treaty has withstood multiple wars, political upheavals, and decades of mutual suspicion.
However, with the rise of new geopolitical tensions, climate-related stress, and strategic interests, the future of the treaty is once again under scrutiny—particularly the question of whether India can suspend it and how Pakistan might respond.
History of Indus Waters Treaty
After the 1947 Partition, the division of the Indus river system created an immediate challenge: India, as the upper riparian state, gained control over the river headwaters, while Pakistan, located downstream, became highly dependent on water flows originating in Indian territory.
In April 1948, India briefly stopped the flow of water into Pakistan, triggering panic and early conflict over this essential resource.
To prevent further escalation, the World Bank facilitated negotiations that eventually led to the Indus Waters Treaty, signed in 1960 by Jawaharlal Nehru, Ayub Khan, and a World Bank representative.
This treaty allocated control over the three eastern rivers (Ravi, Beas, Sutlej) to India, while granting Pakistan rights over the three western rivers (Indus, Jhelum, Chenab), though India retained limited non-consumptive rights over these western rivers.
Structure and Terms of the Treaty
Under the treaty, India can use the western rivers for activities like hydroelectric generation, irrigation, and navigation, provided it does not obstruct the natural flow. A Permanent Indus Commission was established to facilitate technical cooperation, data sharing, and dispute resolution. The World Bank acts as a third-party facilitator, particularly when disagreements escalate beyond the Commission’s scope.
The treaty, while technical in nature, has long been upheld as a symbol of India’s strategic restraint and commitment to peaceful conflict resolution, even during times of war.
Current Importance and Pressures
Today, the Indus Waters Treaty is more relevant than ever due to multiple converging pressures. Pakistan remains overwhelmingly reliant on the Indus system for irrigation, drinking water, and hydroelectric power. With increasing water stress and population growth, this dependence has only grown more acute.
Meanwhile, India has faced internal debate over whether the treaty unduly limits its rights. Political leaders have, on occasion, floated the idea of revisiting or even withdrawing from the treaty—especially in the wake of terror attacks or cross-border tensions. Moreover, climate change, retreating Himalayan glaciers, and erratic monsoons are altering water flows and making efficient water management more urgent.
Can India Unilaterally Terminate the Indus Waters Treaty?
No, India cannot legally and unilaterally terminate the Indus Waters Treaty without severe consequences.
The treaty is a legally binding international agreement, brokered by the World Bank and registered with the United Nations. There is no clause in the IWT allowing for unilateral withdrawal. Any attempt to revoke or suspend the treaty without mutual consent would likely be viewed as a breach of international law, particularly the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969), which, while not retroactively binding, reflects customary international norms.
Even if India argues for a suspension based on national security or emergency interests, the global diplomatic backlash and potential legal action would be significant. Such a move could harm India’s international credibility, trigger retaliatory measures, and potentially provoke broader regional instability.
However, India does have options within the treaty framework to fully utilize its rights on the western rivers. This includes accelerating hydropower projects like Pakal Dul, Ratle, and Baglihar, which often face objections from Pakistan. These actions, though treaty-compliant, can still increase strategic pressure.
How Pakistan Could Respond if the Treaty Is Suspended
If India attempts to unilaterally suspend or withdraw from the treaty, Pakistan has several potential responses, both legal and geopolitical:
Legal Recourse through International Forums
Pakistan would almost certainly seek intervention through international legal mechanisms. It could file a case with the International Court of Justice (ICJ) or push for arbitration under World Bank mechanisms, as the Bank remains a signatory and facilitator of the treaty.
Though the ICJ’s jurisdiction may be contested, Pakistan could still use international platforms to apply diplomatic pressure and frame India’s actions as a violation of international law and humanitarian norms.
Appeal to the United Nations and World Bank
Pakistan may lodge formal complaints with the United Nations, UNESCO, and the World Bank, urging condemnation or mediation. The World Bank, although a facilitator rather than an enforcer, could act to initiate dialogue, mediate disputes, or support third-party arbitration.
Escalation of Diplomatic and Security Tensions
In a worst-case scenario, disruption of water flows could lead to heightened military tensions. Pakistan views water security as part of its national security doctrine, and any move by India perceived as endangering water supply could prompt a severe reaction.
Acceleration of Water Storage and Diversification Projects
In anticipation of prolonged water scarcity, Pakistan might accelerate its efforts to build dams, improve canal systems, and seek Chinese investment in infrastructure projects like the Diamer-Bhasha Dam. It may also strengthen its ties with countries that share grievances with India, forming broader coalitions on water diplomacy.
Public Mobilization and Regional Alliances
India’s withdrawal could spark domestic outrage in Pakistan, uniting political factions and civil society against a perceived existential threat. It might also use the issue to lobby for greater support from allies in the Islamic world, China, or OIC, and position India as an aggressor on the international stage.
Conclusion
The Indus Waters Treaty is more than just a water-sharing pact—it is a cornerstone of peace and predictability in a volatile region. While India cannot legally suspend the treaty unilaterally without risking international backlash, it can still leverage its full rights within the agreement to gain strategic advantage.
On the other hand, Pakistan, though highly dependent on Indus waters, is not without recourse. It could turn to legal, diplomatic, and possibly military avenues to counter any threat to its water security. As environmental pressures mount and bilateral relations fluctuate, the future of the IWT will likely remain a sensitive and strategically significant element of South Asian geopolitics.
Myself Aditya and I am from Mumbai, India. As an intern, I joined the local news agency in Mumbai named “The Mumbai News”. Now I am working with various News Agencies and I provide them reports from Mumbai and other parts of India.
