Font size:
Print
Suspension of Indus Waters Treaty: Strategic Shift or Diplomatic Gamble?
Impact of Suspending a Water Treaty
Context: In a landmark and assertive move, India has suspended the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) of 1960, following a deadly terrorist attack in Pahalgam, Jammu and Kashmir, that left 26 tourists dead.
More on News
- The attackers, linked to The Resistance Front, a Pakistan-based terror group, prompted India’s Cabinet Committee on Security to declare that the IWT would be “held in abeyance” until Pakistan irrevocably ends its support for cross-border terrorism.
- This decision, while framed as temporary, effectively places the IWT — a key bilateral water-sharing agreement between India and Pakistan — in a state of indefinite suspension.
- Though the treaty does not include an exit clause, India’s move may be interpreted as a de facto withdrawal, a position that raises significant legal and geopolitical implications.
Can India Legally Exit the Indus Waters Treaty?
- Termination: The Indus Waters Treaty, brokered by the World Bank in 1960, does not permit unilateral termination.
- According to Article XII (4), the treaty remains in force unless both countries sign a new, ratified treaty to replace it.
- Nonetheless, some Indian legal analysts argue that under Articles 60 and 62 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT), India could justify revocation due to Pakistan’s alleged material breach through support for terrorism or fundamental changes in circumstances.
- Challenges: However, these arguments face legal challenges.
- India is not a signatory to the VCLT, and Pakistan has signed but not ratified it.
- While Article 62 (fundamental change of circumstances) is often cited, its application to water treaties is debated in international law.
- Internationalisation: Moreover, suspending the IWT could risk internationalising the issue, with Pakistan threatening to approach the World Bank, the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA), or the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague.
- Pakistan’s Minister of State for Law and Justice, Aqeel Malik, also indicated that Islamabad may raise the matter at the United Nations Security Council.
Strategic Leverage: What Can India Do Now?
- By suspending the IWT, India gains significant operational and strategic flexibility over the western rivers — Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab — which are lifelines for Pakistan’s agriculture, drinking water, and hydropower generation. India can now:
- Cease water flow data sharing with Pakistan
- Flush reservoirs during high monsoon, potentially causing floods downstream
- Withhold water during dry seasons, risking drought-like conditions in Pakistan
- Construct and operate hydroelectric projects without restrictions previously imposed under the IWT
- Such measures could severely disrupt Pakistan’s agriculture-dependent provinces, especially Punjab and Sindh, which are already locked in a bitter dispute over canal projects like the controversial Cholistan Canal.
- These internal tensions may worsen if upstream water flows are further reduced.
India’s Infrastructure Limitations
- Despite the treaty allowing India to store 3.60 million acre-feet (MAF) of water and irrigate 1.34 million acres in Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh, India currently stores only around 1 MAF and has irrigated approximately 0.642 million acres.
- While India effectively utilises over 90% of its eastern rivers — Ravi, Beas, and Sutlej — through dams like Bhakra, Pong, and Ranjit Sagar, its capacity to manage and control flows from the western rivers remains limited. Key hydro projects like:
- Kishanganga (18.35 MCM)
- Ratle Dam (78.71 MCM)
- Salal Dam (285 MCM)
- Baglihar Dam (475 MCM)
- These dams are mostly run-of-the-river projects with minimal storage.
- Upcoming projects such as Kiru, Pakal Dul, and further developments on the Chenab River are expected to enhance India’s capacity, but the challenging Himalayan terrain and bureaucratic hurdles may delay significant gains by a decade or more.
Regional Fallout: Will India’s Neighbours Push Back?
- While India may justify the IWT suspension as a national security measure, it could have unintended regional repercussions:
- China, as an upper riparian to rivers like the Sutlej and Brahmaputra, may cite India’s IWT move to refuse renewal of water data-sharing Memoranda of Understanding (MoUs).
- These MoUs, critical during monsoon seasons, have already lapsed and are awaiting renewal.
- During the 2017 Doklam standoff, China withheld hydrological data from India, though it continued sharing it with Bangladesh — a precedent that could be repeated.
- The Ganga Water Treaty with Bangladesh, due for renewal in 2026, might be affected if Dhaka views India’s IWT suspension as a warning sign about treaty reliability.
- Given current strained India-Bangladesh ties, this could deepen mistrust.
- In Nepal, some political voices may use India’s IWT suspension to question other bilateral water agreements, reinforcing perceptions of asymmetry.
- Even in Sri Lanka, some commentators have begun advising caution when entering agreements with New Delhi, citing the IWT as a case study in sudden policy reversals.
