The attack on a tourist caravan that took place on April 22, 2025, near Pahalgam in Jammu and Kashmir resulted in the deaths of twenty-six civilians and sparked outrage across the entirety of India.
The Indian capital of New Delhi responded by taking an action that had never been done before: it suspended its responsibilities under the Indus Waters Treaty, which has been a cornerstone of bilateral cooperation since 1960.
As a form of retaliation for Pakistan’s alleged backing of cross-border terrorism, India took the unprecedented step of suspending the provisions of the treaty for the very first time for the first time.
For More Updates & Regular Notes Join Our Whats App Group (https://chat.whatsapp.com/DkucckgAEJbCtXwXr2yIt0) and Telegram Group ( https://t.me/legalmaestroeducators ) contact@legalmaestros.com.
In addition to raising critical questions about the future of South Asia’s water sharing and the endurance of a treaty that was once regarded to be inviolable, the suspension exacerbated the tensions that already existed between two nuclear-armed neighbors who were already embroiled in diplomatic and military standoffs.
The Indus Waters Treaty and the Influence It Had on the World
Within the framework of the Indus Waters Treaty, which was signed in Karachi in September 1960 under the auspices of the World Bank, the waters of six rivers were divided between India and Pakistan.
While Pakistan has rights over the rivers in the west, including the Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab, India has sovereignty over the rivers in the east, including the Ravi, the Beas, and the Sutlej. Although there were wars in 1965, 1971, and 1999, the pact continued to be in effect, which is a rare instance of collaboration in the midst of warfare.
Under its provisions, India is permitted to make limited uses on western rivers, provided that they are accompanied by prior notice and joint inspection. Additionally, Pakistan is granted unrestricted flow downstream. Both sides were able to stabilize their agricultural and hydroelectric development thanks to the treaty, which was also recognized as a model for the management of water beyond their respective borders.
The Attack on Pahalgam and the Increasing Tensions thereupon
The Pahalgam incident broke the delicate calm that had been established in the region, which prompted outrage across the nation. In a straightforward accusation, India pointed the finger of responsibility at Pakistani militant networks for planning and assisting in the attack, which Islamabad declined to acknowledge.
Pressure from within the country increased on New Delhi to take retaliatory actions that went beyond the traditional military or diplomatic tactics. Air strikes, border skirmishes, trade restrictions, and visa suspensions were some of the previous responses that had been used in reaction to terrorist acts.
By suspending the Indus Waters Treaty, however, a fresh type of economic and environmental pressure was represented. This was accomplished by weaponizing shared river flows in order to send a message that terrorism has repercussions that extend well beyond the battlefield.
Due to India’s decision to suspend the treaty
On April 23, 2025, the Ministry of External Affairs of India made the announcement that Pakistan had “put in abeyance the goodwill and friendship” that was entrenched in the preamble of the treaty, so nullifying its own pledges.
The Indian capital of New Delhi has said that it will stop sharing water from rivers that fall under its jurisdiction unless Pakistan takes decisive action against those who finance terrorist activities.
In a public statement, Prime Minister Modi announced that Pakistan would no longer be eligible to receive water from the Chenab and Jhelum rivers, which is promised by the treaty, unless the country fulfilled the core principles of the pact. The suspension was presented as a punitive step that would be transitory in nature, with the intention of exerting pressure on Islamabad to take action against safe havens for militants.
Techniques and Procedures Employed
It was immediately after the suspension that the Indian authorities put a stop to the release of treaty-entitled waters from the Baglihar dam on the Chenab. Additionally, they implemented off-season reservoir flushing at the Salal and Baglihar projects, which are operations that would typically require prior notification.
Because of these steps, the storage capacity upstream was enhanced, which resulted in a reduction in the flow downstream without causing floods. In addition, New Delhi has hastened plans for more hydropower and irrigation facilities on western rivers, which is a further indication of its intention to maximize its own utilization.
It has been stated that China, a significant supporter of Pakistani infrastructure, has accelerated the construction of dams on the Jhelum in order to compensate for any potential shortages. This highlights the increasing significance of water as a strategic asset.
For More Updates & Regular Notes Join Our Whats App Group (https://chat.whatsapp.com/DkucckgAEJbCtXwXr2yIt0) and Telegram Group ( https://t.me/legalmaestroeducators )
International Reactions and Pakistan’s Reaction to the Situation
Islamabad referred to the suspension as a “act of war” and promised to take reprisal actions that were neither specific nor specific. The disruption of treaty flows might potentially lead to an escalation of tensions, which could even involve the use of nuclear deterrent, according to the officials.
On the other hand, Pakistan’s Minister of Finance stated that the country’s existing storage facilities and alternate sources would suffice to prevent any imminent agricultural difficulties. There was a concern expressed by the international community on the potential threat to a stable framework that had endured fighting for a long time.
As the organization that was responsible for negotiating the initial pact, the World Bank indicated that it did not have the authority to compel compliance and recommended bilateral engagement. The use of water as a leverage point, according to regional specialists, poses the risk of damaging future collaboration and fueling environmental hardship.
Legal and Diplomatic Consequences of Decisions
Notification and negotiation are normally required in order to withdraw from or suspend a treaty in accordance with the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties; India did not publicly pursue any of these options.
It has been argued by critics that the unilateral suspension of treaty duties is a violation of international law and establishes a precedent that could be detrimental to other shared-river basins.
Supporters argue that India’s legal obligations were rendered null and void as a result of Pakistan’s purported inability to follow the spirit of the pact by supporting terrorism. The decision, from a diplomatic standpoint, exacerbated the existing enmity and made the ceasefire talks along the Line of Control more difficult to negotiate.
In addition to this, it exerted pressure on other riparian players, especially Afghanistan and China, prompting them to adjust their water strategy in response to the evolving dynamics between India and Pakistan.
Will the Withdrawal Be Temporary or Permanent?
The Indian capital of Delhi maintains that the suspension can be lifted, provided that Pakistan takes tangible steps to combat terrorism. In spite of this, there has been no official mechanism for restart that has been established, which leaves the status of the deal unclear.
It is important to keep in mind that despite widespread suspicion, previous bilateral treaties that contained departure clauses have only rarely been resurrected once they were violated. New Delhi’s leverage is further diminished as a result of China’s involvement and Pakistan’s retaliatory dam projects.
In order to restore complete cooperation, intensive negotiations, confidence-building measures, and possibly mediation by a third party would be required. Given the current state of relations, none of these situations are likely to occur in the near future.
With the suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty as a response to the attack in Pahalgam, India opened a new front in its fight against terrorism. This action transformed water from a resource that was shared among several parties into a potential strategic weapon.
This unusual step poses a risk of the long-term deterioration of a framework that was once able to withstand several crises and wars. The willingness of Islamabad to address security concerns and the ability of both sides to reestablish trust will determine whether Delhi’s measures continue to be a transient form of retaliation or whether they represent a difference that will last permanently.
In light of the fact that South Asia is experiencing a growing water shortage and climate stress, the longevity of the Indus Waters Treaty, as well as the stability of the region, is in jeopardy.
Authors
About the Author
