Is the Indus Waters Treaty really under threat?

After a terror attack on tourists in Kashmir last week, India unilaterally announced it would suspend the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) of 1960, and Pakistan reacted by stating that any violation of the treaty would be considered an act of war. This treaty has held its ground despite Indo-Pakistan wars in 1965 and 1971. Some observers think that the Indian move is political in nature as the flow of the three big rivers cannot be fully stopped in a difficult mountainous terrain. Due to the construction of some dams for power generation in Kashmir however, India has developed the capability to store water, in accordance with the treaty.

India’s hasty announcement has escalated the situation between two nuclear states and added yet another flashpoint to an already tense world. However, the mere fact that both countries have nuclear weapons obviates the possibility of an all-out war. A nuclear war would be devastating to both, more so to India. But the probability of war increases in case India opts to decrease Pakistan’s share of water. 60 percent of Pakistan’s population is directly or indirectly dependent on agriculture for its livelihood. 

South Asian and Gulf security is interlinked, and Saudi Arabia is actively trying to diffuse Indo-Pak tensions. International institutions like the World Bank and the United Nations should also play their roll. 

- Javed Hafeez

Legally speaking, India cannot suspend or modify the treaty unilaterally. It has no provisions for a unilateral exit or even suspension. The Indian decision, taken on the basis of unproven allegations against Pakistan, is in stark violation of Article 26 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties 1969, which clearly lays down that treaties “must be performed in good faith.” Moreover, depriving a bulk of Pakistan’s population of its means of livelihood would be nothing short of a crime against humanity. As an all out war could be more damaging for India, it is highly likely that India will avoid any such misadventures.

India’s population is five times that of Pakistan’s and there is not much disparity in their nuclear arsenals. Large cities on both sides are within range of strike capabilities. A war in the South Asian sub-continent would be a human catastrophe, pushing both nations back by a few decades through huge damage to infrastructure and a human genocide. During the Cold War era, the term ironically used for nuclear weapons was MAD, i.e. mutually assured destruction. The war could spread beyond the sub-continent if India tries to cut the Karakoram Highway between Pakistan and China.

Both customary and treaty laws protect the water rights of lower riparian states. Many international rivers pass through several countries, the Danube and the Nile being just two examples. 
Similarly, the mighty Brahmaputra originates in China and flows into India and Bangladesh. The IWT was facilitated through long negotiations under the supervision of the World Bank and signed by Jawaharlal Nehru and Ayub Khan. This treaty has functioned so well that it has been cited as a model international agreement, with its elaborate three-tier dispute resolution mechanism.

The reading in Pakistan is that India has woven some fiction into the Pahalgam incident, with lots of Pakistan bashing. Official circles are alleging a possible false flag operation to achieve certain goals. Those goals are weakening Pakistan by heating up the Line of Control (LoC) in Kashmir. This creates a two-front situation for Pakistan as it battles terrorism on the Pak-Afghan border and Indian fire on the LoC. Secondly, the alleged false flag is being cited as an attempt to win more US sympathy as Vice President JD Vance was on an official visit in India at the same time. However, the truth can only come out if a neutral third party inquiry is conducted.

Both India and Pakistan have nuclear safeguards but those are not as elaborate as the ones in the US and Russia. Therefore, there is a greater need to exercise restraint and here, the role of the international community to diffuse tensions becomes paramount. Some important regional countries have reportedly offered their good offices. The GCC countries usually feel the heat whenever Indo-Pakistan tensions escalate. When all is said and done, however, the root cause of the tensions lies in the unresolved Kashmir dispute. The Simla Agreement of 1972 called for a solution bilaterally. But India threw that option away by unilaterally abrogating Kashmir’s autonomy and merging it with the Indian Union in 2019. The resultant resentment could also be the cause behind the recent, unfortunate incident. However, only an independent probe can unearth the truth.

South Asian and Gulf security is interlinked, and Saudi Arabia is actively trying to diffuse Indo-Pak tensions. International institutions like the World Bank and the United Nations should also play their role to safeguard the waters treaty, as it is truly an existential threat. 

- Javed Hafeez is a former Pakistani diplomat with much experience of the Middle East. He writes weekly columns in Pakistani and Gulf newspapers and appears regularly on satellite TV channels as a defense and political analyst. X: @JavedHafiz8