A Precedent in Peril

Qazi Hussain Asghar

Signed in 1960 under World Bank auspices, the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) allocated river waters between India and Pakistan, laying out detailed mechanisms for water sharing and dispute resolution. Despite wars, border skirmishes, and political upheavals, the IWT endured for over six decades, until now. In a controversial move, India has unilaterally suspended the treaty’s implementation, citing security concerns and accusing Pakistan of harboring cross-border terrorism. The decision, while politically expedient, raises legal and ethical questions with far-reaching global implications.

India’s suspension may violate Article 60 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.

International law scholars argue that India’s action may constitute a breach of Article 60 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, which requires fundamental treaty violations to be adjudicated or mutually recognized not enforced unilaterally. The World Bank, a guarantor of the Indus accord, has remained cautious but concerned. Meanwhile, observers warn that India’s move risks dismantling a critical framework for peace and water security in the subcontinent.

For Pakistan, a lower riparian state, India’s control over upstream rivers such as the Chenab, Jhelum, and Indus represents an existential challenge. The country relies on these rivers for agriculture, drinking water, and power generation. Any disruption, even temporary, poses dire humanitarian consequences for millions.

“Weaponizing water” is not just a regional worry. In a time of climate volatility, transboundary water management is an issue of global urgency. India’s decision could embolden other upstream nations, including China and Turkey, to manipulate water flows for political leverage, unraveling decades of fragile water diplomacy.

British lawmakers have already voiced concern. A recent House of Lords session warned that India’s suspension of the treaty undermines international norms and risks destabilizing a region already teetering on the edge. “South Asia cannot afford a water war,” one peer noted, calling for immediate international mediation and revival of dialogue.

Pakistan depends on upstream rivers for agriculture, drinking water, and power, facing existential risks.

The breach of the Indus Waters Treaty underscores a deeper crisis: the erosion of trust in international agreements. If one of the world’s oldest democracies can flout treaty obligations so openly, what message does it send to other powers, authoritarian or otherwise? Is international law still relevant or is it being reshaped by geopolitical might?

Pakistan has taken the diplomatic route, urging international forums to step in. Islamabad has not, thus far, reciprocated with treaty suspension or retaliatory action, an approach that deserves recognition in a world quick to escalate. The call now is for multilateral diplomacy, not unilateralism. The global community must act not for Pakistan’s sake alone, but for the sanctity of international agreements. Silence or inaction could normalize treaty violations, igniting similar crises elsewhere: from the Nile Basin to the Mekong Delta.

The World Bank and international forums urge diplomacy to prevent destabilization of water sharing.

This moment demands principled diplomacy. The United Nations, World Bank, and key powers including the United States must reassert their commitment to rule-based order by facilitating talks between India and Pakistan. Water, a lifeline for billions, should never be wielded as a weapon.

South Asia’s future depends on cooperation, not coercion. The Indus Waters Treaty may be under siege, but it is not beyond salvation, if the world chooses dialogue over disengagement, law over leverage, and peace over provocation.

Qazi Hussain is pursing his PhD in International Relations and regular contributes in Dailies.