IWT suspension: India likely to take visible on-ground action soon

In the coming days, action will be visible on the ground that will underscore the suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) of 1960 — which governs the use of waters from rivers flowing downstream from India into Pakistan’s Indus river basin — said a source aware of the matter. The source rejected the notion that no action could be taken without enhancing India’s storage capacity on the three western rivers — the Indus, Jhelum and Chenab — allocated to Pakistan under the treaty. Expanding storage capacity on these rivers, the source added, is now on the agenda, made more feasible in the absence of the treaty’s restrictions on practices such as inter-basin transfer of water.

 

India on Wednesday suspended the IWT and downgraded diplomatic ties with Pakistan, a day after 26 people — mostly tourists — were killed in a terrorist attack in Jammu & Kashmir’s Pahalgam. The government said the attack had "cross-border linkages" and announced it was putting the treaty in abeyance with immediate effect, pending Pakistan’s "credible and irrevocable" renunciation of support for cross-border terrorism. The treaty between India and Pakistan, brokered by the World Bank, was signed on September 19, 1960. It defined the rights and obligations of both countries regarding the use of the Indus River system. Broadly, the treaty allocated the waters of the western rivers — Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab — to Pakistan, and the eastern rivers — Ravi, Beas, and Sutlej — to India.

 

"Not just the quantum, but also the predictability of flow is equally important for Pakistan — and that is something India can already influence," the source, with first-hand experience in India’s handling of the IWT, said. "An impact will likely be seen on the predictability of water flow in the time to come, as India moves to enforce, to the full extent, the rights it anyway had under the treaty, and as some of its restrictions are no longer in force," the source added. Notably, more than 80 per cent of Pakistan’s irrigation depends on water from the Indus basin.

 

The source explained that under the agreement, India retained the right to use the western rivers for non-consumptive purposes — including limited irrigation and hydropower generation. However, there were constraints on storing or diverting their flows in ways that could impact downstream access. For Pakistan, these constraints provided the predictability — particularly in the timing of flows — that the state requires to manage its irrigation and water systems, and that farmers rely on to plan their sowing.

 

The source also noted that, until now, building storage capacity on the rivers allocated to Pakistan under the IWT had not been feasible due to the treaty’s restriction that water could only be stored within the river’s own basin. Citing the example of an existing hydropower project in the Chenab Valley, he explained that a storage capacity of about one million acre-feet (MAF) could now be created through inter-basin transfer — something previously unviable due to both local conditions and treaty constraints.

 

On maximising the rights India already enjoyed under the treaty, the source said that of the 20,000 megawatt (Mw) hydropower potential India could harness from the western rivers, only around 3,000 Mw had been realised by 2016. However, projects totalling 6,000 Mw are expected to come online by 2026–27, with over 3,000 Mw already under construction. The pace, he said, had picked up significantly after the Uri attack in 2016 and the Pulwama attack in 2019. “More such hydropower projects are now on the anvil. Earlier, the treaty allowed Pakistan to object to every run-of-river hydro project, slowing development on the Indian side. That will no longer be possible,” he added.

 

India’s intent behind suspending the IWT is to send a clear message to Pakistan: that given its continued use of cross-border terrorism as a tool of state policy, nothing can be taken for granted going forward, the source reiterated — including hitherto predictable elements of the relationship such as the IWT. Suspending the treaty could also signal to Pakistan that abrogation may be on the table in the future, if the government so decides, underscored the source. He added that while the treaty contains no explicit provision for abrogation, India could explore invoking Article 62 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, which allows for repudiating a treaty due to a fundamental change in the circumstances that prevailed at the time of its conclusion. However, he clarified that this was just one of the possible options — one that Pakistan would likely challenge at forums such as the International Court of Justice. The source indicated that the more immediate outcome of India’s move would likely be to bring Pakistan to the table to modify the treaty — this time on terms more favourable to India.

 

In a first in the IWT’s six-decade history, New Delhi issued a notice to Islamabad in January 2023 seeking the “modification” of the treaty. A second notice, sent in September 2024, called for the “review and modification” of the IWT. Both notices were issued under Article XII (3) of the treaty, which states that "the provisions of this Treaty may from time to time be modified by a duly ratified treaty concluded for that purpose between the two Governments".

 

In a related development, Union Jal Shakti Minister CR Patil told the media on Friday that the Centre has prepared a detailed roadmap to control the flow of Indian river water to Pakistan, following a meeting with Union Home Minister Amit Shah. Patil told one news agency the government is working on short-term, medium-term, and long-term measures, including river desilting, which will be undertaken soon. 

"India is clearly taking a more assertive approach than it did in 2016 or 2019. In linking its own treaty compliance to a decision by Pakistan to 'irrevocably' end support for cross-border terrorism — a condition that can only be reliably assessed over a long period of time — the Indian leadership is signalling that it may use water flows as an ongoing source of leverage, not just a post-attack talking point," said Joshua T White, a professor at Johns Hopkins University in the United States (US), who also served as a senior adviser on the National Security Council staff of former US President Barack Obama. "The Trump administration likely expects, and would effectively countenance, some kind of Indian military retaliation against Pakistan. I do think, however, that the administration and the World Bank would both worry about the complete breakdown of the treaty and may work behind closed doors to prevent that from taking place," added White.

  Responding to an emailed request for comment on the suspension of the IWT, a World Bank spokesperson said, "The World Bank is a signatory to the treaty for a limited set of defined tasks. As an international organisation, the Bank does not opine on treaty-related sovereign decisions taken by its member countries." The spokesperson, nonetheless, described the IWT as an agreement that has been "profoundly important and successful" for more than 60 years.   On Thursday, Islamabad said that any attempt to divert water allocated to Pakistan under the IWT would be treated as an Act of War. Following a meeting of the National Security Committee, chaired by Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif in Islamabad, Pakistan threatened to put the Simla Agreement, which the two neighbours signed in 1972, and other bilateral accords on hold. 

 

   (With inputs from Sanjeeb Mukherjee)