India’s Suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty: A Potential for Water Crisis

Umar Farooq
On April 22, 2025, a sudden attack in Pahalgam, located in Indian-administered Kashmir, resulted in the deaths of 26 civilians, primarily tourists. In response, India suspended the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), a significant water-sharing agreement with Pakistan. This decision has escalated tensions between the two nuclear-armed neighbors, raising concerns about regional stability. The 1960 Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) which brokered by the World Bank, stood as a symbol of cooperation between India and Pakistan. Under the treaty, Pakistan got control of the three western rivers—Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab—while India got the eastern rivers—Ravi, Beas, and Sutlej. For over six decades, treaty survived wars and multiple conflicts. The treaty has much more importance for Pakistan as compared to India. Unlike India, Pakistan has no major river system apart from Indus, which makes it one of the most water-stressed countries in the world. Pakistan is downstream to India which also increased significance of IWT for Pakistan. Around 45 million acres of farmland in Pakistan are irrigated by the Indus system, making it one of the largest irrigation systems in the world. IBIS supported 23% of GDP, 70% of total export earnings and 54% employment of labor force of Pakistan. Climate change have made things worse. Glaciers are melting in the Himalayas faster than before, affecting water levels in rivers. This could mean more flooding in the short term and water shortage in the long run. Studies warn that water flow in the Indus basin could drop by nearly 60% due to global warming in long term and 40% in short term. In such a situation, the IWT acts as a safeguard. That is why its suspension has created serious fear in Pakistan. In recent years, India and Pakistan have experienced growing tension over the construction of dams and hydroelectric projects by India on rivers allocated to Pakistan. Pakistan has raised objections against some Indian projects, claiming they violate the IWT by reducing river flow into Pakistani territory. One of the most well-known disputes is over the Kishanganga Dam. Pakistan argued that this dam would reduce water flow into the Neelum Valley, harming agriculture and power generation. Though the Permanent court of Aberration (PCA) which allowed India to divert water from the Kishanganga River for purposes of electricity production but required India to change the design in order to ensure a minimum standard flow of water downstream to Pakistan. However, Pakistan has remained concerned that more Indian projects could threaten its water supply. In April 2025, following a terrorist attack in Pahalgam , India announced it was suspending the Indus Waters Treaty. Indian officials blamed Pakistan for the attack and used this incident to justify their action. Along with other diplomatic moves, India’s suspension of the treaty was the most serious, as it directly affected Pakistan’s water lifeline.The Pakistani government strongly rejected the accusations and condemned the suspension as an act of aggression. In Islamabad’s view, India was turning water into a political weapon. The National Security Committee of Pakistan declared that blocking the flow of water would be seen as an “act of war,” showing just how serious the situation had become. Water, for Pakistan, is not just a natural resource—it is a matter of survival.continue India’s decision set a dangerous precedent. The treaty had built-in mechanisms for solving disagreements peacefully, including neutral experts and international arbitration. By acting alone, India ignored these rules and international legal standards. Many legal experts agree that a country cannot walk away from a treaty without mutual agreement or following the proper process. The treaty includes mechanisms for resolving disputes, such as the appointment of neutral experts and arbitration through international courts. Legal experts emphasize that unilateral withdrawal from such treaties is not permissible under international law, specifically referencing the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, which mandates mutual consent for termination.Pakistan sees this as not just a violation of the IWT, but also a threat to global water-sharing practices. If India can do this, what is to stop other countries from breaking water agreements too? This fear is real, especially in regions like South Asia, where many rivers cross international borders. Pakistan already faces a water crisis. The country uses almost all of its Indus water, and groundwater is being overused. Farmers in Punjab and Sindh are reporting water shortages, and India’s upstream activities are often blamed. If India decides to stop or reduce water flow, the effects on Pakistan would be disastrous. Agriculture, which employs a major part of the population and contributes to the economy, would be severely affected. Food shortages could occur, and hydroelectric power generation would also drop. Without water, Pakistan’s economy could suffer on a national scale. This explains why Pakistani leaders responded so strongly to India’s move. The suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty is a serious threat to peace and stability in South Asia. From a Pakistani perspective, it endangers food, energy, and national security. It also challenges a long-standing example of cooperation in a Conflict-sensitive region. Without water-sharing mechanisms, the risk of misunderstanding and conflict grows larger. Pakistan must continue to raise this issue on global platforms and use diplomatic, legal, and technical channels to protect its rights. At the same time, both countries need to understand that water can either bring them closer or drive them into deeper conflict. For the future of South Asia, legal agreements must be respected, and diplomacy must win over conflict.