ISLAMABAD: Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar on Monday chaired a high-level meeting, declaring that Pakistan would take all necessary measures to protect its share of water under the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT). The meeting included the ministers for law and justice and water resources, the attorney general, senior officials, and technical experts.
The session was called to formulate a strategy after India announced the suspension of the IWT following an attack on tourists in Indian Illegally Occupied Jammu and Kashmir (IIOJK) on April 22. India accused Pakistan of involvement, but Islamabad denied the charge and offered to join a neutral investigation.
Although concerns exist over military tensions, the major issue is the future of the IWT, which regulates water sharing from six rivers between India and Pakistan. The treaty, brokered by the World Bank in 1960, had previously survived wars and periods of severe tension.
For the first time, India has used water as a political tool, leading Pakistan to warn that any attempt to divert, reduce, or stop water flow would be seen as an act of war. Ishaq Dar stressed that Pakistan would act to defend its water rights, emphasizing that India’s move violated international law and the IWT’s provisions.
He stated that the treaty is crucial for regional stability and essential for Pakistan’s 240 million people, criticizing India for attempting to weaponize water. Dar reaffirmed that Pakistan would continue to seek the treaty’s full implementation to safeguard its water and national interests.
Signed in 1960, the IWT allocates the eastern rivers—Ravi, Beas, and Sutlej—to India and the western rivers—Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab—to Pakistan. India is entitled to about 20% of the total water and uses 93–94% of its share, while the rest flows to Pakistan.
Officials noted that the treaty does not allow unilateral withdrawal, and Article 12 clearly states it can only end through a ratified agreement between the two countries. Under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969), withdrawal without mutual consent is illegal.
The IWT is a binding agreement between the two states, not their governments, and cannot be revoked unilaterally under Article 12(4). It also provides structured dispute resolution mechanisms, including bilateral talks, a Neutral Expert, and a Court of Arbitration.
Experts argue that India cannot physically suspend the treaty without massive infrastructure changes, and unilateral action carries significant military and geographical risks. They warn that India’s move could set a dangerous precedent for other upper riparian states, notably China.
The suspension of the treaty would seriously threaten Pakistan’s water security, affecting agriculture, drinking water, and food supplies, prompting Pakistan to seek legal action through the UN, ICJ, and World Bank. Pakistan could also raise the issue at the UN Security Council under Article 35 of the UN Charter.
Officials suggest that Pakistan can collaborate with other lower riparian states like Nepal, Bangladesh, and Bhutan for joint water diplomacy. They caution that disrupting the IWT could escalate regional tensions, damage the environment, and destabilize millions dependent on the Indus basin.
Pakistan has already warned that unilateral suspension of the IWT could also undermine bilateral agreements such as the Simla Agreement (1972), the Karachi Agreement (1949), and other confidence-building measures, risking the collapse of the broader diplomatic framework between India and Pakistan.
