India’s suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty after the 2025 Pahalgam attack escalates tensions with Pakistan. The move risks water security, regional stability, and sets a dangerous precedent for transboundary rivers, urging dialogue to avert crisis.
Introduction
On April 25, 2025, a deadly terrorist attack (Massacre) took place in the Pahalgam region of Jammu & Kashmir, claiming the lives of 26 Indian citizens. The attack, which occurred in the midst of heightened security alerts and rising temperatures in the region, sent shockwaves across the country. As details emerged, Indian authorities linked the strike to Pakistan-based militant outfits, reigniting a fierce debate about cross-border terrorism and national security. The incident marked a critical tipping point, leading to widespread public outrage and high-level strategic reassessments by the Indian government.
In the immediate aftermath of the Pahalgam attack, India announced the suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), a move that signaled a dramatic escalation in its response to terrorism allegedly emanating from Pakistani soil. The treaty was signed in 1960 and brokered by the World Bank, had long been lauded as a model of international water cooperation, especially given the bitter history of Indo-Pakistani relations. It survived three wars and countless military standoffs. Yet today, the very existence of this agreement stands imperiled. India’s suspension of the treaty reflects not only a policy shift but also a strategic message
The Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) of 1960 has long been celebrated as a triumph of diplomacy amid animosity. It outlined a mechanism for the fair and peaceful distribution of the waters of the Indus River system. Remarkably, the treaty endured despite the turbulent political relationship between the two nations, surviving three full-scale wars (1965, 1971, and 1999) and numerous military skirmishes. It stood as a rare pillar of stability in an otherwise conflict-ridden region.
However, recent developments have plunged the treaty into uncertainty. Following the horrific Pahalgam terrorist attack, in which several Indians lost their lives, India accused Pakistan-based terror outfits of orchestrating the incident. In response, India has now suspended its participation in the IWT, marking the most significant challenge the treaty has faced in over six decades. This move has not only heightened tensions between the two nuclear-armed neighbors but also raised complex questions about the future of transboundary water sharing in South Asia.
Origins and Structure of the Indus Waters Treaty
In the shadow of Partition in 1947, water emerged as one of the first and most urgent points of friction between India and the newly formed Pakistan. The Indus River system, which irrigated vast stretches of land in both countries, did not conform to political borders. While the rivers flowed into Pakistan, their headworks were now located in India. Tensions flared when India briefly halted water flow to Pakistan in 1948, making it clear that without a formal framework, access to water could trigger a crisis or worse, war. Recognizing the severity of the issue, the World Bank initiated a dialogue between the two nations. After nearly a decade of negotiation, the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) was signed on September 19, 1960, by Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru and Pakistani President Ayub Khan, with the World Bank as a guarantor.
The treaty divided the six rivers of the Indus basin into two categories. The Eastern Rivers that are Ravi, Beas, and Sutlej were allocated to India for exclusive use, while the Western Rivers that are Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab were reserved for Pakistan. However, India retained limited rights to utilize the Western rivers for non-consumptive purposes such as hydropower, irrigation (within defined limits), and navigation. These provisions were subject to strict technical guidelines and advance notice to Pakistan, ensuring that India’s usage did not disrupt the flow essential to Pakistan’s agriculture. In return, India agreed to provide financial assistance to Pakistan for the construction of canals and storage facilities to make up for the water redirected from the Eastern Rivers.
To ensure the treaty’s longevity and minimize disputes, a Permanent Indus Commission was established, comprising one commissioner from each country. The treaty includes a three-tiered dispute resolution mechanism: differences are first addressed at the commission level; if unresolved, they move to a neutral expert, and if still in contention, to a Court of Arbitration. This layered structure has allowed the treaty to withstand wars, skirmishes, and political hostilities for over six decades until the recent suspension by India in 2025, following the Pahalgam terror attack, pushed this model of cooperation to the brink. The Indus Waters Treaty is no longer just a water-sharing pact; it has become a litmus test for regional peace and the evolving dynamics of geopolitical leverage in South Asia.
Strategic Importance of the Indus River System
The Indus River system is the backbone of Pakistan’s agrarian economy, providing water for nearly 90% of the country’s food production and sustaining over 13.3 million hectares of irrigated land. It underpins roughly 25% of Pakistan’s GDP, with agriculture contributing one-quarter of economic output thanks to the basin’s expansive canal network and dependable flow regimes. Beyond Pakistan, the basin supports communities across India, Afghanistan, and China’s western provinces, highlighting its regional significance for food security and rural livelihoods. Any upstream disruptions whether from infrastructure projects or climate-induced flow variability, thus pose acute risks of food insecurity and economic instability across South Asia.
The Indus system also fuels Pakistan’s power generation through its major reservoirs: Tarbela (4,888 MW, over half of WAPDA’s hydropower capacity) and Mangla (approximately 1,070 MW), which together supply around 20% of national electricity needs. These dams serve as essential flood-control structures, mitigating the impacts of frequent inundations that have historically inflicted economic losses averaging 1% of GDP annually and catastrophic damages surpassing US $10 billion in single events. By regulating monsoonal peaks and channeling surplus flows into storage, the reservoir network reduces downstream flooding while ensuring water availability during dry seasons for irrigation and power generation. As Pakistan aims to add up to 10 GW of new hydropower capacity by 2030, the strategic utilization of Indus waters remains central to its energy diversification and climate-resilience strategies.
Control over the Indus headwaters has long served as a potent strategic lever in India–Pakistan relations, exemplified by the 1960 Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) that allocated western rivers to Pakistan and eastern to India under World Bank auspices. While the IWT’s data-sharing and dispute-resolution mechanisms have endured wars and political crises, India’s suspension of key treaty provisions in April 2025 following a terror attack in Pahalgam highlighted how hydrological governance can escalate into diplomatic confrontation. Pakistan’s recourse to arbitration under the treaty’s three-tier mechanism i.e. bilateral Commission, Neutral Expert, Court of Arbitration underscores the Indus’s role not only as a resource but as a geopolitical bargaining chip. In an era of intensifying regional rivalries, the river remains a linchpin of South Asian security architecture, where water-sharing disputes can swiftly exacerbate broader political tensions.
Climate projections signal that over 70% of the Upper Indus’s flow derives from meltwater that is 26% glacial and 44% seasonal snow, making the system acutely vulnerable to Himalayan deglaciation and shifting precipitation patterns. Accelerating glacial retreat could initially boost runoffs but ultimately threaten long-term water availability, jeopardizing agriculture, energy, and ecosystems across the basin. Recognizing these challenges, riparian nations and multilateral bodies have launched initiatives like the UNEP-backed “Living Indus” programme to restore ecosystems, enhance data-sharing, and develop joint climate-resilient management frameworks. Ultimately, the strategic importance of the Indus River system transcends national borders, demanding cooperative stewardship to secure South Asia’s food, energy, and environmental future.
The Present Crisis: Why Has India Suspended the Treaty?
In the wake of the devastating Pahalgam terror attack on April 22, 2025, which claimed the lives of 26 civilians, India has taken the unprecedented step of suspending the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) with Pakistan. This move marked a significant escalation in bilateral tensions. The attack, attributed to militants with alleged cross-border linkages, prompted India to reassess its diplomatic and strategic posture towards Pakistan. By suspending the IWT, India signals its intent to leverage water-sharing arrangements as a means to pressure Pakistan into ceasing support for cross-border terrorism.
The suspension entails halting the exchange of crucial hydrological data, including information on water flow, snowmelt, and river discharge, which Pakistan relies upon for managing its water resources. Furthermore, India is no longer constrained by the treaty's limitations on the use of waters from the western rivers i.e. Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab, potentially allowing for new storage and hydropower projects. While the immediate impact on water flow to Pakistan may be limited due to existing infrastructure constraints, the long-term implications could be profound, affecting Pakistan's agriculture and economy.
Pakistan has condemned India's suspension of the IWT, labeling it an "act of war" and warning of serious retaliatory consequences. The move has exacerbated already strained relations, leading to diplomatic expulsions, suspension of visas, and closure of airspace between the two nations. The international community has expressed concern over the potential for further escalation, urging both countries to exercise restraint and engage in dialogue to resolve their differences.
India's decision to suspend the IWT underscores the strategic importance of water resources in South Asia's geopolitical landscape. As climate change and population growth intensify competition over water, the management of transboundary rivers like the Indus becomes increasingly critical. The current crisis highlights the need for robust mechanisms to address water-related disputes and the importance of maintaining cooperative frameworks to ensure regional stability and sustainable development.
Consequences
This is the first such moment when India has made a bold and historic move, suspending the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) for the first time since its inception in 1960. The treaty, a rare symbol of cooperation between India and Pakistan, had weathered two wars and numerous political upheavals. But the April 2025 attack, which claimed 26 lives in the heart of Kashmir’s tourism belt, became a flashpoint. India, citing the need to hold Pakistan accountable for harboring terror networks, announced that it would no longer be bound by the treaty’s terms. Pakistan responded sharply, warning that any move to block or alter river flows would be interpreted as an “act of war,” underlining the gravity of the situation.
As discussed earlier, despite having limited rights on the western rivers, India has historically underutilized even its 20% share due to lack of storage capacity and infrastructure. With the treaty now suspended, India could theoretically pursue new dam projects, modify existing infrastructure, or withhold crucial hydrological data without informing Pakistan. However, experts point out that physically stopping the Indus or diverting its massive flow, particularly during monsoon months, remains practically unfeasible given India’s current capabilities. Run-of-the-river hydropower projects dominate the Indian side of the basin and lack large-scale storage.
Now the question is what India can do and where Pakistan may feel the pinch and contrast is in the dry season. During these months, when river flows are naturally lower, storage capacity and flow timing become critical. Without the treaty’s transparency requirements, India could begin adjusting release schedules or flushing sediment without prior notice, potentially disrupting Pakistan’s irrigation and power generation systems. Moreover, halting data exchange, a vital aspect of flood forecasting and water management could compound vulnerabilities. Pakistani officials have already noted that India had been providing limited data even before the suspension, but the complete severance of communication introduces new uncertainty into an already tense equation.
This move by India also reignites broader regional anxieties around “water as a weapon.” While India risks flooding its own territory if it holds back too much water upstream, even temporary manipulations like sudden releases or sediment surges can cause downstream havoc. The situation also casts a shadow over India’s own concerns in the eastern Himalayan region, where China controls the Brahmaputra’s upper reaches.
In 2016, following another terror attack, Beijing blocked a tributary of the Yarlung Tsangpo, the source of the Brahmaputra in what was seen as a geopolitical signal in support of Pakistan. With water security now deeply entangled in strategic rivalry, the suspension of the IWT may mark not just a diplomatic fracture, but a turning point in how South Asian powers weaponize shared rivers in pursuit of leverage and deterrence.
Legal and Ethical Questions Around Suspension
India’s suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty enters uncharted legal territory, as the treaty lacks any explicit provision for unilateral withdrawal or termination. However, India could invoke the international legal doctrine of rebus sic stantibus, which allows a state to withdraw from a treaty if there has been a fundamental change in circumstances. India may argue that the persistence of cross-border terrorism, particularly the Pahalgam attack, constitutes such a change, one that undermines the very foundation of peaceful cooperation assumed by the treaty. Yet, this doctrine is rarely applied and generally frowned upon in international jurisprudence, especially when dealing with humanitarian or environmental agreements.
Beyond legal interpretation lies a deeper ethical debate: should essential resources like water be weaponized in geopolitical disputes? Critics warn that using water as a tool of coercion sets a dangerous precedent not only for India-Pakistan relations but for all transboundary water-sharing arrangements globally. If water is politicized in one basin, it could inspire similar tactics elsewhere, eroding the principles of cooperative river basin management. Moreover, weaponizing water could lead to unintended humanitarian consequences in Pakistan, particularly affecting civilian populations reliant on the Indus basin for drinking water, irrigation, and electricity.
India also risks undermining its broader regional diplomacy by adopting a hardline stance on water. As an upstream country not just to Pakistan, but also to China (in the Brahmaputra basin) and Nepal (in the Ganges basin), India’s credibility as a responsible stakeholder in shared water resources could be called into question. If it asserts the right to suspend a treaty unilaterally, it weakens its own position in other international negotiations. Thus, while the suspension of the IWT may seem like a strategic move in the short term, it opens a complex web of legal ambiguity and ethical dilemmas that could reverberate far beyond the subcontinent.
Historical Precedents and Lessons
In the past, despite major provocations like the 2016 Uri attack and the 2019 Pulwama bombing, India showed considerable restraint in its approach to the Indus Waters Treaty. Although these attacks sparked intense domestic calls to revisit or scrap the treaty, successive Indian governments chose to maintain the status quo. The IWT was viewed as a stabilizing force amidst frequent political and military tensions, a rare channel of dialogue between two nuclear-armed neighbors. Maintaining the treaty allowed India to project itself as a responsible global actor committed to upholding international agreements, even under severe provocation.
The suspension of the treaty in 2025, however, marks a significant departure from this tradition of cautious diplomacy. Unlike earlier episodes, the Pahalgam attack seems to have tipped the balance toward action, driven by a shift in India's internal political climate. Rising nationalist sentiment, public anger over repeated terror incidents, and a broader strategic pivot toward assertiveness in foreign policy have all contributed to this decision. The Indian government now appears more willing to leverage every possible tool including critical resources like water to pressurize adversaries and redefine the rules of engagement.
Yet, history offers a cautionary lesson. While assertiveness may satisfy immediate political demands, the long-term consequences of dismantling cooperative frameworks like the Indus Waters Treaty are unpredictable. Escalating the conflict over water could entrench hostility, provoke retaliatory measures, and reduce the already narrow space for dialogue. The IWT's durability over six decades had symbolized a measure of predictability in an otherwise volatile relationship. By moving away from this model, both nations risk entering a new and more dangerous phase of strategic competition, one where the costs may far outweigh the perceived gains.
The Way Forward: Conflict or Cooperation?
The suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty marks a profound shift in the India-Pakistan relationship, raising urgent questions about the future of water sharing in South Asia. India’s decision, once unthinkable even after major terror attacks like Uri and Pulwama signals a new era of strategic assertiveness fueled by rising nationalist sentiment and shifting foreign policy doctrines. No longer content with symbolic gestures, India has chosen to leverage one of the most critical shared resources in the region. While the immediate political calculus may favor a tougher stance, history warns that dismantling cooperative frameworks like the IWT could open the floodgates to prolonged instability, humanitarian crises, and diplomatic isolation.
The road ahead offers three broad possibilities. One, India and Pakistan could be compelled by mutual necessity or international pressure to renegotiate a new treaty that reflects changing realities such as climate change, evolving water needs, and security concerns. Two, a complete breakdown could occur, forcing both nations into contentious international legal battles with uncertain outcomes. A third, hybrid path is also plausible: India may continue expanding its infrastructure under the old treaty's framework, gradually building pressure until Pakistan is forced into diplomatic concessions. In all scenarios, environmental and humanitarian considerations must remain paramount. The Indus River is not just a geopolitical tool; it is a lifeline for millions who depend on it for food, water, and survival.
Ultimately, the Indus River has always symbolized more than just shared geography as it represents the possibility of peaceful coexistence despite deep and enduring animosities. Its waters have flowed through decades of conflict, wars, and crises, offering a rare current of cooperation between two hostile neighbors. Whether this suspension heralds a recalibration toward more realistic, updated agreements, or whether it pushes the region toward greater conflict, remains uncertain. What is clear, however, is that the river still runs through the heart of South Asian geopolitics, and its future course will shape the destiny of both nations for generations to come.
