Suspension of Indus Water Treaty: A worrying sign for Indo-Pakistani relations

Neeraj Singh Manhas currently serves as the special advisor for South Asia at the Parley Policy Initiative, Republic of Korea, and is a subject matter expert at the Centre for Joint Warfare Studies, Ministry of Defence, Government of India. He is also a non-resident visiting senior scholar at the Centre for National Security Studies, and an Editorial Board Member for World Water Policy, journal published by (WILEY-Scopus, Elsevier). He closely follows South Asia’s water and river geopolitics. ApEx talked to him about India’s decision to suspend the Indus Water Treaty and its implications for Pakistan and South Asia.

How does the suspension of the IWT affect Pakistan?

The Indus Waters Treaty has been crucial for Pakistan, as it regulates the flow of water from the Indus River and its tributaries, which are vital to Pakistan’s agricultural and energy sectors. Under the treaty, Pakistan was granted exclusive rights over the waters of three western rivers—Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab—while India was allowed to use the waters of the eastern rivers. With India’s suspension of the treaty, Pakistan faces the possibility of having its water supply disrupted, which could lead to severe consequences for its agricultural output, as over 90 percent of Pakistan’s water needs are met by the Indus River. Eighty percent of Pakistan’s agricultural land—around 16m hectares—depends on water from the Indus system. 

Also, this system supplies water to over 237m Pakistanis. The major cities like Karachi, Lahore, and Multan get their water directly from this system. However, 25 percent of Pakistan’s GDP depends on this water, as that share of national income comes from agriculture. The agricultural sector supports 68 percent of Pakistan’s rural households—whose livelihoods are now under threat. Additionally, water shortages could affect hydroelectric power production, which contributes significantly to Pakistan's energy generation. The economic and environmental implications could be disastrous, especially for Pakistan’s rural population, which depends on these rivers for irrigation. This suspension risks destabilizing Pakistan’s food security and overall economy, especially as the country grapples with existing resource shortages.

What are the potential environmental and economic consequences for Pakistan?

The potential environmental and economic consequences for Pakistan are grave, as the Indus River system is not just a source of water but a lifeline for the country’s economy. With Pakistan relying on these rivers for nearly 70 percent of its total water supply, any disruption could lead to significant water shortages, especially in the agricultural sector, which employs a substantial portion of the population. The immediate effect would be felt in irrigation, with crops failing due to insufficient water. 

Additionally, Pakistan’s hydroelectric plants, which rely on the flow of water from the Indus and its tributaries, would face a decrease in power generation, exacerbating the already critical energy crisis. On the environmental side, lower water availability could lead to the degradation of ecosystems, affecting wetlands and biodiversity that depend on consistent water flow. Economically, this could lead to food shortages, price hikes, and social unrest, especially as millions of people depend on these resources for their livelihood.

How has Pakistan responded to the suspension?

Pakistan’s response to India’s suspension of the IWT has been one of strong condemnation. Pakistani officials have rejected India’s accusations and denied any involvement in the Pahalgam attack. They have labelled India’s move as ‘cowardly’ and ‘immature’, claiming that it is an inappropriate and politically charged reaction that violates the spirit of the treaty. 

Pakistan’s foreign minister has called for an international response, urging global stakeholders to condemn India’s actions and mediate the dispute. The Pakistani government has warned of potential retaliation, emphasizing that such moves could escalate tensions further, potentially leading to military or diplomatic consequences. Given the sensitivity surrounding water issues in the region and the shared nature of the Indus River system, Pakistan fears that this could lead to long-term instability in the region. While Pakistan stresses that the treaty should remain intact, it has also warned that India’s actions could undermine future cooperation on regional water-sharing arrangements.

What are the broader implications for regional stability?

The suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty signals a worrying escalation in Indo-Pakistani relations, with far-reaching implications for regional stability. Both India and Pakistan are nuclear-armed countries, and any escalation in tensions over the treaty could lead to further militarization of the conflict. The suspension not only undermines the environmental and economic cooperation that the treaty represents but also exacerbates an already fragile relationship between the two nations. The history of territorial disputes, especially over Kashmir, complicates any diplomatic efforts to resolve the water dispute. The disruption of such a critical agreement could lead to an arms race or proxy conflicts, further destabilizing South Asia. It also risks undermining international efforts to mediate and foster cooperation in the region, with the potential to draw in external actors, including major powers and international organizations like the United Nations, which could get involved to prevent further escalation.

Is there a pathway to de-escalate this crisis?

While the situation remains tense, there is a potential pathway to de-escalation, although it would require significant diplomatic effort from both sides. The role of international organizations, such as the World Bank, which was instrumental in brokering the original treaty in 1960, could be pivotal in facilitating dialogue between India and Pakistan. Both nations need to demonstrate a commitment to peace, moving away from retaliatory measures and focusing on finding a solution that ensures equitable water distribution. One possible avenue could involve third-party mediation, with the World Bank or the United Nations acting as facilitators for negotiations. Additionally, confidence-building measures, such as the exchange of information about water usage and infrastructure development, could help to rebuild trust. However, this would require both countries to prioritize long-term cooperation over short-term political gains. The resolution of the crisis will depend not only on diplomatic negotiations but also on both countries recognizing the importance of the treaty for regional peace and stability.