Access to water is not only a fundamental human right but also a strategic priority for nations—particularly those sharing rivers, lakes, and aquifers across borders. With climate change, rising industrial demand, and population growth placing mounting pressure on water resources, international cooperation has become more vital than ever.
Recognizing the dual potential of water to foster both cooperation and conflict, the United Nations (UN) has established a legal and regulatory framework to guide the management of shared water resources, known as transboundary waters.
Transboundary water resources refer to freshwater systems—such as rivers, lakes, and aquifers—that cross or form boundaries between countries. According to the UN, there are more than 270 shared river basins and over 300 transboundary aquifers globally. Notable examples include the Nile River (shared by 11 countries), the Danube River (19 countries), the Mekong River (6 countries), and the Indus Basin (shared by India and Pakistan). Effective management of these shared water bodies requires robust cooperative frameworks to ensure fair and sustainable access for all riparian (bordering) states.
At the heart of the UN’s legal approach is the 1997 Convention on the Law of the Non-Navigational Uses of International Watercourses, commonly known as the UN Watercourses Convention. This treaty provides comprehensive legal principles for using, managing, and conserving international watercourses. It upholds the right of all countries sharing a watercourse to a reasonable and equitable share of its resources. Determining this equitable use involves factors such as population needs, socio-economic considerations, climate, and existing usage patterns. Moreover, states must manage their activities to avoid causing significant harm to other countries within the same water system. If such harm occurs, the responsible state is obligated to take steps to prevent, mitigate, or rectify the damage.
The Convention also mandates regular data sharing, joint scientific studies, and advance notification of any planned measures that could significantly impact the shared watercourse. Consultations are required if potential impacts are identified.
The Indus Waters Treaty has had a significant and wide-ranging impact on both India and Pakistan, influencing their agricultural development, energy security, and bilateral relations.
Reliable water supplies are fundamental to regional development, supporting agriculture, industry, and urbanization. Beyond direct economic impacts, the treaty’s role in maintaining stability between two nuclear-armed neighbors is invaluable. By managing water disputes within a legal framework, the IWT reduces the risk of conflict, which could have catastrophic economic and security consequences for both nations. The World Bank served as the key mediator and facilitator throughout the nine years of negotiations, successfully bringing India and Pakistan together to reach a mutually acceptable agreement. More than just a witness, the World Bank is a signatory to the Indus Waters Treaty and acts as a procedural guarantor of its dispute resolution mechanisms. Its responsibilities include appointing a Neutral Expert upon request, establishing a Court of Arbitration when necessary, and managing a Trust Fund—financed by member countries—to cover the costs of these experts and arbitrators. The World Bank holds the original treaty document and plays a vital administrative role in overseeing its implementation.
India’s role, however, has been widely criticized as disappointing, with accusations that it has used water as a tool of threat and blackmail against Pakistan. Following the Pahalgam attack, the Indian government announced the suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty on April 23, 2025. The Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) justified this move by alleging Pakistan’s violation of the treaty’s principles of “goodwill and friendship.” Indian Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri informed a parliamentary committee that Pakistan had disregarded the spirit of the 1960 agreement, leading India to place the treaty “in abeyance” until Pakistan unequivocally and permanently renounces its support for cross-border terrorism.
This suspension marked a significant shift in India’s position, as the treaty had long been seen as one of the few stable agreements between the two nuclear-armed neighbors. The decision was widely viewed as a retaliatory measure, based on India’s unsubstantiated claims that Pakistan was behind the Pahalgam attacks. Notably, the Indus Waters Treaty does not include any provision for unilateral suspension; Article XII clearly states that the treaty can only be modified or terminated through a mutually ratified agreement between both governments. India, however, invoked the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, which allows treaty suspension in cases of fundamental changes in circumstances.
This action sparked debate among international law experts, many of whom argue that India’s suspension breaches international legal norms and could set a dangerous precedent for unilateral treaty abrogation.
Pakistan’s civil and military leadership has responded with clarity and force to India’s unilateral suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), interpreting it not merely as a diplomatic shift but as an outright act of water-based hostility. Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif has condemned the move in strong terms, labeling it “a blatant violation and an act of water aggression,” and affirming that Pakistan would deploy its full institutional capabilities—civilian, military, federal, and provincial—to counter the threat. Emphasizing unity in what he termed “a battle of justice,” Sharif likened the defense of Pakistan’s water rights to confronting an external military threat, pledging to approach it with the same resolve and determination.
On the military front, Prime Minister Sharif has acknowledged the armed forces’ critical role in addressing this crisis, participating in strategic briefings alongside Chief of Army Staff Field Marshal Syed Asim Munir, who was elevated to this rank following the 2025 conflict. Munir has made Pakistan’s position unmistakably clear, asserting that India’s treaty suspension crosses a “red line” and vowing that Pakistan will not compromise its water rights under any circumstances. He characterized India’s approach as both illegal and a form of “hydro-terrorism,” and warned that any attempt to divert or restrict water flows to Pakistan would be met with a unified and decisive national response.
Lieutenant General Ahmed Sharif Chaudhry, Director-General of the ISPR, has also played a significant role in articulating the military’s stance. In stark terms, he called India’s intentions delusional, stating that “only a madman would think they can stop water from reaching Pakistan.” His response captured both the emotional gravity and strategic seriousness of the issue: “If you block our water, we will choke your breath.” Chaudhry emphasized that this conflict is about principles and national integrity, and that Pakistan’s military response has been restrained yet effective, backed by complete institutional unity. Defense Minister Khawaja Asif has further intensified the message, branding the Indian move as open aggression. Speaking in Parliament, Asif dismissed the Simla Accord as outdated and irrelevant in the face of such provocation, suggesting that new realities demand new frameworks.
This consensus—spanning the entire civilian and military leadership—makes it evident that Pakistan views the situation as far more than a political dispute; it is perceived as a strategic assault on the country’s most essential resource. For Pakistan, water from the Indus river system is not merely about agriculture or economics—it is about sovereignty and survival. With over 240 million citizens dependent on these river flows, any disruption is seen as an existential threat. Pakistan is responding not only through statements but through tangible actions: accelerating dam construction, intensifying legal advocacy, launching diplomatic offensives, and enhancing military readiness. This is not a one-dimensional struggle but a comprehensive strategy—one that involves every domain from international law to cyber defense.
The seamless coordination between political authorities like Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar, and military figures such as Field Marshal Munir and Lieutenant General Chaudhry, underscores a critical truth: Pakistan has redefined water security as national security. Their united front signals a deep and enduring resolve to challenge Indian aggression on all fronts—legal, diplomatic, economic, cyber, and, if necessary, military. This robust posture is a clear message to India and the international community: Pakistan will not tolerate the politicization or weaponization of water resources.
In Pakistan’s eyes, the Indus Waters Treaty is not merely a historical agreement—it is a legal lifeline and a moral obligation that must be upheld. Islamabad has made it unequivocally clear that India lacks both the legal authority and ethical standing to unilaterally dismantle a decades-old treaty brokered under international auspices. The Pakistani people, in turn, remain steadfast in their belief in the capability of their armed forces. Their confidence is rooted not only in military strength but in a track record of countering Indian provocations, including the much-publicized failure of India’s so-called Operation Sindoor. Today, as the water issue looms large, the entire nation stands firmly behind its leadership—ready to confront, challenge, and, if necessary, combat any move that threatens its rivers, its sovereignty, or its survival. India, meanwhile, is urged to exercise maturity and restraint, avoiding actions that may trigger deeper conflict in an already fragile regional landscape.
Comments are closed, but trackbacks and pingbacks are open.