India hits pause on Indus Waters Treaty: Could this dry up Pakistan's economy?
For Pakistan, the Indus Waters Treaty was a lifeline, flowing steadily even through wars, nuclear threats, and diplomatic breakdowns. But now, India has turned off the tap.India has suspended the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), a water-sharing agreement signed with Pakistan in 1960. The announcement was made by Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri on Wednesday, a day after a deadly attack in Pahalgam killed several civilians. The government said the move will stay in place until Pakistan ends its support for cross-border terrorism.The decision to suspend the treaty was taken by the Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS), India's top body on national security matters, after early investigations showed links between the attackers and groups based across the border.This marks the first time that India has officially put the Indus Waters Treaty on hold, despite years of political tensions and conflict between the two countries.WHAT IS THE INDUS WATERS TREATY?The Indus Waters Treaty was signed in 1960 after years of talks between India and Pakistan, where the World Bank acted as the mediator.The treaty divides the six rivers of the Indus Basin between the two countries:advertisementEastern Rivers: Ravi, Beas, and Sutlej were given to India.Western Rivers: Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab were given to Pakistan.India is allowed to use the western rivers for non-consumptive purposes like irrigation and hydropower but is not allowed to store or divert large amounts of water from them.Under the agreement, India gets about 20% of the total water in the system—roughly 33 million acre-feet (MAF), or 41 billion cubic metres (bcm), while Pakistan receives about 80%, which is around 135 MAF or 99 bcm.WHY THIS MATTERS TO PAKISTANPakistan is already facing a water crisis. The country has very low water storage, with the two main dams, Mangla and Tarbela, able to store only about 14.4 MAF. This is just 10% of Pakistan's annual water share under the treaty.The Indus system plays a key role in Pakistan's economy:advertisement
About 80% of Pakistan's farmland, or 16 million hectares, is watered by the Indus system93% of the water from these rivers is used for farming, including wheat, rice, sugarcane, and cottonThe system supports over 237 million people, of which 61% live within the Indus BasinIt contributes nearly 25% to Pakistan's GDP, mainly through agriculturePakistan is already one of the most water-stressed countries in the world. The average amount of water available per person has been going down fast. Any sudden or large cut in water flow will make the situation worse.Experts warn that the fallout from the suspension could be serious:Food production may drop sharply, affecting prices and availabilityPower cuts may increase, especially in rural areasCities may face drinking water shortages, adding pressure on urban systemsUnemployment may rise, especially among farmers and daily wage workersRural migration to cities may increase, leading to overcrowding and more pressure on resourcesIndia uses its share of the water, around 33 MAF, mainly in the states of Punjab, Haryana, and Rajasthan, for farming and power. But it may now decide to build new storage projects or change water flow patterns, which could directly reduce the amount of water reaching Pakistan.It is still not clear if the suspension will be permanent or temporary. There is also no official statement yet from Pakistan on how it plans to respond. But with water such a critical part of Pakistan's economy and daily life, the effects could start to show soon.Must Watch
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
an hour ago
- The Hindu
Stalin flags 'high' interest rates for development loans, hopes for World Bank support
Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M.K. Stalin said on Tuesday that the interest rates for development loans were high, ranging between 6% and 7%, and expected the World Bank to support investment aimed at fulfilling the socio-economic requirements of the people. In his speech after inaugurating the World Bank Group's Chennai Global Business Center at Taramani, he underlined the World Bank's support for Tamil Nadu's efforts to deal with climate change, attain the Sustainable Development Goals, and empower women. 'I think we should look back on some of the challenges in reaching our target. The interest rates for development loans are high, ranging between 6% and 7%. In the coming days, we expect the World Bank to support investments that fulfill the socio-economic requirements of the people, by providing loans for innovation and change,' he said. The Chief Minister said the Tamil Nadu government would work with the World Bank on long-term goals to make Tamil Nadu a 'model State'. He also recalled the World Bank's support to the Tamil Nadu government in implementing development initiatives and welfare measures. Union Cabinet Secretary T.V. Somanathan recalled his association with the World Bank since 1996 and pointed out how he had been part of several important occasions for the World Bank unit in Chennai. The success of this office stood testimony to the attractiveness of India in general and Chennai in particular for the service sector globally, he said. 'This office is international in quality and Indian in cost structure. It is global in outlook and local in talent. It is cosmopolitan culturally, but conservative financially. I wish the World Bank Group and the Tamil Nadu government continued success in this endeavour,' Mr. Somanathan said. World Bank Group Managing Director and Chief Administrative Officer Wencai Zhang underlined that the World Bank and Tamil Nadu shared a rich history of collaboration. Together, the two had advanced developments in areas such as rural livelihood and skills building, infrastructure, education, healthcare, and Smart Cities. 'We are well-positioned to tackle future challenges and help the World Bank Group achieve its mission of ending extreme poverty and boosting shared prosperity on a livable planet.' World Bank Country Director for India Auguste Tano Kouamé said Chennai had grown to become the second largest footprint of the World Bank around the world serving 130 countries. 'In many ways, the growth of our presence in Chennai has been the mirror image of the growing importance of Tamil Nadu's economy and of Chennai as an investment destination,' he said. Chennai Global Business Center manager Sunil Kumar thanked the gathering.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Citing trade wars, the World Bank sharply downgrades global economic growth forecast to 2.3%
President Donald Trump's trade wars are expected to slash economic growth this year in the United States and around the world, the World Bank forecast Tuesday. Citing "a substantial rise in trade barriers'' but without mentioning Trump by name, the 189-country lender predicted that the U.S. economy - the world's largest - would grow half as fast (1.4%) this year as it did in 2024 (2.8%). That marked a downgrade from the 2.3% U.S. growth it had forecast back for 2025 back in January. The bank also lopped 0.4 percentage points off its forecast for global growth this year. It now expects the world economy to expand just 2.3% in 2025, down from 2.8% in 2024. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like The price of dental implants may surprise you Dental Implants | Search Ads Search Now Undo In a forward to the latest version of the twice-yearly Global Economic Prospects report, World Bank chief economist Indermit Gill wrote that the global economy has missed its chance for the "soft landing'' - slowing enough to tame inflation without generating serious pain - it appeared headed for just six months ago. "The world economy today is once more running into turbulence," Gill wrote. "Without a swift course correction, the harm to living standards could be deep.'' America's economic prospects have been clouded by Trump's erratic and aggressive trade policies, including 10% taxes - tariffs - on imports from almost every country in the world. These levies drive up costs in the U.S. and invite retaliation from other countries. Live Events The Chinese economy is forecast to see growth slow from 5% in 2024 to 4.5% this year and 4% next. The world's second-largest economy has been hobbled by the tariffs that Trump has imposed on its exports, by the collapse of its real estate market and by an aging workforce. The World Bank expects the 20 European countries that share the euro currency to collectively grow just 0.7% this year, down from an already lackluster 0.9% in 2024. Trump's tariffs are expected to hurt European exports. And the unpredictable way he rolls them out - announcing them, suspending them, coming up with new ones - has created uncertainty that discourages business investment. India is once again expected to the be world's fastest-growing major economy, expanding at a 6.3% clip this year. But that's down from 6.5% in 2024 and from the 6.7% the bank had forecast for 2025 in January. In Japan, economic growth is expected to accelerate this year - but only from 0.2% in 2024 to a sluggish 0.7% this year, well short of the 1.2% the World Bank had forecast in January. The World Bank seeks to reduce poverty and boost living standards by providing grants and low-rate loans to poor economies. Another multinational organization that seeks to promote global prosperity - the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development - last week downgraded its forecast for the U.S. and global economies.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
3 hours ago
- First Post
Operation Sindoor: Opposition playing into the hands of foreign lobbies
In a democracy the government will always be criticised by opposition voices even when its policies and actions are not wrong. How else will the opposition find political space for itself? When one talks of the opposition it includes social activists, journalists, political commentators and others who are also critical of the government for ideological, intellectual and other reasons. But such criticism should not be at the cost of larger national interest. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD These broad opposition circles in India are creating controversies over the post-Pahalgam-Operation Sindoor against Pakistan which abets its propaganda and plays into the hands of anti-Indian lobbies abroad. The Congress is particularly vociferous in its attacks on the government. It has made an issue of the ceasefire that India has accepted. President Donald Trump has created the ground for this by announcing the ceasefire even before India and Pakistan could do so, giving the impression that India had succumbed to US pressure. The Congress and others are aware of Trump's penchant for loose and exaggerated talk and his obsession to be seen as a peacemaker. His inconsistent and contradictory commentary on the Ukraine conflict, sometimes showing an understanding of Russia's military action and at other times condemning it and threatening more sanctions, should give thought to those who would take him at his word. Why engage in distasteful rhetoric of the 'Narendra Surrender' kind? That the US intervened diplomatically with India and Pakistan to avoid an escalation of the conflict was to be expected given decades of US involvement in the subcontinent largely in favour of Pakistan, as well as concerns about the implications of nuclear-armed and increasingly radicalised Pakistan's military defeat. That could raise the possibility of an eventual breakup of Pakistan, as the army is seen as the glue that binds the country together. With the independence movement in Balochistan and the violent activities of the TTP from Afghan soil these concerns must have become sharper. The US has always backed a strategic balance in the subcontinent which requires a Pakistan capable of standing up to India, even if this is not the only reason for America's soft handling of that country. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Irrespective of the US role, would the Congress have wanted the military action to continue? To what end and at what cost? One can legitimately argue that a prolonged conflict was neither in India's plans nor seen as desirable. India had wanted to teach Pakistan a hard lesson, convey that it would no longer tolerate terrorism directed at India, and that it would not be deterred from taking condign action despite Pakistan possessing nuclear weapons. This is in addition to diplomatic steps, the most important being holding the Indus Waters Treaty in abeyance, which gives India a handle on Pakistan like none other. In fact, this step gives us a grip on the jugular vein of Pakistan. India had no reason to keep escalating the conflict unless compelled by Pakistan to do so. India cannot, however, ignore that Pakistan is an irrational country, irrational in its emergence based on religion and then losing half of its territory because religion was not a sufficient glue. The fact that a huge number of Pakistan's co-religionists remained part of India added to the irrationality of its creation. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Pakistan's military adventures against India, as well as its recourse to terrorism as an instrument of state policy for decades against a much stronger neighbour have been part of its irrational behaviour. So is its desire to maintain military parity with India despite the precariousness of its economy. Pakistan talks loosely about its readiness to use the nuclear option and claims to have developed tactical nuclear weapons for that purpose, which too is irrational. Pakistan is not learning from Russia's case, which notwithstanding its formidable nuclear arsenal is unable to use its existence to prevent NATO from waging a proxy war against it. To top all this, Pakistan now has a military chief who is a rabid India-hating Islamist. After a military drubbing received from India he has convinced the country that Pakistan scored a victory over India, which supposedly justifies his self-elevation to the rank of a Field Marshal. In view of all this, India cannot dismiss off hand entirely the dangers of an uncontrolled spiral in military escalation. Our Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) in his public comments at the recent Shangri La Dialogue at Singapore has given credit to Pakistan that in the recent conflict there was no irresponsible nuclear signaling on its part. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD One can say that Pakistan had no need to do so as we had made it clear at the very start that our target was not the Pakistani military but the country's terrorist infrastructure. In other words, a readiness to de-escalate after the initial blows seemed a part of our overall strategy. One assumes that the CDS's intention was to de-dramatise the danger of the India-Pakistan conflict going nuclear, as well as to rebut Trump's exaggerated claim that he had helped to avert a nuclear showdown in the subcontinent by his intervention and thus prevented loss of millions of lives. India does not need a prolonged military conflict with Pakistan. India has already very substantially raised the level of dissuasion when it comes to Pakistan using the terror weapon against it. This is enough from our point of view for the time being. India's priority will remain its economic growth, developing its industrial manufacturing base, including in the defence sector, becoming part of global supply chains, investing in critical technologies, increasing its weight in the international system so that it can have more say in shaping the rules of global governance. India's ambitious agenda of Viksit Bharat by 2047 can be derailed by an all-out conflict with Pakistan. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD To say India has been hyphenated with Pakistan because of Trump equating them in his remarks and offering to mediate in resolving the Kashmir issue has no real basis. The major partners of India, including the EU, are not following his ill-considered comments. Trump is needlessly causing wrinkles in India-US ties. US relations with India are incomparably wider and deeper than those with Pakistan. India, a $4.2 trillion economy, has become the world's fourth largest economy this year, whereas Pakistan's $411 billion economy is surviving on IMF bailouts. The US trade with India stands at $200 billion whereas it is a mere $7.4 billion with Pakistan. India is part of the Quad and is a proponent in the Indo-Pacific concept aimed at deterring China whereas China is Pakistan's closest defence and economic partner. India is part of the G20, is an invitee to the G7 meetings because of its stature, has vast pools of human talent in technology areas which the US and the West seek to benefit from, and so on. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Undoubtedly, the international media and think tank narrative on the outcome of the India-Pakistan conflict has been tilted in Pakistan's favour. This is not new because on India-Pakistan issues the narrative has always been biased against India. This narrative was shaped during the Cold War when non-aligned India was perceived to be pro-Soviet Union and Pakistan was an ally. India broke up Pakistan in 1971 against US wishes. Ties at the military level between the US and Pakistan have been nurtured over the years and remain close under the aegis of US Central Command. The US media and that of Europe by and large reflects ingrained prejudices and what the Deep State in these countries wants to be propagated. This media/think tank narrative has been more interested in how many Indian aircraft Pakistan shot down to highlight Pakistan's success, the inferior performance of French Rafales and the superior one of Chinese platforms. To argue that India should have been transparent about its losses in the interest of credibility is playing the game of pro-Pakistan lobbies. Look at the way the western governments and lobbies are projecting the political and military aspects of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, without any concerns about transparency and credibility. It has never announced the losses of its equipment to Russia in the Ukraine conflict. The manner in which the blowing up of Nord Stream 2 has been treated is another glaring example. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Our own opposition parties are wrong in asking the government to reveal our losses in the recent conflict and are, wittingly or unwittingly, playing into the hands of these foreign lobbies. Kanwal Sibal is a former Indian Foreign Secretary. He was India's Ambassador to Turkey, Egypt, France and Russia. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely that of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost's views.
