Pakistan Violated Spirit Of Indus Waters Treaty Through Terror: India At UNSC
India has charged Pakistan with violating the Indus Waters Treaty by trampling its spirit of goodwill through thousands of terrorist attacks and by obstructing the updating of the infrastructure to ensure its safety.
'Despite this, India has shown extraordinary patience and magnanimity,' said India's Permanent Representative P Harish, responding to what he said were Pakistan's campaign of disinformation about New Delhi suspending the treaty.
'India has finally announced that the Treaty will be in abeyance until Pakistan, which is a global epicenter of terror, credibly and irrevocably ends its support for cross-border terrorism. It is clear that it is Pakistan that remains in violation of the Indus Waters Treaty and not India,' he said.
After the massacre of 26 people by Pakistan-based terrorists last month, India said it was suspending the treaty reached in 1960 under the aegis of the World Bank to provide Pakistan with a consistent share of the water from the Indus and its allied water resources.
Speaking at an informal meeting of the Security Council on protecting water in armed conflict, Harish outlined the problems that have arisen since the treaty was signed.
'Far-reaching fundamental changes have taken place not only in terms of escalating security concerns through cross-border terror attacks, but also growing requirements for producing clean energy, climate change, and demographic change', he said.
While the technology for dam infrastructure improved to ensure safety and more efficient water use, 'some of the old dams are facing serious safety concerns'.
He said that New Delhi formally asked Islamabad on several occasions in the last two years to discuss modifications to the treaty, to no avail.
'Pakistan has continued to consistently block any changes to this infrastructure, and any modifications of the provisions, which are permissible under the treaty,' Harish said.
Harish emphasised that while the fundamental basis of the treaty laid out in its preamble is a spirit of goodwill and friendship, Pakistan has inflicted on India three wars and thousands of terror attacks.
He added that these cynical acts continue to endanger our projects' safety and civilians' lives.
"In the last four decades, more than 20,000 Indian lives have been lost in terror attacks, the most recent of which was the dastardly targeted terror attack on tourists in Pahalgam last month. In fact, in 2012, terrorists even attacked the Tulbul Navigation Project in Jammu and Kashmir,' he said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
24 minutes ago
- Time of India
Another former minister returns to SAD: Maluka calls it his ‘ghar vapsi'
Bathinda: A two-time former minister in the SAD-BJP govt, Sikandar Singh Maluka, has rejoined the Shiromani Akali Dal . Maluka had earlier joined the Akali Dal Sudhar Lehar, which had formed by dissidents displeased with party president Sukhbir Singh Badal. After rejoining the party, Maluka said he would campaign for the party candidate in the Ludhiana West byelection. Maluka's daughter-in-law, Parampal Kaur Sidhu, contested the 2024 parliamentary elections from Bathinda as a BJP nominee against SAD's Harsimrat Kaur Badal. Maluka, who was elected the MLA from Rampura Phul in 1997 and 2012, was displeased when his request to be fielded from Maur seat for the 2022 assembly polls was not accepted. Speaking to TOI on Saturday, Maluka said, "I have done ghar vapsi (returned home), and now whatever duty the party assigns, I will discharge it with full devotion, including campaigning for the party candidate in Ludhiana West." Maluka was elevated to the minister's rank in the Parkash Singh Badal govt in 1997, despite being a first-time MLA. He was again made a minister in 2012 in the Badal cabinet. Many leaders, including the now-deceased Sukhdev Singh Dhindsa, his son Parminder Singh Dhindsa, Prem Singh Chandumajra, Bibi Jagir Kaur, and Surjit Singh Rakhra, had formed Sudhar Lehar after parting ways with SAD. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Giao dịch vàng CFDs với mức chênh lệch giá thấp nhất IC Markets Đăng ký Undo Sukhbir, while announcing Maluka's rejoining in a post on X on Saturday, said it gave him "immense pleasure" to welcome the "veteran Akali leader" back to SAD. "Maluka Sahab has significantly contributed to strengthening the party under the leadership of Parkash Singh Badal. His return will further strengthen the party, and he will immediately join the party's campaign in Ludhiana West. With the support of the people of Punjab, Akali Dal is growing stronger with each passing day. I urge all Punjabis to come together to strengthen Punjab's only regional party for the peace and development of the state," he said. Earlier, in an indication of SAD regaining some of its lost ground, former ministers Sohan Singh Thandal and Anil Joshi rejoined the party in recent days. Four-time MLA Thandal, who joined BJP after resigning from SAD in Nov 2024, was nominated by the BJP to unsuccessfully contest the byelection from the Chabbewal assembly segment immediately upon his switching sides. Joshi quit BJP and joined SAD after he voiced support for the farmers' protest in 2021. He left SAD in Nov 2024, but joined back recently. Akali Dal also welcomed Preeti Malhotra, the women's wing head of the Punjab unit of the Aam Aadmi Party, earlier this week. Malhotra was expelled by AAP after she revolted against the party and raised issues about the dominance of Delhi-based leaders in the party's Punjab unit. Follow more information on Air India plane crash in Ahmedabad here . Get real-time live updates on rescue operations and check full list of passengers onboard AI 171 .
Time of India
34 minutes ago
- Time of India
In battle of the delegations, real story lies in what went unsaid
In the aftermath of their recent military clash, rival delegations from Delhi and Islamabad converged on various global capitals, each aiming to shape elite opinion, win sympathy, and control the post-crisis narrative. Having witnessed some of the exchanges in London firsthand, the diplomatic duel across briefing rooms, think tanks, and diaspora events was as revealing for what was unsaid as for what was spoken. Messaging starts with messengers The difference in delegation profiles was notable. India's all-party parliamentary mission carried symbolic weight and cross-party legitimacy, including senior figures like Ravi Shankar Prasad and Pankaj Saran. Pakistan's team leaned more on technocrats and veteran advocates of global engagement, such as Sherry Rehman and Bilawal Bhutto Zardari. India's group projected cohesion and resolve; Pakistan's aimed to influence narratives and broaden appeal. India's cautious case India's delegation framed Operation Sindoor as part of a broader shift: limited cross-border retaliation to terrorist acts as policy, not aberration. They emphasized terrorism as a global threat whose response merits international understanding—not moral equivalence. The delegation linked India's counterterrorism struggle to challenges faced by Western democracies, with Pakistan as a common denominator. In my observation, Indian representatives appeared quietly frustrated that while many countries expressed sympathy after Pahalgam and tacitly accepted India's right to act, few explicitly condemned Pakistan. Though confident in their message, their delivery often felt restrained. In think tanks, the tone was formal, even stiff; diaspora engagements were reportedly more fiery. Though most accepted the delegation's basic premise, some observers noted the irony in Delhi resisting calls to frame Russia's invasion of Ukraine as a shared threat but now seeking solidarity on Pakistani-based terrorism. Crucially, the delegation faltered when pressed on domestic radicalization. Two of the Pahalgam suspects were reportedly Indian nationals. Asked how New Delhi planned to prevent disillusionment turning to violence, the only response was that 'things today are better than in the 1990s.' This was a missed chance to demonstrate nuanced understanding of the challenge. Other inconsistencies emerged. India's representatives rejected 're-hyphenation' with Pakistan, yet much of their messaging focused on Islamabad. While stressing the quarrel was with Pakistan's military, not its people, questions about suspending the Indus Waters Treaty complicated that briefings took place inside the High Commission, with diaspora members complaining to me that they thought too much political outreach was aimed at UK politicians of Indian heritage. Playing it safe has a certain logic, but may have limited engagement with new or skeptical audiences. Pak's polished—but problematic—pitch If India played it safe, Pakistan opted for smooth. Their delegation turned up at major think tanks eager to engage and keen to appear misunderstood. With assistance from lobbying professionals, their narrative was tightly crafted for European audiences: Pakistan sought peace through dialogue, emphasising Kashmir as the 'unfinished legacy of Partition,' terrorism, and water. Pakistan said it wanted talks, a neutral investigation into Pahalgam, and accused India of refusing cooperation or prove culpability. This narrative of peace sat uneasily beside claims of military success and personal attacks on Indian leaders. Critique of Indian media spin might have bolstered believability had it not been accompanied by other factual distortions: legal sleight-of-hand over Kashmir, misreadings of UN resolutions, and claims that India admitted culpability for terrorism in most convincing moment came on the Indus Waters Treaty, where the stark picture painted of the consequences struck a chord, even if significant action has yet to follow. A key question remains: what was the objective? If persuasion abroad was the objective, the reliance on longstanding misrepresentations made it a difficult sell to informed audiences. If the goal was domestic signaling, that focus likely came at the expense of deeper foreign engagement. Simpler sell, harder ask Ultimately, the Indian delegation framed all terrorism as emanating from Pakistan; Pakistan framed it as emerging from Kashmir. The narratives didn't just clash—they barely shared the same terms of reference. As performative exercises providing content for domestic media, both probably succeeded on their own terms. In the battle to move international opinion, outcomes were uneven. India may have achieved more, but it also had the easier task — framing terrorism as a universal threat aligns with European security narratives. Pakistan, by contrast, asked outside actors to invest political capital in corralling New Delhi back to the negotiating table — a much harder sell. Yet neither side escaped contradiction. India's claim to strategic clarity was weakened by deflection on domestic aspects of terrorism in Kashmir. Pakistan's message of peace was blunted by triumphalism and tired tropes. In diplomacy, silence often speaks louder than words. In London last week, the most telling signals were what each side omitted, ignored, or performed for the audience they believed mattered most. Ladwig III is a senior lecturer at the department of War Studies, King's College London
New Indian Express
36 minutes ago
- New Indian Express
Smelling cash in the space race
Space has an odour. Visitors to the Goddard Space Flight Centre in Maryland, US, can smell it by pressing a button to inhale a puff of air that smells of space. Space is airless by definition, but the workaround is essential because we can't inhale 'space' without fatal consequences. Despite this logical complication, the experience is evocative and surprising. Space smells of long-distance travel. It smells of Indian highways far from big cities. It smells like the world did long ago on the railways, when almost everyone travelled without air conditioning. But hereafter, space could smell a little different. From the beginning of the space race, it has smelled of Cold War rivalry, military-industrial complexes and technology-based diplomacy. These metallic notes will remain; but from here on, space will also smell overwhelmingly of commerce, of paper money. Gold is economically and chemically stable. It has no smell, unlike space. The countdown of the Axiom-4 mission to the International Space station has been aborted twice but soon, astronauts from India, Poland and Hungary could be back in space after 40 years and more. In anticipation, their national media have already declared it to be a turning point for their domestic space programmes. But the composition of the Axiom-4 mission also indicates that the whole world has passed a turning point. The crew led by American Peggy Whitson will be taken to orbit on Elon Musk's commercial Dragon launch vehicle, and the project is a collaboration between NASA, the European Space Agency, ISRO and the Houston firm Axiom Space, whose most ambitious project is the first commercial space station. The purpose of the collaboration is to facilitate a range of commercial activities in space, from scientific research to space tourism. Space is about to be opened up commercially, just like the world was opened like an oyster by the European Age of Exploration. About 40 years ago, when India, Poland and Hungary last sent their citizens into space, it was a domain where national governments showed off their technological prowess to compete for geopolitical gains. These three countries made a place for themselves in space under the aegis of Interkosmos, a Russian state programme launched in 1967 to help satellite nations of the USSR and other socialist nations like Afghanistan and Cuba reach space. Non-aligned nations Syria and India were also under its umbrella.
