Latest news with #Canberra-based
West Australian
4 days ago
- Sport
- West Australian
Melhuish claims prestigious Elite Female Mile title in Leonora
ACT's Zoe Melhuish made her mark on Leonora's main street with a tactical performance during the Elite Female Mile on Sunday. Melhuish paced herself behind Stephanie Kelly and Georgia Winkcup before surging ahead on the final lap to record an impressive time of 4min. 42.79sec. as part of this year's $65,000 Leonora Golden Gift program. Kelly (4:45.99) and Winkcup (4.53.03) placed second and third, respectively. The headline event saw a field of experienced athletes face-off across three laps of the freshly resurfaced Tower Street. Melhuish said she enjoyed the street circuit layout of the race. 'I think the corners suited me quite well,' she said. 'It was nice going past every so often and you get the same people (cheering), and the same music going. 'I think a mile is a really good distance, I quite enjoy the mile.' The Canberra-based runner said she had dedicated more time to athletics this season and achieved success in Perth and Sydney. 'I don't think I really raced an awful lot until about this last athletic season,' she said. 'Quite a few things went my way, so I've just had a few good races. 'I went to nationals . . . in Perth and then I've been at Sydney for a 10k and then out here. 'It's my first time in Leonora, I never been before so it was really exciting. 'It has been so nice having everyone out here and having people lining down on the streets. 'All of the other races, like the sprints earlier, I loved watching those.' Melhuish said the event had a 'great atmosphere' and planned to return next year to defend her title. 'The atmosphere was very exciting and having the bands (perform) the night before was really great,' she said. 'It was great to see how many people were out . . . it's exciting to see kids playing and getting photos afterwards. 'It has been an awesome weekend so yes, I will definitely be back next year.' Elite Mile winners pocketed $7500 in prize money and a one-ounce gold coin valued at more than $5000.
Sky News AU
29-05-2025
- Business
- Sky News AU
Australia is ‘below par' on defence spending
Beaten Zone Venture Partners Founder Steve Baxter says Australia is 'below par' compared to other allied nations in terms of defence spending. Canberra-based think tank the Australian Strategic Policy Institute released a detailed report today into our defence sector, calling on the Federal Government to lift its spending. The report asks whether our defence force is strong enough to act as a deterrent from adversaries like China, which recently conducted live-fire drills in the Tasman Sea. 'Australia's spending on defence is measured on GDP like many nations are … we are a 2 per cent, so we are quite below par,' Mr Baxter told Sky News business reporter Ed Boyd.
West Australian
27-05-2025
- Politics
- West Australian
Nationals poised to re-sign Coalition agreement after ‘very encouraging' Ley, Littleproud discussions
Nationals Leader David Littleproud has signalled a Coalition deal could be soon struck after 'very encouraging' discussions with new Liberal leader Sussan Ley. Ms Ley had presented Mr Littleproud with their response to the National's ley policy demands when the pair met on Monday afternoon. It followed a tumultuous week after Mr Littleproud walked away from the partnership on Tuesday over a lack of guarantee on the policies before returning to the negotiation table on Thursday. Ms Ley agreed to take the policies to her party room despite an earlier blanket commitment not to endorse any until after a post-election review but only after Mr Littleproud's concession to honour shadow cabinet solidarity. Mr Littleproud on Tuesday told Sky News he would take the Liberal party's response to his party room but was ultimately ' fairly comfortable' with the direction of negotiations. 'We've got a set of words back that I'll present to our partyroom,' he said. 'I'm fairly comfortable. The rest of it around the positions in Cabinet are all pretty well, dictated time by arithmetic. 'Sussan and I had discussions yesterday afternoon which were very encouraging and I think we'll get into a position.' The ball is now in the Nationals court on whether the Coalition agreement is resigned. If the anticipated deal is struck, Ms Ley would be expected to announce her Shadow Cabinet this week, with 20 spots and 10 in outer ministry positions. Six shadow Cabinet positions are expected to go to the Nationals and two outer ministry spots. Mr Littleproud rejected suggestions his party had 'flip-flopped' on its split with the Liberals, saying his party was 'clear about policy' and were squeezed by a Ms Ley-imposed timeline. He accused Canberra-based media of trying to 'conflate and confuse' the National's reasoning for walking away from the partnership after 38-years. Mr Littleproud said the decision to walk was held by the 'vast' majority of the party room, who were prepared to give up their titles and salaries for 'legacy' policies. 'Because we didn't blink, we've got our four full policy areas assured, which was important as a principal, and as a legacy to our party room. I'm proud of the courage of our party room. Giving up jobs and title and pay because this was important to us,' he said. Mr Littleproud said he expected there to be ongoing discussions around the party's stance on their net zero commitment to 2050, adding it had been a point of tension several times prior to the May 3 federal election poll. 'We actually reviewed it. There were two or three times in which people wanted to re-prosecute the net zero case,' he said. 'And in those cases the party room determined, in majority, that we should stick with it. 'Now, I have no doubt that during the period again of this . . . term of government that we'll also have someone who will want to bring those forward. 'If there is a view that wants to be tested then to facilitate that in the process that allows the airing of that because that makes us a stronger party.' The step forward in negotiations comes after several Coalition MPs and Senators spoke out on the diabolical election loss in an episode of Four Corners on Monday night. Several expressed their frustration at a botched election campaign, poor polling and 'on-the-run' policies which didn't cut through to Australians.
The Advertiser
20-05-2025
- Entertainment
- The Advertiser
An insult to women's sport? Ticket detail exposes a gap for female fans
Parkas on, comfortable shoes, and all the excitement of walking through the graffitied tunnel from O'Connor to Canberra Stadium. It was the first time my friend and I were to properly watch a rugby union game. Before Saturday night, I thought Brumbies was spelt Brumby's, a dummy was for babies, and a drop goal is what I do to New Year's resolutions. That all changed thanks to American social media star, the glamorous Ilona Maher. She was in Canberra to play for the USA Eagles in a Test against Australia's Wallaroos on Saturday night. Maher has 5 million followers on Instagram and 3.5 million on TikTok. Her legions of fans love her for advocating for women in sport and body positivity. She is possibly the world's most famous rugby player. So imagine our surprise when my friend sent me the ticket and the women's match wasn't mentioned at all. "ACT BRUMBIES, 19:35PM," it said. We wanted to watch the Wallaroos play against the USA Eagles, but our tickets only mentioned the succeeding Brumbies game against the Queensland Reds. That was the first time I realised the Brumbies, the ACT's male rugby union team, was playing on Saturday night as well. Had we bought tickets to the wrong game? My friend called Canberra Stadium to check. Admittedly, it was not the Wallaroos we were interested in, but the big social media star on the other side. Even with a superstar like Maher to draw crowds, and a recent pay increase for Australia's female players, the national women's team was treated like the opening act to the local men's one. The Brumbies match actually recorded its highest home crowd in six years that night - without a doubt due to the fans who turned up to watch Maher. Her celebrity status transcends the sporting field, and we'll never know what portion of the crowd turned up just because of Maher, or the preceding women's game, because those people were technically buying Brumbies tickets. People turned to social media to complain about the promotion of the women's match. MORE CANBERRA SPORT I understand Rugby Australia was very keen to use Maher to promote the game, the Wallaroos and women's rugby in general. Maher (or at least Eagles team management) declined interview requests from media. When Maher announced herself in Canberra (via Instagram of course), her post quickly garnered attention and more than 112,000 likes. Her Australia and Canberra-based fans were shocked she was in the capital. And with women's sport gaining a bigger audience and stars like Maher inviting interest from a new cohort, the least Rugby Australia can do is sell tickets with both matches on them. The crowd was full of Maher love - signs scattered throughout and cheers and shouts of "I love you, Ilona" whenever she was flashed on the big screen. Anna Scares decided to shoot her shot, holding a cardboard sign saying: "Ilona Maher-ry me?' "One of the great things about Ilona is that she sends a message of body positivity that you can be beautiful at any size, that strong is beautiful," Scares told me. Like my friend and I, Siobhan Smith was at her first rugby game thanks to Maher. "I would happily come to heaps more women's games," she said. The Wallaroos are ranked sixth in the world, two spots higher than the men's national team, the Wallabies (and yes, I had to Google the men's team name). And as I learnt on Saturday, we have our own female rugby stars like Charlotte Caslick, Desi Miller and Faitala Moleka. As the game concluded, with the Wallaroos beating the Eagles 27-19, I joined many others, including young women and families, in heading home before the Brumbies match started. There were more people walking in the other direction - but perhaps they would have gotten in earlier if only they'd known what they were missing out on. Parkas on, comfortable shoes, and all the excitement of walking through the graffitied tunnel from O'Connor to Canberra Stadium. It was the first time my friend and I were to properly watch a rugby union game. Before Saturday night, I thought Brumbies was spelt Brumby's, a dummy was for babies, and a drop goal is what I do to New Year's resolutions. That all changed thanks to American social media star, the glamorous Ilona Maher. She was in Canberra to play for the USA Eagles in a Test against Australia's Wallaroos on Saturday night. Maher has 5 million followers on Instagram and 3.5 million on TikTok. Her legions of fans love her for advocating for women in sport and body positivity. She is possibly the world's most famous rugby player. So imagine our surprise when my friend sent me the ticket and the women's match wasn't mentioned at all. "ACT BRUMBIES, 19:35PM," it said. We wanted to watch the Wallaroos play against the USA Eagles, but our tickets only mentioned the succeeding Brumbies game against the Queensland Reds. That was the first time I realised the Brumbies, the ACT's male rugby union team, was playing on Saturday night as well. Had we bought tickets to the wrong game? My friend called Canberra Stadium to check. Admittedly, it was not the Wallaroos we were interested in, but the big social media star on the other side. Even with a superstar like Maher to draw crowds, and a recent pay increase for Australia's female players, the national women's team was treated like the opening act to the local men's one. The Brumbies match actually recorded its highest home crowd in six years that night - without a doubt due to the fans who turned up to watch Maher. Her celebrity status transcends the sporting field, and we'll never know what portion of the crowd turned up just because of Maher, or the preceding women's game, because those people were technically buying Brumbies tickets. People turned to social media to complain about the promotion of the women's match. MORE CANBERRA SPORT I understand Rugby Australia was very keen to use Maher to promote the game, the Wallaroos and women's rugby in general. Maher (or at least Eagles team management) declined interview requests from media. When Maher announced herself in Canberra (via Instagram of course), her post quickly garnered attention and more than 112,000 likes. Her Australia and Canberra-based fans were shocked she was in the capital. And with women's sport gaining a bigger audience and stars like Maher inviting interest from a new cohort, the least Rugby Australia can do is sell tickets with both matches on them. The crowd was full of Maher love - signs scattered throughout and cheers and shouts of "I love you, Ilona" whenever she was flashed on the big screen. Anna Scares decided to shoot her shot, holding a cardboard sign saying: "Ilona Maher-ry me?' "One of the great things about Ilona is that she sends a message of body positivity that you can be beautiful at any size, that strong is beautiful," Scares told me. Like my friend and I, Siobhan Smith was at her first rugby game thanks to Maher. "I would happily come to heaps more women's games," she said. The Wallaroos are ranked sixth in the world, two spots higher than the men's national team, the Wallabies (and yes, I had to Google the men's team name). And as I learnt on Saturday, we have our own female rugby stars like Charlotte Caslick, Desi Miller and Faitala Moleka. As the game concluded, with the Wallaroos beating the Eagles 27-19, I joined many others, including young women and families, in heading home before the Brumbies match started. There were more people walking in the other direction - but perhaps they would have gotten in earlier if only they'd known what they were missing out on. Parkas on, comfortable shoes, and all the excitement of walking through the graffitied tunnel from O'Connor to Canberra Stadium. It was the first time my friend and I were to properly watch a rugby union game. Before Saturday night, I thought Brumbies was spelt Brumby's, a dummy was for babies, and a drop goal is what I do to New Year's resolutions. That all changed thanks to American social media star, the glamorous Ilona Maher. She was in Canberra to play for the USA Eagles in a Test against Australia's Wallaroos on Saturday night. Maher has 5 million followers on Instagram and 3.5 million on TikTok. Her legions of fans love her for advocating for women in sport and body positivity. She is possibly the world's most famous rugby player. So imagine our surprise when my friend sent me the ticket and the women's match wasn't mentioned at all. "ACT BRUMBIES, 19:35PM," it said. We wanted to watch the Wallaroos play against the USA Eagles, but our tickets only mentioned the succeeding Brumbies game against the Queensland Reds. That was the first time I realised the Brumbies, the ACT's male rugby union team, was playing on Saturday night as well. Had we bought tickets to the wrong game? My friend called Canberra Stadium to check. Admittedly, it was not the Wallaroos we were interested in, but the big social media star on the other side. Even with a superstar like Maher to draw crowds, and a recent pay increase for Australia's female players, the national women's team was treated like the opening act to the local men's one. The Brumbies match actually recorded its highest home crowd in six years that night - without a doubt due to the fans who turned up to watch Maher. Her celebrity status transcends the sporting field, and we'll never know what portion of the crowd turned up just because of Maher, or the preceding women's game, because those people were technically buying Brumbies tickets. People turned to social media to complain about the promotion of the women's match. MORE CANBERRA SPORT I understand Rugby Australia was very keen to use Maher to promote the game, the Wallaroos and women's rugby in general. Maher (or at least Eagles team management) declined interview requests from media. When Maher announced herself in Canberra (via Instagram of course), her post quickly garnered attention and more than 112,000 likes. Her Australia and Canberra-based fans were shocked she was in the capital. And with women's sport gaining a bigger audience and stars like Maher inviting interest from a new cohort, the least Rugby Australia can do is sell tickets with both matches on them. The crowd was full of Maher love - signs scattered throughout and cheers and shouts of "I love you, Ilona" whenever she was flashed on the big screen. Anna Scares decided to shoot her shot, holding a cardboard sign saying: "Ilona Maher-ry me?' "One of the great things about Ilona is that she sends a message of body positivity that you can be beautiful at any size, that strong is beautiful," Scares told me. Like my friend and I, Siobhan Smith was at her first rugby game thanks to Maher. "I would happily come to heaps more women's games," she said. The Wallaroos are ranked sixth in the world, two spots higher than the men's national team, the Wallabies (and yes, I had to Google the men's team name). And as I learnt on Saturday, we have our own female rugby stars like Charlotte Caslick, Desi Miller and Faitala Moleka. As the game concluded, with the Wallaroos beating the Eagles 27-19, I joined many others, including young women and families, in heading home before the Brumbies match started. There were more people walking in the other direction - but perhaps they would have gotten in earlier if only they'd known what they were missing out on. Parkas on, comfortable shoes, and all the excitement of walking through the graffitied tunnel from O'Connor to Canberra Stadium. It was the first time my friend and I were to properly watch a rugby union game. Before Saturday night, I thought Brumbies was spelt Brumby's, a dummy was for babies, and a drop goal is what I do to New Year's resolutions. That all changed thanks to American social media star, the glamorous Ilona Maher. She was in Canberra to play for the USA Eagles in a Test against Australia's Wallaroos on Saturday night. Maher has 5 million followers on Instagram and 3.5 million on TikTok. Her legions of fans love her for advocating for women in sport and body positivity. She is possibly the world's most famous rugby player. So imagine our surprise when my friend sent me the ticket and the women's match wasn't mentioned at all. "ACT BRUMBIES, 19:35PM," it said. We wanted to watch the Wallaroos play against the USA Eagles, but our tickets only mentioned the succeeding Brumbies game against the Queensland Reds. That was the first time I realised the Brumbies, the ACT's male rugby union team, was playing on Saturday night as well. Had we bought tickets to the wrong game? My friend called Canberra Stadium to check. Admittedly, it was not the Wallaroos we were interested in, but the big social media star on the other side. Even with a superstar like Maher to draw crowds, and a recent pay increase for Australia's female players, the national women's team was treated like the opening act to the local men's one. The Brumbies match actually recorded its highest home crowd in six years that night - without a doubt due to the fans who turned up to watch Maher. Her celebrity status transcends the sporting field, and we'll never know what portion of the crowd turned up just because of Maher, or the preceding women's game, because those people were technically buying Brumbies tickets. People turned to social media to complain about the promotion of the women's match. MORE CANBERRA SPORT I understand Rugby Australia was very keen to use Maher to promote the game, the Wallaroos and women's rugby in general. Maher (or at least Eagles team management) declined interview requests from media. When Maher announced herself in Canberra (via Instagram of course), her post quickly garnered attention and more than 112,000 likes. Her Australia and Canberra-based fans were shocked she was in the capital. And with women's sport gaining a bigger audience and stars like Maher inviting interest from a new cohort, the least Rugby Australia can do is sell tickets with both matches on them. The crowd was full of Maher love - signs scattered throughout and cheers and shouts of "I love you, Ilona" whenever she was flashed on the big screen. Anna Scares decided to shoot her shot, holding a cardboard sign saying: "Ilona Maher-ry me?' "One of the great things about Ilona is that she sends a message of body positivity that you can be beautiful at any size, that strong is beautiful," Scares told me. Like my friend and I, Siobhan Smith was at her first rugby game thanks to Maher. "I would happily come to heaps more women's games," she said. The Wallaroos are ranked sixth in the world, two spots higher than the men's national team, the Wallabies (and yes, I had to Google the men's team name). And as I learnt on Saturday, we have our own female rugby stars like Charlotte Caslick, Desi Miller and Faitala Moleka. As the game concluded, with the Wallaroos beating the Eagles 27-19, I joined many others, including young women and families, in heading home before the Brumbies match started. There were more people walking in the other direction - but perhaps they would have gotten in earlier if only they'd known what they were missing out on.
Express Tribune
18-05-2025
- Politics
- Express Tribune
India's risky gambit over the Indus
Pakistan and India have only just stepped back from the brink of an all-out war, following a fierce exchange sparked by the brutal rampage in Pahalgam, in Indian Illegally Occupied Jammu and Kashmir (IIOJK) — a tragedy New Delhi was quick to lay at Islamabad's door. India, in a show of muscular defiance, escalated tensions by launching a military misadventure against its proportionally smaller adversary, ignoring international calls for restraint. The risky gambit, however, ended in bruised pride. Now, as an uneasy ceasefire — brokered by US President Donald Trump — tentatively holds, the atmosphere remains tense. And amid a volley of hostile rhetoric, New Delhi is reportedly plotting further provocations, threatening to push the two nuclear-armed rivals once again to the edge. In the wake of the April 22 attack in the heart of the occupied territory, and as part of its predictable playbook, New Delhi unleashed a flurry of knee-jerk measures targeting Islamabad — the most consequential of which was its decision to place the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) in abeyance. 'Right after the attack, Prime Minister Narendra Modi turned to non-military measures: expelling defence attachés, revoking visas, suspending trade (what little exists), closing borders. Pakistan retaliated in kind — standard tit-for-tat. But the real escalation was India suspending the Indus Waters Treaty. That's huge,' said Dr Claude Rakisits, a Canberra-based geo-strategic analyst. Rakisits is right in his assessment. The Indian threat to suspend the Indus Waters Treaty — a decades-old water-sharing accord that has weathered three wars and repeated diplomatic lapses — is no minor reaction. It strikes at the heart of Pakistan's agricultural lifeline and is tantamount, in Islamabad's view, to weaponising water. The move has been denounced as a violation of international law, with Pakistan warning that any attempt to revoke the agreement would be regarded as an 'act of war.' Why does this water-sharing pact matter so much? Briefly put, IWT is an agreement mediated by the World Bank between Pakistan and India in September 1960 to split usage rights of six major rivers – the Indus and its tributaries – between the two neighbours. India was granted the use of water from three eastern rivers – Sutlej, Beas and Ravi – while Pakistan was given most of the three western rivers – Indus, Jhelum and Chenab. The two sides have bickered over and disputed several projects on the Indus and its tributaries for years since the signing of the accord. Water from this river system is the lifeline of Pakistan's agrarian economy as it feeds 80% of its irrigated agriculture – a sector which accounts for 24% of its GDP and employs around 37% of its workforce. 'India and Pakistan have fought multiple wars, but they've never touched this treaty. Now, for the first time, India is weaponising water. For Pakistan — where agriculture depends on these rivers — this is like holding a gun to its head,' said Dr Rakisits, who has been following South Asian issues for over 40 years. 'This isn't just aggressive; it's potentially a violation of international humanitarian law. Pakistan is right to call it an act of war,' he added. New Delhi appears to have started following through on its threat despite Pakistan's warning. India officials told Reuters earlier this week that their country has initiated several measures that could affect the flow of water into Pakistan. 'These include plans to double the length of the Ranbir Canal on the Chenab River, which would increase water diversion from 40 to 150 cubic meters per second. Moreover, India is considering the construction of new dams and hydropower projects on the rivers allocated to Pakistan under the IWT.' Can India unilaterally revoke the treaty? The short answer is no. Legally, India cannot unilaterally withdraw from the IWT, as the agreement contains no explicit exit clause. Under international law — particularly the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT) — such a withdrawal or suspension is generally prohibited, unless prompted by a fundamental breach or a significant change in circumstances (rebus sic stantibus). Legal experts argue that Delhi's move would violate both the treaty and customary international law. The fact that the accord has withstood multiple wars and periods of heightened tension further undermines any claim that current conditions justify its revocation. The treaty's own provisions reinforce this legal position. Article XII explicitly states that any modification to the agreement must be made by mutual consent. Similarly, Article IX outlines a formal dispute resolution mechanism, including the Permanent Indus Commission — which meets annually — as well as the option to refer technical matters to a Neutral Expert and broader disputes to a Court of Arbitration. India's decision to place the treaty in 'abeyance' falls outside these established legal and procedural frameworks. In fact, if anything, it was the World Bank chief who recently tutored the Modi government over its misstep. 'There is no provision in the treaty to allow it to be suspended. The way the IWT was drawn up, it either needs to be gone, or it needs to be replaced by another one. That requires the two countries to want to agree,' World Bank President Ajay Banga said in an interview with Indian broadcaster CNBC-TV18. 'The treaty is not suspended. It's technically called something 'in abeyance' — that's how the Indian government worded it,' he explained. On this side of the border, former Indus waters commissioner Jamaat Ali Shah noted that Pakistan can invoke the treaty's legal safeguards — and, if necessary, formally approach the World Bank, which serves as the guarantor of IWT. 'Article VIII of this government-to-government agreement ensures that before any breach, the two sides will discuss issues at the level of the water commissioners. This is followed by engagement at the neutral expert level. If a legal dispute persists, the matter should then be referred to the Court of Arbitration,' Shah elaborated. Banga clarified that the World Bank's role is essentially that of a facilitator when disagreements arise — not to adjudicate, but to initiate the process of appointing a Neutral Expert or convening a Court of Arbitration. 'Not by us making a decision,' he added, 'but by us being the party that goes through a process to find a Neutral Expert or an arbitrator court to settle it.' The World Bank also covers the cost of this process through a trust fund established at the treaty's inception to finance the fees of potential arbitrators. Beyond the World Bank's mechanisms, Pakistan also has other legal avenues to challenge India's move. It could invoke Article 60 (material breach) or Article 62 (fundamental change of circumstances) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties to escalate the matter to the International Court of Justice (ICJ). Alternatively, Islamabad might appeal to the United Nations, invoking principles such as 'equitable water sharing' and the 'prevention of transboundary harm' to press for international mediation. 'I see no reason why Pakistan should not immediately internationalise this,' said former national security adviser Moeed Yusuf. 'We could potentially take the matter to the Court of Arbitration in accordance with the dispute resolution provisions of the IWT. Pakistan has to look at the other legal options too. Technically, the World Bank will be involved in forming the Court of Arbitration. We are also considering raising this matter at the UN Security Council,' he added. However, each of these legal avenues presents its own challenges. The World Bank lacks any enforcement authority. The International Court of Justice has limited jurisdiction, as India does not recognise its compulsory jurisdiction in disputes involving Pakistan. The UN Security Council could be paralysed by a veto, with permanent members potentially blocking any meaningful action. Pakistan also cannot invoke the 1997 UN Convention on the Non-Navigational Uses of International Watercourses, as it is not a signatory — though it may still cite its core principles, such as equitable utilisation and the prevention of significant harm, as part of customary international law. Even so, any unilateral suspension of the IWT risks damaging India's international standing, as it would breach the principle of pacta sunt servanda — the foundational norm that treaties must be honoured. There's also a possibility of Pakistan leveraging its strategic relationship with China, especially as Beijing is not a party to IWT. China, which controls Tibet's Indus headwaters, could use its own water projects on the Brahmaputra River (Yarlung Zangbo), which also flows into India and Bangladesh, as a tool. 'India has made a mistake. They are also a middle riparian between China and Bangladesh. If they do this, they're going to open a can of worms. China already wants to build massively on the Brahmaputra River. I think they [the Indians] will very quickly have to backtrack and realise this is going to be detrimental to them,' said Yusuf. The IWT suspension may not have an immediate impact, as India cannot restrict the flow of the Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab rivers due to insufficient storage capacity. However, it could carry out some diversions using existing facilities, such as the Kishenganga Dam — as it did in early May, when water at a key receiving point in Pakistan briefly dropped by as much as 90% after India reportedly began maintenance work on certain projects. Days later, there was an unusual surge in water flow in the Chenab River when India emptied the Kishenganga Dam, suggesting deliberate water management aimed at storing water for future use. Though India at present doesn't have enough storage capacity, it could in the short term – say one to two years – undertake several measures, such as desilting and making minor diversions, halt data sharing, block project inspections, and reduce hydropower coordination, while impact on Pakistan's agriculture would emerge gradually. In the medium term, 3–5 years, it could accelerate work on disputed projects like the Shahpurkandi dam on the Ravi River and the Ujh multipurpose project on the Ujh River in IIOJK. In the long term, larger storage infrastructure — such as the Ratle hydropower project — could be developed, although any major impact on dry-season flows would take years to materialise. In Yusuf's opinion, Delhi used the Pahalgam pretext to do what it had long aspired to — suggesting a premeditated move, not a trigger-happy moment. 'They [Indians] had been trying to make the IWT dysfunctional for a while. They wanted to carry out more construction on the eastern tributaries, some of which the IWT didn't allow. They had also asked Pakistan to renegotiate the treaty in the recent past (within the last two years), but I think they seized this moment and perhaps used it as an excuse,' Yusuf added. What should Pakistan do for its water security? Given the longstanding tensions over IWT and India's apparent ambitions regarding it, one might ask: why hadn't Pakistan developed a contingency plan for its water security? 'Water from these tributaries is our lifeline. There isn't an easy contingency that can realistically offset this dependence. Contingencies work when a particular part of the body faces disruption, and you can bypass it somehow. But if your entire body is that part — in this case, water rights under the IWT — then what's the bypass? It's not a comfortable position for Pakistan to be in. That's why it is so vital for the IWT to remain intact, both for Pakistan and for India,' explained Yusuf. Experts now argue that Pakistan must ensure long-term water security in the presence of a neighbour that disregards all bilateral agreements and customary international laws. For this purpose, Pakistan should adopt a multi-pronged strategy: diversify its water sources by investing in reservoirs, groundwater management, and China Pakistan Economic Corridor-related infrastructure projects; enhance its legal framework by ratifying the UN Watercourses Convention; strengthen diplomatic alliances by leveraging support from China and the Islamic bloc; and implement internal reforms to curb agricultural water waste through modern techniques such as drip irrigation. This urgency stems from the significant challenges India's move could pose to Pakistan, particularly in the agriculture and energy sectors. Should water flows become erratic — especially during the dry season — the entire agricultural system would suffer, hitting irrigation-dependent crops such as wheat, rice, and sugarcane, and leading to massive economic losses. Similarly, the energy sector could be impacted; Tarbela Dam alone contributes nearly 30% of the country's electricity through hydropower generation. Reduced water availability could diminish this capacity, worsening energy shortages. Moreover, water scarcity risks driving inflation, exacerbating food insecurity, and potentially fueling large-scale social unrest. Yusuf traced India's actions back to the 'saffronisation' shaping the country's political landscape. 'The real issue was that we had a neighbour driven by a supremacist Hindutva ideology that saw no problem with putting on hold a treaty that provides for 250 million people,' he said. 'A country willing to accept — even boast about — starving 250 million people of their main water source shows how far a fascist ideology from the top can take a nation. But such a move would not just hurt Pakistan; it would cause chaos across the entire region.' With its water lifeline under existential threat, Pakistan faces a battle for survival that demands more than diplomacy — it requires a full-spectrum response. Experts argue that Islamabad must adopt a multi-pronged strategy encompassing diplomatic engagement, legal arbitration, and infrastructure readiness to safeguard its water rights. Former Indus waters commissioner Jamaat Ali Shah, who has witnessed the dispute firsthand, warns that if India follows through on its threat, it will not only endanger Pakistan's survival but also escalate tensions across the region. 'Pakistan must impress upon the international community that India's actions could push the region towards war,' he said. 'If India diverts Pakistan's share of water, it will amount to hydro warfare — and in such a case, Pakistan should strike back hard.' But should all diplomatic and legal efforts have failed, and India proceeded with such hostile actions, defence experts have already raised the red flag -- a calibrated military response would have become inevitable to protect Pakistan's vital national interests. And this would come as no surprise — Islamabad has declared unequivocally that any attempt by India to usurp or divert Pakistan's share of water would have amounted to an 'act of war' and would have been met with full force. Outlining what such a response might entail, Maj Gen (retd) Inamul Haq said: 'If all diplomatic avenues are exhausted, Pakistan may have to consider kinetic options. This could involve targeting specific components of Indian hydropower infrastructure, including spillways, powerhouses, and dams.' He acknowledged that such military action could be highly escalatory and risk provoking a strong retaliation. 'However, a credible demonstration of Pakistan's resolve is necessary to deter unilateral moves by India, because water is a matter of life and death for us.' The stakes, experts warn, could hardly be higher. Should the Modi-led government choose to go rogue — flouting international law, rejecting neutral arbitration, and weaponising water against Pakistan — it would risk igniting a conflict with catastrophic consequences. The international community is aware that a war between two nuclear-armed rivals could swiftly spiral into an apocalypse, threatening not only South Asia but global peace and stability.
