Latest news with #waterdiplomacy
ABC News
14-05-2025
- Politics
- ABC News
Water tensions build between India and Pakistan as Indus treaty suspended
India has suspended a water-sharing treaty with Pakistan and fast-tracked the construction of four new hydropower projects on rivers flowing into its neighbour, alarming international legal experts and provoking a sharp response from Islamabad. India's decision to suspend the Indus Waters Treaty came less than 24 hours after a deadly terrorist attack in Pahalgam, Kashmir last month. Citing security concerns, New Delhi halted its participation in the treaty — prompting Pakistan to condemn the move as "an act of war". "This is the first time it has been suspended in its history," said Ayesha Malik, deputy director at the Lahore-based Research Society of International Law. The Indus Waters Treaty, signed in 1960 and brokered by the World Bank after India cut off water supplies to Pakistan in the wake of the partition of India, is considered a cornerstone of trans-boundary water diplomacy. It governs rivers that sustain around 300 million people, irrigates vast farmland in Pakistan, and supplies hydropower infrastructure in Indian-administered Kashmir. Ms Malik warned that this was far more than a diplomatic tit-for-tat. Delhi-based political analyst Anuttama Banerji emphasised that the treaty was originally designed to keep water issues separate from political or military tensions. The first major rupture came in 2016 after a terrorist attack on Indian soldiers in Uri. "That's when the BJP [Bharatiya Janata Party] first put the idea on the table that the treaty should be scrapped," Ms Malik told the ABC. "Blood and water cannot flow together," India Prime Minister Narendra Modi famously declared following the 2016 attack and repeated it in an address to the nation after the recent attack. The treaty allocates three eastern rivers — Ravi, Beas and Sutlej — to India, and three western ones — Indus, Jhelum and Chenab — to Pakistan. The treaty has withstood several wars, but tensions have been steadily rising. In 2017, India completed the Kishanganga dam in Kashmir and moved ahead with the Ratle hydro-electric project on the Chenab River — despite Pakistan's objections to the dam designs and a pending dispute with the World Bank over whether there were violations to the treaty. In January 2023, India escalated matters further by formally requesting a modification of the treaty, citing population growth, climate change and energy needs, before last month's suspension. "Any modification requires mutual consent — and India has sidestepped that entirely with its suspension." Medha Bisht, a senior assistant professor in the Department of International Relations at the South Asian University, said India's pause may be a calculated form of leverage. "Every country looks at what options it has [during such conflicts]. This seemed like a legally safe option," Ms Bisht told the ABC. "India wasn't terminating the treaty — because it can't — but it was putting it into abeyance." She said that India believed Pakistan had not been acting in good faith over the years. "Pakistan treated nearly every Indian project which was designed on the western rivers as an opportunity to internationalise the dispute." As a result, "India grew increasingly frustrated that most of these projects, which it believes were within its rights, kept getting stalled." Experts warn India is now using water for political purposes. "Today the issue of Kashmir for India, in my opinion, is more related to the water issue as opposed to the issue of identity alone," Ms Banerji told the ABC. Under the treaty, India is allowed to build hydro-electric projects as long as water continues to flow freely into Pakistan. The four dam projects India is currently constructing are all on the Chenab River (whose waters are mainly meant for Pakistan) in India-administered Kashmir. "There's never been a restriction on building hydro-electric power projects," said Uzair Sattar, a former research associate with the South Asia Program at the Stimson Center. But he cautioned that violations arise when India changes the infrastructure around dams to enable more storage. Such infrastructure, he explained, could also allow India to "divert water to other tributaries" and control when and how much water reached Pakistan — especially during crucial winter months for crop cycles. Ms Malik said suspending the treaty also gave India greater control, allowing it to stop sharing water flow data and flush dam sediment at will. Previously, such flushing, which results in a significant release of water downstream, was only permitted during peak monsoon season to avoid disrupting Pakistan's irrigation. She argues the dams could become strategic assets in future conflicts if built without Pakistani input. Legal experts say Pakistan still has legal avenues under the treaty. It can appeal to the World Bank, request arbitration, or seek an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice. But each option is slow and politically sensitive. Previous disputes over projects like the Kishanganga dam were settled by international panels that allowed construction but imposed minimum flow requirements. Now, with the treaty suspended, even those safeguards may be void. "India is planning a whole caravan of hydropower projects," Ms Malik said. "Without the treaty's dispute resolution mechanisms, nothing is stopping them from altering flows in ways that could severely harm Pakistan," she warned. Pakistan's dependence on the Indus is profound. Mr Sattar from the Stimson Center said he was concerned about the precedent being set. "This is a conflict over terrorism between two nuclear powers, with water as a secondary source of leverage — which is very worrying. "But if the world accepts that a country can unilaterally suspend a water-sharing treaty, it could open the door for future conflicts where water is the primary issue, especially under climate stress." Despite rising tensions, some experts see potential for water to act as a peace-building tool. "There's a concept called issue linkage," said Ms Malik. "You tie water cooperation to climate finance or energy deals like the Iran-Pakistan pipeline." But trust, she added, was running dry. Ms Bisht warned that while governments debate, the fallout hits people — and ecosystems. "The treaty saw water as just H2O. But it's biodiversity, wetlands, sediments," she said. "It's not just food security — it's nutrition. "India may want reform, but execution is everything."
The Guardian
11-05-2025
- Politics
- The Guardian
Finding a way forward in the India-Pakistan conflict
Your editorial (The Guardian view on India and Pakistan: a newly dangerous moment in an old dispute, 7 May) underscores the alarming escalation between India and Pakistan, but the suspension of the Indus waters treaty and the missile strikes are more than just a return to familiar hostility. They reflect a deeper pattern that I call the urgency-actionability trap: the impulse to respond to provocation, even when those responses, whether symbolic or military, offer little durable benefit and risk spiralling escalation. India's suspension of the Indus treaty is technically limited – it cannot 'turn off the tap' overnight – but it sets a dangerous precedent in normalising water as a weapon. Pakistan's retaliatory posture, similarly, satisfies domestic politics while weakening regional water security. Neither action advances stability; both reinforce distrust. There is a narrow but actionable path forward. Engineering diplomacy, rooted in scientific realism, suggests small, verifiable steps – reinstate real-time data sharing; deploy neutral monitoring; and rebuild the habits of cooperation that long kept this basin out of the fire. Principled pragmatism – the ability to act in ways that are both realistic and values-based – is urgently needed. When symbolism overtakes strategy, rivers become battlegrounds. But they don't have to be. The time to restore channels of communications, however modest, is Shafiqul Islam Director, water diplomacy programme, Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University, US Mirza Waheed's poignant article underscores a critical oversight in the discourse surrounding the Kashmir conflict: the persistent marginalisation of Kashmiris (A massacre has reignited the forever war between India and Pakistan – once more, Kashmiri voices are missing, 29 April). As a resident of Shopian, I have witnessed first-hand the cyclical nature of violence that has plagued our region. The recent escalation following the tragic attack in Pahalgam has once again thrust Kashmir into the spotlight, yet the narratives predominantly focus on the geopolitical tensions between India and Pakistan, sidelining the lived experiences of Kashmiris. India's revocation of Article 370 in 2019, as highlighted by Waheed, marked a significant shift in India's approach to Kashmir, leading to increased militarisation and a sense of disfranchisement among locals. This move, done without consultation with Kashmiris, has deepened the chasm between the region and the central government. For any lasting resolution, it is imperative that the voices of Kashmiris are not only heard but are central to the dialogue. The international community, media and policymakers must prioritise inclusive conversations that address the aspirations and grievances of the Kashmiri Mushtaq TeliShopian, Jammu and Kashmir, India Have an opinion on anything you've read in the Guardian today? Please email us your letter and it will be considered for publication in our letters section.
