The Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), signed in 1960, has long stood as a testament to the possibility of cooperation between India and Pakistan, even amidst deep-seated hostilities. Facilitated by the World Bank, the treaty meticulously delineated water-sharing rights over the Indus River system, ensuring a relatively peaceful management of this critical resource for over six decades. However, recent geopolitical upheavals, particularly following the tragic Pahalgam attack in April 2025, have led to India’s suspension of the treaty, casting a shadow over regional stability and raising pressing questions about the future of water diplomacy in South Asia.

Historical Context and Significance of the IWT

The Indus River system, originating in the Tibetan Plateau and traversing through India and Pakistan before emptying into the Arabian Sea, comprises six major rivers: the Indus, Jhelum, Chenab, Ravi, Beas, and Sutlej. Post the 1947 partition, disputes over water rights became inevitable, given the rivers’ transboundary nature. After protracted negotiations, the IWT was signed on September 19, 1960, by Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru and Pakistani President Ayub Khan in Karachi.

Under the treaty, India received exclusive rights over the eastern rivers—Ravi, Beas, and Sutlej—while Pakistan was granted rights over the western rivers—Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab. To facilitate this division, India agreed to contribute financially to the construction of dams and canals in Pakistan, ensuring a smooth transition. The treaty also established the Permanent Indus Commission, a bilateral body aimed at resolving disputes and facilitating data exchange.

Remarkably, the IWT endured multiple Indo-Pak wars and periods of heightened tension, often cited as a model for transboundary water cooperation.

The Role of David Lilienthal

A pivotal figure in the genesis of the IWT was David E. Lilienthal, former chairman of the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) and the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission. In 1951, Lilienthal visited India and Pakistan to write a series of articles for Collier’s magazine. During his visit, he observed the acute tensions between the two nations, particularly over Kashmir, and proposed that cooperation on water management could serve as a foundation for reducing hostilities.

Drawing from his experience with the TVA, Lilienthal suggested that India and Pakistan jointly develop and operate the Indus Basin River system, emphasizing that the issue should be treated as an engineering problem rather than a political one. He recommended that the World Bank facilitate this cooperation and assist in financing the necessary infrastructure.

Lilienthal’s proposal was well received by World Bank officials and subsequently by the Indian and Pakistani governments. Eugene R. Black, then president of the World Bank, supported the idea and initiated the formation of a Working Party comprising engineers from both countries and the World Bank. Although initial negotiations were challenging, with both sides holding firm to their positions, the World Bank eventually offered its own proposal in 1954, leading to the eventual signing of the IWT in 1960.

Implementation Over the Years

For decades, the IWT functioned effectively, with both nations adhering to its provisions. Disputes, when they arose, were addressed through the mechanisms outlined in the treaty. Notably, projects like India’s Kishanganga Hydroelectric Plant faced objections from Pakistan, leading to arbitration. In 2013, the Permanent Court of Arbitration allowed India to proceed, provided a minimum water flow to Pakistan was maintained. Such instances underscored the treaty’s resilience and the commitment of both nations to uphold its tenets.

The Pahalgam Attack and Subsequent Suspension

On April 22, 2025, a devastating attack in the Baisaran Valley near Pahalgam, Jammu and Kashmir, resulted in the deaths of 26 tourists. India attributed the attack to militants based in Pakistan, leading to immediate diplomatic fallout. In a significant escalation, India suspended the IWT on April 23, 2025, citing national security concerns. This move was unprecedented, marking the first suspension since the treaty’s inception.

Following the suspension, India reduced water flow through the Chenab River, with Pakistan reporting a 90% drop in supply. India initiated new hydroelectric projects on the western rivers, previously constrained under the treaty. Pakistan warned that any attempt to disrupt water flow could be considered an act of war, even threatening nuclear retaliation. The World Bank, a signatory to the treaty, was not formally informed of the suspension, limiting its capacity to mediate.

Impacts of the Suspension

The suspension of the IWT has profound implications for both nations. For Pakistan, the reduction in water flow threatens its agriculture, which accounts for approximately 20% of its GDP and employs about 40% of its population. The sudden reduction in water supply jeopardizes food security and economic stability. Hydroelectric power, a significant energy source for Pakistan, is compromised, exacerbating existing energy crises. The unpredictability of water flow instills a sense of vulnerability, affecting planning and resource management.

For India, the suspension provides greater autonomy over water resources, potentially using it as a diplomatic tool. However, India faces criticism for unilaterally suspending a longstanding treaty, potentially affecting its global image. The move also raises concerns about regional stability, as water scarcity could lead to increased tensions and conflict escalation.

Future Scenarios

Several potential scenarios could unfold in the aftermath of the IWT suspension. Diplomatic re-engagement, possibly facilitated by international mediation, could lead to the reinstatement of the treaty. Both nations might consider revising the treaty to reflect current realities, addressing concerns over water usage and infrastructure development. Alternatively, continued suspension could lead to increased tensions, with potential for conflict escalation, especially if water scarcity intensifies. A broader framework involving neighboring countries could be established to manage transboundary water resources collaboratively.

The Escalating Conflict

The Pahalgam attack of April 22, 2025, not only marked a dark day for India but also reignited one of South Asia’s most volatile rivalries. While India’s immediate diplomatic reaction involved suspending the Indus Waters Treaty, it became increasingly evident that this move was just one part of a broader and more aggressive response. Within two weeks of the attack, on May 6, India launched a series of airstrikes across nine locations in Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir. These strikes, according to Indian military statements, targeted militant training camps and weapons storage facilities allegedly linked to groups involved in the Pahalgam incident.

However, the consequences were more severe than the official Indian narrative suggested. Pakistan’s military reported that the Indian strikes had led to the deaths of 31 civilians, including women and children, sparking widespread outrage. What made these strikes particularly provocative was the fact that several of the targets lay deep within mainland Pakistan, including the heartland of Punjab province—traditionally considered off-limits in earlier skirmishes. This was a clear escalation, signaling that India was no longer observing the unwritten boundaries that had kept full-scale war at bay in the past.

International powers like the US, China, and the EU are urging India and Pakistan to refrain from further escalation, and are specifically calling on Pakistan not to retaliate. However, Pakistan is in a tight spot. The Muslim majority nuclear armed country claimed that its air force had intercepted and downed four Indian jets during retaliatory air engagements. According to the Pakistani Air Force, three of the downed aircraft were Rafale jets—India’s prized French-built multirole fighters known for their advanced avionics, AESA radar systems, Meteor air-to-air missiles, and high maneuverability in dogfight scenarios. Although Indian defense officials categorically denied losing any aircraft, reports in the French and American press, citing senior government sources, confirmed that at least one Indian Rafale was indeed lost in aerial combat.

Pakistan further stated that it had deployed its Chinese-made Chengdu J-10C fighter jets during these engagements. The J-10Cs are considered a significant upgrade in Pakistan’s aerial capabilities. Equipped with Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radar, PL-15 long-range air-to-air missiles, and a sophisticated electronic warfare suite, the J-10C offers a credible response to India’s air superiority, particularly with the induction of Rafales on the other side.

In the days following the airstrikes and the aerial dogfights, tensions escalated further. India deployed a wave of drones aimed at major Pakistani urban centers, including Lahore, Rawalpindi—which hosts the General Headquarters of the Pakistan Army—and Karachi. Pakistani authorities claimed that all incoming drones were successfully neutralized. The drones, according to defense analysts and visual evidence shared by local media, were identified as Israeli-made Harop loitering munitions. These drones are known for their “kamikaze” capabilities, designed to loiter over a target area before diving into it with a high-explosive payload, making them particularly effective in precision strikes on radar or missile defense systems.

Pakistan completely closed its airspace to commercial and foreign military flights, signaling a full-scale military alert. The country braced for further escalations and had vowed to avenge what it calls “Indian aggression.” Meanwhile, India had maintained a defensive posture publicly but issued stern warnings that any further attacks on Indian territory would be met with “swift and decisive” military retaliation.

As of May 10, tensions between Pakistan and India have escalated dramatically, pushing the region to the brink of a full-scale conflict. Pakistan had already closed its airspace to all commercial and foreign military flights, signaling a high-level military alert. The situation intensified further when India launched a new wave of ballistic missile strikes, this time targeting key military airbases inside Pakistan — including the Nur Khan Air Base near Rawalpindi, which is in close proximity to Pakistan Army headquarters. Indian sources claimed that other major Pakistani bases were also targeted.

In response, Pakistan launched Operation Bunyan-ul-Marsous, a retaliatory military campaign that began around dawn on the same day. According to the Pakistan Army spokesperson, the operation involved precision strikes on 26 Indian military installations, specifically targeting the air bases believed to be involved in the earlier attacks on Pakistan.

Amid these developments, Pakistan convened a meeting of its National Command Authority, the body responsible for oversight of the country’s nuclear arsenal. The move sparked widespread concern internationally, raising the specter of a potential nuclear confrontation between the two nuclear-armed neighbors.

As fears of a broader war mounted, U.S. President Donald Trump intervened. Around midday on May 10, he announced an immediate ceasefire via a statement on Truth Social.The Pakistani leadership welcomed the U.S. ceasefire initiative, viewing it as a step toward de-escalation and regional peace. Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif thanked President Trump for his intervention. India also agreed to the ceasefire but expressed dissatisfaction with the U.S. involvement. Although there were some minor violations of the ceasefire, the agreement has largely held.

Conclusion

The Indus Waters Treaty has long been a beacon of hope in Indo-Pak relations, demonstrating that cooperation is possible even amidst deep-seated animosity. Its suspension underscores the fragility of such agreements and the profound implications of geopolitical conflicts on resource management. As both nations navigate this precarious juncture, the importance of dialogue, mutual respect, and international mediation cannot be overstated. The future of the Indus River system, and the millions who depend on it, hangs in the balance.

Source: The Indus Waters Treaty – Wikipedia

About the Author

Mohsin Rasheed is the Managing Editor of Everyman Science, where he leads editorial coverage on science, policy, and geopolitics. With a keen interest in the intersection of science and international affairs, he brings depth and clarity to complex global issues. He can be reached at [email protected]