Indus Waters Treaty: Time for India to Turn Off the Tap?

The Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), signed in 1960 between India and Pakistan with World Bank's mediation, has long been hailed as a model of water-sharing cooperation between two hostile neighbours. However, growing frustration in India—fueled by persistent cross-border terrorism and Pakistan’s refusal to reciprocate goodwill—has prompted a renewed debate: Should India withdraw from or renegotiate the treaty?

What Does the Treaty Say?

Under the IWT, India was allocated full control over three eastern rivers—Ravi, Beas, and Sutlej—while Pakistan received rights over the three western rivers—Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab. The agreement allowed India limited non-consumptive use of western rivers, such as for irrigation, hydroelectric power, and transport, without altering their natural flow.

Despite this generous arrangement, India has strictly adhered to the terms of the treaty for over six decades, even during wars and major terror incidents.

A Legacy of One-Sided Generosity?

Many in India argue that the treaty is not just outdated but also disproportionately in Pakistan’s favour. The allocation of approximately 80% of the total Indus basin water to Pakistan, despite India being the upper riparian state, has long been viewed as overly generous.

In 1960, India was still recovering from Partition and the trauma of 1947. The political leadership, under Jawaharlal Nehru, was keen to project India as a responsible global power and maintain peace in the region. That idealism, many critics argue, came at the cost of India’s strategic and ecological interests.

The Trust Deficit: From Uri to Pulwama

The Indus treaty has withstood many shocks, including the 1965 and 1971 wars, the Kargil conflict in 1999, and frequent border skirmishes. However, the 2016 Uri attack and 2019 Pulwama bombing, both orchestrated by Pakistan-based terror groups, reignited calls in India for a harder stance.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s remark—“blood and water cannot flow together”—following the Uri attack, underscored the growing national sentiment that continued water-sharing under the treaty is untenable while Pakistan supports terrorism.

The Legal Debate: Can India Walk Away?

International law is not straightforward when it comes to treaties. Article 62 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties allows for withdrawal only in cases of a “fundamental change in circumstances.” India could argue that persistent terror attacks and hostile diplomatic relations constitute such a change.

In January 2023, India issued a formal notice to Pakistan seeking a modification of the IWT, citing stalled negotiations and Pakistan’s frequent misuse of the treaty to raise objections over Indian hydro projects.

A New Doctrine?

India’s restraint on the Indus waters front has been commendable, but in light of Pakistan’s unrelenting animosity, this benevolence may no longer be seen as strength. Strategic water leverage could become a legitimate tool of diplomacy.

Opponents argue that unilateral withdrawal might violate international norms or provoke global criticism. However, others believe that if Pakistan can’t respect India’s sovereignty, then India is under no obligation to sustain such goodwill.

To sum up

As one observer put it, “This is not a game of 'three for you, three for me'.” When a neighbour refuses to recognize your fundamental right to exist in peace, every treaty and agreement deserves a second look.

The time has come for India to reassert its national interest—not as a threat, but as a reasonable response to persistent betrayal.

Also Read: Who Let the Killers In? Pahalgam Bloodbath Sparks Questions Over Security Lapses