Bureau, April 24, 2025 – In a dramatic escalation of tensions following the deadly terrorist attack in Pahalgam, the Modi government has suspended the 65-year-old Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) with Pakistan, a move that threatens to exacerbate an already dire water crisis in the neighboring country. The decision, announced late on April 23, 2025, marks a significant shift in India’s strategic approach to its western neighbor, with far-reaching implications for Pakistan’s agriculture, economy, and population.
The Indus Waters Treaty, signed in 1960 and brokered by the World Bank, has long been hailed as a rare example of sustained cooperation between India and Pakistan, surviving multiple wars and diplomatic crises. Under the agreement, India was granted control over the eastern rivers—Ravi, Beas, and Sutlej—while Pakistan was allocated the western rivers—Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab, which originate in Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir. This division has historically favored Pakistan, providing it with approximately 80% of the total water flow from the Indus River system, an annual volume of about 99 billion cubic meters. This water is a lifeline for Pakistan, supporting 80% of its cultivated land—around 16 million hectares—and sustaining the lives of over 237 million people, with Pakistan accounting for 61% of the Indus Basin population.
The suspension of the treaty comes in the wake of the April 22, 2025, terrorist attack in Pahalgam’s Baisaran meadow, where 26 tourists, including one foreign national, were killed by suspected militants linked to Pakistan-based groups. India’s Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri, addressing the media on April 23, stated that the treaty would remain suspended “until Pakistan credibly and irrevocably abjures its support for cross-border terrorism.” The decision was made during a Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) meeting chaired by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who cut short a visit to Saudi Arabia to address the crisis. Other punitive measures announced include the closure of the Attari-Wagah border, the expulsion of Pakistani military advisors from New Delhi, and a ban on Pakistani nationals entering India under the SAARC visa exemption scheme.
For Pakistan, the suspension of the IWT is a devastating blow. The western rivers are the country’s principal water source, irrigating its agricultural heartland in Punjab and Sindh provinces and powering hydropower plants like Tarbela and Mangla, which are critical for electricity generation. Major urban centers such as Karachi, Lahore, and Multan rely heavily on these rivers for drinking water and industrial use. The Indus system contributes nearly 25% of Pakistan’s GDP, supporting key crops like wheat, rice, sugarcane, and cotton. With 93% of the water used for irrigation, any disruption could lead to a collapse in food production, threatening food security for millions.
Pakistan is already grappling with severe water management challenges. The country ranks among the most water-stressed in the world, with per capita water availability declining rapidly due to population growth, climate change, and poor infrastructure. Groundwater reserves, a critical backup, are depleting at an alarming rate, leaving Pakistan heavily dependent on surface water from the Indus system. Experts warn that if India significantly reduces or halts the flow of the western rivers, the impact would be immediate and catastrophic: agricultural yields could plummet, hydropower generation could stall, and rural communities might face mass migration, unemployment, and loan defaults.
India’s decision to suspend the treaty is not without precedent. Following previous attacks, such as the 2016 Uri and 2019 Pulwama incidents, Indian leaders, including Prime Minister Modi, have threatened to revisit the IWT, with Modi famously stating, “Blood and water cannot flow together.” However, this is the first time India has formally suspended the treaty, a move that removes restrictions on its ability to control water flows from the western rivers. While India primarily uses its allocated 33 million acre-feet from the eastern rivers for agriculture in Punjab, Haryana, and Rajasthan, and for hydropower, the suspension now gives New Delhi greater leverage over the western rivers, potentially allowing it to divert or store water to Pakistan’s detriment.
Pakistan has yet to issue an official response, but diplomatic pushback is expected. Deputy Prime Minister Ishaq Dar announced that Pakistan’s National Security Committee would meet on April 24 to formulate a response, with all service chiefs and key cabinet ministers in attendance. In the past, Pakistan has warned that any unilateral revocation of the IWT could be considered an “act of war,” with officials like Sartaj Aziz in 2018 stating that such a move would warrant action at the United Nations and the International Court of Justice. The World Bank, which facilitated the treaty, may also be drawn into the fray as a mediator, given its historical role in resolving disputes under the agreement.
Critics of India’s decision caution that while the suspension sends a strong message, it risks escalating tensions between the two nuclear-armed neighbors. The treaty’s suspension could also undermine India’s international standing as a responsible upper riparian state, potentially straining relations with other countries that rely on transboundary water agreements. On the other hand, supporters argue that India has long been too lenient, allowing Pakistan to benefit from the treaty despite its alleged support for terrorism. BJP leader Ravinder Raina, speaking in Jammu on April 23, called the suspension a “bold decision,” emphasizing that Pakistan cannot “create bloodshed in Kashmir and then expect water to flow.”
The suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty marks a new chapter in India-Pakistan relations, one fraught with uncertainty and potential for further conflict. For Pakistan, the immediate challenge is to mitigate the impact on its already strained water resources, while for India, the move signals a hardening stance against cross-border terrorism. As both nations navigate this crisis, the international community watches closely, aware that the stakes—both humanitarian and geopolitical—could not be higher.
