India’s decision to suspend the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) following the Pahalgam terror attack marks a significant escalation in its ongoing conflict with Pakistan, transforming water-historically a tool of cooperation-into a strategic lever. The move has triggered sharp rhetoric, military posturing, and heightened diplomatic tensions, with both countries signalling readiness for confrontation.

The 1960 Indus Waters Treaty, brokered by the World Bank, has survived wars and decades of hostilities, regulating the distribution of the Indus basin’s waters between India and Pakistan. Under the treaty, India controls the eastern rivers (Ravi, Beas, Sutlej), while Pakistan relies on the western rivers (Indus, Jhelum, Chenab) for 80% of its irrigated agriculture and a significant portion of its hydropower. The recent suspension comes in direct response to a deadly attack in Indian-administered Kashmir, which India attributes to Pakistan-based militants.

India’s suspension of the treaty is part of a broader, multi-pronged response to cross-border terrorism. The government has outlined short-, medium-, and long-term plans to restrict water flow to Pakistan, including immediate steps like desilting rivers to redirect flow, and more ambitious infrastructural and policy interventions in the future. The move is intended both as a punitive measure and as a demonstration of India’s willingness to leverage its upstream geographical advantage.

Indian officials argue that the treaty has long been unfair to regions like Jammu & Kashmir and that the current security environment justifies a fundamental policy shift. The suspension is also accompanied by other retaliatory actions: closing border crossings, halting trade, and expelling Pakistani nationals from India.

Pakistan has reacted with alarm, labelling the treaty its “lifeline” and warning that any attempt to block or divert water would be considered an “act of war”. Senior Pakistani officials, including Minister Hanif Abbasi, have issued explicit nuclear threats, emphasising that their strategic arsenal is aimed at deterring Indian actions. Pakistan is preparing to challenge India’s move through international legal channels, including the World Bank, the International Court of Justice, and potentially the United Nations Security Council.

Both nations have reinforced their military readiness. The Indian Navy has demonstrated its combat preparedness with successful anti-ship missile exercises, while India is poised to finalise a major deal for advanced Rafale-M fighter jets. Pakistan, meanwhile, has reportedly received advanced PL-15 air-to-air missiles from China, enhancing its air force’s capabilities. Diplomatic ties have further deteriorated, with both countries suspending participation in key bilateral treaties and restricting diplomatic personnel.

While India’s announcement is historic, experts caution that the immediate impact on Pakistan’s water supply may be limited. India lacks the large-scale storage and diversion infrastructure needed to halt or significantly redirect the flow of the Indus and its tributaries in the short term.

Most Indian projects on the western rivers are run-of-the-river hydropower plants, which do not allow for substantial storage or manipulation of flows. However, even the threat of such action is deeply destabilising for Pakistan, where water security is already under strain due to climate change and population pressures.

India’s move is seen by many as a diplomatic masterstroke, leveraging Pakistan’s acute dependence on Indus waters to pressure it on the issue of cross-border terrorism. However, the risk of escalation is real, with both sides invoking the possibility of war-including nuclear conflict-over water rights. The situation places the onus on the international community, particularly key global powers, to intervene and mediate before the crisis spirals further.

The suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty marks a dangerous new phase in India-Pakistan relations, where water has become both a weapon and a bargaining chip. While the technical and legal complexities may delay any immediate disruption of flows, the political and psychological impact is profound, raising the stakes in an already volatile region. As both sides brace for further escalation, the world watches closely, aware that the next moves could have consequences far beyond South Asia.

Agencies