India has declared that the Indus Waters Treaty cannot be revived in its current form. Officials have stated that any future water‑sharing arrangement will require a revised framework and will be contingent on Pakistan ending cross‑border terrorism against India, India Today reported.

Sources emphasised that the 65‑year‑old pact needs a complete overhaul and cannot continue as it stands.

Pakistan’s military and political leadership have repeatedly warned India of dire consequences, including war and even nuclear escalation, if New Delhi were to permanently stop the flow of water following the suspension of the treaty last year.

Indian sources, however, clarified that any reactivation of river water‑sharing provisions would only be possible under a modified format and only if Islamabad permanently halts support for terrorism. India is not actively seeking withdrawal from the treaty at this stage but retains the sovereign right to terminate any agreement that undermines its interests.

Officials stressed that the treaty in its present form will not function again. They said provisions related to water sharing could only be reactivated in a different format and only if Pakistan abjures terrorism. They added that India has seen no evidence of Pakistan making any effort in that direction.

New Delhi also accused Pakistan of pushing a false narrative that India’s suspension of the treaty is causing water scarcity. Indian officials argued that Pakistan loses a significant volume of water due to its own lack of storage infrastructure, widespread leakages, and internal disputes among provinces.

The suspension of the treaty was part of punitive measures announced after the Pahalgam terror attack in April last year, which killed 26 civilians. The attack was attributed to The Resistance Front, described as a proxy of the Pakistan‑based Lashkar‑e‑Taiba. In May, India launched Operation Sindoor to target terrorist infrastructure in Pakistan in response to the attack.

Under the World Bank‑brokered treaty, India has rights over the eastern rivers Ravi, Beas and Sutlej, while Pakistan controls the western rivers Indus, Jhelum and Chenab. The pact allows India to build run‑of‑river hydroelectric projects such as Kishenganga and Ratle on western tributaries before they cross into Pakistan. Signed in 1960 after nine years of negotiations, the treaty was intended to manage cross‑border rivers. India had long argued for its modification, citing Pakistan’s obstructionist approach to dispute resolution.

In 2015, Pakistan sought the appointment of a neutral expert to examine objections to Kishenganga and Ratle projects but withdrew its position in 2016 and demanded a Court of Arbitration instead. The World Bank appointed both a neutral expert and the Court of Arbitration, which India did not recognise. 

India attended meetings with the neutral expert but boycotted the Court of Arbitration proceedings. Officials said Pakistan’s conduct under the treaty has consistently reflected obstruction rather than cooperation, objecting to virtually every Indian project on western rivers regardless of size or design.

Even small projects, such as a 200 KW hydropower scheme for a tribal area, faced prolonged objections. Larger projects including Salal, Tulbul, Baglihar, Kishenganga, Ratle and Pakal Dul also met resistance. Indian sources said Pakistan used the treaty not to ensure compliance but to delay India’s legitimate developmental rights.

Dispute resolution provisions, meant for exceptional differences, were turned into instruments for obstruction. Pakistan escalated routine technical issues to third‑party forums, prolonged bilateral discussions without resolution, and sought parallel proceedings before both the neutral expert and the Court of Arbitration, contrary to the treaty’s graded framework.

Indian officials also highlighted that Pakistan has taken no credible steps to curb terrorism. They pointed out that proscribed individuals and entities sanctioned by the UN Security Council continue to appear at public events in Pakistan and use platforms to spread their messages.

Evidence gathered by Indian agencies also suggests ongoing terrorist activity across the Line of Control. Officials concluded that the future of the treaty depends entirely on Pakistan’s conduct, both in relation to terrorism and its approach to the pact.

They reiterated that the Indus Waters Treaty cannot resume in its current form and any revival would require a changed framework and a permanent end to cross‑border terrorism.

Agencies