India's decision to place the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) in abeyance represents a major shift in New Delhi's approach towards water-sharing arrangements with Pakistan, with greater emphasis now being placed on national security, reciprocity and long-term developmental priorities.

According to an analysis published by the Centre for Peace Studies (ICPS), New Delhi, the decades-old agreement must be viewed in the context of evolving geopolitical realities, increasing resource demands and changing security conditions across South Asia.

In the issue brief, The Indus Waters Treaty at Crossroads: Law, Security and Geopolitics in South Asia, Dr Mohammad Usman Bhatti examines the treaty's origins, India's legal and strategic concerns, and the case for modernising an arrangement negotiated more than sixty years ago.

Signed in 1960 with the World Bank acting as a mediator, the treaty divided the Indus river system between the two countries. India was allocated the eastern rivers - Ravi, Beas and Sutlej - while the western rivers - Indus, Jhelum and Chenab - were largely reserved for Pakistan. Under the arrangement, Pakistan received roughly 80 per cent of the Indus basin's waters, while India accepted restrictions on storage and hydropower development along the western rivers.

The analysis notes that India not only agreed to the division of waters but also contributed substantially towards the infrastructure required for the treaty's implementation, including a payment of USD 174 million to the Indus Basin Development Fund.

However, the paper argues that the strategic environment surrounding the treaty has changed significantly since its inception. India's concerns now encompass persistent cross-border terrorism, growing domestic water requirements, population growth, climate change pressures, rising energy demand and delays affecting hydropower projects that New Delhi maintains are fully consistent with treaty provisions.

India placed the treaty in abeyance on 23 April 2025 following the Pahalgam terror attack, which killed 26 civilians. New Delhi subsequently stated that cooperation under the agreement could not remain detached from broader security considerations and linked any restoration of normal treaty engagement to Pakistan credibly and irrevocably ending support for cross-border terrorism.

The analysis argues that India's position is rooted in the principle of reciprocity, maintaining that international agreements rely upon conditions of trust and responsible conduct from all parties involved.

Particular attention is given to disputes surrounding the Kishanganga and Ratle hydropower projects, both of which Pakistan has challenged despite India's assertion that their designs comply with treaty rules. These projects have become central points of disagreement within the treaty's dispute-resolution framework, reflecting broader tensions over the utilisation of western river waters.

The paper further stresses that India's decision does not amount to a formal withdrawal from the treaty. Instead, it is presented as a calibrated measure intended to safeguard national interests while leaving the possibility of future engagement open under changed circumstances.

Broader debates surrounding the treaty have also intensified in recent years, with India repeatedly raising concerns over evolving demographic, environmental and technological realities. New Delhi has argued that provisions negotiated in the mid-twentieth century require reconsideration to reflect present-day challenges, including climate variability, flood management needs and expanding energy requirements.

The analysis recommends that India accelerate critical water infrastructure projects, maximise the lawful utilisation of its allocated resources, enhance hydrological data collection, strengthen flood-management capabilities and expand scientific assessment of the Indus basin.

It also calls for a modernised framework incorporating improved water-data systems, climate-risk assessments, more effective dispute-resolution mechanisms and provisions to address extreme weather events, which are becoming increasingly frequent across the region.

Concluding that the treaty cannot remain insulated from changing security and environmental realities, the paper advocates what it describes as a pragmatic and calibrated Indian approach. Such a strategy, it argues, should firmly protect national security interests while preserving the possibility of negotiated modernisation in the future.

According to the analysis, India's long-term objective should be not merely preserving the existing arrangement unchanged, but securing a framework that better serves the country's water, energy and national security interests in the decades ahead.

ANI