Is the Indus Waters Treaty the Latest India-Pakistan Flashpoint? | Water News

Islamabad, Pakistan – For more than 60 years, India and Pakistan have jointly managed the waters of six rivers in the Indus Basin, home to one of the oldest human civilizations.

Despite four wars and near-constant tensions between their South Asian neighbors, they took advantage of the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) to irrigate the fertile lands on both sides of their border.

But that pact could become the latest turning point in the fragile relationship between New Delhi and Islamabad, as India signals to Pakistan to renegotiate the terms of the treaty.

According to Indian media reports, India sent a formal notice to Pakistan on September 18, citing several concerns, including changes in population demographics, environmental challenges and other factors, asking Pakistan to reassess the treaty.

“India’s notification highlights fundamental and unforeseen changes in circumstances that require a reassessment of obligations under various articles of the Treaty,” the Indian notification said.

So what does the announcement actually mean? Why is the Indus Waters Treaty so important to both countries – and what lies ahead?

What is the Indus Waters Treaty?

Like many issues between India and Pakistan, the origins of the IWT date back to the Partition of India in August 1947, when British rule ended and India and Pakistan emerged as two sovereign nations. Both countries, with a combined population of over 1.6 billion, are heavily dependent on the water of the rivers flowing from the Himalayas.

Since both countries depended on the same river systems for irrigation and agriculture, there was an urgent need to negotiate a fair sharing of water resources, particularly to resolve issues relating to the operation of an integrated irrigation system in Punjab – a province in which the British invested heavily, but through which the new India-Pakistan border ran.

After nine years of discussions facilitated by the World Bank, then Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru and former Pakistani President Ayub Khan signed the IWT in September 1960 (PDF).

According to the treaty, India controls the three eastern rivers – Ravi, Sutlej and Beas – while Pakistan controls the three western rivers – Jhelum, Chenab and Indus. India is obligated to allow the waters of the western rivers to flow into Pakistan with limited exceptions.

The treaty allows India to develop hydroelectric projects on the western rivers under certain conditions. These projects must be “run-of-the-river”, meaning that they must not significantly alter the flow or storage of water, thereby not adversely affecting Pakistan’s water rights as the downstream bank.

What does India want?

In short, India has indicated that it wants to renegotiate the terms of the treaty.

According to Anuttama Banerji, a New Delhi-based political analyst, India believes the current terms of the treaty are inconsistent with its position.

The Jhelum, Chenab and Indus rivers – rivers that Pakistan is allowed to use – have far more water than the Ravi, Sutlej and Beas, which India controls. In fact, Banerji said, India has access to about 20 percent of the total water under the treaty, while Pakistan has access to the remaining 80 percent.

This limited access to water from rivers has become a major problem for India as its population has grown dramatically in recent decades, making it the world’s most populous country.

“India believes that the treaty does not address newer threats and concerns such as population stress and climate change and its aftermath within the treaty boundaries,” said Banerji, a former researcher at the Stimson Center in Washington, DC.

While India has not yet indicated what specific changes it wants to make to the treaty, many analysts believe New Delhi will seek terms that would make it easier than it is now to develop hydroelectric dams and other infrastructure on the western rivers whose waters Pakistan is allowed to use.

Meanwhile, Pakistan has also raised concerns about the implementation of the treaty in recent years.

What does Pakistan want with the treaty?

Despite ongoing tensions between India and Pakistan, the IWT remained largely uncontested until the late 1990s, when India announced plans to build the Baglihar hydropower project in Indian-administered Kashmir, on the Chenab River.

Recently, India also constructed the Kishanganga hydroelectric power station on the Jhelum River.

“Pakistan argues that the way India is designing these dams violates its absolute obligation to keep the water flowing,” said Ahmed Rafay Alam, a Lahore-based environmental lawyer.

India, on the other hand, insists that its projects comply with the treaty’s provisions. “India claims that if it intends to block the flow of water, it will have to flood its own territory, which is impractical,” Alam added.

Officially, however, Pakistan has not sought any changes to the treaty itself.

Pakistani Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mumtaz Zahra Baloch said on Thursday that the treaty is the “gold standard” of bilateral treaties, adding that Pakistan remains “fully committed” to its implementation.

“Pakistan believes that it is our shared responsibility to maintain ecological balance, protect our environment and avoid any action that may have adverse effects on the environment. The two countries have an Indus Commissioners mechanism and we believe that all issues related to this treaty can be discussed in this mechanism,” Baloch said during her weekly press conference.

How does the treaty fit into the broader relations between India and Pakistan?

It is an important part of it. Although it focuses on a technical subject and ultimately deals with an essential human aspect, namely water, it has not been immune to the geopolitical aspects of the region.

In September 2016, armed fighters attacked an Indian army base in Uri in Indian-administered Kashmir. At least 19 soldiers were killed. India blamed Pakistan for the attack. Islamabad denied any role.

But after the attack, Indian officials said Prime Minister Narendra Modi had indicated that New Delhi could use India’s position as the upper riparian state in the Indus Valley as a weapon to punish Pakistan with restrictions on water. “Blood and water cannot flow together,” Modi told them, the officials told multiple Indian journalists.

According to Erum Sattar, a lecturer in the sustainable water management program at Tufts University, “any attempt to view water sharing as a purely technocratic issue, divorced from political, geopolitical and financial realities, is simplistic and shortsighted.”

“The IWT is contentious because of the geography and territorial control exercised by both countries. The rivers flow downstream and Pakistan, as a lower riparian, is heavily dependent on historical water flows,” Sattar told Al Jazeera.

Banerji, the New Delhi-based analyst, said that while the treaty itself is not controversial, its technical nature means there is little general public understanding of its provisions, allowing political interests to use the treaty as bait to escalate tensions within India and Pakistan.

“For example, we only know that India has asked for an amendment or revision of the treaty, but the details are not public,” she told Al Jazeera.

What arguments do both countries put forward?

According to Sattar, Pakistan’s position is that it has a historical right to the western rivers, as enshrined in the treaty. Pakistan has relied on these rivers since the colonial era to support its vast agricultural infrastructure.

However, she says India’s position has gradually changed over the past few decades as it sought to build more infrastructure to gain greater control over the waters of western rivers, which flow mainly into Pakistan.

“India is now increasingly arguing, as it appears to have done in its latest notification to Pakistan, that changing environmental realities, shifting demographics and the overall need for economic development and a reliable and ‘greener’ energy supply to meet those economic development needs, mean that India wants to reopen the treaty to presumably negotiate better terms for itself,” she said.

Lawyer Alam says this treaty is the only transboundary water treaty on earth that “divides waters and does not share them”.

“All other treaties talk about how waters that flow through multiple countries are ‘shared’ and how waters should be respected. But this is still the only one where water is ‘divided’ instead,” he added.

In January 2023, India accused Pakistan of “intransigence” over the implementation of the treaty after Islamabad repeatedly raised objections to India-built hydropower projects on the western rivers and referred the matter to the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) in The Hague.

India has rejected the PCA’s jurisdiction over the dispute, arguing that Pakistan has failed to first exhaust other dispute settlement mechanisms in the Indus Waters Treaty.

What dispute settlement mechanism does the Convention use?

Within the framework of the IWT, the countries have established a Permanent Indus Commission, with a commissioner from each party.

Minor disputes are dealt with by the Commission, but unresolved issues can be referred to a neutral expert appointed by the World Bank. This expert facilitates the dispute settlement mechanism of the treaty.

Pakistan had initially sought appointment of a neutral expert to resolve the dispute over Indian projects on western rivers but then approached the PCA. India, meanwhile, then requested appointment of a neutral expert.

The World Bank decided in 2022 to both appoint a neutral expert and allow proceedings at the PCA. India will only participate in the mediations of the neutral expert.

Did the treaty serve its purpose?

According to Sattar, the IWT has largely been a success. However, when issues of territorial control – particularly in relation to Kashmir – are taken into account, the situation becomes more complicated.

The Kashmir Valley, a beautiful but contested region, has been the scene of multiple wars between India and Pakistan since 1947. Both countries claim the region in its entirety, although each administers a portion of it.

“The IWT was intended to prevent the Kashmir conflict from escalating into a larger conflict, while ensuring that water issues were managed to some extent,” Sattar said.

Alam also said he believes the treaty has largely served its purpose over the past 60 years.

What is the future of the treaty?

Since India decided to revoke the autonomy of Indian-administered Kashmir in August 2019, relations between the two countries have further deteriorated.

Sattar believes the best way to move forward with the treaty is to return to the “spirit” in which it was originally negotiated.

But as India’s influence in the world continues to grow, Pakistan is likely to pursue its water-related claims through international law, while India will use its geopolitical importance to strengthen its position, the academic said.