Flow of Justice Blocked: India’s Violations and Pakistan’s Lawful Resistance

2026-02-12 - 22:06

The Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), signed in 1960 through World Bank mediation, remains one of the most enduring examples of international cooperation. By allocating the Eastern Rivers, Beas, Ravi, and Sutlej to India and the Western Rivers, Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab to Pakistan, the treaty granted India roughly 20 percent of the basin’s waters while Pakistan retained 80 percent. Although India was allowed limited use of the Western Rivers for irrigation and hydropower under strict technical conditions, its core obligation was clear: the waters flowing to Pakistan must remain uninterrupted. For over six decades, Pakistan’s adherence to the treaty has reflected its commitment to international law, even as India has sought to expand its unilateral control in ways that challenge the treaty’s spirit. Recent developments have exposed India’s disregard for its legal and moral obligations. Following the Pahalgam attack in April 2025, India unilaterally announced the suspension of the treaty, citing national security concerns. This unprecedented move amounted to an attempt to bypass established international mechanisms and weaken Pakistan’s rightful control over its waters. The Baglihar and Kishanganga hydropower projects, long sources of dispute, have increasingly been viewed by Pakistan as tools for manipulating river flows in violation of treaty provisions. A framework designed for cooperation now faces strain from political maneuvering. The dispute has been placed before the Court of Arbitration under the Permanent Court of Arbitration. Procedural Order No. 19, issued on 29 January 2026, reaffirmed the Court’s jurisdiction and directed India to provide detailed operational and technical records by 9 February 2026. These records, including reservoir data, operational logbooks, and flow measurements, are essential to assessing Pakistan’s claims that natural river flows have been disrupted. However, India has not complied with these directives or offered justification. Its silence, including non-response to the UN Special Rapporteurs’ communication of 16 October 2025, suggests a pattern of evasion rather than oversight. Such defiance carries serious legal and reputational consequences. International arbitration allows tribunals to draw adverse inferences when a party withholds relevant evidence without reasonable explanation. By failing to share critical data, India risks legal criticism while Pakistan continues to present itself as a state committed to lawful dispute resolution. The unilateral suspension of treaty obligations and selective engagement with arbitration processes reinforce concerns about compliance with established norms. Beyond legal doctrine, the human dimension is profound. Pakistan depends heavily on the Western Rivers for agriculture, drinking water, and economic stability. Any significant disruption in water flow could affect food security, livelihoods, and environmental sustainability. Access to water is closely linked to fundamental human rights, including the rights to food, work, and a healthy environment, as recognized by UN experts. Therefore, disputes over river management are not merely technical disagreements but issues with far-reaching social consequences. The present situation underscores a stark contrast in approaches. Pakistan continues to engage treaty mechanisms and legal forums, emphasizing dialogue and adjudication. India’s suspension of the treaty and non-compliance with arbitral directions raise questions about the durability of cooperative water-sharing arrangements. The Indus Waters Treaty, long regarded as a resilient model of conflict management, now faces one of its most serious tests. Preserving the treaty’s integrity is vital not only for Pakistan’s water security but also for regional stability and respect for international commitments. Agreements of this nature rest on good faith and consistent compliance. When one party departs from these principles, the broader framework of trust is weakened. The future of the Indus basin depends on reaffirming the rule of law, honoring treaty obligations, and ensuring that shared resources remain a basis for cooperation rather than confrontation. —The writer is a freelance columnist wafatania25@gmail.com