WASHINGTON: Pakistan has warned that India’s continued decision to keep the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) in abeyance could have serious consequences for regional peace and security, as Islamabad renewed its call for the restoration of the decades-old water-sharing agreement.
Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar issued the warning on August 28 while addressing a seminar hosted by Pakistan’s Embassy in Washington on the Indus Waters Treaty and its implications for South Asian security.
Dar maintained that the 1960 treaty remains valid and binding under international law and argued that it contains no provision allowing either India or Pakistan to unilaterally suspend its implementation.
He said any attempt to interfere with Pakistan’s water rights could have profound implications for regional peace and security, particularly because the Indus basin is fundamental to Pakistan’s agriculture, food security and economy.
The Indus Waters Treaty was signed in 1960 with the World Bank as a signatory. Under the agreement, the waters of the eastern rivers — Ravi, Beas and Sutlej — were allocated primarily to India, while Pakistan received the principal use of the western rivers — Indus, Jhelum and Chenab — subject to provisions governing their use by both countries.
The treaty has remained in place through several wars and periods of intense political tension between India and Pakistan, making it one of the world’s longest-lasting water-sharing arrangements between rival states.
However, relations between the two nuclear-armed neighbours deteriorated sharply after the April 2025 attack in Pahalgam, Indian-administered Kashmir, in which 26 people were killed.
India subsequently announced that it was placing the Indus Waters Treaty in abeyance, linking the decision to its concerns over terrorism and Pakistan’s alleged support for cross-border militant activity. Pakistan has denied involvement in the attack and rejected India’s allegations.
New Delhi has maintained that the treaty will remain in abeyance until Pakistan takes what India describes as credible and irreversible action against terrorism.
Islamabad, meanwhile, has argued that security and political disputes cannot be used as a legal basis for unilaterally suspending an international treaty.
Dar called for the two countries to return to technical engagement and use established mechanisms to address disagreements. He also stressed the importance of transparency, data sharing and continued communication between the two sides.
The Pakistani position is that water disputes should be addressed through the treaty’s existing institutional and dispute-resolution mechanisms rather than through unilateral measures.
The issue has become even more significant because of growing pressure on the Indus basin from climate change, population growth, water shortages and increasingly unpredictable weather patterns.
Changes in rainfall, glacier and snowmelt patterns and extreme weather events are adding new uncertainty to water availability across the region.
For Pakistan, the stakes are particularly high because the country’s agricultural sector depends heavily on irrigation from the Indus River system. Millions of farmers rely on predictable water supplies for crops, while the wider economy depends on agricultural production for food, employment and exports.
Dar’s warning therefore reflects concerns extending beyond diplomacy. Islamabad views the uninterrupted availability of water as an issue directly connected to national security and economic stability.
The dispute also raises broader questions about the future of international water agreements. Pakistan argues that allowing one party to unilaterally place such an agreement in abeyance could establish a dangerous precedent for other transboundary river systems around the world
