The Current Column

Eroding International Law?

Why the Indus Waters Treaty must be abided by

Kazi, Mudaser Aijaz / Ines Dombrowsky
The Current Column (2026)

Bonn: German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS), Bonn: German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS), The Current Column of 21 September 2026

Bonn, 21 September 2026. India’s 2025 decision to suspend the Indus Waters Treaty affects Pakistan’s water security and India-Pakistan security relations, and may also contribute to the erosion of international law.

In April 2025, India put the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) “in abeyance”, following a deadly militant attack in Pahalgam in Indian-administered Kashmir. On 31 August 2026, the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague unanimously held that India’s suspension or termination was impermissible under the Treaty and international law.  However, India immediately rejected the ruling, disputed the court’s jurisdiction over its sovereign decisions and declared that it would maintain the IWT in abeyance. Keeping the IWT in abeyance may not only have severe consequences for Pakistan’s water security and India-Pakistan security relations, but may also contribute to a broader erosion of international law.

The Indus Waters Treaty

The Indus River Basin sustains over 200 million people in Pakistan (over 80 percent of its population) and about 100 million people in northwestern India. Negotiated under the mediation by the World Bank in 1960, the IWT allocates exclusive use of the three eastern rivers (Ravi, Beas, Sutlej) to India and the three western rivers (Indus, Jhelum, Chenab) to Pakistan, subject to certain uses permitted to India in upstream Kashmir, including run-of-river hydropower within certain limits. The treaty mandates data-sharing on all rivers flowing into Pakistan. It provides a three-tier dispute resolution mechanism, through i) the Permanent Indus Commission, ii) Neutral Expert proceedings and iii) arbitration by an ad-hoc Court of Arbitration. The decision to suspend the IWT is unprecedented for a treaty often cited as a rare success in transboundary water cooperation, having survived over six decades of hostility between the treaty countries, including the wars of 1965, 1971 and 1999. 

Pakistan’s Water Security

India’s move poses hydrological risks to Pakistan by disrupting established arrangements for sharing hydrological and technical information, which is critical for downstream flood forecasting and disaster preparedness. The 2025 floods demonstrated the risks of weakened institutional communication, when warnings were reportedly transmitted through diplomatic channels rather than the Permanent Indus Commission. Since suspending the IWT, India has fast-tracked hydropower development and other water-management measures on the Western Rivers, which Pakistan fears could increase India’s ability to regulate and divert flows currently reaching Pakistan.

India-Pakistan Security Relations

India’s April 2025 decision did not emerge in a political vacuum. Following a deadly militant attack in Uri, Indian-administered Kashmir in September 2016, the Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi declared that “blood and water cannot flow together”, explicitly connecting the management of the Indus with India’s security relationship with Pakistan. The language became more explicit after the 2025 abeyance. India’s Minister for Water C.R. Patil said in June 2026 that the government was working to ensure that “not a single drop” of water would flow to Pakistan in the coming years.

Such rhetoric invited counter-rhetoric further intensifying tensions. Following the suspension, Pakistan’s National Security Committee warned that any attempt to divert or stop water allocated to Pakistan under the IWT would constitute an “act of war”. Former Foreign Minister Bilawal Bhutto Zardari even warned of a possible “nuclear Armageddon scenario”. This demonstrates an intensifying process of securitisation around water between two nuclear-armed neighbours.

Erosion of international law?

The Permanent Court of Arbitration has issued four rulings since India placed the Treaty in abeyance in April 2025. These arose from proceedings initiated by Pakistan in 2016 over the Kishanganga and Ratle Hydroelectric Projects in Indian-administered Kashmir. Pakistan invoked arbitration under Article IX and Annexure G of the IWT, arguing that the dispute involved broader questions of Treaty interpretation, while India later sought a Neutral Expert under Article IX and Annexure F, arguing that the issues were primarily technical. The World Bank paused both processes in 2016, encouraging India and Pakistan to resolve the dispute bilaterally, but resumed them in 2022, after concluding that the stalemate itself posed a risk to the Treaty. On 31 August 2026, the Permanent Court of Arbitration ordered restrictions in the construction of the Ratle Hydroelectric Plant until 90 days after the Neutral Expert’s decision, expected in July 2027. For now, the Neutral Expert’s decision should be awaited before creating further facts at the Ratle site. A continued suspension of the Treaty, however, could weaken confidence in international water law and contribute to a broader erosion of international law. 

In summary, abiding by the rules of the Indus Waters Treaty is important for Pakistan’s water security and for avoiding military escalation between India and Pakistan. By doing so, India would also send a strong signal for its respect for international law.