Indus Water Treaty: Can anti state skirmishes revoke the IWT and change the region's Water map

The recent Pahalgam attack in Indian Jammu and Kashmir has driven bilateral relations between Pakistan and India towards the threat of revocation of Indus Water Treaty. Sources claim that India's Kashmir has deployed around 9 lac (900,000) soldiers in its territories and this significant military presence raises a question on how would it be geographically and strategically possible for external attacks in the Indian Kashmir region? Indian leadership has accused to hold Pakistan to be responsible for the attack and as a result, has unilaterally decided to withdraw from the Indus Water Treaty.

The Indian Administered Kashmir was attacked by five armed terrorists which led to 26 civilian casualties near Pahalgam. This put India on a high alert and accused Pakistan for facilitating non state actors to carry out this attack. Since then, Indian news channels have put Pakistan in the media spotlight. As a result, Modi government decided to cut "already tense" ties with Pakistan and threatened to revoke the Indus Water Treaty. This puts the diplomatic relations between both nuclear states at test, as the two most conflicted domains,i.e. Kashmir and the IWT are at stake. Later, sources leaked out calls between Indian military officials for orchestrating the attack in the Pahalgam and has put the question of credibility on the Indian media and the Modi Government.

Pakistan, in its Press Conference of Ministers, has taken the issue on the front. Primarily, India cannot unilaterally withdraw from the Indus Water Treaty, as the articles of the treaty, do not allow for unilateral revocation and would have to go through a bilateral process. Secondly, the construction of the Kishan Ganga dam is against the articles of IWT, as it cuts off water from the rivers of Jhelum and Chenab in Punjab to Pakistan. Pakistan as a lower riparian is under pressure from India while India has continuously asked for reforms and calls it outdated during the sessions in the court of arbitration. Pakistan had won the case in the court on legal grounds. World Bank itself calls the abeyance of the treaty to be the act of war. In response Pakistan has closed off visas for India ( excluding sikh pilgrims ) and closed off Wagha border to India, suspending all trade immediate effect. Pakistan Airforce Authority has decided to halt air space movement of Indian flights from Pakistan. Previously, a similar restriction on Indian air space led to 9 billion worth of loss to India. Pakistan also proposes to uphold abeyance of the bilateral Simla agreement. Ishaq Dar, Sherry Rehman and other political leaders have opined on the National Peace Committee stating this action as violence of international law.

"Attempts to stop water will be considered act of war" Pakistan

Geopolitical analysts, including, Defense Minister, Muhammad Khwaja Asif, provided a rationale that India's action of water terrorism poses an existential threat to Pakistan and revocation of the treaty has never taken place, even during the last 3 wars fought between both states. On security issues, Pakistan positions itself as a frontline state in the fight against terrorism, refuting India's allegations of involvement in cross-border terrorism. In an interview, Khawaja Asif, Pakistan states that India finances the terrorists and non state actors in Balochistan and KPK. He adds that Indian leadership is financing proxies in Pakistan to win elections in the Indian public. The rise of BJP party has led to winning populist extremist votes. It is also said that Indian leadership is shifting its blame to Pakistan to cover for its responsibility in security deficit. These diversion tactics are motivated to influence the Hindu voter bank. Meanwhile in Pakistan, Islamabad 's High commission of India faces protests of public and civil society, on response to India's unilateral revocation of IWT. Pakistan's official account on X is disabled in India. Rahul Gandhi , Sanjit Singh and opposition parties in India have criticized Modi and questioned the role of intelligence agencies in Kashmir. Additionally, the role of India's media comes in question. An Indian couple's video was taken and was put up on media, stating them as victims of Pehlgam attacks. The couple spoke against the Indian media on how it manufactured the false propaganda.

Pakistan has decided to:

· Close trade with India

· Close off wagha border

· Close off Indian Airlines and airspace

· Declare Indian Leadership's actions as an Act of War

It seems that foreign policy of both states revolve around deterrence and balance of power. Instead of collaboration of both states on countering terrorism, the recent conflict has led to another series of diplomatic tensions. On the issue of the Indus Water Treaty, which could cut off, 46.1 million population's access to water in Pakistan, UNSC would have to take credibility to arbitrate the conflict and uphold the treaty on legal grounds in compliance to international law. So far, the issue is being discussed on bilateral level. UN could take tangible steps if no politicization and interests are in play. For the moment, Indian leadership has confused security concerns with the transboundary water agreement. It is important for both states to reach at a proactive solution, regardless of historical biases and political agendas.