India Pakistan and the Sindhu

India and Pakistan have had their complexities and still does to this day. There was a time when both the countries belonged to the same motherland but since 1947 it's been two of everything.
But, there's one things which has made a connecting thread between the two countries and it's the Indus river.

The Indus Water Treaty, signed on September 19, 1960, was a landmark agreement between India and Pakistan that regulates the use of the Indus River system's waters. Brokered by the World Bank, this treaty has been a cornerstone of water-sharing between the two nations, despite periods of tension and conflict.

A little background, The Indus River originates in Tibet and flows through India and Pakistan before emptying into the Arabian Sea. After the partition of India in 1947, disputes arose over the sharing of waters between the two countries. The treaty was negotiated over nine years, finally coming into effect on April 1, 1960.

Key Provisions:-

1)Water Allocation-The treaty allocates the waters of the three eastern rivers (Ravi, Beas, and Sutlej) to India and the three western rivers (Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab) to Pakistan. India receives 20% of the total water carried by the rivers, while Pakistan receives 80%.

2)Permitted Uses-India is allowed to use the waters of the western rivers for limited irrigation purposes and non-consumptive uses like hydroelectric power generation.

3)Permanent Indus Commission-A permanent commission was established to resolve disputes and ensure compliance with the treaty.

The Challenges and Disputes:-

Despite its success, the treaty has faced challenges and disputes over the years. Pakistan has raised concerns about India's construction of dams on the western rivers, which it claims could affect the water flow. India, on the other hand, asserts its right to use the waters for hydroelectric power generation and irrigation.

Let's talk about some recent developments about the thing, In April 2025, India suspended the treaty, citing national security concerns and Pakistan's alleged support for terrorism. This move has raised concerns about the treaty's future and the potential for water conflicts between the two nations.

The Indus Water Treaty has been a vital instrument in maintaining peace and cooperation between India and Pakistan, despite their complex and often contentious relationship. Its success has been hailed as a model for other transboundary water-sharing agreements worldwide.

But due to the recent activities by Pakistan at Pahalgam, India doesn't have any other way but to not continue with the treaty. Considering the heinous and terrifying deaths of Indians based on their religion, not continuing with the treaty is just not enough. Peace talks only work when both the parties follow through it.

To ensure the treaty's continued relevance, both countries must work together and Pakistan should really consider the things it has been a mother to like terrorism and hatred towards a religion different than theirs. Regular dialogue and cooperation through the Permanent Indus Commission can help resolve disputes but following through the decisions is what will make the really difference.

 

[Subiksha Anand]

India and Pakistan have had their complexities and still does to this day. There was a time when both the countries belonged to the same motherland but since 1947 it's been two of everything.
But, there's one things which has made a connecting thread between the two countries and it's the Indus river.

The Indus Water Treaty, signed on September 19, 1960, was a landmark agreement between India and Pakistan that regulates the use of the Indus River system's waters. Brokered by the World Bank, this treaty has been a cornerstone of water-sharing between the two nations, despite periods of tension and conflict.

A little background, The Indus River originates in Tibet and flows through India and Pakistan before emptying into the Arabian Sea. After the partition of India in 1947, disputes arose over the sharing of waters between the two countries. The treaty was negotiated over nine years, finally coming into effect on April 1, 1960.

Key Provisions:-

1)Water Allocation-The treaty allocates the waters of the three eastern rivers (Ravi, Beas, and Sutlej) to India and the three western rivers (Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab) to Pakistan. India receives 20% of the total water carried by the rivers, while Pakistan receives 80%.

2)Permitted Uses-India is allowed to use the waters of the western rivers for limited irrigation purposes and non-consumptive uses like hydroelectric power generation.

3)Permanent Indus Commission-A permanent commission was established to resolve disputes and ensure compliance with the treaty.

The Challenges and Disputes:-

Despite its success, the treaty has faced challenges and disputes over the years. Pakistan has raised concerns about India's construction of dams on the western rivers, which it claims could affect the water flow. India, on the other hand, asserts its right to use the waters for hydroelectric power generation and irrigation.

Let's talk about some recent developments about the thing, In April 2025, India suspended the treaty, citing national security concerns and Pakistan's alleged support for terrorism. This move has raised concerns about the treaty's future and the potential for water conflicts between the two nations.

The Indus Water Treaty has been a vital instrument in maintaining peace and cooperation between India and Pakistan, despite their complex and often contentious relationship. Its success has been hailed as a model for other transboundary water-sharing agreements worldwide.

But due to the recent activities by Pakistan at Pahalgam, India doesn't have any other way but to not continue with the treaty. Considering the heinous and terrifying deaths of Indians based on their religion, not continuing with the treaty is just not enough. Peace talks only work when both the parties follow through it.

To ensure the treaty's continued relevance, both countries must work together and Pakistan should really consider the things it has been a mother to like terrorism and hatred towards a religion different than theirs. Regular dialogue and cooperation through the Permanent Indus Commission can help resolve disputes but following through the decisions is what will make the really difference.

The Indus Water Treaty (IWT) stands as one of the rare pillars of cooperation in the otherwise turbulent and often acrimonious relationship between India and Pakistan. Your article captures the emotional and historical complexity of the issue quite well — from the shared past of both countries to the strained present, marked by distrust, violence, and competing national interests.


At its core, the treaty is not just about water — it symbolizes diplomacy, restraint, and the possibility of peaceful engagement even between adversaries. Signed in 1960 after nine grueling years of negotiations, the IWT has withstood wars, cross-border terrorism, and countless political standoffs. That, in itself, speaks volumes about the foresight of its architects and the compelling need to avoid conflict over a resource as vital as water.

A Model Treaty with Uneven Gains​

The division of the rivers — with India receiving the eastern rivers (Ravi, Beas, Sutlej) and Pakistan the western ones (Indus, Jhelum, Chenab) — was considered a pragmatic solution. Pakistan, being downstream, was heavily dependent on the western rivers for agriculture and drinking water. While India got the right to use only 20% of the total flow, it agreed to the compromise to prevent a larger geopolitical fallout.


India’s permitted usage of the western rivers — limited irrigation, hydroelectricity (non-consumptive), and navigation — reflects the treaty’s intent to provide balance. But over the decades, especially with India's growing need for clean energy, several hydroelectric projects on these rivers (like Kishanganga and Ratle) have stirred Pakistani concerns about water storage and potential manipulation of flows, particularly in times of conflict.

A Treaty Tested by Time and Terror​

While the technicalities of the treaty have largely been respected, the political relationship has seen repeated collapses, especially in the wake of cross-border terrorism. The recent suspension of the IWT by India in April 2025, citing Pakistan's alleged involvement in the Pahalgam terror attacks, marks a pivotal moment. It raises urgent questions — not only about the treaty’s future but about the very possibility of structured peace-building between the two nuclear neighbors.


From India’s perspective, a treaty that requires fairness and mutual trust cannot exist alongside a policy of proxy warfare. The killing of Indian citizens — especially on religious grounds — stokes national outrage and justifies calls for severe action. In that context, suspending the IWT isn’t just a diplomatic move; it’s a message that peace cannot be one-sided, and treaties are meaningless unless both parties honor them in spirit and in practice.

The Path Forward — If There’s One​

Despite everything, abandoning the treaty entirely would come with serious global and humanitarian consequences. Water scarcity affects millions in Pakistan, and a full revocation could trigger regional instability, including international condemnation. Yet, continuing without addressing Pakistan’s repeated breaches of trust also undermines India’s strategic autonomy and moral authority.


The better path — though difficult — is conditional engagement. India could use the treaty as leverage, pressing Pakistan to take verifiable actions against terrorism. It could also insist on updating some provisions of the treaty to reflect 21st-century realities, such as climate change impacts, glacial melt, and changing river patterns.

Conclusion: A Treaty Hanging by a Thread​

The Indus Water Treaty has long been a symbol of what is possible even in hostility. But symbols don’t survive on sentiment alone. They must be backed by consistent, good-faith action. Pakistan must recognize that support for extremist ideologies and harboring terrorism cannot coexist with peace agreements. India, meanwhile, must carefully weigh its response, keeping humanitarian impact in mind, while asserting its right to security and justice.


In the end, water is life — and using it as a weapon, either directly or indirectly, serves no one. The time has come not just to revisit the treaty but to reimagine the India–Pakistan relationship in a way that values lives over ideologies, and peace over provocation.

 

[Priyani Gupta]

India and Pakistan have had their complexities and still does to this day. There was a time when both the countries belonged to the same motherland but since 1947 it's been two of everything.
But, there's one things which has made a connecting thread between the two countries and it's the Indus river.

The Indus Water Treaty, signed on September 19, 1960, was a landmark agreement between India and Pakistan that regulates the use of the Indus River system's waters. Brokered by the World Bank, this treaty has been a cornerstone of water-sharing between the two nations, despite periods of tension and conflict.

A little background, The Indus River originates in Tibet and flows through India and Pakistan before emptying into the Arabian Sea. After the partition of India in 1947, disputes arose over the sharing of waters between the two countries. The treaty was negotiated over nine years, finally coming into effect on April 1, 1960.

Key Provisions:-

1)Water Allocation-The treaty allocates the waters of the three eastern rivers (Ravi, Beas, and Sutlej) to India and the three western rivers (Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab) to Pakistan. India receives 20% of the total water carried by the rivers, while Pakistan receives 80%.

2)Permitted Uses-India is allowed to use the waters of the western rivers for limited irrigation purposes and non-consumptive uses like hydroelectric power generation.

3)Permanent Indus Commission-A permanent commission was established to resolve disputes and ensure compliance with the treaty.

The Challenges and Disputes:-

Despite its success, the treaty has faced challenges and disputes over the years. Pakistan has raised concerns about India's construction of dams on the western rivers, which it claims could affect the water flow. India, on the other hand, asserts its right to use the waters for hydroelectric power generation and irrigation.

Let's talk about some recent developments about the thing, In April 2025, India suspended the treaty, citing national security concerns and Pakistan's alleged support for terrorism. This move has raised concerns about the treaty's future and the potential for water conflicts between the two nations.

The Indus Water Treaty has been a vital instrument in maintaining peace and cooperation between India and Pakistan, despite their complex and often contentious relationship. Its success has been hailed as a model for other transboundary water-sharing agreements worldwide.

But due to the recent activities by Pakistan at Pahalgam, India doesn't have any other way but to not continue with the treaty. Considering the heinous and terrifying deaths of Indians based on their religion, not continuing with the treaty is just not enough. Peace talks only work when both the parties follow through it.

To ensure the treaty's continued relevance, both countries must work together and Pakistan should really consider the things it has been a mother to like terrorism and hatred towards a religion different than theirs. Regular dialogue and cooperation through the Permanent Indus Commission can help resolve disputes but following through the decisions is what will make the really difference.

Thank you for this thought-provoking and detailed article on the Indus Water Treaty. Your writing captures both the historical essence and the modern-day dilemmas surrounding this pivotal agreement between India and Pakistan. It’s essential to appreciate your effort in not just revisiting history, but also courageously contextualizing it in light of recent events. However, let’s approach this issue with a practical lens that balances logic, realism, and the harsh truths both countries must acknowledge.


First, one must commend the treaty’s longevity. Over six decades of sustained cooperation, especially between two nations with a fraught relationship, is nothing short of remarkable. The Indus Water Treaty has been a blueprint for resolving transboundary water disputes peacefully, and to its credit, has weathered multiple wars and hostilities. It's easy to overlook this when recent developments stir emotions, but stepping back shows the value it has provided—both diplomatically and practically.


That said, your article rightfully highlights the contradiction: how can such a treaty survive when one party feels betrayed, not just diplomatically but on humanitarian grounds? If terrorism continues to claim innocent lives and violates the very spirit of coexistence, the value of such treaties comes under serious ethical scrutiny. It is not only logical but necessary to question whether an agreement—no matter how historically revered—should still stand if one party consistently undermines the peace it was designed to support.


Still, here’s where we must remain practical. The suspension of the treaty, though emotionally and politically justified from India's viewpoint, poses severe risks—not just to Pakistan, which is heavily dependent on the western rivers, but also to regional stability. Water, especially in a climate-stressed subcontinent, is a non-renewable diplomatic currency. Once weaponized, it could ignite a different kind of conflict—one driven by thirst and agriculture collapse rather than ideology. Would we want to be responsible for setting that precedent?


Moreover, the Permanent Indus Commission, while bureaucratic, is the only structured dialogue platform both nations continue to honor. Instead of discarding the treaty, what if India used this platform more assertively to enforce compliance—not just on water usage, but indirectly pressing for behavioral change on broader geopolitical concerns like terrorism?


The real challenge isn’t the treaty itself—it’s the inability of both countries to act on the outcomes of dialogue. Agreements are only as effective as their enforcement. Perhaps, the treaty needs to evolve, not end. Stronger clauses, accountability measures, and international scrutiny might restore faith in its relevance.


Your article’s bold tone—linking Pakistan’s internal failings to its treaty rights—will spark debate, and that’s valuable. Yet, we must be careful not to fall into the trap of reactive policymaking. Emotionally satisfying decisions can often lead to regrettable strategic consequences.


Let this article be not just a call for suspension but a call for reinvention—of how we use peace tools to confront nations that misuse peace as a cover.


#IndusWaterTreaty #IndiaPakistanRelations #WaterDiplomacy #TerrorismAndTreaties #PeaceVsPracticality #Geopolitics #SouthAsiaPolicy #HydroPolitics

 

[Dhruv Bindhani]

The provided article offers a clear and concise overview of the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), a landmark agreement that has remarkably served as a "connecting thread" between India and Pakistan despite their tumultuous relationship. The writer adeptly presents the treaty's historical context, key provisions, and the challenges it has faced, culminating in a critical reflection on its recent suspension in April 2025. The piece effectively conveys the treaty's significance as both a model for water-sharing and a barometer of bilateral relations.

A Beacon of Cooperation Amidst Conflict​

The article effectively establishes the IWT's foundational importance by highlighting the shared origins of India and Pakistan from the "same motherland" and the subsequent "two of everything" dynamic. It then introduces the Indus River as the singular "connecting thread," setting a poignant tone. The background on the river's origins and the post-partition water disputes provides essential context for appreciating the monumental achievement of the treaty's negotiation and signing in 1960, facilitated by the World Bank. The treaty's longevity—sustaining through "periods of tension and conflict" for over six decades—is rightly celebrated as a testament to its robust framework.

Treaty Mechanics: Allocation and Oversight​

The clear exposition of the Key Provisions is a strength of the article. The allocation of the eastern rivers (Ravi, Beas, Sutlej) to India and the western rivers (Indus, Jhelum, Chenab) to Pakistan, along with the 20% to 80% water share, is presented in an easily understandable manner. The clarification of India's "Permitted Uses" on western rivers, primarily for non-consumptive purposes like hydroelectric power, is crucial for grasping the treaty's delicate balance. The establishment of the Permanent Indus Commission as a mechanism for dispute resolution and compliance monitoring underscores the foresight built into the agreement, anticipating and providing channels for addressing future disagreements.

Challenges and the Breaking Point: Pahalgam's Shadow​

Despite its historical success, the article acknowledges the inherent Challenges and Disputes. Pakistan's concerns regarding India's dam construction on western rivers and India's assertion of its rights to use these waters for power generation highlight the ongoing technical and interpretative complexities of the treaty.

However, the most critical "recent development" discussed is the suspension of the treaty by India in April 2025, directly linking it to "national security concerns and Pakistan's alleged support for terrorism," specifically in the wake of the "heinous and terrifying deaths of Indians based on their religion" at Pahalgam. This direct linkage powerfully conveys the severity of India's response and the profound impact of non-water-related geopolitical events on the treaty's stability. The writer's assertion that "not continuing with the treaty is just not enough" given Pakistan's actions, and the observation that "Peace talks only work when both the parties follow through it," underscore a palpable frustration with Pakistan's perceived lack of commitment to counter-terrorism.

A Future Precariously Balanced​

The conclusion effectively reiterates the IWT's historical role as a "vital instrument in maintaining peace and cooperation" and its recognition as a "model for other transboundary water-sharing agreements." However, this commendation is immediately tempered by the grim reality of the recent suspension. The call for both countries to "work together" and for Pakistan to "really consider the things it has been a mother to like terrorism and hatred towards a religion different than theirs" is a direct and forceful appeal for a fundamental shift in Pakistan's approach. The final emphasis on "following through the decisions" as the true differentiator for successful dialogue through the Permanent Indus Commission highlights that the treaty's continued relevance hinges not just on its framework, but on political will and genuine adherence to peace.

In essence, the article masterfully presents the Indus Waters Treaty as a paradox: a beacon of stability in a volatile relationship, now under severe strain due to factors external to water management. It's a poignant reflection on how geopolitical tensions and trust deficits can erode even the most resilient of agreements, leaving the future of a vital "connecting thread" uncertain.