ISLAMABAD: Legal experts, diplomats and international researchers have warned that India’s decision to place the 1960 Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) in abeyance could constitute a breach of international law and create serious risks for regional stability and security.
The experts voiced their concerns during a webinar titled “Violation of the Indus Waters Treaty by India”, organised by the Islamabad Policy Research Institute (IPRI).
Participants cautioned that India’s move, announced following the Pahalgam attack and accompanied by the closure of sluice gates at the Baglihar Dam on the Chenab River, amounted to the weaponisation of water and could establish a dangerous precedent for transboundary water disputes across South Asia.
According to figures presented during the webinar, the closure significantly reduced Chenab River flows entering Pakistan at the Marala measuring point, raising concerns over the livelihoods of millions of farmers in Punjab and Sindh and the potential impact on agricultural production.
International law expert Ahmer Bilal Soofi said the IWT is a standalone international agreement and contains no provision allowing either party to unilaterally suspend, place it in abeyance or withdraw from it.
He argued that India’s attempt to link the treaty to allegations of cross-border terrorism has no basis in the treaty itself. He also noted that Pakistan’s counter-terrorism compliance has been assessed by international mechanisms, including the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) and relevant United Nations Security Council mechanisms.
Soofi described India’s action as potentially inconsistent with its obligations under the treaty and international law.
Advocate Feisal Naqvi discussed Pakistan’s available legal options, observing that the existing Court of Arbitration, in its present composition, may not have a comprehensive mandate to determine the issue of abeyance.
He suggested that Pakistan obtain an authoritative advisory opinion from leading international legal experts and make it public to engage the broader international legal community. He also recommended pursuing separate adjudication on the legality of India’s move while simultaneously addressing New Delhi’s stated technical concerns, including issues related to sediment management.
Margarida Gama, a PhD researcher in International Politics and Conflict Resolution at the University of Coimbra and the Centre for Social Studies, described the closure of the Baglihar gates as a form of water weaponisation through deprivation.
Drawing on her research into hydropolitics and India’s control over Chenab flows, she characterised the development as part of a broader “continuum of water violence” and warned that it could have implications beyond the India-Pakistan dispute, particularly for other shared river basins involving Bangladesh, Nepal and Bhutan.
She also highlighted what she described as gaps in the existing international legal framework governing transboundary water resources.
In its concluding remarks, IPRI’s leadership urged Pakistan to mobilise the international community and increase the political and diplomatic costs of actions that undermine established water-sharing arrangements.
The institute stressed that the issue should be treated not only as a bilateral dispute but also as a humanitarian, environmental and regional security concern, calling for urgent international attention to uphold the sanctity of binding water treaties.
