Introduction

• Indus Waters Treaty signed in 1960 between India and Pakistan, brokered by the World Bank.
• Divides control of six rivers: India controls eastern rivers (Ravi, Beas, Sutlej), Pakistan controls western rivers (Indus, Jhelum, Chenab).
• Despite wars, the treaty has endured.
• Growing tensions have led to calls for suspension, with far-reaching implications.

a. Strain on Infrastructure and Resource Planning

• India uses less than 4% of the 33 MAF water it is entitled to from western rivers.
• To utilize more, India would need dams, reservoirs, and canal systems requiring long-term planning and capital.
• Pakistan relies on Indus Basin for 90% of agricultural needs; disruption would affect food security in Sindh and Punjab.
• Projects like Bhakra-Nangal and Ranjit Sagar depend on existing flow framework; sudden changes could paralyze irrigation in North India.
• India’s hydro projects (Kishanganga, Ratle) would face technical, legal, and environmental delays if treaty revoked.

b. Shift in Regional Dominance and Power Dynamics

• Control over water could become a strategic tool; India may leverage water as pressure.
• China, controlling Tibet-origin rivers like Brahmaputra, may follow suit, jeopardizing India’s northeast water security.
• Water conflicts historically shift power equations (e.g., Nile dispute among Ethiopia, Egypt, Sudan).
• India’s ability to reshape or stop water flow could be seen as “weaponization,” increasing clout but inviting retaliation.

c. Heightened Geopolitical Tensions and International Pressure

• Water is considered a shared humanitarian resource under international law.
• Suspension could be viewed as breach of international norms.
• Pakistan may escalate issue to international courts or UN, prompting external pressure on India.
• World Bank, as guarantor, may intervene, affecting India’s diplomatic standing.
• Terrorism, border skirmishes, or proxy conflicts may intensify, increasing South Asian instability.
• Global perception: India may face criticism from Western democracies and neighbors, impacting foreign relations.

Balanced View

• Infrastructure strain and power shifts unfold gradually.
• Geopolitical tensions would rise swiftly, drawing international attention.
• Risks regional security and invites diplomatic isolation.

Conclusion

• Suspension of IWT would impact agriculture, energy, and strategic sectors.
• Most severe consequence: rapid escalation of geopolitical tensions, bilaterally and globally.
• Far-reaching diplomatic and security implications make this the most critical risk.