By its own actions, Pakistan had forfeited the entitlement to receive hydrological data – such as vital flood forecasts and river discharge volumes – that India had regularly shared in the past for early warning and water management. Through its persistent policy of fomenting instability in the neighbourhood via proxy wars and terrorism, Pakistan has lost access to timely alerts. The absence of such information, particularly during the recent surge of the Sutlej crossing 122,000 cusecs, would have greatly aggravated the devastation.
Due to sharing of advanced data by India, Pakistan was able to anticipate or prepare for dangerous inflows, reducing evacuation lead time and exposing vulnerable communities along the Chenab, Ravi, and Sutlej to even greater risk. We all are aware that post the Pahalgam bloodshed in April 2025, India formally suspended the Indus Water Treaty, citing Pakistan’s alleged support for cross-border terrorism,and invoking changes in ground realities such as demographics and climate as a justification. India invoked the principle of rebus sic stantibus (from international customary law) under Article 62 of the Vienna Convention to defend its position of suspension under a “fundamental change of circumstances”.
Indian leaders, including External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar, and the Ministry of External Affairs, have iterated that the Treaty remains in abeyance until Pakistan “credibly and irrevocably” stops cross-border terrorism claiming legal justification under changed circumstances. Officials argue the Treaty doesn’t provide for suspension by one party alone. Pakistan has raised its concern towards any attempt to divert or block treaty-guaranteed waters. As of August 2025, Pakistan has iterated its commitment to the full implementation of the Treaty and urged India to restore its normal functioning. While we as Indians are very clear about our stance, at an international level, on 27 June 2025, the Court of Arbitration issued a “Supplemental Award on Competence,” reaffirming that it still has jurisdiction over disputes under the Treaty – even though India has suspended it.
The Court also stated that the Treaty does not allow unilateral suspension or abeyance. We have categorically rejected the Court’s authority, calling its formation and decisions illegal and void under the Treaty. On August 25, Pakistan again requested for resumption, but the Treaty remains paused. Let us have a look at the practical impacts of “Held in Abeyance” under which several key functions under the Treaty have been suspended. These include “Discontinuation of formal meetings between Indus Waters Commissioners”, “No Hydrological data to be shared with Pakistan such as flood forecasts, glacier data or even river discharge information”, “Pakistani officials cannot visit J&K to monitor projects”, “India’s position to proceed with hydro projects without sharing design details with Pakistan” and lastly discontinuation of publication of the Treaty’s usual annual reports.
These disruptions have a direct impact and serious risks, particularly for Pakistan’s agriculture – more than 90 per cent of which relies on Indus basin water. On the other hand, recently, Pakistan’s Punjab province, particularly the eastern region, has endured the worst flooding in four decades. Over one million people have been evacuated, with more than 1,400 villages inundated, and at least 12 deaths in one week alone. In southern Sindh, more than 100,000 people were evacuated as floodwaters moved downstream, threatening further catastrophic losses. Newer figures report that over 2,000 villages were submerged, displacing over two million people, with more than 760,000 people and 516,000 livestock evacuated. At least 33 lives have been lost so far.
East Punjab alone has seen nearly 250,000 people displaced, with 1.2 million affected and 1,400 villages hit. Mr Randhir Jaiswal, spokesperson of MEA said, “We have timely shared high flood data and hydrological data through our High Commisionand through our diplomatic channels with Pakistan on humanitarian grounds, despite the Indus Waters Treaty held in abeyance. This has reduced dramatically the impact of this year’s floods across Pakistan. Without warning or data, communities would have diminished lead time for evacuation and infrastructure defense, elevating the scale of human, agricultural and economic devastation.” If the recent floods underscore the compounded consequences of the Indus Waters Treaty’s suspension, Pakistan must reflect on whether persisting with terrorism – at the cost of innocent civilian lives – serves any purpose.
The moment has come for Pakistan to look inward, end cross-border terrorism in a credible and irreversible way, and begin to act as a responsible neighbour. This juncture presents an opportunity for Pakistan to change course. It is also worth recalling that neither its proxy warfare nor its conventional military capabilities pose a challenge to India – something conclusively demonstrated during Operation Sindoor, when Pakistan was brought to its knees within 48 hours and forced to plead for a ceasefire. Pakistan is otherwise well aware that it already enjoys the most favorable terms under the existing Treaty and will likely continue stonewalling any Indian attempt at modification or renegotiation. India, on the other hand, is almost certain to insist that any renegotiation remain strictly bilateral. This prospect is deeply unsettling for Pakistan and explains why some of its experts occasionally float the idea of involving China & Afghanistan (with 8 and 6 per cent of the basin respectively) – should renegotiation ever take place.
After more than six decades, India has finally leveraged its position as the upper riparian state, having exhausted other avenues to deter Pakistan’s cross-border terrorism. By introducing a measure of uncertainty in the volume and timing of water flows, India is signaling the potential for serious logistical consequences for Pakistan – hoping this might compel Islamabad to reconsider its actions. However, India’s primary intent in keeping the Treaty in suspension is not to disrupt flows, as Pakistan fears, but rather to assert its rightful claim to fully utilize the western rivers. Unbound by strict adherence to the Treaty, India is in no rush to alter the existing stalemate; instead, it appears focused on expediting long-pending water projects in Jammu & Kashmir, irrespective of Pakistan’s objections. Keeping other options up our sleeves, we also need to have in-depth analysis of various opportunities that present itself for India.
We have to find ways to exhaust the water within India, and building dams is one option, but can we build 24 Bhakras in the desired time frame? For those who know, even the size of the Gobind Sagar reservoir is unimaginably large. Together, India’s river water projects on Jhelum, Chenab, and Indus already allow for storage between 1.2 to 3.6 MAF, and from here either we can expand the storage through more dams and checkpoints, or else, do what the Chinese have done to aid their northwestern region. We can also have a plan which may extend beyond 2035 under which “a six-canal project” (see chart), each canal 40m wide (13-15 DTC buses stacked sideways), running from Jammu region to other states including Punjab, Haryana, Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan, Chandigarh, Delhi, and even Gujarat, can be set up.
The lie of the ground doesn’t allow one to build through Himachal & Uttarakhand, but the plains are ideal. Think of them as water highways, and a canal network does exist, but the water shortages are soon going to be upon us. We have to give it ten years. Politically, the land acquisition should not be a challenge, given farmers in Punjab, Haryana, Rajasthan, and Uttar Pradesh do know that water is getting over. These canals will even help overcome flood like situations as prevailing now in J&K and Punjab. The cost is going to be more than Rs. 5 Lakh Crore, but we can spend. In the Punjab-Haryana belt, it solves a political problem, since abundant water will be available, and once it gets to Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh, it can go anywhere. Delhi also needs water with its expanding outer areas and population density. “Win Win For All”.
(The writer is a retired Major General of the Indian Army.)