Indus Water Treaty: A simple overview of Pakistan’s diplomatic, legal response

ISLAMABAD, (APP - UrduPoint / Pakistan Point News - 2nd May, 2026) Despite facing serious challenges to the Indus Water Treaty (IWT) arising from the policies and ideology of Modi’s Hindutva-driven government, Pakistan adopted a calm, careful and international law-based approach.

Pakistan’s strategy emphasized patience, legal recourse, and proactive diplomacy, which not only helped protect its rights as a lower riparian state but also strengthened its image as a responsible member of the international community.

The situation became aggravate and tense when India unilaterally decided to put the Indus Waters Treaty on hold in violation of international laws which raised serious concerns because the treaty does not allow either country to suspend it on its own.

In international law, agreements between countries must be respected—a principle known as Pacta sunt servanda (agreements must be kept). India’s move created uncertainty and raised questions about whether international agreements can be ignored so easily.

Former Chairman Council of Research in Water Resources (PCRWR) and renowned water expert Dr Muhammad Aslam Tahir was of the views that Pakistan always acted as responsible state and India under the influence of Modi’s Handutva ideology resorted to violate all international laws and norms.

He went on to say that instead of reacting emotionally, Pakistan chose to follow legal course of action by approaching institutions already built into the treaty system, including the Court of Arbitration and Neutral Experts. “These are official mechanisms designed to resolve disputes peacefully.

By using them, Pakistan showed that it believes in resolving conflicts through law rather than confrontation,” he remarked.

It is worth mentioning here that one of the biggest developments came when the Court of Arbitration confirmed that the IWT is still valid, regardless of India’s position.

This was visible victory for Pakistan. The decision made it clear that no country can ignore a treaty on its own and that refusing to participate does not remove legal responsibility.

This ruling further strengthened Pakistan’s case and reinforced the importance of international agreements.

Dr Muhammad Aslam said that the Neutral Experts also supported the dispute resolution process, showing that the treaty still has strong and functioning mechanisms.

Pakistan’s willingness to engage with these experts demonstrated its commitment to cooperation, while India’s limited participation created a visible difference in how both countries handled the situation, he asserted.

Pakistan also raised the matter at international forums, including the United Nations, where Special Rapporteurs (Independent Experts) took interest in this grave issue and asked questions about possible treaty violations.

This helped shift the issue from a simple bilateral dispute to a broader global concern involving international law, human rights, and fair access to water.

Despite receiving formal questions from UN experts, India has not provided a detailed response, even after the deadline passed. This silence has raised concerns internationally which shows India lack of engagement with global accountability systems and weakening respect for international rules. Such behavior could set a risky example if other countries begin ignoring treaties as well.

Another Water Expert Dr Ahmad Ashraf said that water is a critical resource, especially for Pakistan. As a downstream country, it depends heavily on the rivers governed by the treaty. Any disruption could affect agriculture, energy production, and the daily lives of millions of people, he said.

He said that Pakistan has focused on protecting the treaty through legal means rather than escalating tensions.

India tried to justify its actions by linking the treaty to false flag Pahalgam incident. However, no strong evidence has been presented in international legal forums or by neutral bodies.

In international law, serious actions require solid proof, and without evidence, such claims weaken credibility and trust.

It is pertinent to mention here that beyond legal action, Pakistan also launched a strong diplomatic campaign by engaging with other countries, raising awareness in international forums, and highlighting the importance of following global rules. This helped bring global attention to the issue and build support for a fair and law-based resolution.

Over the past year, Pakistan has secured important legal support, strengthened its international image, and highlighted the risks of ignoring treaties. At the same time, it has exposed the limitations of unilateral actions and the dangers of disregarding established norms.

This experience shows that international law still matters, especially in times of uncertainty. International agreements including IWT are not just technical documents—they are built on trust and cooperation. If such agreements are weakened, the consequences could extend far beyond the countries involved and affect the global system itself.

At the same time, global institutions must ensure that rules are respected and that violations are addressed.

/395