Document

INDUS WATER TREATY
1. Context

The 1960 Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) gives India unrestricted rights over the three eastern rivers — Ravi, Beas, and Sutlej. While Pakistan was given exclusive control over the three western rivers — Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab, India retained limited rights to use the waters for “non-consumptive” purposes. However, following the terror attack in Pahalgam on April 22, India announced the IWT would be held in abeyance with “immediate effect”.

Various Projects to be Inspected Under IWT:

Pakal Dul and Lower Kalnai: Pakal Dul Hydro Electric Project built on river Marusudar, a tributary of the Chenab. Lower Kalnai is developed on the Chenab.
Kishanganga Hydroelectric Project: It is a run-of-the-river project located in J&K.
Pakistan objected to the project arguing that it would affect the flow of the Kishanganga River (called the Neelum River in Pakistan).
In 2013, The Hague’s Permanent Court of Arbitration (CoA) ruled that India could divert all the water with certain conditions.
Ratle Hydroelectric Project: It is a run-of-the-river hydroelectric power station on the Chenab River, in J&K.

2. Is unilateral suspension permissible?

The Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) cannot be modified or terminated by one country alone. Article XII explicitly states that the agreement may only be ended through a "duly ratified treaty" mutually accepted by both India and Pakistan.
India’s reference to placing the treaty “in abeyance” in its communication with Pakistan lacks legal grounding, as international law and the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT), 1969—which serves as the foundational framework for international agreements—do not recognize this term.
Under Article 62 of the VCLT, a treaty may be withdrawn from if there has been a “fundamental change of circumstances” compared to when it was first signed.
Although India is not a signatory and Pakistan has signed but not ratified the VCLT, the International Court of Justice (ICJ), in its ruling on the Fisheries Jurisdiction cases, recognized Article 62 as part of customary international law—making it applicable even without formal ratification.
India appears to be appealing to this legal doctrine in its letter, which emphasized that a “fundamental change in circumstances” warrants a reassessment of its commitments under the IWT.
For instance, in the 1997 Gabcíkovo-Nagymaros case involving Hungary and Slovakia’s dam project, Hungary claimed that evolving political and economic conditions, along with potential environmental risks, justified ending the treaty.
The ICJ dismissed these claims, asserting that the cited changes were not directly tied to the treaty’s central goal of cooperative energy generation

3.How will this have effect on Pakistan?

Over 80% of Pakistan’s agricultural activities and nearly one-third of its hydropower production rely on the Indus basin's water resources.
Despite this heavy dependence, analysts point out that India does not have the extensive water storage facilities or a widespread canal network necessary to retain the vast volumes—tens of billions of cubic metres—of water from the western rivers.
India’s existing infrastructure primarily comprises run-of-the-river hydropower projects, which are not designed for significant water storage.
Nevertheless, the primary concern lies in the unpredictability of water flows, which poses a serious threat to Pakistan’s largely agriculture-based economy

4. Applications moved by Pakistan and India earlier

The World Bank, the third party to the Treaty and the acknowledged arbiter of disputes were, meanwhile faced with a unique situation of having received two separate requests for the same dispute.
New Delhi feels that the World Bank is just a facilitator and has a limited role.
On December 12, 2016, the World Bank announced a "pause" in the separate processes initiated by India and Pakistan under the Indus Waters Treaty to allow the two countries to consider alternative ways to resolve their disagreements.
The regular meetings of Indus Waters Commissioners resumed in 2017 and India tried to use these to find mutually agreeable solutions between 2017 and 2022.
Pakistan refused to discuss these issues at these meetings.
At Pakistan's continued insistence, the World Bank, in March last year, initiated actions on the requests of both India and Pakistan.

On March 31, 2022, the World Bank decided to resume the process of appointing a Neutral Expert and a Chairman for the Court of Arbitration.
In October last year, the Bank named Michel Lino as the Neutral Expert and Prof. Sean Murphy as Chairman of the Court of Arbitration.

They will carry out their duties in their capacity as subject matter experts and independently of any other appointments they may currently hold.
On October 19, 2022, the Ministry of External Affairs said, " We have noted the World Bank's announcement to concurrently appoint a Neutral Expert and a Chair of the Court of Arbitration in the ongoing matter related to the Kishanganga and Ratle projects".
Recognising the World Bank's admission in its announcement that "carrying out two processes concurrently poses practical and legal challenges".
India would assess the matter that "India believes that the implementation of the Indus Water Treaty must be in the letter and spirit of the Treaty".
Such parallel consideration of the same issues is not provided for in any provisions of the Treaty and India has been repeatedly citing the possibility of the two processes delivering contradictory rulings, which could lead to an unprecedented and legally untenable situation, which is unforeseen in Treaty provisions.

5. Dispute redressal mechanism

The dispute redressal mechanism provided under Article IX of the IWT is graded.
It's a 3-level mechanism.
So, whenever India plans to start a project, under the Indus Water Treaty, it has to inform Pakistan that it is planning to build a project.
Pakistan might oppose it and ask for more details. That would mean there is a question and in case there is a question, that question has to be clarified between the two sides at the level of the Indus Commissioners.
If that difference is not resolved by them, then the level is raised. The question then becomes a difference.
That difference is to be resolved by another set mechanism, which is the Natural Expert.
It is at this stage that the World Bank comes into the picture.
In case the Neutral Expert says that they are not able to resolve the difference or that the issue needs an interpretation of the Treaty, then that difference becomes a dispute.
It then goes to the third stage the Court of Arbitration.
To Sum up, it's a very graded and sequential mechanism first Commissioner, then the Neutral Expert and only then the Court of Arbitration.

6. India's notice and its implications

While the immediate provocation for the modification is to address the issue of two parallel mechanisms, at this point, the implications of India's notice for modifying the treaty are not very clear.
Article XII (3) of the Treaty that India has invoked is not a dispute redressal mechanism.
It is in effect, a provision to amend the Treaty.
However, an amendment or modification can happen only through a "duly ratified Treaty concluded for that purpose between the two governments".
Pakistan is under no obligation to agree to India's proposal.
As of now, it is not clear what happens if Pakistan does not respond to India's notice within 90 days.

The next provision in the Treaty, Article XII (4), provides for the termination of the Treaty through a similar process " a duly ratified Treaty concluded for that the purpose between the two governments".

India has not spelt out exactly what it wants to be modified in the Treaty.
But over the last few years, especially since the Uri attack, there has been a growing demand in India to use the Indus Waters Treaty as a strategic tool, considering that India has the natural advantage of being the upper riparian state.
India has not fully utilized its rights over the waters of the three east-flowing rivers Ravi, Beas and Sutlej over which India has full control under the Treaty.
It has also not adequately utilized the limited rights over the three west-flowing rivers Indus, Chenab and Jhelum which are meant for Pakistan.
Following the Uri attack, India established a high-level task force to exploit the full potential of the Indus Waters Treaty.
Accordingly, India has been working to start several big and small hydroelectric projects that had either been stalled or were in the planning stages.

7. Indus river System

A river system consists of a river and all its tributaries. The Indus River system is made up of six rivers: Indus, Jhelum, Chenab, Ravi, Beas, and Sutlej. Among these, the Indus and Sutlej are antecedent rivers, meaning they existed before the formation of the Himalayas and carved deep gorges as they flowed from the Tibet region. The remaining four rivers—Jhelum, Chenab, Ravi, and Beas—originate in India.
The Indus Basin stretches across four countries: China, India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. In India, it covers the Union Territories of Ladakh and Jammu and Kashmir, as well as Chandigarh, and the states of Himachal Pradesh, Punjab, Haryana, and Rajasthan. The total drainage area of the basin is about 3,21,289 square kilometers, representing roughly 9.8% of India’s total geographical area.

Western rivers

The Indus River originates from the trans-Himalayan range near Mansarovar Lake in Tibet, known as Singi Khamban or the Lion’s Mouth. Flowing west, it enters India at Demchok in Ladakh.
Within India, the river runs for about 1,114 kilometers, flowing between the Ladakh and Karakoram ranges. Its main right bank tributaries include the Shyok (originating from Rimo Glacier), Shigar, and Gilgit, while the Zaskar and Hanle rivers are its left bank tributaries. The Indus River travels a total of 2,880 kilometers, eventually emptying into the Arabian Sea near Karachi, Pakistan. The Indus River Dolphin, listed as endangered by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), primarily inhabits the Indus.
The Jhelum River (252 km) begins at Verinag near the Pir Panjal in India, flowing through Wular Lake in Srinagar before entering Pakistan, where it merges with the Chenab near Jhang. The Chenab River, the Indus’s largest tributary, is 1,180 km long within India and originates from the confluence of the Chandra and Bhaga rivers at Tandi in Keylong, Himachal Pradesh.

Eastern river

The Ravi River (95 km) starts from the Kullu Hills near Rohtang Pass in Himachal Pradesh and joins the Chenab at Sarai Sidhu in Pakistan. The Beas River (354 km) originates from Beas Kund, located at 4,000 meters above sea level near Rohtang Pass. It flows through the Kullu Valley and joins the Sutlej near Harike in Punjab, India. The Harike Barrage, built in 1952, diverts water for the Indira Gandhi Canal system.
The Sutlej River (676 km) is another antecedent river, originating from Rakas Tal (4,555 meters above sea level) near Mansarovar in Tibet. It enters India near Ropar. India has built several important dams to harness the waters of the eastern rivers, including the Ranjit Sagar Dam on the Ravi, the Bhakra Dam on the Sutlej, and the Pong and Pandoh Dams on the Beas. These projects, including the Beas-Sutlej Link, the Madhopur-Beas Link, and the Indira Gandhi Canal Project, allow India to utilize nearly 95% of the waters of these eastern rivers.

River	Source	Joins
Jhelum	Spring at Verinag, Kashmir Valley	Chenab at Trimmu, Pakistan
Chenab	Chandra and Bhaga streams near Bara Lacha Pass	Satluj after receiving Jhelum and Ravi
Ravi	Kullu hills near Rohtang Pass	Chenab near Rangpur, Pakistan
Beas	Near Rohtang Pass	Satluj at Harike Barrage, India
Satluj	Manasarovar-Rakas Lakes, Tibet	Indus a few kilometres above Mithankot, Pakistan

Way Forward
However, India’s projects on the western rivers have been a source of dispute with Pakistan. Significant projects on the western rivers, such as the Salal Dam, the Baglihar Hydropower Project, the Pakal Dul Project, and the Kiru Project, are located on the Chenab River, while the Tulbul Project is situated on the Jhelum River in Jammu and Kashmir. These projects have been at the center of objections from Pakistan over the year

Focus on Technical Dispute Resolution: Both sides should prioritise utilising the treaty's existing framework for resolving technical disputes.
Transparency and Data Sharing: Both nations can share hydrological data to address mutual concerns.
Joint Basin Management: Climate change and population growth pose common challenges in the Indus basin, urging joint management for water conservation, flood control, and sustainable usage.
Political Commitment and Dialogue: Sustainable solutions require a commitment from both governments to prioritize dialogue and cooperation over confrontation.

Student Login