Pakistan Envoy Urges India to Honour Indus Waters Treaty, Warns Against Unilateral Moves
WASHINGTON, UNITED STATES — WEB DESK: Pakistan’s Ambassador to the United States Rizwan Saeed Sheikh has called on India to return to full compliance with the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), rejecting New Delhi’s arguments for placing the landmark water-sharing agreement “in abeyance” and warning that unilateral action over transboundary rivers could undermine regional peace.
Sheikh set out Pakistan’s position in an article responding to an August 1 piece by India’s Ambassador to the United States Vinay Kwatra, who had criticised the structure and operation of the treaty. Sheikh argued that the Indian account misrepresented the history, purpose and legal framework of the agreement.
The dispute centres on the future of a treaty signed more than six decades ago that governs the distribution and use of the Indus river system between the two nuclear-armed neighbours.
Pakistan Says Treaty Remains Binding
Sheikh argued that the Indus Waters Treaty remains a binding international agreement and contains no provision allowing either Pakistan or India to unilaterally suspend it, place it in abeyance or terminate it.
Under Article XII, he said, the treaty continues unless it is terminated through a duly ratified treaty concluded between the two governments.
Pakistan therefore considers India’s April 2025 decision to hold the treaty “in abeyance” incapable of changing its underlying legal status.
“The Treaty remains valid, operative and binding,” Sheikh wrote in his response, while urging India to reverse its unilateral measures.
Pakistan’s Foreign Ministry has consistently taken the same position, saying India’s unilateral move has no basis in the treaty itself and that Islamabad continues to regard the agreement as fully operative.
How the Indus Waters Treaty Divides the Rivers
The Indus Waters Treaty was signed on September 19, 1960, following negotiations facilitated by the World Bank.
Under its framework, India received unrestricted use of the three eastern rivers — the Ravi, Beas and Sutlej — while Pakistan received rights over the waters of the three western rivers — the Indus, Jhelum and Chenab — subject to specified uses permitted to India.
India is allowed certain uses of the western rivers, including run-of-river hydroelectric generation, provided projects comply with treaty requirements.
Pakistan, meanwhile, undertook major infrastructure projects to reconfigure its irrigation system following the division of the rivers.
Sheikh rejected the argument that this arrangement represented an unfair concession to Pakistan, describing it instead as the outcome of a negotiated settlement designed to provide predictable rights and obligations to both upstream and downstream states.
Hydropower Disputes Remain Central
Another major disagreement concerns Indian hydropower projects on the western rivers.
India has accused Pakistan of using treaty mechanisms to impede its hydropower development. Sheikh rejected that characterisation, saying Islamabad’s use of dispute-resolution procedures is explicitly permitted under Article IX of the treaty.
Pakistan has raised objections over technical features of some Indian projects, including issues involving pondage, spillways, outlets, intakes and operating criteria.
Islamabad argues that submitting such disagreements to neutral experts or arbitration represents implementation of the treaty rather than obstruction.
Pakistan’s government has also publicly said it does not object to India’s treaty-permitted use of the western rivers, provided projects remain within the agreed legal framework.
Water Security for Pakistan
The dispute carries major economic and strategic significance for Pakistan because the Indus basin supports much of the country’s irrigated agriculture and is closely connected with food security, livelihoods and power generation.
Sheikh said the issue directly affects the well-being of Pakistan’s population and argued that weakening the treaty would reduce the predictability provided by a rules-based system for managing shared waters.
Pakistan’s government has repeatedly characterised access to the western rivers under the treaty as a vital national interest.
Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar said at an international seminar in June that Pakistan remained committed to resolving differences through diplomacy and the mechanisms established under the treaty.
Pakistan Warns of Regional Consequences
Sheikh warned that undermining an established transboundary water arrangement could have wider consequences for peace and stability in South Asia.
He called on India to rescind its unilateral measures, resume full compliance and use the treaty’s institutional and dispute-resolution mechanisms for disagreements.
The warning reflects Pakistan’s official position rather than an independently established assessment that conflict will result from India’s policy.
The dispute has also featured in Pakistan’s recent international diplomacy. During Pakistan-UK talks in London on August 27, Dar raised developments concerning the Indus Waters Treaty and stressed Islamabad’s position that international treaty obligations must be upheld.
The core disagreement therefore remains unresolved: India maintains that circumstances justify its decision to hold the treaty in abeyance, while Pakistan insists neither country has the legal authority to suspend the agreement unilaterally.
For Islamabad, the way forward is a return to the treaty framework and its established mechanisms. For New Delhi, the dispute has become part of a broader reassessment of its relationship with Pakistan.
How the two countries manage that disagreement will be closely watched because the Indus system is not merely a diplomatic issue but a critical water resource for hundreds of millions of people across South Asia.
