Why ending the Indus Water Treaty is easier said than done

On August 30, 2024,  India served a notice on Pakistan, seeking a review and modification under Article XII (3) of the treaty.

The April 22 terror attack in Jammu and Kashmir’s Pahalgam, which has left at least 26 people dead, has led to calls for retaliation against Pakistan, including a review of the Indus Water Treaty.

The Resistance Front, a proxy of Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba, has claimed responsibility for one of the deadliest strikes against civilians in recent years.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who cut short his visit to Saudi Arabia to return home early April 23, has said those “behind the heinous act will not be spared... their evil agenda will never succeed. Our resolve to fight terrorism is unshakeable”.

There is also talk of the need to revisit the Indus treaty, as India plans its strategy in the aftermath of the strike that targeted tourists, dealing a body blow to tourism, which is vital to J&K’s economy.

“…I am suggesting an indefinite suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty and India proceeding with river projects unilaterally in accordance with its needs,” former foreign secretary Kanwal Sibal wrote on the X platform.

It is easier said than done. Signed by the two sides in 1960 to share the water of the Indus and its tributaries, the treaty has survived wars, the ups and down of bilateral ties and is seen as one of the most enduring global water-sharing agreements.

Brokered by the World Bank, then called the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, the Indus treaty gave waters of the eastern rivers - the Ravi, Beas and Sutlej to India – and the western rivers -- the Indus, Jhelum and Chenab -- to Pakistan.

It allows India the control of the so-called eastern rivers — Ravi, Beas and Sutlej — and Pakistan the Indus, Jhelum and Chenab.

It does not permit the exit of any of the three parties involved. Even changes have to be made by consensus.

The Indus is the lifeblood of Pakistan’s agriculture, especially the Punjab and Sindh belt where the bulk of the country’s farming is done.

On August 30, 2024, India served a notice on Pakistan, seeking a review and modification under Article XII (3) of the treaty.

According to reports, India gave three reasons for seeking a review, one of them was the persistent cross-border terrorism in Jammu and Kashmir. The other concerns were the altered demographic and the need to accelerate clean energy development to meet India’s emission targets.

But the treaty can only be reviewed if all parties —India, Pakistan and the World Bank — agree.

The 2019 Pulwama attack prompted the Centre to speed up work on the long-pending Shahpurkandi Barrage on the Ravi River in Punjab’ Pathankot district, which borders Jammu and Kashmir. According to reports, the work on the dam is completed.

First proposed in 1979, the dam was revived in 2018 and work picked up after the Pulwama strike.

Some of the water used to flow to Pakistan, the lower riparian state, through the Madhopur headworks, which has stopped now. It was not much to begin with.

India’s move is not violative of the treaty but has been labelled as “water terrorism” by many in Pakistan.

The treaty gave Pakistan access to 135 million acre feet annually and India 33 million acre feet, which amounts to over 80 percent of water share to Pakistan. The treaty permits India the right to generate hydroelectricity through run -of-the river projects .

The Shahpurkandi dam is projected to supply 1,150 cusecs of water to irrigate 32,173 hectares in the Kandi belt of the Kathua-Samba corridor of J&K.

The dam has two hydel projects with an installed capacity of 260 MW. J&K will get a 20 percent share of the power and Punjab the remaining 80 percent and also water to irrigate 5,000 hectares.

Annual meetings of the Indus Water Treaty Commission have become irregular in the aftermath of the Uri attack in 2016 and Pulwama in 2019.