A day after the Pahalgam massacre, India announced a raft of punitive measures against Pakistan, including putting the Indus Waters treaty (IWT) “in abeyance”. This decision didn’t come all of a sudden. In 2016, Prime Minister Narendra Modi said “blood and water can’t flow together at the same time” in a meeting with water ministry officials on the Indus Waters treaty.
Nine years later, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-led union government finally moved to suspend the Treaty—though whether New Delhi can legally revoke it or successfully divert the waters remains uncertain and subject to future developments.
In Kashmir, the decision felt like déjà vu for many who have long questioned the treaty, which has been consistently viewed unfavorably by people.
This wasn’t the first time India considered scrapping the water-sharing arrangement; tensions over river water distribution have existed since the partition of the subcontinent.
IWT, a brief background
As per IWT which was brokered by the World Bank in September 1960, three Eastern rivers -- Ravi, Sutlej, and Beas -- are allocated to India for unrestricted use, subject to restrictions specified in the Treaty, while three Western rivers --- Jhelum, Chenab, and Indus --- are allocated to Pakistan for unrestricted use, save for restrictions outlined in IWT. All the three Western rivers flow through Jammu and Kashmir—thus making the region central to the Treaty.
For decades, the political leaders in Kashmir argued that IWT restricted the ability of river-rich J&K to harness its huge hydel power potential primarily due to storage constraints.
The fact is despite having enough water resources, the region is unable to fully utilize it for irrigation, storage, or hydropower development, leading to long-standing resentment among its people and leadership.
In November 2024, nearly a month after being sworn in as the Chief Minister of Jammu and Kashmir, Omar Abdullah launched a sharp critique of the six-decade-old treaty saying that it has created hurdles in power generation in the region. The CM called it “the most unfair document” for the people of the union territory.
The Valley has been a flashpoint between the two-nuclear armed countries, while the people have welcomed any deal between New Delhi and Islamabad aimed at securing peace, this is the only treaty that was opposed—and for obvious reasons.
J&K’s power cuts
Kashmir is grappling with an acute electricity shortage. Whether in the freezing winters or scorching summers, residents have endured frequent and unscheduled power cuts.
As per officials, J&K has the potential to generate around 20,000 megawatts of hydel power but generates only around 1200 megawatts. It may be noted that the UT presently has 20 hydroelectric projects with an installed capacity of 758.70MW located in various districts.
Several hydroelectric projects in J&K are controlled by the National Hydroelectric Power Corporation (NHPC), which supplies electricity to other states while providing little to no share to J&K itself.
Every year, the J&K government has to purchase electricity from the Northern Grid worth crores of rupees. The Kashmir Power Distribution Corporation Limited (KPDCL) which is responsible for managing and distributing the power supply in the region is running in losses.
Even if the J&K government wanted to generate more hydroelectric power with new projects, the IWT poses significant obstacles to power generation as it restricts India from holding the water and constructing the large reservoir dams on the western rivers.
Economic downside of not being exploit irrigation potential
Apart from choking J&K’s potential for energy self-sufficiency, the treaty has also hampered the economic development. As per a report, the J&K has suffered an estimated Rs 6,500 crore annually due to the Treaty. The report further revealed that the Treaty has badly hit the agricultural potential of J&K.
Notably, around 42% of agricultural land in Kashmir has irrigation facilities, while the remaining 58% of agricultural land relies on rainfall for irrigation. There is not a single year that goes without drought. Agriculture is the main economy of the region, while over 40% of J&K’s population is dependent on horticulture. Farmers have to face a lot of difficulties in the absence of a proper irrigation system. Experts say, the government could easily store the water and then use it for irrigation purposes had there been no Treaty.
While the J&K is allowed to use only limited waters from the Chenab and Jhelum for power generation and lift irrigation, it cannot build reservoirs or dams on these rivers without Pakistan’s prior approval, nor can it construct barrages for irrigation.
Back in 2002 the J&K legislative assembly passed a resolution to seek the termination of this treaty. National Conference leader Nazir Gurezi once called the treaty an agreement of “slavery” for Kashmiris.
India’s lower riparian states benefit at the expense of J&K
A political analyst based in Kashmir argues that J&K had to sacrifice its waters for other states so that India can have exclusive rights on Eastern rivers.
“Technically, the J&K leaders at that time should have demanded compensation for surrendering its waters for the sake of Punjab and Haryana. Since this was the international treaty, it was the responsibility of New Delhi to take care of J&K,” he said, wishing not to be named.
He further said that when the Treaty was signed there were no inputs from the leaders of Kashmir—neither were they taken on the board.
As the IWT is back in the news due to the Pahalgam terror attack, the people of the Valley are expecting a re-examination of the treaty so that they don't feel left out and will take the benefits of its own waters.
(Aquib Javeed is a Srinagar-based journalist and tweets @AquibJaveed.)
Views are personal and do not represent the stand of this publication.
Discover the latest Business News, Sensex, and Nifty updates. Obtain Personal Finance insights, tax queries, and expert opinions on Moneycontrol or download the Moneycontrol App to stay updated!
