The consequences of suspending a water treaty

• India’s Cabinet Committee on Security has decided to suspend the IWT of 1960, a water treaty signed in 1960, until Pakistan abjures its support for crossborder terrorism.

• The IWT does not have an exit clause or provision for unilateral abrogation, but Article XII (4) states that the treaty will continue in force until terminated by a duly ratified treaty.

• The suspension may also internationalize water matters between the two hostile countries, with legal options including raising the issue at the World Bank, the Permanent Court of Arbitration, the International Court of Justice in the Hague, or the UN Security Council.

• India can now stop sharing water flow data with Pakistan, flush reservoirs, and have no hydro project design or operation-related restrictions on India.

• This could intensify inter-provincial water disputes in the country, with Punjab and Sindh arguing over a plan to construct six canals.

• India requires major infrastructure projects to materialize its political decision on the IWT, but has a storage capacity of only around 1 MAF and has developed irrigation for about 0.642 million acres.

• India’s hydroelectric projects on the western rivers, such as the Kishanganga Hydroelectric Project, Ratle Dam, Salal Dam, Nimoo Bazgo, and Baglihar Dam, aim to harness the water resources of the Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab rivers to generate electricity, utilising India’s allocated share of water under the IWT.

• India’s water decisions may prompt a section of the Nepalipopulation to caution the government on water-related and other agreements with New Delhi.