Following a deadly terror attack in Pahalgam, India, which claimed 26 lives, the already fragile relationship between India and Pakistan has reached a critical point. India’s response to the attack, which it attributes to Pakistan-backed militants, has included the suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), a move that could have far-reaching consequences.
India’s Response: A Multi-Pronged Approach
In the aftermath of the Pahalgam attack, India has taken a series of decisive actions:
- IWT Suspension: India has suspended the IWT, a water-sharing agreement that has been a cornerstone of relations between the two countries for over six decades. This action has been met with strong condemnation from Pakistan, which views any attempt to disrupt water flow as an act of aggression.
- Diplomatic Downgrade: India has reduced its diplomatic presence in Pakistan and expelled Pakistani diplomats, a move mirrored by Pakistan.
- Trade and Airspace Restrictions: All trade with Pakistan has been halted, and Indian airspace has been closed to Pakistani aircraft.
- Visa Restrictions: India initially imposed a deadline for Pakistani nationals to leave the country, later extending it for those with medical visas.
Pakistan’s Response and International Concerns
Pakistan has denied any involvement in the Pahalgam attack and has criticized India’s response. Key developments include:
- Water Diversion Warning: Pakistan has warned that any interference with its allocated water supply under the IWT would be considered an act of war.
- Potential Legal Action: Pakistan is exploring legal options, potentially involving international bodies like the World Bank, the International Court of Justice, or the UN Security Council.
- Increased Military Activity: Reports suggest heightened military activity along the Line of Control (LoC), with exchanges of fire and troop movements.
The international community has expressed concern over the escalating tensions and has urged both nations to exercise restraint and engage in dialogue.
Pakistan is gearing up to challenge India’s suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT)
Pakistan is gearing up to challenge India’s suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) through various international legal avenues. However, several factors suggest that Pakistan’s legal battle may face significant hurdles:
1. Jurisdictional Limitations of International Courts:
- International Court of Justice (ICJ): The ICJ’s jurisdiction is based on the consent of states. A key exclusion in its jurisdiction is for “disputes with the government of any State which is or has been a Member of the Commonwealth of Nations.” As both India and Pakistan are Commonwealth members, the ICJ may not have jurisdiction in this matter. Additionally, the ICJ typically avoids cases related to hostilities, armed conflicts, or national security, which could be argued as the underlying context of the current situation.
- Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA): Similar to the ICJ, the PCA’s jurisdiction relies on the mutual consent of the parties involved. If India does not agree to submit to arbitration, the PCA may not have the authority to adjudicate the dispute.
2. Limited Role of the World Bank:
- While the World Bank played a crucial role in brokering the IWT in 1960, it does not act as a guarantor or have enforcement powers over the treaty. Its role is primarily that of a mediator and facilitator for dispute resolution mechanisms like appointing neutral experts or chairs for arbitration. The Bank’s recommendations are non-binding.
3. India’s Justification and Treaty Interpretation:
- India argues that the suspension of the IWT is a justified response to Pakistan’s alleged support for cross-border terrorism, viewing it as a matter of national security. While the treaty doesn’t explicitly allow for unilateral suspension, India may argue that the prevailing circumstances constitute a material breach of the treaty’s spirit of goodwill and cooperation.
- Legal interpretations of the IWT could also play a significant role. India might argue that its actions fall within the permissible limits of the treaty, especially concerning non-consumptive uses of the western rivers.
4. Practical Constraints on Water Flow:
- Experts suggest that India cannot immediately halt the flow of water to Pakistan on a large scale due to the existing infrastructure. The treaty allows India to build run-of-the-river hydroelectric projects without significant storage capacity on the western rivers allocated to Pakistan. Building the infrastructure needed to significantly disrupt water flow would take considerable time and investment.
5. Potential for Bilateral Resolution:
- The IWT itself emphasizes the role of the Permanent Indus Commission (PIC) as the primary mechanism for resolving disputes. While the current tensions have disrupted the PIC meetings, there remains a possibility that international pressure or the long-term mutual interest in water sharing could push both sides back to bilateral discussions.
While Pakistan may pursue legal challenges, the jurisdictional limitations of international courts, the World Bank’s limited role, India’s stated justification, and the practical realities of water flow make it an uphill battle.
Potential Consequences and Future Outlook
The current situation carries significant risks:
- Water Scarcity: The suspension of the IWT raises serious concerns about water scarcity in Pakistan, which is heavily reliant on the Indus River system for agriculture.
- Economic Impact: Further escalation could have severe economic consequences for both countries.
- Military Conflict: The heightened tensions and increased military activity raise the risk of armed conflict between the two nuclear-armed neighbors.
The coming days and weeks will be crucial in determining whether the situation can be de-escalated through diplomacy or whether the region is headed towards further conflict.
