India has issued a notice to Pakistan under the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), alleging a breach of the Treaty’s dispute resolution mechanisms. India has called for modifications to the Treaty’s annexures and for negotiations on the issue, marking the first such request since its inception.

Dr. Ashok K. Behuria commenced the session by highlighting that MP-IDSA has undertaken several studies to explore how the Treaty has functioned since its inception and the likelihood of its survival. He emphasised the need to harness the waters of the eastern rivers and noted that the 3.6 million acre feet (MAF) allowance on the western rivers remains highly underutilised. Dr. Behuria explained the graded dispute resolution mechanism under Article IX of the Treaty. He also discussed Pakistan’s objections to the Kishenganga and Ratle hydroelectric power projects being constructed by India. He added that India has sent a notice of modification to Pakistan under Article XII (3) of the Treaty, seeking a response within 90 days. He stated that transboundary rivers should be seen as connectors, not disruptors, in bilateral relations.

With these remarks, Dr. Behuria invited Dr. Sinha to make his observations. At the outset, Dr. Sinha stated that fear, angst, manipulation and misinformation often govern the behaviour of the states on hydrological issues. He opined that as India expands its water resources footprint in the UT of Jammu and Kashmir and the Administration of UT of Ladakh, Pakistan’s captiousness will only increase. He then observed that water is an emotive issue in Pakistan’s domestic political discourse.

Dr. Sinha pointed out that to understand the present circumstances, it is pertinent to consider the history of negotiations, as well as the physiography and hydrology of the basin. He cautioned against accepting the notion of India’s over-generosity in negotiating the Treaty and emphasised that the IWT is an arrangement to divide the basin rather than a water-sharing agreement. Drawing from his book Indus Basin Uninterrupted (Penguin Random House, 2021), he interestingly observed the critical role of the engineers during the Partition in the division of the canals and the allocation of the headworks to India.

In the next part of his presentation, Dr. Sinha displayed maps of the rivers to depict their flow across political boundaries. He discussed the dual context of rivers – their interlinkage with politics, society, environment, and the economy, as well as their importance in the hydropolitical security complex. Dr. Sinha observed that the basin remained unified prior to the Partition, which created a new geography. While India emphasised its geographical status as an upper-riparian state, Pakistan focused on historical usage of water, such as canal irrigation.

Through maps, the speaker showed that the Indus Basin has a drainage area of 11,65,000 square kilometres, with India accounting for 27 per cent and Pakistan for 65 per cent of the total drainage area. He opined that rivers are a technical issue and political insinuations must be avoided, and underlined that the IWT negotiations prioritised technical and engineering solutions. The speaker pointed out that the Treaty emphasises the utilisation of waters and not their control. The negotiations eventually underscored ‘water rationality’ and India effectively defended its rights on the eastern rivers. The Treaty was designed to facilitate effective water cooperation through “checks and balances”. In addition, he noted that the IWT negotiations effectively addressed not only the Punjab region, but also the Jammu and Kashmir region. Dr. Sinha discussed that the difficult terrain of the western rivers makes it challenging to achieve the target of 3.6 MAF of storage capacity. He argued that Chenab carries the potential to fulfil its storage needs.

Through various data sets, Dr. Sinha displayed the status of the irrigated areas and the hydroelectric projects under operation and construction. He added that, through the modification process, India will also communicate the issues in developing these projects.  He opined that the Court of Arbitration will recognise India’s objections to the breach of the Treaty’s dispute resolution mechanisms. He added that Pakistan, through its move to the arbitration court, aims to set a legal precedent for all future projects. In his conclusion, Dr. Sinha advocated for a technical resolution to the issues through a neutral expert.

Dr. Behuria discussed the potential outcomes if Pakistan chooses not to respond to India’s notice. Additionally, he drew attention to responses from the popular media in Pakistan as well as the role of its domestic political turmoil.

Maj. Gen. (Dr.) Bipin Bakshi (Retd.) emphasised that despite India’s relatively small catchment area, it contributes nearly 50 per cent of the total flow due to glacial melt. He also underlined the importance of distinguishing between captive dams and run-of-the-river projects.

Mr. S.C. Saxena, Member, MP-IDSA made a query on the history of bilateral negotiations between India and Pakistan. He discussed the importance of technology in harnessing river potential.

Dr. Nihar R. Nayak discussed the geological structure of the basin and inquired about the consequences of the suspension of the Treaty.

Col. Manish Rana raised a query on the factors that compelled India and Pakistan to sign the Treaty and how India’s actions can impact its lower-riparian status in the east.

Col. (Dr.) DPK Pillay (Retd.) underscored the importance of harnessing rivers and the success of the Ganga canal in irrigation.

Capt. Anurag Bisen (IN) highlighted the incompetence of the World Bank in several bilateral arrangements globally. He raised the possibility of abrogating the current Treaty and setting up a new Treaty on India’s terms.

Dr. Priyanka Singh raised questions about the neutrality of the World Bank and its decision to allow two parallel dispute resolution mechanisms.

Dr. Anand Kumar discussed the financial costs of the IWT negotiations and the strategic available options for India unilaterally.

Mr. Rohith Sai Stambamkadi raised a query on the strategic implications of dams.

Commodore (Dr.) Mani Singh Mamik (Retd.), through the online chat function, inquired about the loss of agricultural and fertile land after the Partition.

In his response, Dr. Sinha highlighted that unilateral abrogation will not significantly reduce the availability of water in Pakistan. In addition, it will risk India’s international image and goodwill in the neighbourhood, and will cast doubts on its status as a responsible actor. He added that India should focus on developing the water infrastructure capacities allowed under the Treaty and clearly suggested optimising the Treaty. He added that India’s strategic approach to water issues is highly unique, as it is both a responsible upper-riparian and a concerned lower-riparian. He further noted that India’s cross-border water dependence is significantly high and reiterated the need to build water storage capacity.

The discussion ended with a Vote of Thanks by Dr. Ashok K. Behuria.

The report has been prepared by Ms. Richa Kumaria, Intern, Non- Traditional Security Centre, MP-IDSA.