Join our Whatsapp channel

       Speakers at a high-level event of Pakistan’s Mission to the United Nations on Friday stated that India’s move to unilaterally hold the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) in abeyance had raised serious doubts about the sanctity of international commitments.

       India held the IWT in abeyance following the April 22 attack in occupied Kashmir’s Pahalgam that killed 26 — an incident New Delhi blamed on Islamabad without evidence. Pakistan termed any attempt to suspend its water share an “act of war”.

       Friday’s event was jointly organised at the UN headquarters in New York by the Permanent Mission of Pakistan to the UN and the Muslim-American Leadership Alliance (Mala), according to a statement posted by the Mission on X earlier today.

       Participants of the event, which was on the theme of ‘Indus Waters Treaty and Pakistan’s Water Crisis: Challenges and the Way Forward’, termed the Indian move a “grave violation of international law, including international humanitarian law and human rights law”, the statement said.

       Attendees included diplomats, academics, policy practitioners, students, water experts and members of different organisations. Pakistan’s Ambassador to the UN Asim Iftikhar Ahmad was the keynote speaker, while others who addressed the event included Mala chairperson Maha Khan, former World Bank official Dr Masood Ahmad and lawyers.

       Pakistan’s Deputy Permanent Representative to the UN Ambassador Usman Jadoon, in his concluding remarks, warned that undermining the treaty would have “grave” humanitarian implications.

       Jadoon stressed that denial of critical data-sharing translated into “food insecurity, displacement, and heightened vulnerabilities — especially for women, children, and the poor”.

       He said the event’s discussions highlighted that the IWT, “despite current challenges, remains a binding and enduring international instrument”.

       “The Indus River system is not only Pakistan’s lifeline but also a shared heritage of humanity,” he was quoted as saying by the Mission.

       Amid the floods last month, the Foreign Office (FO) noted that India had shared flood warnings with Pakistan but the alerts were routed through diplomatic channels rather than the Indus Waters Commission, as stipulated under the IWT.

       In his keynote speech at the event, Ambassador Ahmad warned against the “weaponisation of water”, which would have serious consequences for regional peace and stability.

       Asserting that the IWT remains legally intact and recalling decisions by the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA), he noted that treating water as an instrument of political leverage is to deny people their most fundamental human right.

       In June, the PCA in The Hague issued a “Supplemental Award of Competence” in the case, stating that India cannot unilaterally hold the treaty in abeyance. In August, the court affirmed Pakistan’s right to “unrestricted use” of the western rivers.

       Earlier this month, Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif also raised the issue at the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation’s (SCO) summit in China, where his Indian counterpart Narendra Modi was also present, and called for a “structural” dialogue on all outstanding disputes.

       “These rulings leave no ambiguity — no party has the authority to unilaterally suspend or abandon this agreement. The Indus Waters Treaty is alive, and its provisions remain binding on the parties,” he highlighted.

       Ambassador Ahmad also warned that the consequences of undermining the IWT are “extremely grave in terms of human suffering”.

       “Water — especially in arid regions like ours — cannot be withheld or manipulated by the upper riparian without serious consequences for the lower riparians.”

       Underscoring that access to water was a basic right, the UN envoy said: “Water scarcity heightens vulnerabilities, particularly for women and children. The human cost of undermining the Indus Waters Treaty is therefore borne disproportionately by those least able to endure it.”

       He added that beyond the humanitarian dimension, India’s actions carried “grave implications for peace and security”, the Mission statement said.

       Dawood Ghazanavi, a Supreme Court lawyer, spoke about the humanitarian consequences of IWT violations.

       He pointed out that India’s failure to share hydrological data and key information with Pakistan “contributed to devastating displacements and mass migrations” caused by the recent floods in Punjab.

       Ghazanavi said 45 per cent of Pakistan’s livelihoods primarily depend on the Indus River, warning that water insecurity threatens both survival and stability.

       According to the Mission’s statement, Ghazanavi argued that India’s dam constructions and unilateral actions violated international conventions. Describing water deprivation as a breach of basic human rights, the lawyer called on the World Bank to reassert its role in mediation and also sought the UN’s involvement and mobilisation of civil society to demand compliance.

       ‘Far-reaching consequences’

       Maha, the Mala chairperson, highlighted that water security had been at the heart of Mala’s work, given its “profound humanitarian implications for Pakistan”. She said the water crisis was not a distant challenge but a “pressing threat to livelihoods, stability and human dignity”, according to the statement.

       “Addressing it is not only urgent, but essential to ensuring peace and sustainable development,” Maha was quoted as saying.

       Dr Ahmad, a World Bank Infrastructure Development specialist who retired in 2017, “brought forth the technical depth and engineering basis” of the IWT.

       Noting that the treaty enabled significant infrastructure development across the basin, he stressed that beyond legal and political debates, the “real challenge lies in improving water efficiency, irrigation systems, and resilience in times of crisis”.

       The infrastructure expert, the Mission statement said, urged Pakistan to strengthen its capacity to respond to future shocks, ensuring the IWT continues to function as a foundation for sustainable development.

       Among various legal experts who addressed the moot was independent consultant Kishor Uprety, who referred to the IWT as a “remarkable framework of cooperation” but cautioned that its credibility was under strain.

       Uprety criticised India for bypassing the dispute resolution mechanisms set in place, warning that IWT’s suspension or collapse would have “far-reaching consequences across Asia and even beyond”. He stressed the need for strict adherence to international legal norms to preserve the balance between regional powers and protect human rights.

       “He argued that terrorism allegations cannot be classified as material breaches that justify suspension and reminded the participants that the treaty contains no exit clause — its termination can only come through a replacement agreement,” according to the Mission.

       Legal scholar Shahmeer Halepota, a partner at Aza Law, hailed the IWT as South Asia’s “most durable example of multilateralism and cooperation” but pointed to serious flaws in its current dispute resolution system. He noted the World Bank’s “active moderating role” when mediating the treaty but lamented that its “recent silence has led to delays and inconsistent rulings”.