The Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) of 1960, brokered by the World Bank, stands as a monumental achievement in the history of water diplomacy. It represents a remarkable and rare, enduring pact of cooperation between India and Pakistan—two countries often at odds. Its preamble captures this spirit, "The Government of India and the Government of Pakistan, being equally desirous of attaining the most complete and satisfactory utilisation of the waters of the Indus system of rivers… in a spirit of goodwill and friendship… making provision for the settlement of differences that may arise as to such use…"

At its heart lies the promise of "goodwill and friendship", envisioning shared growth rooted in genuine mutual trust.

Over more than six turbulent decades, this goodwill has faced contamination, worn thin by cycles of conflict, terrorism, and accusations of state support for cross-border militancy. The erosion of this goodwill not only threatens the region's geopolitical stability but also the lives and livelihoods of millions of people who depend on the Indus river system for their water supply and agriculture.

Goodwill: The Treaty's Moral Pillar

The use of "goodwill" in the preamble is not decorative—it was intended as a firm moral anchor. It represented hope that both nations would prioritise shared water security over political discord. The IWT thus became a pioneering example of how ecological interdependence might transcend geopolitical tension.

But recent terror incidents—most tragically, the 22 April 2025 Pahalgam massacre that claimed 26 lives, an attack allegedly carried out by Pakistan-based militants—have deeply corroded that goodwill. India, asserting that Pakistan-based militants were behind the attack, publicly acknowledged that Islamabad's alleged proxy support had "corroded the spirit of goodwill" essential to the treaty's viability.

When the foundation of mutual trust crumbles, treaties risk being hollowed out from within—legally intact but morally unwoven.

Legal Recourse Under the Treaty

Aware of potential tensions, the IWT created a robust, graduated dispute-resolution framework: 

Permanent Indus Commission (PIC)

A bilateral forum to resolve day-to-day "questions" relating to data sharing, flow notification, or technical cooperation.

Neutral Expert

Engaged when technical "differences" arise, such as dam design issues, operational rules, or compliance with Annexe E storage limits.

Court of Arbitration (CoA)

Convened for serious legal "disputes" that the two prior mechanisms cannot resolve. This ad hoc tribunal ensures final adjudication under a binding mandate.

India's Suspension, Pakistan's Response

In April 2025, following the Pahalgam attack, India unilaterally suspended the IWT, citing Pakistan's alleged terrorism sponsorship and asserting a sovereign right to withhold water based on national security imperatives.

In response, Pakistan initiated legal recourse through the CoA. On 27 June 2025, the tribunal issued a Supplemental Award, affirming its continuing competence and declaring that the IWT remained valid and enforceable despite India's suspension from the tribunal.

New Delhi, however, dismissed the CoA's finding, calling it a "charade at Pakistan's behest", asserting that the tribunal was legally void and that the IWT, in practice, hinged on goodwill, not coercion.

India's Assertive Water Strategy

Over recent years, India has aggressively moved to leverage its rights under the IWT: 

Treaty Suspension – Framed as a legitimate response to alleged cross-border terrorism.

Tulbul Navigation Project Revival – The project was reactivated in Jammu and Kashmir, marked as "non‑consumptive" under Annexe E. Pakistan disputes this, arguing that it involves harmful storage.

Hydropower Initiatives – Projects such as Baglihar, Kishanganga, and Ratle have been taken forward by India, prompting objections and referrals to the Neutral Expert and the CoA.

This strategy reflects a clear Indian objective: assert water rights, reinforce water resilience, and exert political pressure. However, it also risks crossing the delicate line between legal compliance and the strategic weaponization of water. If India's assertive actions lead to a significant reduction in water flow to Pakistan, it could have severe consequences for the region's water security, threatening agriculture, power generation, and ecological balance.

The Chinese Variable: Upstream Leverage

As India adopts this posture, China looms upstream, controlling crucial Himalayan headwaters. China's massive dam on the Yarlung Tsangpo/Brahmaputra (in Medog) equips Beijing with potential hydrological control over vital flows to India and Bangladesh.

In response, India is developing the Siang Upper Multipurpose Project in Arunachal Pradesh, designed as both an energy project and a buffer against Chinese manipulation of water flows.

Strategic Ripples

India's assertive approach toward Pakistan may invite similar upstream strategies from China, such as dam projects upstream that could reduce or regulate the flow of water into India.

Such hydro-strategic tensions could significantly disrupt India's water security, threatening agriculture, power generation, and ecological balance.

These developments paint a picture of a growing water-security arms race in South Asia, where water is rapidly becoming both a resource and a weapon.

For six decades, the IWT has stood as a unique example of resource diplomacy—a legal and institutional shield that managed shared river resources across conflict lines. But the erosion of goodwill, driven by terrorism and mistrust, has tested the treaty's resilience.

India is now charting an assertive course—suspending the treaty, restarting navigation projects, and expanding its hydropower capabilities. Pakistan has resorted to legal channels, while India has rejected institutional recourse, facing off in a diplomatic and legal war of words.

Enter China, wielding upstream leverage that could threaten India's water supply—the result: a triangular clash of water diplomacy, legal assertion, and geopolitical posturing. 

Dangerous standoff

The Indus Waters Treaty stands as a testament to what disciplined cooperation can achieve, even between bitter rivals. Yet, its foundation of goodwill and friendship is under severe strain in 2025. Terrorism, mistrust, and geopolitical manoeuvring have hollowed out the very spirit that once bound water to peace.

With Pakistan's legal challenge still underway and India building hydro-assets and fortifying its strategic position, a dangerous legal and diplomatic standoff is brewing. Simultaneously, China's upstream ambitions introduce a parallel set of water-power dynamics that could dictate the future of Himalayan water governance. The potential consequences of this standoff are dire, underscoring the need for a swift resolution.

The way forward demands strategic sophistication—balancing developmental ambition, legal respect, and regional ecological stability. New frameworks may be needed, such as enforceable treaties that acknowledge climate-driven challenges, geopolitical rivalries, and the imperative of environmental resilience. The gravity of this task cannot be overstated.

Because in regions where glaciers feed billions, controlling rivers is not just about infrastructure—it is about trust, cooperation, and collective survival. And water, once weaponised, cannot easily return to being a source of shared life.

(The writer, an Indian Army veteran and a former officer in the Armoured Corps, is a security analyst. Views expressed are personal. He can reached at manojchannan@gmail.com; linkedIn www.linkedin.com/in/manoj-channan-3412635; X @manojchannan )