Water Wars on the Horizon? India’s Treaty Suspension Sparks Regional Tensions

India’s recent suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), a longstanding agreement with Pakistan, has triggered renewed anxiety over the possibility of water being used as a geopolitical weapon. The move followed a deadly militant attack in Indian-administered Kashmir, which India blamed on Pakistan. While the treaty has endured decades of hostility between the two nations, this is the first time either country has suspended cooperation under the pact—raising questions about the future of river sharing and regional peace.

Under the 1960 treaty, brokered by the World Bank, India received rights to the eastern rivers (Ravi, Beas, Sutlej), while Pakistan was granted access to about 80% of the waters from the western rivers (Indus, Jhelum, Chenab). This allocation has been vital for Pakistan’s agriculture and electricity production. However, India has long voiced concerns about the agreement's limitations, especially given growing demands for irrigation, drinking water, and hydropower amid climate change pressures.

Despite historical disputes over India’s infrastructure projects along the western rivers, this is the first instance of a total freeze in treaty implementation. Experts, however, argue that India may not be capable of entirely stopping water from flowing into Pakistan. The country lacks sufficient infrastructure to store or divert the vast amounts of water these rivers carry, particularly during the high-flow monsoon months. Most of India's hydropower installations are "run-of-the-river," meaning they do not store significant water volumes.

That said, India now has more leeway to modify or build infrastructure without needing to consult Pakistan. Previously, both sides were bound to share project documents and data under the treaty’s protocols. With the suspension, India is no longer obligated to inform Pakistan about new developments or changes to water systems. However, terrain challenges and internal opposition to some projects have slowed India’s construction progress, limiting the immediate impact of the treaty’s suspension.

Nonetheless, experts warn that Pakistan could suffer during the dry season if India begins to actively control water flow using existing and potential future infrastructure. The absence of treaty constraints could allow India to withhold or release water with strategic timing. According to environmental scholars, such actions—especially during periods of low water availability—could have severe consequences for Pakistan's agriculture and power generation.

Another point of contention is the sharing of hydrological data, crucial for flood management and irrigation planning. India is now in a position to cease all data-sharing obligations. Although Pakistani officials claim that India had already been providing only partial data before the suspension, the complete loss of communication could hinder flood preparedness, especially during the volatile monsoon season.

There are also concerns that India could exploit the situation by releasing water or silt from its dams without warning—a tactic known as deploying a “water bomb.” While India would risk damaging its own upstream areas due to the location of its dams, the sudden flushing of silt-heavy water could harm Pakistan’s downstream infrastructure and farmlands. This type of asymmetrical water warfare has become a recurring fear in times of diplomatic strain.

The broader geopolitical context adds another layer to the crisis. The Indus River originates in Tibet, placing China—an ally of Pakistan—in a powerful upstream position. In 2016, after similar cross-border tensions, China blocked a tributary of the Yarlung Tsangpo (which becomes the Brahmaputra River in India), signaling support for Pakistan. Now, China is moving forward with massive hydropower developments in Tibet, including what will be the world’s largest dam. India worries that such projects could give Beijing dangerous leverage over regional water flows—adding to an already volatile situation between the nuclear-armed neighbors.