Indus Waters Treaty Stalled: India Says Pakistan Must End Terrorism First

New Delhi’s officials have made it plain: the 1960 Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) is not coming back to life the way it once did. The decades‑old water‑sharing arrangement between India and Pakistan can only be resurrected if Pakistan takes a decisive, irreversible step away from sponsoring cross‑border terrorism.

Speaking to reporters, a senior government source said, “The treaty in its present shape will not function again. If we ever want to reactivate river‑water provisions, it will have to be under a new, revised framework – and only if Pakistan abjures terrorism.” The comment echoes the mood in New Delhi after the Pahalgam attack of April 2025, which claimed 26 civilian lives and prompted India to place the IWT in abeyance.

India’s decision to suspend the treaty was not taken lightly. It came alongside a string of diplomatic and economic measures aimed at pressuring Islamabad to curb militant activities. New Delhi blames the attack on The Resistance Front, a group it says operates as a proxy for the Pakistan‑based Lashkar‑e‑Taiba (LeT). In May, the Indian army launched Operation Sindoor, a limited strike targeting what it described as terrorist infrastructure inside Pakistani territory.

Despite the heightened rhetoric, officials stress that India is not actively seeking to quit the treaty altogether. As one source put it, “Exiting the IWT depends on Pakistan’s future actions. As a sovereign nation, India retains the right to terminate any agreement that harms its interests, but we hope for a negotiated path forward.”

At the heart of the stalemate lies a bitter dispute over hydro‑electric projects on the western rivers. India has lodged a series of dam and run‑of‑the‑river schemes – Salal, Tulbul, Baglihar, Kishenganga, Ratle, Pakal Dul and even a modest 200‑kilowatt plant for a remote tribal area – but Pakistan has repeatedly invoked the treaty’s dispute‑resolution mechanisms to stall progress. Critics say Islamabad inflates technical disagreements into protracted legal battles, taking matters to neutral experts, arbitration courts and even international forums.

Pakistan, for its part, has tried to paint India’s suspension of the treaty as the cause of its own water shortages. New Delhi dismisses that narrative, pointing to Pakistan’s own woes: leaking canals, inadequate storage capacity and internal provincial disputes that already sap a large share of the water it receives. “It’s a false narrative,” the Indian official said. “The real problem is poor water‑management on their side, not a lack of Indian cooperation.”

Adding another layer of complexity, the government highlighted that individuals and organisations listed on the United Nations Security Council’s 1267 sanctions regime continue to operate openly in Pakistan. “We keep getting reports that sanctioned entities still hold public events and platforms in Islamabad,” the source noted, underscoring what New Delhi sees as a lack of genuine commitment to curbing terror.Intelligence agencies in India also say they receive regular updates indicating that terrorist activity along the Line of Control remains unabated. “Our evidence shows no credible steps have been taken to control these activities,” the source added.

The treaty itself was a product of nine years of painstaking negotiations under the World Bank’s auspices, signed on 19 September 1960. It allocated the eastern rivers – Ravi, Beas and Sutlej – to India, while granting Pakistan rights over the western rivers – Indus, Jhelum and Chenab. For over six decades it has largely held, despite wars and political turbulence, because both sides managed to keep the technical mechanisms functioning.

Now, with trust eroded and diplomatic channels strained, experts argue that any future water‑sharing agreement will have to address two core issues: a verifiable cease‑fire on terrorism and a modernised dispute‑resolution process that reflects today’s hydropower ambitions.

Whether Islamabad will take the necessary steps remains to be seen. Until then, the Indus Waters Treaty, as it stands, is likely to stay on the shelf – a relic of a more cooperative era, waiting for a new chapter that both neighbours can agree upon.