05. Mustafa Bilal-Wat-Wea-IWT-Oped thumbnail-June-2025-rev1-AP

The Indus and its tributaries are not just rivers; they are the arteries of Pakistan. Over 90% of Pakistan’s agriculture relies on the Indus River System, which also powers dams and sustains wetlands and fisheries that are crucial for biodiversity and the well-being of coastal communities. However, for more than 240 million Pakistanis, India’s water weaponisation could now be a visceral reality. Remarks from Indian leadership hinting at intentions to ‘starve the people of Pakistan’ by cutting off the water supply as a long-term strategy was initiated in 2016 but has been expedited in the wake of the Pahalgam incident.

Suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) was merely the opening salvo in India’s water warfare against Pakistan. What followed was the sudden, unannounced slashing of Chenab flows by up to 90% via Baglihar Dam, throttling Neelum River from the Kishanganga project and accelerated pursuit of storage dams like Pakal Dul and Ratle. The Ranbir Canal expansion was also announced just days after the Indo-Pak ceasefire, disguised as national development, evident from Union Minister C.R. Patil’s pledge to not let even ‘a drop of water’ from reaching Pakistan.

In this context, India’s potential filling of massive reservoirs risks leaving Pakistan without water for extended periods. During the dry season, India’s manipulation of timing and flow could also be a calibrated suffocation of Pakistan’s agrarian heartland. Moreover, the potential withholding of critical flood data, as reported by former Indian Commissioner for Indus Waters Pradeep Saxena, highlights that in a time of climate crisis, where South Asia is grappling with dire threats from glacial melting and unpredictable monsoons, India is exacerbating environmental fragility for political advantage.

Although this is not an isolated incident, it is the culmination of a long-standing Indian practice of hydro-aggression against its neighbours. India’s predatory riparianism extends from the Farakka Barrage, which diverts the Ganges’ flow during the dry season to devastate Bangladesh, causing desertification, salinity intrusion, crop failures, and fisheries collapse, to the coercive hydro-politics imposed on Nepal. Additionally, India’s proposed USD168 billion National River Linking Project, aiming to reroute 37 rivers, signals an ambition for total regional hydrological control, pursued without consultation and underscored by its refusal to ratify the UN Watercourses Convention.

If India’s hydro-aggression is allowed to persist, it would undermine global transboundary water systems, empowering upstream aggressors, a concern that India itself had flagged at the start of the year. Ironically, a few months later, it was India who decided to weaponise water against Pakistan, constituting a gross violation of fundamental human rights. Notably, the UN General Assembly explicitly recognised water as a human right in 2010. International Humanitarian Law (IHL) also categorically prohibits attacks on water resources and infrastructure, as emphasised by Pakistan’s Health Minister, Mustafa Kamal, at the World Health Assembly. India’s water warfare would also violate the Geneva Conventions’ prohibition on collective punishment and could constitute a crime against humanity under the Rome Statute.

In light of the illegality of India’s water weaponisation, Pakistan’s stance is unequivocal: blocking or diverting water would constitute an act of war. Moreover, Pakistan’s civil and military leadership have drawn a red line by warning that Pakistan could have destroyed Indian dams in response to attacks on Neelum-Jhelum, highlighting the lethal seriousness with which the state views this existential threat. Pakistan’s national security officials have also sent a clear message to Indian policymakers that the country would use the full spectrum of its national power to defend its water rights for years and decades. To dismiss these statements as hyperbole is to ignore the fact that this is a question of Pakistan’s survival. Pakistan’s response, therefore, is not warmongering; it is the imperative of self-preservation.

Moving ahead, Pakistan should accelerate its efforts to assert its hydrological sovereignty. Developing strategic storage and hydropower infrastructure on the Chenab, Jhelum, and Indus is paramount. This serves dual purposes: enhancing water security through regulation, mitigating floods and droughts, generating clean energy, and, crucially, establishing accrued rights under international law. However, the path forward demands more than just Pakistani resolve; it requires urgent international intervention. The UN Security Council, having recognised water as a catalyst for cooperation, must live up to its responsibility. In this regard, Pakistan’s stance at the UNSC must resonate: India’s weaponisation of water is unacceptable and cannot be tolerated.

Although the guns on the Line of Control have fallen silent, India’s strangling of Pakistan’s rivers remains an act of sustained violence against more than 240 million people. Pakistan’s warnings represent a rational response by a nation confronting an engineered genocide, perpetrated not by terrorists but by Indian policymakers. The world must act decisively to defuse this ticking water bomb, for India’s water warfare imposes a grim logic: when a nuclear-armed state threatens another’s very survival, the result would be not only massive regional destruction but also the global normalisation of water as a weapon of mass disruption. The taps of water diplomacy in South Asia are closing; world leaders must wrench them open before the only flow left is that of blood.

Mustafa Bilal is a Research Assistant at the Centre for Aerospace & Security Studies (CASS), Islamabad. The article was first published in The News International. He can be reached at [email protected].


Share this article

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Recent Publications

Browse through the list of recent publications.

The US-Israel War on Iran: Objectives, Strategy, and Escalation Management

Zahra Niazi
‘States tend to overestimate themselves or the benefits and swiftness of war, and to underestimate their opponents’ capabilities, intentions, or the costs and duration of war.’ If anything, the 2026 war initiated by the United States and Israel against Iran shall be remembered in the annals of warfare among the most visible manifestations of this dynamic.
The war, immediately preceded by the January mass protests in Iran, did not represent a sudden rupture but rather the continuation of a 47-year-long confrontation and a more intense phase of the June 2025 war.
The US Secretary of War, Pete Hegseth, defined the war’s objectives as being laser-focused: to destroy Iran’s missile capabilities and its security infrastructure, while ensuring that it could never develop nuclear weapons. Beyond these stated objectives, among the priorities on the continuum also lay the objective of regime change, with both President Trump and Prime Minister Netanyahu explicitly calling on the Iranian population to take over the government at the outset of the war.

Read More »

Marka-e-Haq to the Peace Talks: Pakistan’s Middle Power Status

On 7th May 2025, Pakistan’s military forces took the international security community by surprise when it demonstrated operational superiority against its larger belligerent adversary India with its rapid and coordinated response. The Four-Day conflict proved to be a watershed moment for Pakistan, marking its rapid emergence as an important player in the region. In recent years, amidst the ongoing global competition between the United States and China, Islamabad has adopted a position of ’Strategic Balancing,’ where it maintains ties of cooperation with both Beijing and Washington. Deft diplomacy, emphasis on geo-economics, and credible conventional and strategic deterrence have remained the foundational pillars for Pakistan’s ambition as a rising middle power

Read More »

Debunking the S-400 Shield: Lessons from the India-Pakistan Conflict

Air defense has always been a central aspect of warfare. In South Asia, the phenomenon carries immense significance due to compressed reaction times. In this context, one of the most-hyped systems is the Russian-made S-400, touted by New Delhi as a one-stop solution to counter aerial threats from both Pakistan and China.
The 2025 conflict between India and Pakistan marked an important chapter in testing the S-400 technology. The conflict began on May 7, when India attacked what it alleged were terrorist targets in both Pakistani-held Kashmir and Pakistan proper, using drone and missile strikes. The conflict lasted for four days, culminating in a U.S-facilitated ceasefire. However, the brief conflict debunked a lot of the myths regarding the S-400 technology.
First, India claimed that the mobile S-400 would be able to control Pakistan’s airspace. In contrast, Pakistani aircraft continued to operate freely, according to official briefings by the Pakistani military. Although the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) aircraft were in their own airspace, they were still within the air defense range.

Read More »