- Pakistan warns India over suspended Indus Waters Treaty.
- India links treaty restoration to dismantling terror infrastructure.
- Pakistan's "international" seminar lacked prominent global attendees.
Ajeet Kumar, New Delhi: It has been more than a year since India suspended the Indus Waters Treaty following the deadly Pahalgam terror attack in April 2025, which killed 26 civilians. Since then, Islamabad has consistently raised its voice domestically against India’s decision. However, in recent weeks, the rhetoric against New Delhi has spiked sharply, with top ministers, diplomats, bureaucrats, and scholars aggressively roped in to challenge India’s move.
This time, the campaign extends beyond Pakistani borders, leveraging the Pakistani diaspora and scholars in the UK to build momentum internationally.
The state machinery has also launched an aggressive social media campaign, with ministers and other prominent figures posting coordinated messages on the Indus Waters Treaty using nearly identical wording. It says Pakistan does not want any 'confrontation' or 'dispute' with India, but that any attempt to block the country's water resources will be considered as an "act of war".
While Pakistan has stuck to the terms of ceasefire after may 2025 than the question is do we still abide to a ceasefire when India continues to pose an existential threat to us said Bilawal Bhutto #induswatertreaty
— Dr Maria Sultan (@DrMariaSultan1) June 30, 2026
Ambassador Naela Chohan says the message from the #IWT2026 seminar was clear: unilateral actions on the Indus Waters Treaty risk regional stability. Cooperation, mutual responsibility, and respect for water-sharing agreements are essential for millions. #IndusWaterTreaty pic.twitter.com/Fq6sKIcgSZ
— PakDefenders (@Pak_Defenders_) June 30, 2026
"پاکستان آبی حقوق پر بھارتی قبضہ قبول نہیں کریگا"
— 365 News (@365dotNews) June 30, 2026
اسحاق ڈار کا بھارت کو دو ٹوک پیغام!#IshaqDar #IndusWaterTreaty #India #365NewsPK pic.twitter.com/SqAiliEdRp
Pakistan’s case on the Indus Waters Treaty must be fought with seriousness.
— Kashif Mateen Ansari (@kashifmateenpk) June 30, 2026
This is not just a foreign policy issue. It is about food security, agriculture, exports, hydropower and the survival of millions of farmers.
Our message should be clear:
Treaties cannot be suspended…
"International" seminar on the Indus Waters Treaty
Pakistan recently organised an “international” seminar on the Indus Waters Treaty on Tuesday at the Jinnah Convention Centre in Islamabad. Ironically, the event failed to attract any prominent or recognised international guests.
Addressing the seminar, Deputy Prime Minister Ishaq Dar began his speech with strong anti-India rhetoric and warned New Delhi of “decisive action” if the treaty remains suspended. “No party can unilaterally suspend or terminate its obligations under a treaty that contains no such provision,” Dar claimed.
He said the Indus Waters Treaty is not merely a water-sharing arrangement, but a "vital instrument of regional peace, stability and cooperation". The minister further said the shared waters "must remain a bridge between nations, guided by cooperation, dialogue and respect for international law for the benefit of the present and future generations".
He claimed that any attempt to deprive Pakistan of the waters "rightfully allocated" to it would have "profound consequences" for regional peace and security.
The Indus Waters Treaty was signed on September 19, 1960, after nine years of negotiations with the aim of managing issues related to cross-border rivers.
IWT are not for negotiations: Bhutto
In his address at the seminar titled ''The Indus Waters Treaty: A Key Instrument for Peace and Regional Stability'', Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) chief Bilawal Bhutto Zardari said that the Indus River was not for negotiations.
The former foreign minister proposed a new "international convention against the weaponisation of waterways". He said that the convention should establish that waterways could not be used as instruments of coercion and the principle should apply globally, including the Strait of Hormuz, the Suez Canal, the Panama Canal, the Nile, the Tigris, the Euphrates and the Indus.
Comparing the strategic significance of the Indus River to the Strait of Hormuz, Zardari asked, if peace can not be achieved between the US and Iran with the Strait of Hormuz shut, then "how can any ceasefire between India and Pakistan hope to endure without the IWT being restored?"
Dar gets bold answer
Responding to Dar’s post on X, Kanwal Sibal, former Foreign Secretary. Ex-Ambassador to Turkey, Egypt, France and Russia reminded Islamabad about the treaty and the two wars initiated by Pakistan in 1965 and 1971. “If the Indus Waters Treaty, signed in 1960, was a vital instrument of regional peace, stability, and cooperation, how come Pakistan initiated the 1965 war, and the war in 1971 took place. Pakistan has discarded the 1972 Simla Agreement,” Sibal wrote on X.
If the Indus Waters Treaty, signed in 1960, was a vital instrument of regional peace, stability, and cooperation, how come Pakistan initiated the 1965 war, the war in 1971 took place.
— Kanwal Sibal (@KanwalSibal) June 30, 2026
Pakistan has discarded the 1972 Simla Agreement.
In the 1990s Pakistan made terrorism an… https://t.co/inbZrExMdn
“In the 1990s, Pakistan made terrorism an instrument of state policy. Mumbai and several other terror attacks,even against the Indian parliament, were sponsored. The Kargil aggression occurred after Vajpayee made the Lahore visit,” he added.
“Army Chief Munir openly talks of irreconcilable differences between Hindus and Muslims in saying that their 'religion, customs, traditions, thoughts, and ambitions' are entirely different. Terror can be used as a weapon, but “shared waters must never be weaponised,” the former diplomat said in a bold reply to Pakistan’s foreign minister.
What are the options India has?
India has solid options to maintain pressure until Pakistan addresses fundamental security concerns.
Boycott the Permanent Indus Commission (PIC): India can continue to refuse to participate in regular bilateral data exchanges and meetings, rendering the treaty’s operational infrastructure inactive.
Dismiss third-party rulings: India has already rejected recent rulings from the Court of Arbitration (CoA) at The Hague, labelling the tribunal illegally constituted. India can continue to ignore these international forums, as the IWT does not provide a mechanism to enforce a third-party ruling without bilateral consent.
Accelerate hydrological and engineering projects: The geography of the Indus Basin places India upstream, giving it significant leverage over the physical flow of the rivers before they cross the border. India can maximise its permitted uses and alter infrastructure strategies:
Stick to the “terror and talks” red line: India can use Pakistan’s diplomatic panic over water security as a powerful bargaining chip to enforce its primary foreign policy objective:
Conditional Restoration: New Delhi can clearly communicate to the international community that any return to the negotiation table or restoration of the IWT is strictly contingent upon Pakistan dismantling terror infrastructure on its soil. By firmly holding this line, India shifts the diplomatic burden entirely back onto Islamabad.
(With inputs from agency)
