Islamabad: Amid concerns over water shortages during an intense heatwave, Pakistan hosted an international conference in Islamabad, warning that the global rules-based order would be undermined if the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) was not upheld, NDTV reported.
India suspended the World Bank-brokered treaty after the April 2025 Pahalgam terror attack, in which 26 civilians were killed, as part of a series of punitive measures against Pakistan.
Signed in 1960, the treaty governs the sharing of waters from the Indus River system between the two nuclear-armed neighbours.
Pakistan fears a worsening water crisis as soaring temperatures are expected to intensify this year due to the El Niño weather pattern over the equatorial Pacific.
Speaking at the conference titled The Indus Waters Treaty: A Key Instrument for Peace and Regional Stability, Pakistan’s Deputy Prime Minister Ishaq Dar described India’s decision to suspend the treaty as “illegal” and maintained that water should never be used as a political tool.
“No party can unilaterally suspend or terminate its obligations under a treaty that contains no such provision,” Dar claimed while addressing a seminar on the Indus Waters Treaty in Islamabad, Radio Pakistan reported.
He said the treaty was not merely a water-sharing arrangement but a “vital instrument of regional peace, stability and cooperation”.
“Shared waters must never be weaponised. They should remain a bridge between nations, guided by cooperation, dialogue, and respect for international law for the benefit of present and future generations,” he was quoted as having said.
Dar described water as essential for human dignity, food security, economic development and environmental sustainability, arguing that transboundary rivers should promote cooperation instead of confrontation.
Reiterating Pakistan’s official position, he said any attempt to divert, interrupt or reduce water allocated to Pakistan under the treaty would be treated as an “act of war”.
He added that depriving Pakistan of waters “rightfully allocated” to it would have “profound consequences” for regional peace and security.
Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) chief and former foreign minister Bilawal Bhutto Zardari said the Indus River was not open to negotiations and proposed a new “international convention against the weaponisation of waterways”.
“If anyone believes that Pakistan will surrender Sindh, they do not know Pakistan. They do not know Sindh. They do not know Punjab. They do not know Balochistan. They do not know Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. They do not know Kashmir or Gilgit Baltistan. They do not know the people who have lived by these rivers for thousands and thousands of years. We want peace, but peace with dignity. We want dialogue, but dialogue under law. We want coexistence, but not submission. So from this seminar, from this city, from this moment let a message go forth. Pakistan will defend its water, its people, its treaty, its sovereignty and its future,” he said.
Bhutto Zardari also said “any attempt to undermine Pakistan’s water rights would receive a national response” and asserted that “Pakistan would not compromise on the fundamental rights of its people”. Without addressing India’s concerns over state-sponsored militancy, he argued that “the use of water as a weapon was contrary to international law”.
“Pakistan must speak clearly. The Indus is not a pressure point. The Indus is not a bargaining chip. The Indus is not a weapon to be placed in India’s hands. The Indus is a lifeline of Pakistan. And any attempt to turn that lifeline into a noose must be treated as a threat to the survival of our state. This is the message that Pakistan must deliver to India. This is the message that Pakistan must deliver to the world. Not in panic, not in hysteria, not in recklessness, but with the cold clarity of a people who know what is at stake,” he added.
Pakistani Minister Musadik Malik also defended the treaty, saying its future would determine the credibility of international agreements.
“The Indus Waters Treaty has witnessed three wars between the two nuclear powers. If this treaty doesn’t hold, no world order that is on paper post World War II will remain secure,” Malik said.
“When a law needs to be tested, it must be done at the weakest point and not the strongest point. The Indus Waters Treaty is the strongest pact the world has ever seen,” Malik added.
Pakistan has repeatedly accused India of violating the treaty since its suspension. During the seminar, Mehar Ali Shah, chairman of Pakistan’s Indus River System Authority, alleged that India had reduced water flows in the Chenab River in recent months in violation of the agreement.
There was no immediate response from New Delhi to the conference. However, addressing a United Nations event marking World Water Day 2026, India’s Permanent Representative Harish Parvathaneni said India was compelled to place the treaty in abeyance after repeated provocations and the failure of bilateral engagement.
He said the treaty would remain in abeyance until Pakistan took credible and irreversible steps to end support for terrorism.
The Indus Waters Treaty came under renewed strain after India suspended its participation following the killing of 26 tourists in Jammu and Kashmir in April 2025. New Delhi blamed Pakistan-based militants for the attack, an allegation Islamabad denied.
The attack led to one of the sharpest declines in bilateral relations in decades. Both countries downgraded diplomatic and trade ties, shut their main land border crossing and revoked visas for each other’s nationals. Tensions escalated further in May 2025 after India launched Operation Sindoor, and relations have remained frozen since.
Brokered by the World Bank and signed in 1960, the treaty regulates the sharing of waters from the Indus River system. India has control over the eastern rivers — Ravi, Sutlej and Beas — while Pakistan receives the waters of the western rivers — Indus, Jhelum and Chenab.
Until its suspension in May 2025, the treaty had survived multiple conflicts between India and Pakistan, including the wars of 1965 and 1971 and the 1999 Kargil conflict, and had long been regarded as one of the few enduring agreements between the two neighbours.
