ISLAMABAD: Federal Minister for Information and Broadcasting Attaullah Tarar said Tuesday that Pakistan would respond effectively if India attempted to stop water flows, stressing that the Indus Waters Treaty remains vital for regional peace and stability.
Addressing the inaugural session of an international seminar titled “Indus Waters Treaty: An Instrument of Peace and Regional Stability,” Tarar said the event was not merely about a treaty but about the lifeline of more than 240 million Pakistanis.
Water is not just a resource for Pakistan but a matter of survival, the minister said.
Tarar emphasized that the Indus Waters Treaty was concluded through mutual agreement and cannot be amended, revoked, suspended or held in abeyance unilaterally. Any changes, he said, could only be made with the consent of both parties.
He said India’s attempt to unilaterally suspend the treaty has caused it embarrassment at various international and legal forums.
“The moral, legal and diplomatic foundations of any unilateral action are weak, and anything built on such weak foundations cannot endure,” he said.
Highlighting the growing impact of climate change, Tarar said protecting the treaty has become even more important as glaciers melt at unprecedented rates and water scarcity emerges as one of the world’s biggest challenges.
He warned that the weaponization of water or unilateral attempts to alter long-standing agreements would undermine not only regional peace and stability but also the broader framework of international law.
Tarar said Pakistan has consistently demonstrated its commitment to peaceful engagement, constructive dialogue and the faithful implementation of the treaty. However, he warned that if India attempts to stop Pakistan’s share of water, the country’s leadership is fully prepared to respond effectively to safeguard the nation’s water rights.
Pakistan’s Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar urged India to resolve all outstanding issues through dialogue and diplomacy, stating that “it takes two to tango” for lasting peace.
Addressing an international seminar on the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) in Islamabad, Dar issued a stark warning against any violation of the treaty, stressing that the cost of sabotaging an international agreement on rivers can be very high.
He emphasized that consequences of such actions are not limited to the two countries, setting a “dangerous precedent in international relations” .
Dar’s comments come amid heightened tensions between the nuclear-armed rivals. He noted that India had held the Indus Waters Treaty in abeyance following a deadly attack in Indian Illegally Occupied Jammu and Kashmir in April 2025, an allegation Pakistan has denied .
“If Pakistan is deprived of its water rights, it will have serious consequences,” DPM Dar warned, asserting that long-term peace was possible only through mutual respect and state sovereignty .
The Deputy Prime Minister reiterated Pakistan’s readiness for a comprehensive dialogue with India. “We in all sincerity are ready to talk on all issues, but we call for composite dialogue, but it takes two to tango,” he stated .
He also criticized India’s domestic policies, claiming that India has become so “narrow-minded that even sports are now subjected to this Hindutva philosophy.” He further pointed to the recent elections in Bihar, saying that 40 million people were disenfranchised and that the world community must take notice .
Commissioner cites unaddressed concerns
Pakistan Commissioner for Indus Waters Syed Muhammad Mehar Ali Shah said Tuesday that he had written to his Indian counterpart regarding fluctuations in the flow of the Chenab River four times since last April, when New Delhi unilaterally decided to hold the Indus Waters Treaty in abeyance, but has received no response.
Speaking at the same seminar in Islamabad, he said he wrote to his Indian counterpart Monday night over “significant fluctuations” in the flow of the River Chenab.
The 1960 treaty allocates the eastern rivers, Ravi, Beas and Sutlej, to India, while the western rivers, Indus, Jhelum and Chenab, are largely allocated to Pakistan. The agreement has also established mechanisms for data-sharing and dispute resolution.
Shah said the fluctuation in the Chenab is not a “technical inconvenience, but rather a strategic hazard.”
“There is no brainer in understanding that data-sharing is the line between natural risk and manufactured vulnerability,” he said, adding that India should answer for the fluctuations.
“I will state this carefully and without overclaiming causation. These events required explanation and operational data, and we have been asking India through treaty channels, but there is no response from the Indian side, and no response creates a risk,” he said.
He said no responsible downstream commissioner would view such fluctuations as routine and move on.
“These are precisely the events the Indus Water Commission exists to examine,” he added.
Shah said Pakistan, in the past year, has tried to keep channels of communication and data-sharing active despite India holding the treaty in abeyance.
“Pakistan continued to provide the required data, sent correspondents, requested meetings, inspections, project information and Article 9 consultations,” he said, but Pakistan received no response from the Indian side.
He said India followed a similar pattern before the 2025 abeyance, noting that the last commission meeting was held in May 2022.
“No general or special tour of inspection, corresponding monthly data has remained outstanding after August 2023 and multiple core treaty communications have received no response,” he added.
“This is precisely what increases the risk of avoidable escalation,” he warned, adding that “hydrological information is not a diplomatic courtesy” but an “operational necessity.”
“Without data, the downstream state is forced to guess whether it faces nature or the upstream operation,” he explained.
Treaty a matter of national security, commissioner says
Earlier, Shah said that for Pakistan, the treaty is not just a matter of hydrology but national security.
“When the lives and livelihoods of more than 240 million are tied to the Indus basin, when more than 80 percent of the arable land depends on these waters… when agriculture contributes almost a quarter of GDP and almost one-third of employment, water uncertainty becomes national uncertainty,” he explained.
The commissioner said the treaty functions as a “conflict prevention system” and that “Pakistan’s restraint has been deliberate.”
“But water, food, livelihood, and social stability are not negotiable abstractions; that is why Pakistan has publicly defined the strategic threshold for any attempt to stop and divert the treaty water belonging to Pakistan,” he said.
Shah said the treaty works because of four elements operating together, allocation, cooperation, the institution and dispute control.
“Allocation tells each side what it may use, what it may not; cooperation provides data, notice and inspection, and the commission gives a regular channel of communication,” he said, warning that removing any of these elements would lead to the peace function failing.
“Therefore, abeyance is not a diplomatic slogan but an attempt to disable the stabilising architecture of the treaty,” he said.
Seminar highlights legal protections
The seminar began with an opening speech by Tarar, who said the 240 million people of Pakistan have an “inalienable right” to water from the Indus River System.
“When we say that Indus is our lifeline and our people, the 240 million people of Pakistan, have an inalienable right to the water of Indus, we mean it, from the core of our hearts,” he said.
Tarar also described the treaty as “an instrument of peace and regional stability.”
“Today, we are not merely discussing the treaty. We are discussing the lifeline of nearly 240 million people of Pakistan,” he said.
He recalled that the treaty was signed under the auspices of the World Bank and has endured wars, political upheavals and prolonged periods of tension.
“Its resilience, for more than six decades, demonstrates an enduring truth that cooperation, dialogue and adherence to international commitments remain the only sustainable path to peace,” Tarar said.
The minister said the treaty stands as “a remarkable example” of the rule-based international order.
“It embodies the principle of good faith, pacta sunt servanda, the sanctity of agreements and peaceful dispute resolutions. These are not merely legal concepts, but foundations upon which trust is built,” he said.
Tarar said the weaponization of water or attempts to unilaterally alter established arrangements undermine not only regional peace and stability but also the broader framework of international law.
“International agreements, as I said, cannot be suspended or disregarded at convenience. Respect for treaties is indispensable for maintaining confidence among nations and preserving the global order,” he emphasized.
Concluding his address, he said: “Let us reaffirm today that we will, by all means, not only protect the sanctity of this treaty, but we will do all that we can to protect the inalienable right of the 240 million people of Pakistan to the water of the Indus River.”
Commissioner: Treaty a binding settlement, not a favor
Shah said the treaty has converted a “territorial water system” into a legal structure by fixing rights and obligations each party owes to the other.
“The eastern rivers were allocated to India, and the western were placed under Pakistan, with India’s use confined to carefully defined exceptions,” he recalled. “Pakistan accepted that bargain, rebuilt its irrigation life around that bargain and planned its national water economy around the assurance that the western rivers would be let flow.”
“The bargain remains a bargain,” he said, stressing that the agreement is “not a favor, but a binding settlement.”
The commissioner said the way forward for the treaty is not “abeyance, but performance,” calling for an immediate commission meeting, full restoration of data sharing, and resumption of general and special tours and inspections.
“No unilateral abeyance, no data blackout, no diversion, no fait accompli,” he said, emphasizing that “IWT is a life and the commission must therefore be allowed to work.”
Pakistan not opposed to ‘lawful hydropower’
Shah said Pakistan is not opposed to lawful hydropower development, but “unlawful control, excessive discretion and opaque operations are a problem.”
He warned that starting from the Marala Barrage, India has begun reopening its low-level outlets, giving India control through manipulation of reservoirs.
“India has started reopening its low-level outlets, and what would happen in simple terms is that by way of so doing, India will have control by way of emptying the reservoirs and refilling and repeating these manipulations just to the detriment of Pakistan,” he warned.
Shah also noted India’s plans to develop the Chenab-Beas link project, which he said would divert 1.9 million acre-feet of water from the Chenab.
He raised concern that “one project may be a question in terms of Article 9 [of the treaty] but a cluster of accelerated works with no data, no inspection and no commission engagement, that becomes a strategic pattern, no longer a question.”
On the Chenab-Beas project, Shah held that Pakistan’s legal position stems from Article 3 of the treaty, which governs the three western rivers.
Shah said Article 3 contains “no free-standing category of the surplus western river waters available for diversion by India into an eastern river basin,” warning that diversion changes the character of the bargain at the core of the treaty.
Court of Arbitration rulings
Talking about Article 9 of the treaty, Shah said it provides an “elaborate dispute resolution mechanism” that begins at the bilateral level and, if that fails, the process moves on to a third-party forum.
“The sequence is deliberate: institutional settlement first and third-party determination where necessary but no paralysis,” he added.
On the arbitration mechanism, Shah said the Court of Arbitration has “reactivated the treaty” and addressed legal uncertainty around the issue.
He recalled that Pakistan received two awards from the Court of Arbitration, one in 2025 and another in May 2026.
Shah said the court confirmed four essential points in its rulings: “First, India’s non-appearance before the court does not paralyse the proceedings. Second, the abeyance posture does not deprive the court of competence. Third, the award is final, binding and controlling. And India must let the western rivers flow with treaty exceptions applied strictly.”
He asserted that it is not merely “political rhetoric” or Pakistan’s stance but the “treaty speaking through its own court.”
