Bilawal Kamran
In a significant development for regional diplomacy, the Court of Arbitration has directed India to provide operational data for its hydropower projects on rivers allocated to Pakistan under the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT). While the ruling may appear procedural, it carries substantial legal and political weight for Islamabad, especially as it comes after India’s unilateral suspension of the IWT following the Pahalgam attacks in occupied Kashmir last year.
The court’s decision is notable because it disregards India’s attempt to freeze the treaty, making it clear that international law does not accept such one-sided actions. The Court of Arbitration has also requested a formal explanation from New Delhi if it refuses to share data about the Baglihar and Kishanganga projects. Importantly, the court affirmed that only a Court of Arbitration—rather than a neutral expert—can impose interim measures, thereby strengthening Pakistan’s position. Despite India’s refusal to participate in the proceedings, the court has chosen to continue its hearings, underscoring the legitimacy of the process and providing Islamabad with a diplomatic and legal advantage.
However, the ruling does not automatically mean India will comply. Pakistan has long argued that the Baglihar and Kishanganga projects violate the design parameters outlined in the IWT, but India has consistently refused to provide the operational logbooks requested by Pakistan. It’s important to note that Pakistan does not contest India’s right to construct hydropower projects on shared rivers, as permitted by the treaty. The real issue is India’s efforts to build structures that allow greater upstream control, potentially giving it the ability to manipulate water flows—something the IWT was specifically designed to prevent.
India’s ongoing refusal to share operational data has intensified concerns in Pakistan that water could be used as a weapon, especially given recent incidents during both floods and periods of low flow. The IWT has historically acted as a stabilizing force in South Asia, surviving even during wars and severe diplomatic standoffs since it was signed in 1960. Its strength lies in its clear, rules-based framework and a robust dispute-resolution mechanism. Yet, in recent years, the Indian government under Prime Minister Modi has repeatedly called for the treaty’s renegotiation and, most recently, has put it into abeyance—a move not supported by the treaty itself. Such actions have only heightened fears that India may seek to use water as leverage, creating uncertainty and tension downstream.
The latest ruling by the Court of Arbitration provides an opportunity for India to reconsider its position. If the Modi government reverses its decision to suspend the IWT and agrees to engage in bilateral dialogue on the issues at hand, it could help defuse tensions and restore confidence in the treaty’s mechanisms. By adhering to the established rules and dispute-resolution processes, India could demonstrate its commitment to regional stability and peaceful coexistence.
Ultimately, the future of the IWT—and by extension, peace in South Asia—depends on both countries’ willingness to honor their commitments and resolve disputes through dialogue rather than unilateral action. The Court of Arbitration’s ruling serves as a reminder that international agreements and institutions remain relevant, even in times of heightened tension. For India, stepping back from its current stance could open the door to renewed cooperation and help prevent the escalation of conflict over shared resources.
At a time when global geopolitics is increasingly unpredictable, ensuring stability in South Asia is more important than ever. A peaceful and collaborative approach to managing the region’s vital water resources is not just a legal or diplomatic necessity, but a prerequisite for the prosperity and well-being of millions who depend on these rivers for their livelihoods and daily needs.
