Table of Contents
In a sharp escalation of tensions between South Asia’s nuclear-armed neighbours, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Thursday declared that Pakistan would no longer receive water from rivers under India’s control, signalling a hardline shift in response to the April 22 attack in Indian Illegally Occupied Jammu and Kashmir (IIOJK) that killed 26 people.
The announcement came a month after India suspended the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), a cornerstone of bilateral water cooperation that has stood since 1960, and marks one of the most serious ruptures in Indo-Pakistan relations in decades.
Modi: Pakistan Will Pay “A Heavy Price”
Speaking at a public event in Rajasthan, a state bordering Pakistan, Prime Minister Modi said:
“Pakistan will have to pay a heavy price for every terrorist attack. Pakistan’s army will pay it, Pakistan’s economy will pay it.”
The Prime Minister’s comments echo the Indian government’s broader stance following the IIOJK attack, which New Delhi blames on Pakistan-backed militants — a claim Islamabad has strongly denied, calling it unsubstantiated and politically motivated.
Indus Waters Treaty Suspension: A Historic Break
The Indus Waters Treaty, brokered by the World Bank in 1960, has been a rare example of successful cooperation between the two adversaries, even during periods of war. The agreement divides control of six rivers between the countries — with India controlling the eastern rivers (Ravi, Beas, Sutlej) and Pakistan relying heavily on the western rivers (Indus, Jhelum, Chenab) for over 80% of its agricultural water supply.
India’s decision to suspend the treaty is being viewed as a major diplomatic and strategic move, raising fears of a long-term water crisis in Pakistan.
“This suspension is part of a series of retaliatory steps taken by India following the April 22 attack,” said a senior Indian official, adding that the move signals a willingness to use “water as leverage.”
Pakistan Downplays Immediate Impact
Despite the gravity of the situation, Pakistan’s finance minister downplayed the immediate consequences of the treaty’s suspension, stating earlier this month:
“There will be no immediate impact. We have contingency plans, and we are engaging with international bodies.”
However, analysts warn that a prolonged disruption could devastate Pakistan’s agriculture sector, which is already under pressure from water scarcity and climate change.
Military Strikes and a Fragile Ceasefire
India’s reaction to the April 22 attack in IIOJK went beyond diplomatic measures. It included missile strikes on Pakistani territory, killing over 50 people and damaging civilian and military infrastructure. These actions triggered the worst military escalation between the two nations in nearly 30 years.
Pakistan Slams India at WHO for Water Threats and Health Infrastructure Attacks
A U.S.-brokered ceasefire took effect on May 10, and has largely held since then. Indian Foreign Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar told Dutch outlet NOS:
“There is no exchange of fire currently. There has been some repositioning of forces accordingly.”
Yet Jaishankar also made it clear that the Indian military “operation continues”, and India will continue targeting what it claims are “terrorist elements” based in Pakistan.
“If the terrorists are in Pakistan, we will hit them where they are,” he said.
Pakistan has not officially responded to the recent statements from Modi or Jaishankar, but previous government comments have accused India of reckless military adventurism and violations of international law.
Ties Continue to Deteriorate
In the wake of the April incident, both nations have taken aggressive steps against each other beyond the battlefield. These include:
- Suspension of bilateral trade
- Closure of land borders
- Suspension of most categories of visas
- Media blackouts and diplomatic downgrades
India’s hardline stance, coupled with Pakistan’s retaliatory rhetoric, suggests that relations are at a dangerous low, with little sign of immediate de-escalation beyond the current ceasefire.
Global Concerns Mount
International observers and humanitarian groups have voiced concern over India’s move to weaponize water. Several rights groups argue that denying a lower riparian nation access to its historically guaranteed water supply may violate international norms and human rights obligations.
“Water should never be used as a tool of war,” a representative from the International Rivers Network told reporters. “This risks creating a humanitarian disaster for millions.”
The United Nations has not officially commented, but sources indicate that quiet diplomacy is ongoing to prevent further deterioration between the two nuclear-armed states.
