Pakistan’s willingness to engage with these experts demonstrated its commitment to cooperation.
ISLAMABAD:
Despite facing serious challenges to the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) arising from the policies and ideology of Modi’s Hindutva-driven government, Pakistan adopted a calm, careful and international law-based approach.
Pakistan’s strategy emphasized patience, legal recourse and proactive diplomacy, which not only helped protect its rights as a lower riparian state but also strengthened its image as a responsible member of the international community.
The situation escalated and became tense when India unilaterally decided to suspend the Indus Waters Treaty, in violation of international law, raising serious concerns because the treaty does not allow any of the countries to suspend it on their own.
In international law, agreements between countries must be respected, a principle known as Pacta sunt servanda (agreements must be upheld). India’s move created uncertainty and raised questions about whether international agreements can be so easily ignored.
Former Chairman of Research Council on Water Resources (PCRWR) and renowned water expert Dr. Muhammad Aslam Tahir was of the view that Pakistan always acted as a responsible state and India, under the influence of Modi’s Handutva ideology, resorted to violating all international laws and norms.
He went on to say that instead of reacting emotionally, Pakistan chose to pursue a legal course of action by approaching institutions already embedded in the treaty system, including the Court of Arbitration and Neutral Experts. “These are official mechanisms designed to resolve disputes peacefully.
By using them, Pakistan has shown that it believes in resolving conflicts through law and not confrontation,” he said.
It is worth mentioning here that one of the biggest developments came when the Court of Arbitration confirmed that the IWT remains valid irrespective of India’s position.
This was a visible victory for Pakistan. The decision made clear that no country can ignore a treaty on its own and that refusing to participate does not eliminate legal responsibility.
This ruling further strengthened Pakistan’s case and reinforced the importance of international agreements.
Dr Muhammad Aslam said neutral experts also supported the dispute resolution process, showing that the treaty still has robust and functional mechanisms.
Pakistan’s willingness to engage with these experts demonstrated its commitment to cooperation, while India’s limited participation created a visible difference in the way both countries handled the situation, he said.
Pakistan also raised the issue in international forums, including the United Nations, where Special Rapporteurs (Independent Experts) took interest in this serious issue and raised questions about possible violations of the treaty.
This helped move the issue from a simple bilateral dispute to a broader global concern involving international law, human rights and fair access to water.
Despite receiving formal questions from UN experts, India has not provided a detailed response even after the deadline. This silence has raised concern internationally, showing India’s lack of commitment to global accountability systems and weakening respect for international rules. Such behavior could set a risky example if other countries also begin to ignore the treaties.
Another water expert, Dr Ahmad Ashraf, said that water is a critical resource, especially for Pakistan. As a downstream country, it relies heavily on the rivers governed by the treaty. Any disruption could affect agriculture, energy production and the daily lives of millions of people, he said.
He said Pakistan has focused on protecting the treaty through legal means rather than escalating tensions. India attempted to justify its actions by linking the treaty to the Pahalgam false flag incident. However, no solid evidence has been presented in international legal forums or by neutral bodies.
