IWT Suspension is an Act of War

“Unilaterally holding Indus Water Treaty (IWT) in abeyance by India is tantamount to an “Act of War”. Water is lifeline of 250 million people of Pakistan. In order to protect out people’s interests we will take water issue to the end-stage,” said categorically by Federal Minister for Water Resources Muhammad Moeen Watto.

He was speaking in a seminar titled “Indian Imperialism on Pakistan Water; Are new War clouds lurking, Consequences and Way forward” organized by Institute of International Relations and Media Research (IIRMR) at a local hotel here on Saturday.

Smelling a rat, he cautioned about India’s sinister intention on water manipulation saying in coming days we should be on high alert against Indian’s wickedness. However, he said so far Pakistan has been experiencing normal flow of water from Indian side which is a good omen. Unmasking Indian’s pre-planned maliciousness, he said India wrote a letter on 18th April on water issue seeking reply from Pakistan on 8th May. But without awaiting Pakistan stance, India blatantly announced to suspend IWT, he added. He assured that as per law neither IWT can be annulled nor can be suspended unilaterally.

Institute of International Relations & Media Research (IIRMR) Chairman Muhammad Mehdi and President Yasir Habib Khan said that India has no capacity to cut off Sindh water because only five percent water flow comes from Indian side. Same is the case with Jelum riven, they added. “Rest of mischievous effort will be exerted only at Chanab river. And in such case if it is orchestrated, it will take many years to materialize,” they said. Beside IWT is a test case for world, they said, if it is violated, then none of international treaties will survive,” they asserted. They termed China as party in such water management and distribution affairs as entire stream of water descends from south Tibet, territory of China. Secondly because the US came forward as mediator, so it is its responsibility to settle the water issue without any delay of time,” they demanded.

Former Indus Water Commissioner Punjab Sheraz Memoon said that infringing water treaty, even if India tries to block water flow toward Pakistan, it will be an exercise in futility due to India’s insufficient capacity to water maneuverability. “IWT survived in Pak-India two wars and barrage of terrorism’s allegations, he revealed and suggested that sagacity demands that treaty should go unaffected in all worst scenarios. He demanded to resolve water issue through diplomatic channels and raising the burning issue on international forums.
He said that Pakistan now has to actively engage the World Bank and the neutral experts appointed under the Indus Waters Treaty. These organizations have the responsibility to see that the treaty is upheld and respected. He again pointed out that the World Bank and neutral arbitrators are obligated to act when a party violates the terms of the agreement, and it is the time for Pakistan to engage all these mechanisms at full strength in defending its national water interests.
Former Minister for Irrigation Punjab Mohsin Laghari categorically ruled out any kind of IWT suspension through one-sided formula, saying if it comes about and India is given liberty to do so, none of international treaty will stand exist and will lose its holistic merits.
Meanwhile, he said that if India remains hell-bent on, it will cost billions of dollars for building structures on water follow. Later profuse storage capacity and water usability will put India’s own stake at high risk, he added.
Former Indus water Commission Commissioner Asif Baig and Ex chief Engineer Irrigation (Punjab) Mr Shafiq said that India has transboundary agreements on water with China, Nepal, Bangladesh and other neighbours. Because China is sitting on upstream level from where water flows down to Indian located at downstream position. Similarly in Pakistan case, India is on upstream location which is being bragged by Indian government. If India dubbing its upstream status as authority to stop water follow to Pakistan transgressing treaty, then what will happen if China and other upstream country may block flow of water to India.
Logically, technically and lawfully, they said India’s rhetoric to suspend IWT carries no weight as it is bilateral agreement that stipulates unambiguously that if any revision is required, both parties will have to proceed with unanimity to make things happen.
They stated that the IWT remains an internationally recognised and binding agreement. “Under Article 12(4), termination is only possible through the written consent of both parties. India cannot annul it unilaterally,” they stated. They said that IWT had survived multiple wars and diplomatic crises over the decades, underscoring its strength and legitimacy.