India Rejects Hague Ruling on Indus Waters Treaty

India has rejected a ruling from an international arbitration panel regarding the Indus Waters Treaty, raising questions about the future of the 1960 agreement. The ruling stated that the treaty remains in force, a position welcomed by Pakistan, which asserts that India is still bound by the treaty. India's Ministry of External Affairs criticized the tribunal, calling it a "so-called Court of Arbitration" that was "illegally constituted" by the World Bank, claiming it breached the treaty. The ministry stated that India "categorically rejects its so-called award, just as it has firmly rejected all prior pronouncements by this illegally constituted body." The Indus Waters Treaty, established by the World Bank, governs the distribution of water from six rivers flowing through India and Pakistan, granting India rights over three eastern rivers and Pakistan rights over the western Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab rivers. India is permitted to use the western rivers for specific purposes, including hydroelectric projects. The treaty has survived wars and periods of tension between the two nations. However, India placed the treaty in abeyance in April 2025 following a deadly attack in India-administered Kashmir. Pakistan subsequently approached the Hague court regarding the treaty's status. Pakistani officials have warned that any denial of water from the rivers would be considered an act of war. Ajay Bisaria, a former Indian high commissioner to Pakistan, noted that India challenges the treaty on both political and legal grounds, using its abeyance as leverage against Pakistan. Bisaria indicated that India's earlier requests to renegotiate the treaty were based on climate change and deteriorating relations. He stated that the Hague ruling would not alter India's course regarding the treaty. Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar of Pakistan asserted that the ruling "decisively rejects" India's attempt to suspend the treaty, emphasizing its binding nature. Ayesha Siddiqa, a Pakistani political scientist, remarked that while the ruling may be difficult to implement if India does not accept it, it provides Pakistan with a moral advantage. Shanthie Mariet D'Souza, a South Asia analyst, explained that India's non-participation in the proceedings allows it to disregard the tribunal's rulings. The ongoing disagreement over the treaty has centered on India's hydropower projects on rivers primarily allocated to Pakistan. Uttam Kumar Sinha, a senior fellow in New Delhi, highlighted that India is contesting not only the treaty's interpretation but also the authority of its dispute-settlement mechanism. The practical implications of the ruling will depend on India's actions regarding its infrastructure on the western rivers, with significant projects requiring extensive time and investment. Sinha noted that there is a gap between India's strategic potential regarding the western rivers and its actual capacity to change water flows.