A Terror Attack took place in Pahalgam, Kashmir, on Wednesday. Six terrorists armed with AK-47 killed at least 28 tourists and injured many others.
This is the deadliest terror attack in Kashmir since the abrogation of Article 370 in 2019.
Also Read – India’s Yes to Ceasefire, But No Relief to Pakistan
The assailants reportedly asked individuals to identify them by name and recite Islamic verses before opening fire at point-blank range.
India started retaliating diplomatically. The country had closed its Atari – Wagah border and decided to stop issuing Visas to Pakistani nationals. Those who are already in the country were given 48 hours to go back.
Also Read – Ceasefire – A Historic Mistake By India?
The Support staff will be withdrawn from Pakistan’s High Commission office in Delhi.
The most important of all is the abeyance of the Indus Valley Treaty. Political Observers say India may have waged more than a war on Pakistan with this step.
Also Read – 80% Pakistan Will Be Destroyed: Venu Swamy
The World Bank brokered an agreement between Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru and Pakistani President Ayub Khan. The agreement gave India 30 percent of the Indus waters, while Pakistan was entitled to the remaining 70 percent. 80 percent of Pakistan’s cultivable land, about 16 million hectares, depends on the water from the Indus system.
93% of this water is used for irrigation. It is like the backbone of the country’s agriculture. More than 237 million people depend on this system. Pakistan accounts for 61% of the population of the Indus Basin. Major urban areas such as Karachi, Lahore, and Multan get water directly from these rivers. Hydroelectric power stations such as Tarbela and Mangla depend on the Indus River’s uninterrupted flow.
The Indus System contributes about 25% of Pakistan’s GDP. It supports crops such as wheat, rice, sugarcane, and cotton. Pakistan is already one of the most water-scarce countries in the world. The per capita availability of water will decline rapidly if India stops or significantly reduces the flow of water from the Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab.
Urban water supplies would dry up, and unrest would erupt in cities. Power generation would cease, and industries and households would come to a standstill. Rural areas could see an increase in debt defaults, unemployment, and migration.
India had threatened to review the treaty during previous wars, but this was the first time it had taken serious action.
The treaty consists of 12 articles and 8 annexes (A to H). Under the terms of the treaty, all the water from the “eastern rivers” of the Indus system – the Sutlej, Beas, and Ravi – would be available to India for “unrestricted use.” Pakistan would receive water from the “western rivers” – the Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab. Suspending the treaty would give India more leeway in how to use the waters of the Indus system.
For example, India could immediately stop sharing water flow data with Pakistan. There would be no design or operational restrictions on India for water use from the Indus and its tributaries. Also, India can now create storage on the western rivers, Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab.
However, this suspension may not have an immediate impact on water flow to Pakistan for at least a few years. India currently does not have sufficient infrastructure to stop the flow of water into Pakistan or divert it for its own use.
From a Legal Point of View, the Indus Waters Treaty does not have an exit clause. This means that neither India nor Pakistan can legally terminate it unilaterally.
The treaty has no end date. Any amendment requires the consent of both parties. But even if it cannot exit the treaty, it does have a dispute resolution mechanism: Article IX, along with Annexes F and G, sets out the procedures for raising complaints. First, before the Permanent Indus Commission, then before a neutral expert, and finally, a forum of mediators.
However, there are mixed opinions on whether the dispute resolution mechanism in this treaty will be of any use.
Pakistan itself has no confidence in the dispute resolution mechanism.
In an interview with the Dawn newspaper in 2016, former Pakistani law minister Ahmer Bilal Sufi said that mediation might not be of much help if India chose not to follow the treaty.
“If India withdraws the treaty, it means it has abandoned it. The dispute settlement mechanism under Article IX, Annexes F and G will be of no use or assistance to Pakistan,” he said.
“Since there is no provision in the treaty about its duration or termination, there is no way Pakistan can approach the International Court of Justice for ‘revival’ of the treaty,” he explained.
In other words, Sufi made it clear that Pakistan will not have any mechanism to seek the implementation of the treaty by India.
India’s decision to put the Indus Water Treaty in abeyance will have severe repercussions, even though not immediately. The damage inflicted on Pakistan with this will be even more than what a war can cause to Pakistan and its economy. In simple words, this is deadlier than a war.
This should pressure Pakistan big time to act and cooperate with India in the Anti-Terror operations.
The next step in this war would be India announcing some projects on the western rivers, Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab which will stop or divert the water going to Pakistan.
