Revising the Indus Water Treaty
A policy commentary has argued that India and Pakistan should codify the principle of "equitable and reasonable utilisation" while renegotiating the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), 1960
The commentary calls for building flexibility into the treaty framework to accommodate changing conditions arising from climate change
It follows India's decision in April 2025 to hold the IWT "in abeyance" after the Pahalgam terror attack, which suspended routine data-sharing and Permanent Indus Commission inspections
The debate reflects a broader push, including an earlier Parliamentary committee recommendation, for renegotiating the treaty's institutional architecture rather than treating it as static
Indus Waters Treaty, 1960
The IWT was signed on 19 September 1960 between India and Pakistan, brokered and guaranteed by the World Bank, to apportion the waters of the six-river Indus basin system. It is widely cited as one of the few water-sharing treaties globally to have survived multiple wars between the two signatory states without a formal breach until recently.
Key Details
- India was given rights over the three Eastern Rivers — Ravi, Beas and Sutlej — for unrestricted use
- Pakistan was given rights over the three Western Rivers — Indus, Jhelum and Chenab — with India retaining limited rights (non-consumptive use, agriculture, and run-of-the-river hydropower) on these
- The treaty created the Permanent Indus Commission (PIC), with a Commissioner from each country, mandated to meet at least once a year to exchange data and resolve differences
- In April 2025, India announced the treaty would be held "in abeyance with immediate effect," suspending hydrological data exchange and PIC inspections, citing Pakistan's continued support for cross-border terrorism
The commentary's call to renegotiate the treaty's substantive principles (equitable and reasonable utilisation) and its institutional design responds directly to this abeyance, arguing that any resumption or successor arrangement must build in climate resilience rather than reverting to the rigid 1960 allocation formula.
Three-Tier Dispute Resolution Mechanism under the IWT
The treaty provides a graded, three-stage mechanism for resolving disagreements between India and Pakistan over water use and infrastructure on the Indus system, moving from technical bilateral discussion to binding international arbitration.
Key Details
- Stage 1: "Questions" are resolved bilaterally by the Permanent Indus Commission
- Stage 2: "Differences" (technical disputes, e.g., over a hydropower project's design) go to a Neutral Expert appointed with World Bank involvement
- Stage 3: "Disputes" (broader legal disagreements) go to a Court of Arbitration (Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague)
- Both the Neutral Expert and Court of Arbitration tracks have been simultaneously invoked in the Kishenganga (on a Jhelum tributary) and Ratle (on the Chenab) hydropower disputes — a procedural anomaly India has contested
The commentary's proposal for an "institutional structure" with review mechanisms speaks to criticism that the existing three-tier mechanism was not designed to handle simultaneous, overlapping proceedings or long-term issues like climate-driven flow variability.
"Equitable and Reasonable Utilisation" — UN Watercourses Convention Principle
Equitable and reasonable utilisation is the foundational customary-international-law principle for sharing transboundary rivers, codified in the UN Convention on the Law of the Non-Navigational Uses of International Watercourses (1997, entered into force 2014). It requires riparian states to consider a basket of factors — climatic, hydrological, ecological, social and economic — rather than fixed volumetric allocations.
Key Details
- The 1997 UN Watercourses Convention lists factors for equitable utilisation: geography, hydrology, climate, population dependent on the watercourse, and effects of use in one state on another
- The IWT, by contrast, uses a fixed river-by-river allocation (three rivers each) rather than a needs-based or proportional-use formula, making it comparatively rigid
- India is not a party to the 1997 Convention, but the principle is treated as customary international law applicable to transboundary basins
- Roughly a quarter to a third of the Indus basin's flow originates from glacial melt and snowmelt, making the fixed 1960 allocation vulnerable to climate-driven variability not anticipated at the time of drafting
The article's central recommendation — codifying "equitable and reasonable utilisation" — would shift the IWT from a fixed-allocation treaty toward a needs- and factor-based framework more common in modern transboundary water law, explicitly to absorb climate variability.
- Indus Waters Treaty signed: 19 September 1960; broker/guarantor: World Bank
- Rivers: Eastern (Ravi, Beas, Sutlej) to India; Western (Indus, Jhelum, Chenab) to Pakistan
- Treaty held "in abeyance" by India: 23 April 2025, following the Pahalgam attack
- Dispute resolution: three-tier — Permanent Indus Commission → Neutral Expert → Court of Arbitration (Permanent Court of Arbitration, The Hague)
- UN Watercourses Convention: adopted 1997, entered into force 2014
- Active IWT-related disputes: Kishenganga (Jhelum tributary) and Ratle (Chenab) hydropower projects
- Estimated share of Indus basin flow from glaciers/snowmelt: approximately 25-30%