Indus Waters Treaty explained: what India's 'abeyance' means and why Pakistan calls it a red line

What is the Indus Waters Treaty?

It is the 1960 agreement that splits the rivers of the Indus basin between India and Pakistan.

When the subcontinent was partitioned in 1947, the border cut across the canals and rivers that fed Punjab’s farms. After years of argument, the two countries signed the Indus Waters Treaty in 1960, with the World Bank as broker and a signatory.

The treaty takes the six rivers of the system and divides them, rather than the water in each. India got the three eastern rivers, the Ravi, Beas and Sutlej, for largely unrestricted use. Pakistan got most of the water of the three western rivers, the Indus, Jhelum and Chenab, which carry far more water and on which most of its irrigated farming depends. Pakistan’s share is usually put at roughly four-fifths of the system’s flow.

Can India use the western rivers at all?

Yes, but only in limited ways. India may draw water for domestic use and some irrigation and may build run-of-river hydroelectric plants, which generate power from the flow without holding back large volumes. The treaty sets detailed design limits on such plants, including how much water they may store, known as pondage, and where their outlets and spillways sit.

Almost every quarrel under the treaty has been about those limits. Pakistan objected to India’s Kishenganga project on a tributary of the Jhelum and the Ratle project on the Chenab, both in Jammu and Kashmir, arguing that their designs give India too much control over the flow.

How are disputes meant to be settled?

Through a three-step ladder. Technical questions go first to the Permanent Indus Commission, where each country has a commissioner. A “difference” can be referred to a neutral expert. A full “dispute” can go to a court of arbitration.

Over Kishenganga and Ratle, Pakistan asked for a court of arbitration, while India asked for a neutral expert. Both were set up in 2022. India took part only in the neutral expert process and refused to recognise the court, saying the treaty requires the neutral expert route first.

What did India do in April 2025?

It put the treaty “in abeyance”. After 26 people were killed in the terror attack at Pahalgam on 22 April 2025, which India blamed on Pakistan, New Delhi announced that it would hold the treaty in abeyance. India has said it will stay that way until Pakistan credibly and verifiably stops supporting cross-border terrorism.

Pakistan denies any role in the attack and argues that the treaty has no clause allowing either side to suspend it. It sees the step as a threat to its food and water security.

What has the Hague court said since?

That the treaty still binds India. In June 2025 the Court of Arbitration issued a supplemental award on its own competence, and on 8 August 2025 an award on how the treaty should be read in general. It held that India must generally “let flow” the waters of the western rivers to Pakistan, that the exceptions for hydropower must be read strictly, and it gave design guidance for run-of-river plants. It did not yet rule on Kishenganga or Ratle themselves. A further ruling on the maximum pondage India’s plants may keep followed on 15 May 2026.

India has rejected every one of these. “India categorically rejects the present so-called award,” Ministry of External Affairs spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal said on 16 May. “Any proceeding, award, or decision issued by it is null and void. India’s decision to hold the Indus Waters Treaty in abeyance remains in force.”

The treaty since the Pahalgam attack

1. 22 Apr 202526 people killed in Pahalgam; India puts the treaty in abeyance
2. Jun 2025Court of Arbitration issues supplemental award on its competence; India rejects it
3. 8 Aug 2025Award on general interpretation: India must 'let flow' the western rivers
4. 15 May 2026Award on maximum pondage; India calls it null and void
5. 21 Oct 2026Shehbaz Sharif says any violation will be treated as an act of war

Why is Pakistan raising the alarm now?

Because it says it is seeing the effects upstream. Speaking alongside the visiting Maldivian president in Islamabad on Wednesday, Shehbaz Sharif said water was a “red line” and that “any violation in this regard will be regarded by Pakistan as an act of war.” Pakistani officials have reported unusual fluctuations in river flows in recent weeks and accuse India of pushing ahead with reservoir and diversion work, though Islamabad has not named the projects. New Delhi did not respond immediately.

Can India actually stop the water?

Not quickly, and not by much. India has little large storage on the western rivers, and run-of-river plants are built to pass water through rather than hold it. What India can change in the short run is timing, for instance when reservoirs are filled or flushed, and how much information it shares about flows and floods. Building enough dams and canals to divert a significant share would take many years.

That is why the dispute is as much about trust and data as about volume. For Pakistan, even small swings in the flow of the Chenab or Jhelum during sowing season are felt on the farm. For India, the treaty has become one of the few levers it holds over a neighbour it accuses of sponsoring terror. Neither side has shown any sign of letting go of its position.