by Muhammad Mohsin Iqbal
How wisely it has been said that if you are blessed with a good neighbor, life becomes easy and peaceful. This golden principle is equally true for individuals and for nations. Countries that enjoy cordial and friendly relations with their neighbors tend to progress steadily, ensuring prosperity for their citizens and stability for their governments. On the contrary, when neighbors are hostile or uncooperative, both peace and development remain elusive. Sadly, Pakistan has not been fortunate in this regard. Since its inception in 1947, Pakistan has had to endure a turbulent and confrontational relationship with its eastern neighbor, India—a country that has never truly accepted the reality of Pakistan’s existence.
From 1948 onwards, hostile winds have continued to blow from across the border. India’s attitude has remained aggressive, manipulative, and disruptive, undermining any chance for lasting peace in the region. Despite Pakistan’s repeated gestures for peace and regional cooperation, India has always chosen to respond with antagonism. Their efforts to destabilize Pakistan have ranged from military confrontations to hybrid warfare, propaganda campaigns, and even economic sabotage. But each time, by the grace of Allah and through the resilience of our people and armed forces, Pakistan has managed to thwart these designs effectively.
Recently, India has once again attempted to stage a poorly-directed drama aimed at maligning Pakistan. While Indian cinema enjoys global recognition, the fictional narratives they create about Pakistan fall flat on the international stage. These narratives, full of distortion and prejudice, are consumed domestically for political mileage but fail to convince the global community, which increasingly sees through the smokescreen of Indian propaganda. The infamous Balakot incident and the capture of Indian Air Force pilot Abhinandan Varthaman is one such example where India’s aggressive posturing was met with a firm, yet mature, response from Pakistan. His swift return, in line with international humanitarian standards, portrayed Pakistan as the more responsible and peaceful actor in the region.
Now, India has turned its attention towards a more dangerous and long-term threat; the suspension or manipulation of the Indus Waters Treaty. Signed in 1960 under the mediation of the World Bank, this treaty is a cornerstone of peace and water security in South Asia. It is not merely a bilateral agreement but a model of conflict resolution that has endured despite three wars between the two countries. The World Bank played a pivotal role not only in brokering the treaty but also in establishing a legal and institutional framework to manage disputes. Under the treaty, India received rights to the eastern rivers—Ravi, Beas, and Sutlej—while Pakistan was allotted the western rivers—Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab—forming the lifeblood of Pakistan’s agricultural economy.
The importance of the World Bank lies in its role as a guarantor and neutral third party that ensures both sides adhere to the agreed framework. It also facilitates dispute resolution through mechanisms like neutral expert appointments and arbitration panels. The treaty has survived more than six decades precisely because of this robust structure. However, India’s recent unilateral actions and threats to block or reduce the flow of water from the western rivers not only breach the treaty but challenge the authority and credibility of the World Bank’s mediation. Such behavior amounts to water terrorism and an environmental aggression that could set a dangerous precedent for international water politics.
This act amounts to water terrorism, an alarming and dangerous escalation that can destabilize the region. Pakistan’s economy is largely agrarian, with agriculture contributing around 23% to the GDP and employing nearly 38% of the labor force. More than 90% of our agricultural activity depends directly on river water. If this lifeline is choked or blocked, the consequences for Pakistan’s food security, employment, and economic stability will be devastating. A country whose backbone is agriculture cannot afford to have its water supplies weaponized by a hostile neighbor. This is not merely a bilateral issue; it is a human rights concern and an environmental hazard, with implications for peace and regional stability.
Pakistan must remain alert and resolute. It is imperative that we utilize every available diplomatic channel to raise this issue, particularly highlighting India’s violations before the World Bank, the United Nations, and other international platforms. The World Bank must also act impartially and proactively to prevent further deterioration. Silence or inaction at this stage would erode global trust in such treaties and embolden aggressive powers to weaponize natural resources.
It must be made clear that any attempt to undermine the Indus Waters Treaty is not just an attack on Pakistan—it is a direct challenge to international law and the moral architecture of dispute resolution between nations. Water is not a weapon. It is a shared resource, a necessity of life, and a sacred trust. If this lifeline is used as a tool of coercion, then Pakistan will be compelled to respond in a language that India understands, not out of aggression, but out of necessity.
We have no desire for confrontation. Pakistan has always been a proponent of regional peace, dialogue, and economic cooperation. But peace cannot come at the cost of dignity or survival. India must understand that bullying will not bring respect, nor will aggression yield stability. The path to lasting peace in South Asia lies in cooperation, not coercion; in treaties honored, not violated.
Let the Indus Waters Treaty remain a beacon of hope for peaceful coexistence. But if one party insists on extinguishing that light, the consequences will flow far beyond the riverbanks.
