What India can and cannot do under the Indus Waters Treaty

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan has repeatedly stated that India is violating both the letter and spirit of the 1960 Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), warning that a series of hydropower projects, disputed engineering designs, and New Delhi's decision to place the treaty "in abeyance" threaten Pakistan's water security.

Signed in 1960 and brokered by the World Bank, the Indus Waters Treaty governs the sharing of the six rivers of the Indus Basin between Pakistan and India. 

Long regarded as one of the world's most successful transboundary water-sharing agreements, the treaty grants Pakistan primary rights over the western rivers while allowing India limited upstream use under detailed engineering and operational restrictions. 

Pakistan maintains that India's expanding hydropower infrastructure and unilateral decision to place the treaty in abeyance violate the treaty's provisions and undermine its core purpose.

The treaty divides the six rivers of the Indus Basin into two groups rather than sharing each river equally.

Under the agreement, India enjoys unrestricted rights over the eastern rivers, the Ravi, Beas and Sutlej, while Pakistan has primary rights over the western rivers, the Indus, Jhelum and Chenab.

Although the western rivers originate or flow through Indian territory before entering Pakistan, the treaty permits India only limited uses under detailed technical conditions designed to prevent upstream manipulation of river flows.

What India is permitted to do under the treaty

On the western rivers, India's rights are significantly more limited.

The treaty permits India to:

• Use western river waters for domestic purposes such as drinking water and sanitation.
• Undertake non-consumptive uses, including navigation and fisheries.
• Irrigate specified areas within the limits prescribed in Annexure C.
• Construct treaty-compliant run-of-river hydropower projects in accordance with Annexure D.
• Carry out flood-control, drainage, erosion-control and river-training works, provided these do not conflict with treaty restrictions.

What India cannot do under the treaty

Pakistan says the treaty does not permit India to:

• Permanently block or divert the waters of the Indus, Jhelum or Chenab.
• Consume western river waters for uses beyond those specifically permitted under the treaty.
• Construct storage reservoirs on the western rivers beyond the limits allowed under Annexure E.
• Expand irrigation beyond the acreage limits established in Annexure C.
• Design or operate hydropower projects in a manner inconsistent with the engineering rules contained in Annexure D.
• Materially interfere with Pakistan's treaty-protected use of the western rivers.

Projects that violate treaty provisions:

Kishanganga Hydroelectric Project

Constructed on the Kishanganga (Neelum) River, a tributary of the Jhelum, the Kishanganga Hydroelectric Project has remained one of Pakistan's longest-running treaty disputes.

Pakistan maintains that diverting water from the Kishanganga into another tributary reduces downstream flows into Pakistan's Neelum Valley and affects the Neelum-Jhelum Hydropower Project.

Islamabad says the diversion is inconsistent with the principles governing India's limited use of the western rivers and the design criteria for run-of-river projects contained in Annexure D. Pakistan also maintains that the project undermines its downstream rights over the Jhelum system.

India maintains that the project complies with the treaty.

An International Court of Arbitration directed India to maintain a minimum environmental flow downstream, while Pakistan maintains that the ruling did not endorse every aspect of India's interpretation of the treaty.

Baglihar Hydroelectric Project

Pakistan challenged the Baglihar Hydroelectric Project on the Chenab River, maintaining that the dam's gated spillways, live storage capacity and outlet structures exceeded what is permitted for run-of-river projects.

According to Islamabad, these features violate the engineering restrictions contained in Annexure D, which regulates spillway design, pondage, live storage and operational control to prevent upstream manipulation of river flows.

The dispute was referred to a Neutral Expert, who required India to modify certain technical aspects of the project.

Pakistan maintains that the case demonstrated India's continued attempts to push the treaty's engineering limits.

Ratle Hydroelectric Project

Pakistan has also challenged the Ratle Hydroelectric Project on the Chenab River.

Islamabad maintains that the project's pondage, gated spillways and operating procedures violate the design requirements set out in Annexure D, thereby giving India excessive flexibility to regulate downstream water releases.

The dispute remains part of ongoing international proceedings and has not yet been finally resolved.

Pakal Dul Hydroelectric Project

Pakistan has expressed concerns regarding the Pakal Dul project in the Chenab Basin, maintaining that its storage and operational characteristics exceed what is permissible under the treaty.

Islamabad says the project raises issues under Annexure D, which governs run-of-river hydropower projects, and may also engage the provisions relating to permissible storage under Annexure E.

India maintains that the project complies with the treaty.

Kwar Hydroelectric Project

Pakistan has similarly questioned the Kwar project on the Chenab River.

According to Islamabad, aspects of its design could allow India to exercise greater operational control over river flows than is permitted under Annexure D.

India rejects Pakistan's position and maintains that the project complies with the treaty.

Tulbul Navigation Project

The Tulbul Navigation Project on the Jhelum River has remained suspended for decades following Pakistan's objections.

Pakistan maintains that the project effectively creates storage on the Jhelum beyond what is permitted under the treaty and therefore violates provisions governing storage works under Annexure E.

India maintains that Tulbul is a navigation project designed to improve river transport and that it falls within the uses allowed under the treaty.

Kero, Kirthai-I and Kirthai-II projects

Pakistan has also challenged the proposed Kero, Kirthai-I and Kirthai-II hydropower projects in the Chenab Basin.

While each project is assessed individually, Islamabad maintains that their cumulative effect could significantly increase India's ability to regulate flows on the western rivers.

Pakistan says these projects must strictly comply with Annexure D and Annexure E, warning that multiple upstream structures could collectively undermine the treaty's purpose even if considered separately.

India's decision to place the treaty in abeyance

Pakistan maintains that the gravest challenge to the treaty emerged in 2025, when India announced it was placing its participation in the Indus Waters Treaty "in abeyance" following the Pahalgam attack.

Islamabad says neither the treaty nor any of its annexures contains a provision allowing one party to unilaterally suspend or place the agreement on hold. 

Pakistan therefore maintains that the treaty remains fully binding unless both countries jointly agree to modify or terminate it through the mechanisms provided under the agreement.

Pakistan has also criticized India for reducing routine hydrological data exchanges and for carrying out sediment-flushing operations at some dams without prior notification, maintaining that such actions undermine treaty implementation.

India, however, says changing security circumstances justified its decision and continues to maintain that its hydropower projects comply with the treaty.

Dispute that remains unresolved

Pakistan maintains that India's expanding network of upstream hydropower projects, together with its unilateral decision to place the treaty in abeyance, represents a gradual erosion of one of the world's most successful transboundary water-sharing agreements.

With disagreements continuing over multiple projects and the treaty facing its most serious challenge in decades, the Indus Waters Treaty remains at the center of one of South Asia's most consequential water disputes.

Pakistan maintains that preserving the agreement is essential not only for bilateral stability but also for protecting the water security of millions who depend on the Indus River system.