ISLAMABAD: Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar on Friday warned of India’s alleged “weaponisation of water” following sudden and unusual variations in the flow of the Chenab River, raising alarm among farmers in Punjab.
Dar made the remarks while briefing the diplomatic corps in Islamabad, a day after the Foreign Office said Pakistan had sought clarification from India over the abrupt changes in river flows.
Opening his address, Dar said the situation posed a serious threat to peace and stability in South Asia. He recalled India’s unilateral move in April to hold the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) in abeyance, describing recent developments as “material breaches” that strike at the core of the treaty and undermine international law.
He said Pakistan had observed abrupt variations in the Chenab’s flow on two occasions this year — from April 30 to May 21 and again from December 7 to December 15. According to him, these fluctuations suggested the unilateral release of water by India without prior notification or data-sharing, as required under the IWT.
Dar said Pakistan’s Indus Water Commissioner had formally written to his Indian counterpart seeking clarification, adding that the latest incident exemplified India’s alleged strategy of using water as a tool of coercion.
“Manipulation of water at a critical stage of our agricultural cycle directly threatens livelihoods, food security and the economic well-being of our people,” he said, stressing that Pakistan expected India to respond to the queries, refrain from unilateral actions and fully comply with its treaty obligations.
He accused India of repeatedly undermining the IWT in a “systemic manner”, citing hydropower projects such as Kishanganga and Ratle, which he said violated the treaty’s technical specifications. Dar warned that India’s growing capacity to store and regulate water through such projects endangered Pakistan’s security and economy, as well as the livelihoods of its 240 million people.
The minister also alleged that India had stopped sharing hydrological data and halted joint oversight mechanisms under the treaty, exposing Pakistan to risks of floods and droughts. He cautioned that such conduct could trigger a humanitarian crisis and amounted to violations of international and humanitarian law.
Dar further accused India of subverting the treaty’s dispute resolution mechanisms by refusing to participate in proceedings before the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) and neutral expert processes. He noted that the PCA had recently reaffirmed the treaty’s validity and the binding nature of its dispute settlement framework.
“These rulings leave no ambiguity that the IWT remains in force,” he said, urging the international community to reject what he termed “Indian impunity”.
Referring to a report by UN rapporteurs made public on December 15, Dar said the experts had also expressed concern over India’s actions related to the IWT. He cited the report as noting remarks by India’s home minister in June that New Delhi would not restore the treaty and would instead divert water through a new canal to Rajasthan.
Dar reiterated Pakistan’s position that any attempt to stop or divert water flows guaranteed under the treaty would be considered an act of war. While reaffirming Islamabad’s commitment to peaceful dispute resolution, he stressed that Pakistan would not compromise on its “existential water rights”.
Calling on the international community, particularly members of the UN Security Council, to take urgent notice of the situation, Dar said water must never be weaponised. “Water is life,” he said, concluding that safeguarding international treaties was essential for regional peace and stability.
Meanwhile, according to daily reports by the Pakistan Water and Power Development Authority (Wapda), inflows and outflows at Marala headworks on the Chenab River remained alarming between December 9 and December 18.
India had held the IWT in abeyance in April following an attack on tourists in occupied Kashmir’s Pahalgam, an allegation Pakistan rejected. Islamabad has maintained that the treaty does not allow unilateral suspension, a position later reinforced by the PCA’s supplemental award stating India cannot unilaterally put the treaty on hold.
