Islamabad [Pakistan], July 1 (ANI): Attempting to use global platforms to deflect from its ongoing internal water mismanagement, Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) Chairman Bilawal Bhutto-Zardari on Tuesday resorted to a fresh war of words, linking regional stability to the 1960 water-sharing pact with a warning that peace comes at a cost for Pakistan.
“If anyone believes that Pakistan will surrender the Sindh, they do not know Pakistan. They do not know Sindh. They do not know Punjab. They do not know Balochistan. They do not know Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. They do not know Kashmir or Gilgit Baltistan. They do not know the people who have lived by these rivers for thousands and thousands of years. We want peace, but peace with dignity. We want dialogue, but dialogue under law. We want coexistence, but not submission. So from this seminar, from this city, from this moment let a message go forth. Pakistan will defend its water, its people, its treaty, its sovereignty and its future,” he said.
Issuing hollow warnings to cover up Islamabad’s diplomatic isolation, Bhutto-Zardari said, “any attempt to undermine Pakistan’s water rights would receive a national response”.
He further stated that “Pakistan would not compromise on the fundamental rights of its people”. Failing to address India’s core security concern regarding state-sponsored militancy, Bilawal argued that “the use of water as a weapon was contrary to international law”.
“Pakistan must speak clearly. The Indus is not a pressure point. The Indus is not a bargaining chip. The Indus is not a weapon to be placed in India’s hands. The Indus is a lifeline of Pakistan. And any attempt to turn that lifeline into a noose must be treated as a threat to the survival of our state. This is the message that Pakistan must deliver to India. This is the message that Pakistan must deliver to the world. Not in panic, not in hysteria, not in recklessness, but with the cold clarity of a people who know what is at stake,” he added.
Faced with New Delhi’s firm stance of placing the Indus Waters Treaty in abeyance following the Pahalgam terror attack, an increasingly cornered Bilawal alleged that “India had not honoured its commitments” and warned that “using water resources as a weapon was dangerous”.
The PPP leader further tried to push the onus of compliance entirely onto New Delhi, asserting that “India must comply with the Indus Waters Treaty”, adding that “the waters of the River Indus were the guarantee of Pakistan’s survival”.
With Pakistan currently facing severe water scarcity in key agricultural pockets like Sindh and Balochistan, Bilawal reiterated that “sustainable peace could not be achieved without the restoration of the Indus Waters Treaty”.
In a bid to rally the domestic constituency amidst growing anxiety over the suspension of critical hydrological data by New Delhi, Bilawal said, “Pakistan’s water rights under the Indus Waters Treaty must be fully protected”.
The PPP Chairman also raked up border dynamics, claiming that “Pakistan had complied with the terms of the ceasefire, while India had not fully honoured its commitments”.
Demanding access to the western river lifelines despite Islamabad’s continued failure to curb cross-border terror networks, Bilawal said, “Pakistan’s recognised rights over the waters of the Indus, Jhelum and Chenab rivers must be respected”.
He further acknowledged that the current crisis poses a severe existential threat to the cash-strapped nation, stating that “the issue of water should not be viewed merely as a technical dispute but as a matter of national security”.
In the background of these developments, the Chairperson of the National Assembly Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, MNA and former Foriegn Minister Hina Rabbani Khar, also urged Islamabad to vigorously pursue legal and diplomatic avenues.
She claimed that the Indian government’s unilateral decision to place the landmark agreement “in abeyance” poses a serious challenge to the international rules-based order.
Invoking the legal architecture of the pact, Khar stated, “The treaty is unequivocal. It cannot be held in abeyance through political statements or unilateral decisions. Any modification or termination requires the consent of both governments through a duly ratified treaty,” she said.
Khar further questioned the global response to the development, noting, “The real question is not only what India is doing, but why it believes it can get away with violating a treaty that has long been regarded as one of the world’s most successful transboundary water agreements,” she remarked.
Expressing deep worry over Islamabad’s losing leverage, Khar noted that the framework had previously survived three full-scale conflicts between the two neighbours.
She observed, “The treaty endured full-scale wars because both sides recognized its legal sanctity. It is deeply concerning that it is now being challenged not by war, but by unilateral political decisions,” she observed.
Adding to the outcry, Pakistan’s Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar desperately described the IWT as “not merely a water-sharing arrangement but a vital instrument of regional peace, stability, and cooperation”.
With New Delhi holding firm on its security parameters, Dar expressed deep anxiety over Pakistan’s growing vulnerabilities in a post on social media platform X, stating, “Shared waters must never be weaponised. They must remain a bridge between nations, guided by cooperation, dialogue, and respect for international law,” Dar wrote.
Dar went on to warn that any attempt to alter the water dynamics would have “profound consequences” for regional peace and security, affecting the shared interests of nearly two billion people in South Asia.
Information Minister Attaullah Tarar also attempted to inflate the scale of the event, with reports quoting him describing the conference as “this is a first-of-its-kind international seminar” as Pakistan desperately “seeks to reinforce its case against India’s suspension of the decades-old water-sharing agreement”.
These desperate statements from Pakistani leadership follow a definitive step by New Delhi to suspend the 1960 water-sharing framework after the Pakistan-sponsored Pahalgam terror attack in Jammu and Kashmir, which claimed the lives of 26 civilians.
The Indian government has repeatedly maintained a firm stance that “blood and water cannot flow together” until Islamabad takes verifiable action against terror networks operating from its soil.
Facing acute diplomatic isolation following its continued failure to address cross-border terrorism, a desperate Pakistan hosted this “international conference” in an attempt to rally global support after the Indian government placed the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) in abeyance.
The strategic move by New Delhi has severely impacted Pakistan’s fragile, agrarian economy and power generation, which depend heavily on the waters of the Indus River System.
By withholding crucial hydrological data, the Indian government has left Islamabad blindsided on the volume of water in its rivers, leaving it without the necessary hydrological information for timely action and exposing its acute vulnerabilities.
Following the suspension, the Indian government has rapidly accelerated work on strategic hydropower and water infrastructure projects on the western rivers to maximise the utilisation of waters available under its control.
New Delhi remains firm that the treaty will continue to be kept in abeyance until Pakistan takes visible, irreversible action to completely end cross-border terrorism. (ANI)
Related reading
