‘A half measure, political gesture…’: Chellaney warns India’s Indus Water Treaty abeyance a legal vacuum

India’s decision to place the Indus Waters Treaty “in abeyance” is merely symbolic and has no legal standing, says strategic affairs analyst Brahma Chellaney, warning that this half-measure is now producing consequences.

On X (formerly Twitter), Chellaney wrote, “Instead of exercising its legal right under international law to suspend or withdraw from the Indus Waters Treaty, India opted for a half-measure — a political gesture rather than a legal action — by placing the treaty ‘in abeyance,’ a term with no standing in international law. The consequences of this ambiguous approach are now evident.”

Chellaney’s post coincided with India’s rejection of a “supplemental award” issued by what it calls an “illegal” Court of Arbitration set up under the 1960 Indus Waters Treaty.

India’s foreign ministry said, “India has never recognised the existence in law of this so-called Court of Arbitration, and India’s position has all along been that the constitution of this so-called arbitral body is in itself a serious breach of the Indus Waters Treaty.” It added that any proceedings or awards from this forum are “illegal and per se void.”

India blamed Pakistan for the treaty’s suspension after the Pahalgam terror attack and asserted, “Until such time that the Treaty is in abeyance, India is no longer bound to perform any of its obligations under the Treaty.”

Labeling Pakistan as the global epicenter for terrorism, the foreign ministry said Pakistan’s “fabricated arbitration mechanism” was another attempt to evade accountability.

New Delhi warned that any future terror attack linked to Pakistan would be treated as an escalation justifying a military response “anywhere in Pakistan.”

Signed in 1960, the Indus Waters Treaty allocates waters from the Indus and its tributaries between the two countries, with western rivers flowing to Pakistan and eastern rivers reserved for India.