Watershed decision

The Permanent Court of Arbitration's (PCA) supplemental award affirming its jurisdiction over the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) despite India's unilateral suspension marks a critical juncture in South Asia's most volatile water dispute. But with India categorically rejecting the ruling in Pakistan's favour, it must be noted that dangerous fissures are being exposed.

This is because international law is only enforceable if state parties act in accordance with the law, or superpowers ensure their enforcement. Recent history has shown India to be a rogue state, conducting assassinations in foreign jurisdictions and starting wars on flimsy grounds without offering evidence. Unfortunately, unlike other rogue states, India's market makes it attractive to many Western nations, meaning that enforcing a legal arbitration decision is going to be an uphill task.

In what can only be seen as mocking the court, New Delhi has questioned the legitimacy of the PCA, even though it is involved in half a dozen other ongoing arbitrations before it. The only difference is that most of those other arbitrations were initiated by parties based in developed countries, including the UK and South Korea.

The arbitrator's ruling that IWT requires mutual consent throws cold water on India's attempt to hold it "in abeyance" following the April 22 Pahalgam terror attack. Perhaps more significantly, the case, which was brought by Pakistan over India's proposed Kishenganga and Ratle hydropower projects, appears to confirm that India has no authority to build any dams or barriers that would alter the flow of the river without Pakistan's consent.

However, even if New Delhi is to be believed and this issue can only be discussed bilaterally, they would still need to treat Pakistan with due respect. Unfortunately, India's leaders have clearly succumbed to delusions of grandeur, earnest in their delusions that when India talks, the US and Russia listen, rather than the other way around.