Climate Minister Malik warns India against weaponisation of water at global conference in Dushanbe

Calls for binding water laws and enforceable mechanisms

Climate Change Minister Musadik Malik on Tuesday warned that India’s reported move to place the Indus Waters Treaty in abeyance could set a dangerous precedent for downstream countries across the world, cautioning that the weaponisation of water threatened the foundations of global treaty systems and multilateralism.

Addressing the Fourth High-Level International Conference on the International Decade for Action “Water for Sustainable Development” in Tajikistan’s capital Dushanbe, Malik accused India of politicising shared water resources and said climate change should lead to greater cooperation, transparency and compliance with international agreements — not unilateral actions.

“There was no legal provision in the treaty to take any unilateral action, and yet this treaty was put in abeyance,” Malik said. “It wasn’t put in abeyance because it was legally defective. It was put in abeyance, or so it is suggested, because it did not serve the politics of one country.”

Read: Pakistan wins Hague ruling in IWT row

He warned that such actions could undermine water rights for lower riparian states globally.

“No downstream country in the world after this shall have water rights,” he said. “Mark my words, once this precedent is set, no downstream country across the world would have water rights.”

The minister said the issue was not merely about Pakistan, but about the future of international treaties and transboundary water governance.

“If this treaty doesn’t hold, then all of the treaties of the world are not worth the weight of the paper on which they were printed,” he said.

Last year, India placed the Indus Waters Treaty in abeyance following the April 22 attack in Indian Illegally Occupied Jammu and Kashmir (IIOJK)’s Pahalgam area, in which 26 people were killed by unidentified assailants.

Malik said climate change demanded “more compliance, not less”, as well as increased transparency, data sharing and early warning systems.

“Climate change meant all these things, not to use it as an excuse to suspend or unilaterally reinterpret or bypass a legally binding treaty,” he added.

Referring to a recent court of arbitration ruling, Malik said the judgment had clarified limits on water retention and hydropower design for upstream countries, but lamented the absence of binding enforcement mechanisms.

“The rule-based regimes are collapsing,” he said. “Multilateralism is weakening, and new doctrines of unilateralism are rising.”

Also Read: FM Dar urges UNSC president to press India to restore Indus Waters Treaty

“I can tell you that even water is getting weaponised,” he added.

Calling for stronger international mechanisms, the minister urged the conference to work towards binding global covenants on transboundary water management and compulsory third-party dispute resolution mechanisms between upstream and downstream countries.

“Pakistan would like to call upon this conference to come up with binding international covenants for transboundary water,” he said. “Pakistan would like to ask for political, economic and diplomatic consequences for violators.”

The minister also highlighted the human cost of climate change and water insecurity, saying vulnerable communities were paying the price for global inaction.

“The woman who wakes up at dawn and walks four hours for one bucket of water is not looking forward to a conference outcome framework,” he said. “The child who is dead or dying is not asking for another voluntary commitment.”

Malik called for stronger legal and institutional mechanisms to protect water rights, saying the world needed enforceable laws, institutions with the courage to implement them, and leadership that recognised access to water as a fundamental right requiring justice and accountability.

Speaking about Pakistan’s climate vulnerability, Malik said the country contributed less than 1% of global greenhouse gas emissions but continued to suffer devastating floods, droughts and glacial melt.

“We didn’t cause it. Why are we paying for this?” he asked.

Malik said recurring cycles of floods and droughts were pushing farming communities back into poverty and damaging agricultural land.

“These are not tragedies,” he said. “These are the consequences of the decisions that people like us make at these conferences.”

Also Read: Zardari urges India to fully restore IWT, warns against ‘weaponisation’ of water

Describing water scarcity as a growing global crisis, the minister said nearly two billion people lacked safe drinking water, while billions more faced seasonal water shortages.

“This water bankruptcy that we’re talking about is not water bankruptcy; this is a food security issue,” he said. “People are going to deal with hunger.”

Malik argued that the political architecture surrounding water resources disproportionately disadvantaged downstream nations.

“Water flows downhill, but power does not,” he said. “Country after country, basin after basin, the countries that are downstream have less political power, less influence and less economic power.”

He concluded by urging global leaders to move beyond declarations and voluntary commitments.

“We should not be talking about how we think and what we think,” he said. “We should be talking about what we are going to do.”

The IWT of 1960 stands as one of the most carefully negotiated and legally robust transboundary water agreements in modern international law. Concluded between Pakistan and India with the good offices of the World Bank, the treaty was designed to remove water from the volatility of politics and conflict and to anchor it firmly in law, engineering discipline, and neutral dispute resolution. It is a binding international instrument governed by the foundational principle of pacta sunt servanda — that treaties must be honoured in good faith.

Read: Pakistan accuses India of violating Indus Waters Treaty

At the heart of the IWT lies a permanent and unqualified allocation of rivers. Article II vests the eastern rivers — Ravi, Beas, and Sutlej — exclusively in India, while Article III accords Pakistan exclusive rights over the western rivers — Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab. This allocation was the treaty’s foundational bargain.

India’s access to the western rivers is permitted only within the narrow confines of Article III(2) of the Indus Waters Treaty, read with Annexures D and E, allowing limited, non-consumptive uses such as run-of-the-river hydroelectric projects. These permissions are subject to strict design and operational constraints, including limits on pondage, prohibition of storage for flow regulation, and a ban on engineering features enabling control over water flows to Pakistan.

These safeguards were intended to protect Pakistan as the lower riparian and prevent water from becoming a strategic tool. Pakistan’s objections to projects such as Kishanganga and Ratle stem from concerns over excessive pondage, gated spillways, and drawdown mechanisms, which it says violate treaty provisions and could affect downstream flows, particularly during lean seasons.

The dispute entered a more troubling phase in April 2025, when, following a terrorist incident in Pahalgam, India announced that it was placing the Indus Waters Treaty “in abeyance”.

Earlier this year, India unilaterally approved the Dulhasti Stage-II Hydropower Project on the Chenab River, an action that violates the treaty’s provisions governing the western rivers and infringes upon Pakistan’s legally protected rights under the binding international agreement.

The unilateral suspension and expedited approval of upstream projects, including the withholding of hydrological data, diversion of river flows, and alteration of natural regimes, constitute deliberate water weaponisation, jeopardising Pakistan’s agriculture, food security, hydropower generation, and ecological stability. Under the IWT, customary international law, and Article 51 of the UN Charter, Pakistan has clear legal avenues to respond.

International law expressly prohibits the use of water as a weapon against downstream populations, making strict enforcement of the IWT essential not only for bilateral stability but also for the integrity of global water governance norms.