OF late, the Indus Basin Water Treaty, which has survived two full-fledged wars between India and Pakistan and the Kargil battle, has come under pressure.

Last time that India stopped water flow to Pakistan was in 1948, but it has done the same twice in the last two months – August and September. The mere frequency of tampering with cross-border water flow should be a cause of worry for the country and needs to be analysed seriously– what caused India to do something that it had scrupulously avoided so far.

According to water experts and political analysts, two apparent reasons are worth analysing i.e. increasing diplomatic isolation of Pakistan in the region and its ability to fight for its rights. Second, it is the increasing Indian clout in the world, giving it a confidence to violate treaties and to get away with it.

It built a hydro-power project on the Chenab River in clear violation of the design provisions in the Indus Basin Water Treaty. Unfortunately, even the so-called neutral experts favoured India, in clear violation of the treaty, granting a decision that equipped India to rig the dam filling criteria.

The way the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers’ Group, prodded by the US, has relaxed its rules to accommodate India on its terms and conditions and the US bending backwards to push India into its civil nuclear deal, have only convinced India about its political and economic prowess.

At the same time, Pakistan preferred to look the other way when India was building the dam in violation of the treaty. It waited for six years (1994-2000) to get initial design data. This has convinced India about Islamabad’s inability to ensure treaty provisions. Later, when Pakistan belatedly decided to pursue its dam design objections, its acceptance of the final verdict only emboldened Indians to follow their own water agenda.

The Indus Basin Water Treaty includes conflict resolution mechanism and the neutral experts, appointed by the World Bank, is the highest forum. Granted, that their decisions are binding on both sides, they still give option to the aggrieved party to apply for a review. The manner in which the country’s rulers accepted the decision, according to experts, fell clearly outside the terms of reference of the neutral experts.

Pakistan’s position was undermined by the lack of expertise and political inability. On the other hand, Pakistan has never been taken off the world’s terrorist radar despite it being the front line state against the war on terror.

Pakistan should try to use the moral force of international treaties, like the Indus Basin Water Treaty, to pursue its case.

Of late, some of water experts and non-governmental organisations have started advocating a review of the entire treaty for two reasons: frequency of Indian violations and introduction of a new phenomenon called climatic effect, which was missing in the early 1960s when it was signed.

This may serve as a trap which must be avoided. It would be a difficult if not an impossible task in the present circumstances to get a better deal, at least if the Baglihar case is anything to go by.

Pakistan has suffered earlier on the Wuller Barrage issue and is suffering on Kishanganga Dam episode, but this should, in no way, be allowed to become reasons to re-negotiate the entire treaty. The disputes should be resolved within the provisions of the current treaty. As part of the policy matters, the government should also carry out the SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats) analysis for past failures and try to correct them.

The treaty has been a pillar of water and other developmental activities in the region for the last 48 years. Rivers flow through the states and could only be used with mutual consent and agreed formulae. If these treaties lose their moral or legal force, life on the planet would turn to a Hobessian state, where it would be “nasty, brutish and short.”