Islamabad:

Pakistan will take all appropriate steps to protect his proper proportion of water, guaranteed by the Indus Water’s Treaty (IWT), Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar, who chaired a high -level meeting Monday to discuss the country’s strategy in the wake of the Indian movement on the critical water department.

The meeting attended the Ministers of Law and Justice and Water Resources, Legal Attorney, High -ranking Officials and Technical Experts, according to an official distribution issued by the Foreign Office.

The meeting was convened to prepare Pakistan’s strategy after India suspended the IWT from 1960 following an attack on tourists in the Pahaldam area of ​​the Indian illegally occupied Jammu and Kashmir (IIOJK) on April 22.

The Indian decision was part of its fleet of measures to punish Pakistan for his alleged role in the killing of tourists in the disputed region. Islamabad denied hard New Delhi’s charges and offered to be part of any “neutral, transparent and credible” investigation.

While there is fear of potential military drop of the current crisis, the most significant question is currently fate of IWT that controls water sharing from 6 rivers passing through India.

The treaty, which is broken by the World Bank, resisted wars, several stages of tension and other crises between the two countries.

But for the first time, the Indian government decided to use water as a weapon, a step that triggered a strong response from Islamabad, warning that any attempt to divert, stop or reduce water belonging to Pakistan would be treated as an act of war.

According to the statement, the Foreign Minister emphasized that Pakistan will take all appropriate steps to protect his proper proportion of water, guaranteed in the treaty.

He emphasized that India’s unilateral and illegal steps to keep the treaty in violation violated the established norms of intermediate relations, international law and IWT’s own provisions.

He emphasized that the treaty is critical of regional stability and its holiness must be preserved. When he noticed that the water in the Indus river system remains a lifeline of Pakistan’s 240 million people, he lamented the Indian attempts to weapon water.

He reiterated that Pakistan will continue to advocate for the full implementation of the treaty to ensure the protection of its hiking rights and its people’s well -being.

IWT was signed in 1960 between India and Pakistan with the World Bank as a broker and guarantor. It assigns eastern rivers-Ravi, Beas, Sutlej-to India and Western Rivers Indus, Jhelum, Chenab-to Pakistan.

India receives approx. 33 million acre feet or 20% of the total 168 million acre feet water, using 93-94%. The remaining unused water flows to Pakistan.

According to officials, the treaty has no one -sided exit clause. Article 12 of the IWT clearly states that “the provisions of this treaty … shall continue in force until terminated by a duly ratified treaty concluded … between the two governments.”

According to international law, especially the “Vienna Convention on the Treaty Act (1969),” a state cannot withdraw from a treaty unless neither parties accept or the treaty itself allows.

IWT is state -specific, not regime -specific and legally binding. India may not revoke the treaty unilaterally under Article 12 (2). 4, in Iwt.

IWT delivers a structured dispute resolution mechanism, including bilateral conversations, a neutral expert (Appendix F) and an arbitration court (Appendix G). Pakistan may invoke Article 9 to escalate the case.

Experts are of the opinion that India cannot physically suspend the IWT without massive, long -term infrastructure projects. Natural river flow, geographical limitations and military escalation risks make one -sided action strategically impossible, according to experts.

They also point out that unilateral to suspend the treaty would violate international law and would set a dangerous precedent for upper ripar states such as China. China may follow India’s precedent by suspending water flow to India in the Brahmaputra River.

Experts believe that the suspension of IWT would pose a serious threat to Pakistan’s water safety affecting agriculture, drinking water and food supply, which probably caused Islamabad to pursue legal and diplomatic uses through the UN, ICJ and the Mechanisms of the World Bank.

Pakistan may also turn to the UN Security Council under Article 35 of the UN Charter, which allows any UN Member State to jeopardize a dispute or situation that is likely to jeopardize international peace and security.

Pakistan can form alliances with other lower riparian state – Nepal, Bangladesh, Bhutan – for collective water diplomacy. IWT has served as a stabilizing force in South Asia, its disturbance could escalate geopolitical tensions, the risk of the environment and destabilize millions that depend on the Indus basin, according to officials.

Pakistan already warned that one-sided suspension could destabilize the most important bilateral agreements such as the Simla Agreement (1972), the Karachi Agreement (1949) and Vital CBMS, signaling India’s willingness to bypass structured diplomacy and potentially reveal the wider Indo-Pakistani diplomatic framework.