World Bank President Ajay Banga recently stated that the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) cannot be unilaterally suspended or altered. He emphasized that any changes require mutual consent from India and Pakistan. Speaking exclusively to CNBC-TV18, Banga clarified the Bank’s limited administrative role, stressing it has no decision-making authority. The Bank merely facilitates treaty-related processes as per the original agreement.
World Bank’s Role is Purely Administrative
Banga explained that the World Bank’s responsibilities are confined to administrative functions established at the treaty’s inception. A trust fund covers expenses for neutral experts and arbitrators. “We have no role beyond that,” he said. The Bank acts as a neutral facilitator, ensuring procedural compliance. Any amendment or suspension must be mutually agreed upon, as the treaty lacks provisions for unilateral action.
No Formal Communication from India or Pakistan
Banga confirmed that the World Bank has not received any official communication from either government regarding treaty modifications. His remarks followed India’s recent suspension of the IWT after a militant attack in Pahalgam, Jammu and Kashmir. Pakistan has since reaffirmed the treaty’s validity, warning against violations. The Bank remains a passive observer unless both nations seek intervention.
Also Read: Trump Secures $600 Billion US-Saudi Deal with Support from Tech Elite
Pakistan Rejects India’s Suspension of the Treaty
Pakistan’s Foreign Office responded to India’s suspension, declaring the treaty fully operational and binding. Spokesperson Shafqat Ali Khan stated that Pakistan would defend its rights under the agreement at international forums. India’s decision to halt the treaty and close the Attari-Wagah border has escalated tensions, but Pakistan insists on adherence to the IWT’s terms.
Historical Context of the Indus Waters Treaty
The IWT was signed in 1960 after nine years of negotiations mediated by the World Bank. It resolved water-sharing disputes following the 1947 Partition, which divided British India’s integrated irrigation system. The treaty allocated three eastern rivers (Ravi, Sutlej, Beas) to India and three western rivers (Indus, Jhelum, Chenab) to Pakistan, ensuring equitable distribution.
Key Provisions of the Treaty
India can use the western rivers for limited irrigation and hydroelectric projects, but must ensure uninterrupted water flow to Pakistan. Projects must be “run-of-the-river,” preventing significant water storage or diversion. These conditions protect Pakistan’s downstream rights while allowing India limited usage. The treaty’s dispute-resolution mechanism involves neutral experts and arbitration.
Why the Treaty Remains Crucial
The IWT has survived multiple conflicts, proving its resilience. With over 1.6 billion people dependent on these rivers, their collapse could trigger severe water disputes. Both nations rely on Himalayan waters for agriculture, making the treaty vital for regional stability. Unilateral changes risk escalating tensions, underscoring the need for cooperation.
Conclusion: Upholding the Treaty is Essential
The World Bank’s stance reinforces the IWT’s binding nature. Unilateral actions violate its framework, requiring bilateral consensus for amendments. As tensions rise, adherence to the treaty is crucial to prevent further conflict. Both nations must engage in dialogue to address grievances while preserving this critical agreement. The IWT remains a cornerstone of regional water security and peace.
