Forget air strikes — India has already hit Pakistan where it hurts the most
Here’s why India’s suspension of the Indus Water Treaty matters more than the military strikes everyone’s demanding
By Sanjay Dubey
In the aftermath of the ghastly Pahalgam terror attack, India’s public mood has turned sharply aggressive. Demands for immediate military retaliation against Pakistan have dominated television debates and social media feeds, placing intense pressure on the government to act. Sections within the establishment too appeared to contribute to this heightened public mood. Yet, what many Indians have not fully realised is that India may have already delivered a far more consequential response — one that strikes at the heart of Pakistan’s long-term security, without firing a shot.
Among a series of diplomatic, economic, and strategic measures, the suspension of the Indus Water Treaty stands out. There’s a risk of it being dismissed as symbolic or routine, but it is arguably the single most significant strategic decision taken by India in the wake of the attack — one that has the potential to fundamentally reshape the India-Pakistan dynamic.
Signed in 1960 under World Bank mediation, the Indus Water Treaty has long been considered one of the world’s most resilient water-sharing agreements, surviving wars and prolonged hostilities. Under its terms, India, as the upper riparian country, controls the three eastern rivers — Ravi, Beas, and Sutlej — while Pakistan has rights over the three western rivers — Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab. These rivers are the lifeline of Pakistan’s agriculture, economy, and drinking water supply.
What makes this treaty critical for Pakistan today is the country’s deepening water crisis. With one of the world’s lowest per capita water availability figures, Pakistan stands on the verge of officially being declared a water-scarce nation. Decades of poor management, over-extraction, and outdated irrigation infrastructure have worsened the problem. Equally troubling is Pakistan’s internal water conflict, with Punjab province — the upper riparian within Pakistan — historically diverting a disproportionate share of Indus waters, leaving downstream Sindh grappling with drought-like conditions for years.
In this context, Pakistan’s political and military interest in Kashmir is not solely driven by ideological or territorial ambitions. It is closely tied to water security. Control over rivers flowing through Kashmir — the Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab — is vital for sustaining Pakistan’s agricultural heartland and ensuring its food security. This often-underestimated factor adds a critical dimension to the Kashmir dispute.
The Indian government’s move to suspend the treaty, therefore, carries far greater strategic weight than is being acknowledged in India’s domestic discourse. Even if partial or symbolic, the very act of revisiting or threatening the terms of a treaty that has ensured uninterrupted water flows to Pakistan for over six decades sends a deeply unsettling signal to Islamabad. Yet, within India, the gravity of this move has not been fully registered. A significant section of public opinion, fuelled by prime-time rhetoric, continues to demand visible military action, mistakenly assuming that the government has done little in response.
This is a dangerous misreading of the situation. If public anger and nationalist fervour continue unchecked, ignoring the significance of this strategic move, the government might find itself cornered into ordering a military strike to manage domestic expectations. In a region where both nations are nuclear-armed and tensions are habitually volatile, such a step risks triggering a conflict far more serious than what much of the current public discourse seems to comprehend.
The suspension of the treaty is not a token gesture. It is a calculated and high-stakes diplomatic lever — one that fundamentally alters the strategic balance without firing a shot. It signals to Pakistan that the price of continued proxy warfare will no longer be limited to border skirmishes and diplomatic condemnations. Water, the resource most vital to Pakistan’s survival, is now on the table.
At this juncture, what India needs most is restraint, clarity, and strategic patience — not just from its political leadership, but from its citizens. Recognising the gravity of the decision already taken, rather than clamouring for instant, visible retribution, is the wiser and more responsible course. Real strength lies in responding where it unsettles the adversary most, not where prime-time studios and trending hashtags demand. India has already acted decisively. The prudent, powerful thing now is to hold that line — and let quiet pressure speak louder than war.