Prof. Cheng Warning on India’s Indus Waters Conduct and the Threat to Pakistan’s Water Security

A Beijing-Based Alarm That Pakistan Cannot Ignore

A serious warning from Beijing has once again drawn attention to India’s troubling conduct under the Indus Waters Treaty. Professor Cheng Xizhong, a senior researcher at the Charhar Institute, has clearly stated that India’s unannounced water releases and refusal to share key hydrological data pose a direct threat to Pakistan’s survival and regional stability. These actions are not technical errors but deliberate policy choices that carry serious human and economic consequences. When shared rivers are treated as tools of pressure, the result is instability rather than cooperation. This warning matters because it frames the issue as treaty compliance and international responsibility, not political rhetoric.

◆ Why this warning matters: A Beijing-based expert’s statement strengthens Pakistan’s long-standing concern that water must never be used as leverage.
◆ Why it is urgent: Sudden water actions can damage farming, storage planning, and flood safety at critical times.
◆ What it signals: India’s conduct is now being questioned beyond South Asia.

Indus Waters Treaty Under Pressure from Indian Actions

The Indus Waters Treaty rests on predictability, coordination, and respect for agreed rules. India’s repeated failure to follow these principles weakens the treaty in practice, even if it remains intact on paper. When water releases happen without notice and required data is delayed or withheld, the treaty’s purpose is undermined. A treaty does not collapse suddenly; it erodes when violations become routine and accountability disappears. Pakistan’s position remains clear and reasonable: treaty obligations are binding and must be followed in good faith, not adjusted for political convenience.

◆ Treaty credibility: Repeated violations weaken trust and damage the treaty’s authority.
◆ Loss of cooperation: Water management cannot work without transparency.
◆ Core concern: India treats compliance as optional rather than mandatory.

Risk to Pakistan’s Agriculture and Food Security

Pakistan’s agriculture depends on stable and predictable river flows, as planting schedules, irrigation cycles, and water storage planning are closely linked. Unannounced releases can cause local flooding, damage canals, and disrupt irrigation at sensitive stages. Sudden shortages can be just as harmful, leading to crop stress and reduced yields. These disruptions affect food prices, rural incomes, and national economic stability. When such incidents occur repeatedly, they no longer appear accidental but resemble pressure tactics that place millions of livelihoods at risk.

◆ Farmer impact: Sudden changes in water flow disrupt irrigation planning.
◆ Food security risk: Crop losses can increase prices and deepen economic stress.
◆ Human cost: Ordinary families bear the burden of water instability.

Data Sharing Refusal and Control Through Information

Hydrological data sharing is a basic requirement for safe river management, flood warning systems, and dam operations. When India withholds or delays this information, Pakistan is forced to plan under uncertainty, increasing risks to both agriculture and disaster response. In transboundary water management, control over information often means control over outcomes. This makes data refusal a serious strategic issue rather than a minor technical dispute. Responsible regional behavior requires timely, accurate, and verifiable data sharing, especially between treaty partners.

◆ Planning risk: Lack of data weakens flood control and storage decisions.
◆ Strategic imbalance: Information control shifts risk onto Pakistan.
◆ Required change: Transparent and routine data sharing must be restored.

Hydropower Projects and Quiet Treaty Erosion

Concerns have repeatedly been raised that India uses hydropower projects to stretch treaty limits instead of resolving disputes through agreed mechanisms. Building first and debating later weakens the dispute resolution system designed to prevent escalation. This approach creates facts on the ground while legal processes move slowly. If allowed to continue, it damages not only the Indus Waters Treaty but also global confidence in transboundary water agreements. Pakistan’s demand is straightforward: follow treaty limits and use formal channels to address disagreements.

◆ Rule stretching: Projects are used to test treaty boundaries.
◆ Process bypass: Dispute mechanisms are weakened by unilateral action.
◆ Global signal: Such conduct encourages similar behavior elsewhere.

International Silence and Its Consequences

The World Bank and other international actors have recognized roles in supporting the treaty framework. Continued silence in the face of repeated violations weakens their credibility and the rule-based order they claim to support. Silence does not reduce tension; it increases it by lowering the cost of non-compliance. Pakistan’s case should be treated as a treaty enforcement issue with real human consequences, not as a routine political disagreement. Stability in South Asia depends on consistent standards, not selective attention.

◆ Institutional responsibility: Treaty-linked bodies must act, not observe.
◆ Credibility gap: Ignoring violations weakens global legal norms.
◆ Rising risk: Inaction increases mistrust and instability.

Pakistan’s Peaceful Stance and Non-Negotiable Rights

Pakistan has consistently shown commitment to peaceful dispute resolution and dialogue. However, water security is an existential issue tied directly to food, health, and livelihoods. Pakistan’s water rights under the treaty are legal rights, not concessions granted by India. Protecting these rights requires strong technical preparation, clear diplomacy, and consistent international engagement. Firmness in defending survival interests should not be confused with hostility; it is a necessary response to sustained pressure.

◆ Peace with clarity: Dialogue remains important, but rights cannot be diluted.
◆ Legal foundation: Treaty rights are binding obligations.
◆ Policy need: Diplomacy must be backed by evidence and readiness.

Water Must Not Become a Tool of Pressure The warning from Beijing highlights a troubling reality: India’s conduct under the Indus Waters Treaty reflects a pattern of pressure rather than cooperation. Unannounced releases, weak transparency, and treaty-stretching projects create risk for millions and weaken regional stability. If India seeks credibility as a responsible regional actor, it must return to predictable behavior, honest data sharing, and proper dispute resolution. Pakistan’s message should remain firm and clear: water security is survival, and survival cannot be negotiated away. Ignoring this reality will only increase the risk of conflict and human suffering.