Although it proceeds with new hearings and document orders within the framework of the Indus Water Treaty, it is evident that India does not accept the validity of such actions and will not take part in these proceedings at all, even after the Court of Arbitration in Hague does.
The most recent powder keel is a directive given by the Court of Arbitration (CoA) constituted under the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) which ordered that operating Indian hydroelectric plant pondage logbooks also be prepared as a component of what it terms the Second Phase on the Merits.
The Court has set the hearings on February 2-3 in the Peace Palace in The Hague and has observed that India has not filed any counter-memorial and does not show any participation.
In the case of New Delhi, though, this whole exercise is null.
According to government sources, the so-called illegally constituted CoA still contains parallel proceedings (along with neutral expert). As we fail to acknowledge the authority of the CoA, we do not react to any of its messages.
Also, since IWT is in abeyance, India has no obligation to retaliate. It has been a Pakistani strategy of drawing us in to demonstrate that we are not stagnant.
Convention in the Abstract, Strategy in Action
The context to such an unprecedented standoff is that New Delhi on April 23, 2025, a day after 26 civilians were assassinated in Pahalgam by the Pakistan-linked terrorists, made the decision to do so. India effectively set the Indus Waters Treaty aside, and, in the first instance since 1960, made the further provision that water cooperation must in any case be subject to Pakistan continuing to use terrorism as a state instrument.
The relocation coincided with Operation Sindoor and was a serious change in the India Pakistan policy – collaboration was impossible in the atmosphere of aggression.
Islamabad has responded in a panic fashion. Pakistan has called envoys, scurried delegations to world capitals, written to the United Nations, brought more than ten cases to court, held numerous international conferences in nine months since, located on a single theme which is that India has attacked the part of it which is most vulnerable.
Almost 80-90 per cent of the Pakistan agriculture is controlled by the Indus River system. Its water holding has a capacity of hardly a monthly flow. Its big reservoirs- Tarbela and Mangla are being reportedly close to dead storage. What was bequeathed as a technical treaty set up has turned out to be a strategic point of pressure.
The Hague Moves Ahead Indus Water treaty – Indifferent India
The Hague based court is going in the same direction regardless of the stand of India because the treaty process is not fully functional.
The court gave a comprehensive timetable of the hearing on February 2-3, with Pakistan as the only person present in court at the Peace Palace in the event that India fails to attend.
In another order, five days later, on the request of Pakistan, the court requested India to provide internal operational logbooks of the hydroelectric plants of Baglihar and Kishanganga to help determine whether India has traditionally overstated its pondage computations. It also threatened that, failure to comply with the part of India will lead to the drawing of adverse inferences or requesting Pakistan to provide the identical documents retrieved by neutral expert proceedings.
It was clearly indicated in the court that India did not limit competence of the court by its position to put the treaty in abeyance.
This is the exact stance that India denies.
Dual Mail dispute: Neutral Expert Vs Court of Arbitration
In IWT dispute, a neutral expert reviews technical differences whereas a Court of Arbitration reviews legal disputes. India had always insisted on the issues being within the jurisdiction of the neutral expert and that the action taken by Pakistan to call to bear of the Court is tantamount to forum shopping.
This interpretation is the basis of New Delhi refusing to have its involvement with the CoA. India is sending a message by still embracing only the neutral expert procedure because this means that the country is not allowing Pakistan to widen the argument into a wider stage of legal and political arena.
According to the recent adjudgments by the court, it attempts to reconcile information regarding the two separate processes which is regarded by India to be illegitimate.
Drama of Strategic Law
What is being played in The Hague is not just a legal wrangle over hydroelectric calculations. It will be the initial practical of whether India will weaponize the treaty system in a diplomacy move after decades of trying to keep political silence. In the case of internationalising the issue by Pakistan, it is a survival need. In the case of India, it is a strategic decision to disengage.
The CoA is still permitted to pass orders, set hearings and impose procedural directions. However, in the absence of the participation of India and the established official stance of the treaty on the abeyance level, the proceedings are likely to turn into a one-sided legal document and not the binding adjudication.
This is exactly what however South Block regards.
The message that India has preached since Pahalgam has remained the same: treaties cannot exist separate of earthly realities. And until Pakistan can resolve what New Delhi terms as abnormal hostility, even the most referred to water-sharing agreement in the world will be suspended in more senses than one.
For more updates follow: Latest News on NEWZZY
