Indus Water Treaty: Discussion, News & Updates

[Watandar]

No, India is not in violation of the treaty it signed. The treaty is put in abeyance/suspension following material breach of treaty.

India has sought rectification of material breach of Indus Water Treaty, asked Pakistan for suitable date

New Delhi [India], February 2 (ANI): India’s Indus Commissioner issued a notice to Pakistani counterpart to notify a date for the commencement of interstate bilateral negotiations to rectify an ongoing material breach of the Indus Water treaty, Ministry of External Affairs spokesperson Arindam...

theprint.in

The treaty is not effective anymore, so there is no point in it being violated.

Rogue, not rogue, no one values what fictional nouns Pakistanis give to India.

There is no such thing as "abeyance" in the IWT. India is in violation of it and the world has recognized its criminality. It's why nobody listens to Indian claims about Pakistan or anything else.

 

[c14-Isotope]

There is no such thing as "abeyance" in the IWT. India is in violation of it and the world has recognized its criminality. It's why nobody listens to Indian claims about Pakistan or anything else.

If there is no such thing as abeyance in treaty, so it does not mean anything- Ok

Then you should know that

There is no mention of two parallel processes in the treaty too, the treaty specifically mentions graded process for dispute resolution.

"The world has recognised", "nobody listens" are some silly phrases you use to cope inside your head, they mean nothing really.

 

[Watandar]

If there is no such thing as abeyance in treaty, so it does not mean anything- Ok

Then you should know that

There is no mention of two parallel processes in the treaty too, the treaty specifically mentions graded process for dispute resolution.

"The world has recognised", "nobody listens" are some silly phrases you use to cope inside your head, they mean nothing really.

What means nothing is India's "abeyance" or "suspension" of the Treaty. India signed the Treaty and must obey it, else it is an international criminal.

The water is still flowing to Pakistan same as before, btw.

 

[c14-Isotope]

What means nothing is India's "abeyance" or "suspension" of the Treaty. India signed the Treaty and must obey it, else it is an international criminal.

The water is still flowing to Pakistan same as before, btw.

There was a material breach of treaty, Pakistan accepted something that wasn't in the treaty(parallel dispute resolution), it now has to accept something else that's not in the treaty (abeyance).

India is not bound by any treaty anymore so it has the rights on the waters being an upper riparian country. Ofcourse it will be fair usage of water as India is a responsible country

There's nothing Pakistan can do apart from making noise over it, which again will be mostly for domestic consumption rather than being anything substantive.

 

[Watandar]

There was a material breach of treaty, Pakistan accepted something that wasn't in the treaty(parallel dispute resolution), it now has to accept something else that's not in the treaty (abeyance).

India is not bound by any treaty anymore so it has the rights on the waters being an upper riparian country. Ofcourse it will be fair usage of water as India is a responsible country

There's nothing Pakistan can do apart from making noise over it, which again will be mostly for domestic consumption rather than being anything substantive.

The treaty remains in force, India is in violation of it. Pakistan is still getting its water, that is the substance of the matter. All this talk of abeyance breach blah blah is for Indian domestic consumption only.

 

[Master Chief]

So sad!

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Pakistan cannot demand water from eastern rivers... because it would mean legitimising and accepting the abeyance of treaty!

India simply broke a treaty.

Is it somehow shameful to admit to this?

 

[Master Chief]

It's just a stupid Bollywood film. You actually take geopolitical lessons from it ?

You've hit the nail on the head. I've never seen the global jeet movement so excitable as this movie has made them.

 

[Master Chief]

No, India is not in violation of the treaty it signed. The treaty is put in abeyance/suspension following material breach of treaty.

India has sought rectification of material breach of Indus Water Treaty, asked Pakistan for suitable date

New Delhi [India], February 2 (ANI): India’s Indus Commissioner issued a notice to Pakistani counterpart to notify a date for the commencement of interstate bilateral negotiations to rectify an ongoing material breach of the Indus Water treaty, Ministry of External Affairs spokesperson Arindam...

theprint.in

The treaty is not effective anymore, so there is no point in it being violated.

Rogue, not rogue, no one values what fictional nouns Pakistanis give to India.

Did India break the specific terms of the treaty or did Pakistan? Please support your answer with citations from the treaty itself or - to give you a chance - even from any relevant UN resolutions that might guide an contextual interpretation.

 

[Master Chief]

There was a material breach of treaty,

Did India break the terms of the Indus Waters Treaty or did Pakistan?

References please.

 

[Goenitz]

Pak should dig up lakes downstream in case India retaliates on Mangla and Tarbela.
Without preparing for war, attacking an Indian dam is stupidity.

 

[PK781]

Heard a couple of journalists mention that the Water flow has already increased in the Chenab river to Pakistan......guess they couldn't hold it off, or, because Pakistan is now ready to give the befitting response (ABABEEL) to their plans.

I also think we're inching closer and closer to the final decisive war between the 2.

 

[drkrn86]

Lol. You asked. We declined.

Did we break the treaty at any point?

Did India break the treaty?

Please be clear. This word "quashed" you used....it's not quite the same as "broke".

I want to know if ONE SINGLE Indian phraand on these pages thinks that India BROKE the treaty.

Words like "quash" and "abeyance" may sound clever in whatsapp communities but we need to know categorically if India broke a signed and ratified treaty that was made between two sovereign nation states. Such an act tells us what we need to know about the reliability of doing business with baniya qom.

So, come on, cough up - yes or no question. No excuses or whataboutery or obfuscation like the rest of your compatriots have been doing. Own your acts.

Did India break the terms of the IWT?

India did break the treaty. Now what?
IWT is dead. no amount of grammar will change that.

 

[drkrn86]

No, India is not in violation of the treaty it signed. The treaty is put in abeyance/suspension following material breach of treaty.

India has sought rectification of material breach of Indus Water Treaty, asked Pakistan for suitable date

New Delhi [India], February 2 (ANI): India’s Indus Commissioner issued a notice to Pakistani counterpart to notify a date for the commencement of interstate bilateral negotiations to rectify an ongoing material breach of the Indus Water treaty, Ministry of External Affairs spokesperson Arindam...

theprint.in

The treaty is not effective anymore, so there is no point in it being violated.

Rogue, not rogue, no one values what fictional nouns Pakistanis give to India.

No matter what we say, India did breach the IWT terms.

No matter what Pakistanis call us, world wont give an ear.

 

[drkrn86]

The treaty remains in force, India is in violation of it. Pakistan is still getting its water, that is the substance of the matter. All this talk of abeyance breach blah blah is for Indian domestic consumption only.

As Pakistan is getting their water there is no need to cry a river.

 

[drkrn86]

India simply broke a treaty.

Is it somehow shameful to admit to this?

Vis-a Vis Pakistan, not really.