Water has often been described as the lifeblood of civilisations, and as trying to destroy humanity. But in South Asia, it is increasingly becoming a source of political tension and strategic rivalry. India is a definite example of this practice. For Pakistan, a country whose agriculture, food security, and economic stability depend heavily on the Indus River system, recent developments upstream are being watched with growing concern.
Water in South Asia is no longer just a shared natural resource; it is becoming a strategic pressure point. For Pakistan, whose survival is deeply tied to the Indus River system, developments upstream are increasingly viewed not as routine infrastructure projects, but as calculated shifts in regional water control dynamics.
The Indus Waters Treaty of 1960 was designed precisely to prevent this scenario, but India has always violated international law. It was meant to convert water from a potential conflict driver into a structured framework of cooperation. Remarkably, it survived multiple wars and decades of hostility between India and Pakistan, but the bone of contention always became India. Yet today, its spirit is under visible strain not because the treaty has vanished, but because trust in its implementation is steadily eroding.
Water has the power to unite nations through cooperation or divide them through mistrust.
The latest example is India’s Uri-I Stage-II Hydroelectric Project on the Jhelum River, a project that has reignited fears about the future of regional water security and the integrity of long-standing water-sharing arrangements. Also, this can become the cause of the destruction of peace and human beings.
For Pakistan, the implications are direct and severe. Agriculture, food security, and rural livelihoods depend on uninterrupted and predictable river flows. Any ambiguity in upstream behaviour translates into economic uncertainty downstream. In strategic terms, water insecurity is no longer an environmental concern; it is a national stability issue. The World Bank should intervene and urge India to resolve the matter.
The 240 MW Uri-I Stage-II Hydroelectric Project has entered a major phase of construction following the commencement of underground excavation works in the Baramulla district of Indian-administered Kashmir. The project, expected to generate approximately 932 million units of electricity annually, consists of two 120 MW generating units.
India’s actions are seen as a direct challenge to international laws and global powers, showing that it will continue its violations regardless of consequences and will not stop, even if it harms humanity.
Every country has the right to pursue economic growth and energy security. However, the controversy surrounding Uri-I Stage-II is not merely about electricity production; it is about transparency, trust, and treaty obligations. Critics argue that India continues to move ahead with major upstream projects while failing to provide timely technical details and hydrological information that lower riparian states consider essential for planning and water management. In this context, critics argue that India’s actions are being viewed with concern regarding the use and management of shared water resources in the region, and questions continue to be raised about trust and transparency in these policies.
The concerns become even more significant when viewed in the broader context of the Indus Waters Treaty of 1960. Brokered by the World Bank, the treaty has often been described as one of the world’s most successful water-sharing agreements. Remarkably, it survived wars in 1965, 1971, and 1999, demonstrating that even during periods of intense hostility, both countries recognised the importance of protecting water cooperation. Yet today, many observers fear that the spirit of that agreement is facing unprecedented strain. However, critics argue that certain policies of the current government in India are raising concerns about regional and global peace, creating a sensitive situation for regional stability.
History offers important lessons. Across the world, disputes over shared rivers have often escalated when transparency declines, and cooperation is replaced by unilateral decision-making. The tensions surrounding the Nile between Ethiopia, Egypt, and Sudan demonstrate how major upstream projects can create geopolitical anxieties. Similar concerns have emerged along the Mekong River, where downstream states have repeatedly sought greater information-sharing regarding upstream developments. South Asia now risks moving in a similar direction if confidence-building measures continue to weaken.
The Uri-I Stage-II project, therefore, represents more than a construction site in Kashmir. It symbolises a growing debate about the future of transboundary water governance in South Asia. Whether the region moves toward greater cooperation or deeper confrontation will depend largely on the willingness of all parties to uphold transparency, strengthen institutional mechanisms, and respect the concerns of those who depend on shared rivers for survival. However, certain policies of India are raising concerns about the sustainability of peace and stability in the region.
Water has the power to unite nations through cooperation or divide them through mistrust. India always urges hate; on the other hand, Pakistan condemn the negative policy.
The writer is a journalist