After a remark made by Boutros-Boutros Ghali, the former Secretary General of the United Nations that water was going to be the reason for the third world war, many officials and scholars started chanting this mantra at various forums. It is certain that water is going to be a source for conflicts between the co-riparian, but a war over it is too fantastical a situation at the moment. Yes, the nature and degree of conflicts will depend upon a changing political relationship between them. In case, they have cordial relations then water-related mutual differences will be easily sorted out by making certain mutually accepted adjustments, and also a few compromises. But, in case, they do not have good relations or have bitter political relations then the degree of conflicts over water is likely to be very high; still, possibility for war is very bleak. It is not that cooperation cannot take place among the riparian but the problem is that they are not willing to cooperate. The reasons for non-cooperation are: decreasing physical availability of water resources and bitter political relationships between the riparian. In the Human Development Report of 2006 titled Beyond scarcity: Power, poverty and the Global Water Crisis four reasons were mentioned for the growing conflicts among the riparains: Competing claims and perceived National Sovereignty Imperatives; Weak Political Leadership; Asymmetries of Power and Nonparticipation in basin initiatives. Now, talking about the recent developments on water-sharing between India-Pakistan, on February 19, 2013, the Court of Arbitration (CoA) declared an interim award on the fate of Kishanganga/Neelum project on River Jhelum. This award had been hailed by the Indian media, which made a point that this was India’s second consecutive victory over its arch-rival on water-related disputes. First one was in 2007 over the issue of Baglihar multi-purpose project on river Chenab. Both of the projects were challenged by Pakistan because according to the Indus Water Treaty (IWT) of 1960 waters from these two rivers is to be utilised by Pakistan. India has only limited rights over the rivers. These were not the only occasions when India-Pakistan were at loggerheads over the water issue; in the past too there were instances when the state and non-state actors from the two countries had boisterously raised their voice against the continuation of the treaty or to stop flow of rivers into Pakistan. Thankfully, till now things have been well managed by people at the helm of affairs, especially in India. The root cause of the water conflicts between India and Pakistan is the bitterness in their political relations. The IWT of 1960 is one of the two treaties they have maintained in letter and spirit, due to many reasons. Firstly, it was mediated by the World Bank. Even if Pakistan would have been the upper riparian it had to follow it because the weaker country in international system do not have the right to violate the set rules. In case they violate they are penalised by the international community. Various examples of it can be cited. Secondly, till now both India and Pakistan have been able to fulfil their water-demands, so there are no sound reasons to violate the treaty. But as geometrically rising population has increased the demand for water and allied products, there is an immense pressure on the available sources of water. The demand-supply gap is likely to increase further in the future, and so are the conflicts over water sharing from the Indus River Systems (IRS). Once tension over the water issue becomes public, people from both sides start justifying their position against the ‘other’. Not falling into any sort of trap and being honest to my discipline, I argue that to come out from the grip of future crisis there is the urgent need to consider the entire IRS as a single unit. This was proposed even by David Linlithel, whose visit to the region led to mediation by the World Bank and successful negotiation of the IWT between India and Pakistan. Given the immaturity of two nation-states, to outdo the partition of IRS is a difficult task but, pragmatically, it can be the only effective way to address the growing water problem in the catchment areas of the IRS. This is only possible when the two countries are determined to improve their bilateral political relations. Once this happens conflicts over water can be jointly managed; otherwise, one country will celebrate its pyrrhic victory and the other will keep training its innocent youth for a ‘water jihad’. In this entire process, the losers will be the people from both sides of the border, who are highly dependent upon water from the tributaries of the IRS. To conclude, if judiciously used and objectively thought, water bodies can act as a source for peace and cooperation between India and Pakistan. If, not then the two immature modern nation-states can even go for war or at least a military stand-off over this issue because they like to fight no matter what the issue and consequence is. The writer is an assistant professor (guest) at the Delhi University, New Delhi. He can be reached at amitranjan.jnu@gmail.com