The Tale of Indus Valley: When Blood Flows, Then Water Does Not
On April 22, 2025, India witnessed the horrific Pahalgam terror attack, in which 26 innocent civilians (or to be more specific, 26 innocent tourists) lost their lives. This is not the first time; these are continuous acts of cross-border terrorism. And India, under the hegemony of PM Narendra Modi, has strongly responded to these attacks. This time India used both diplomatic non-violent retaliation and terror strikes. The terror strikes was the “Operation Sindoor” which the Indian defence ministry termed as “India’s action with precision, precaution & compassion to destroy the Terror camps of Pakistan and PoK”. However, this is not the point of today’s discussion, but the diplomatic non-violent retaliation of India against terrorism, which is ithe Suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) a sign of India’s resolve to defend its national interests through action that is hard but not belligerent.
Understanding the Indus Waters Treaty: A Historical Analysis
The Indus Waters Treaty, signed in 1960 with World Bank facilitation, has at all times been considered a model of international cooperation in the instance of transboundary water resources. Under the treaty, India was assigned authority over the eastern rivers (Ravi, Beas, and Sutlej), and Pakistan was assigned rights in relation to the western rivers (Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab). Despite there having been a number of hostilities between the two nations, the treaty has been upheld, demonstrating a commitment to peaceful coexistence.
But the continued sponsorship of terrorist activity from Pakistani territory has forced India to rethink this deal. Suspension of the IWT is not an emotional response but a calculated move based on the assumption that cooperation cannot be one-sided, particularly when national security is the question at hand.
A Non-Violent Assertion of Sovereignty
India’s cessation of the IWT is a calculated and non-violent response to continued aggression.
Prime Minister Modi quoted “Water and blood cannot flow together”.
In other words, life and national security take precedence over agreements broken repeatedly. India’s IWT response is aligned with the non-cooperation philosophy. India has chosen to disengage from agreements that its enemies exploit to damage India to their advantage. Through the non-violent stopping of the flow of water, India made a clear signal that support for terrorism cannot be tolerated, and peaceful coexistence is based on some common decency and adherence to some common international standards.
International Implications: The IMF and Terror Financing
The global community, and financial institutions in particular, such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF), need to consider the more serious consequences of their financial and logistical support to countries that harbor and fund terrorists. The Indian Defence Minister, Rajnath Singh, expressed unease about Pakistan’s grant of ₹14 crore ($1.8 million) to Masood Azhar, a UN-designated terrorist, and whether the IMF should continue to financially support a state that funds terrorism.
In short, global institutions should act to ensure that they are not unwittingly providing financial support to states while they engage with non-state actors that threaten international peace and security. The IMF should conduct an audit of their various grants and loans to Pakistan to ensure that all available funds are not directed towards terrorism or other negative activities, but rather intended for the development and stability of society. And it is opined the “larger $7 billion Extended Fund Facility (EFF) program” needs to be carefully analysed so that the fund would not be used to nurture the terrorism.
Conclusion: A Call for Responsible Diplomacy
India’s suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty is evidence of its resolve to protect its citizens and maintain national sovereignty in a measured and non-violent manner. The action reiterates that while India is open to dialogue and collaboration, however at the same time, it is not hesitant to take strong action against perceived threats to its security.
The international community has to come together against terrorism and ensure that resources and assistance are not extended to the perpetrators of violence. It is only through the adoption of collective responsibility and adherence to moral values that true peace and stability can be achieved in the region.
