ISLAMABAD - Pakistan yesterday sent a letter to India reminding that the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) was fully in force and there was no change in its status.
Pakistan formally sent a letter to India in response to the suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty de-claring the move as “unlawful.”
The letter by Secretary of Water Resources, Syed Ali Murtaza, was addressed to his Indian counter-part. Pakistan said the suspension was not supported by any clause within the treaty.
Pakistan has reiterated the Indus Waters Treaty remains valid in its original form and stressed that the treaty contains “no provision” allowing for “unilateral” amendments or suspensions.
“There is no provision in the 1960 Indus Waters Treaty that allows for its suspension by either party,” says the letter.
Pakistan’s communication emphasized that the language used in India’s suspension notice does not exist within the legal framework of the treaty.
The letter reiterates Pakistan’s commitment to the treaty in its original form, dismissing any notion of modification or suspension by one party as baseless. The World Bank, a signatory to the treaty, has also reportedly rejected India’s position regarding the suspension.
Pakistan, according to officials, has not made any appeal regarding the treaty but has expressed will-ingness to engage in dialogue within the established treaty framework upon India’s request.
Foreign Office spokesperson Shafqat Ali Khan earlier said Pakistan had responded to the Indian letters by conveying that the treaty remains fully in force and is binding on the parties. “There is no provision in the treaty to hold it in abeyance. This remains our position,” he added.
On April 23, 2025, India had unilaterally suspended the IWT with Pakistan, citing national security con-cerns. This followed an attack in Pahalgam that claimed the lives of 26. India’s decision has raised seri-ous concerns.
Meanwhile, government official said Pakistan is preparing for possible talks with India at a neutral ven-ue despite New Delhi’s reluctance to accept any such offer.
Highly placed government sources told The Nation that Pakistan has almost all points ready to be put on the table. “We are ready for talks at any neutral venue. If India decides to join, we can start the dia-logue any time. We know India is running away for talks,” one official said.
Another official said Pakistan prefers to resolve all the issues through talks. “We want this to happen at a neutral venue because they (India) will not agree to come here and we may not go there. People like President Trump can be helpful in talks,” he added.
Earlier, the US said Pakistan and India had agreed to an immediate and comprehensive ceasefire, fol-lowing days of dangerously escalating military tensions between the two nuclear-armed neighbours.
The breakthrough was formally announced by US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who also revealed that both nations will engage in wide-ranging dialogue at a neutral venue in the coming days.
In a post on social media platform X, Rubio stated, “Over the past 48 hours, Vice President J D Vance and I have held extensive consultations with senior officials from both India and Pakistan, including Prime Ministers Narendra Modi and Shehbaz Sharif, External Affairs Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishan-kar, Chief of Army Staff General Asim Munir, and National Security Advisors Ajit Doval and Asim Malik.” These diplomatic engagements culminated in a mutual agreement to de-escalate tensions and pursue diplomatic engagement on contentious issues.
US considered Pakistan-India ceasefire a diplomatic win. “Marco, stand up,” President Donald Trump said in a speech. “What a great job you did on that. Maybe we can get them together for a nice dinner. Wouldn’t that be nice?”
India later rejected President Trump’s offer to mediate on Kashmir issue. New Delhi suggested it sees no role for external intervention in the matter.
The ceasefire, which took effect over the weekend, comes in the wake of intensifying hostilities that included deadly cross-border strikes, aerial skirmishes, and growing fears of a nuclear confrontation.
The ceasefire follows a period of acute military confrontation triggered by a deadly terror attack in oc-cupied Kashmir on April 22, which left 26 dead. India swiftly blamed Pakistan for the incident without any evidence, alleging support for the group responsible. Pakistan categorically denied involvement and offered to cooperate in an impartial investigation.
Tensions peaked with India launching aerial attacks on Pakistani territory. In retaliation, Pakistan shot down five Indian jets, including advanced Rafale fighters, and initiated Operation Bunyan Ul Marsoos, targeting Indian military installations, including BrahMos missile depots and key airbases in Pathankot, Udhampur, Gujarat, and Rajasthan.
In behind-the-scenes diplomacy, Secretary Rubio personally reached out to key figures, including Shehbaz Sharif and Indian External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar, urging an end to hostilities. The US commitment to facilitate direct dialogue proved decisive in securing the ceasefire.
Senior diplomat Abdul Basit said the enduring root of these tensions is the unresolved dispute over Jammu and Kashmir. He welcomed Trump’s readiness to address the issue, even as he acknowledged that India has traditionally resisted third-party mediation.
Basit proposed appointing special envoys from India, Pakistan, and the United States to address the Kashmir conflict. “It’s a bold idea,” he said. “If successful, Trump could even be seen as a candidate for the Nobel Peace Prize.”
Despite accusations, counterclaims, and conflicting narratives, both countries agreed on May 12 to de-escalate further. Talks are expected to continue in the coming days, with both sides pledging to reduce troop levels along sensitive borders.
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, however, claimed that the ceasefire represented only a “pause,” not an end to hostilities. Pakistan criticised this statement, calling it dangerous for peace.
