IWT a close and settled transaction: Senators

ISLAMABAD: The opposition in the Senate on Friday said in categorical terms that the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) was a close and settled transaction and the international law would justify Pakistan’s military response in case India blocked even a drop of its rightful water.

Speaking in the House on a motion under Rule 218 on “unilateral suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty by India, a clear violation of international law and the treaty obligations”, the parliamentary leader of PTI, Barrister Syed Ali Zafar, presented a strong viewpoint, covering diverse aspects of the matter, emphasising that India’s upper-riparian status does not permit it to block or divert Pakistan’s water.

He explained that the international law says that water is a fundamental human right for the low riparian and UN resolutions including the UN General Assembly Resolution 64/290 also say so. He made it clear New Delhi was violating the international law by holding the IWT in abeyance, which it could not, as the UN Charter and resolutions, international conventions and law say that Pakistan in self-defence can take any adverse action, including the military action if India stops Pakistan’s share of water.

Ali Zafar pointed out, “If India stops a drop of our water; the (international) law, UN resolutions and international conventions say that Pakistan can destroy the structure (used for this purpose) through missiles, planes and soldiers”.

He said Indus basin was their (Pakistan) lifeline as 90 percent of people and crops depend on its water. He described the Indian decision to suspend the treaty as a water bomb hanging overheads and said the IWT was irrevocable and there were complex mechanisms mentioned in the treaty to settle any dispute.

Ali Zafar referred to an article of the IWT and noted that treaty once implemented could not be changed unilaterally but both countries could sign a new treaty if it needs to be amended or suspended or abolished.

India’s claim to hold the treaty in abeyance is a violation of this agreement, he said, adding the neighbouring country did not care about the international law.

He cautioned that the matter was highly sensitive, therefore, the government should be careful while speaking over the issue because it may damage Pakistan’s case. He called for dedicating one or two ministers to only speak on it.

Leader of Opposition in the House Syed Shibli Faraz accused the neighbouring country of making a false flag operation only to stop Pakistan’s water.

He said that IWT was a settled matter and Pakistan should not even talk to India over the treaty, emphasising that it is a treaty and can only be changed if both parties want, otherwise it stands as it.

The opposition leader urged the need to make a well-thought-out plan to handle it technically and internationally.

PTI Senator Humayun Mohmand said that Pakistan even should not talk to India over the IWT and warned the government functionaries against showing willingness to discuss the water sharing issue with India.

JUI-F Senator Kamaran Murtaza proposed constitution of a committee of the House comprising legal experts of all parties to examine all agreements including Shimla Agreement and IWT but also study remedies.

Earlier, the treasury agreed with the opposition on the need for protecting and enhancing prestige and dignity of the Senate by sticking to the rules of business and precedents. The agreement came in the wake of a strong speech made by Leader of Opposition in the House Syed Shibli Faraz, who said the Senate was established to give equal representation to the federating units to use collective wisdom but it has been turned merely into a post office. The chair had also almost stopped giving rulings.

PML-N parliamentary leader Irfan Siddiqui, who was presiding over the sitting, agreed to most of the things highlighted by the leader of opposition. However, he recalled when he became senator in 2021, the scene in the House was no different from that time.