IWT suspension a real threat to Pakistan, Simla exit a symbolic bluff

New Delhi: In a dramatic turn of events following the deadly terror attack in Pahalgam that killed 26 civilians, Pakistan has unilaterally suspended the 1972 Simla Agreement, an accord that has served as the foundational diplomatic framework for India-Pakistan relations for over half a century.

The announcement came within days of India’s decision to suspend the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), marking an unprecedented low in bilateral ties between the two nuclear-armed neighbours.

Taken together, the twin suspensions indicate not just a rupture in protocol, but a structural unravelling of post-war norms that had prevented past conflicts from spiralling out of control.

The Simla agreement

Signed on July 2, 1972, by then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi and Pakistani President Zulfikar Ali Bhutto in the aftermath of the 1971 Indo-Pakistan war, the Simla Agreement sought to stabilise South Asia after one of the region’s most consequential conflicts—one that led to the creation of Bangladesh.

Three key principles anchored the pact:

1. Bilateral resolution of disputes – Both countries agreed that all outstanding issues, including Kashmir, would be resolved bilaterally without external mediation.
2. Formalisation of the Line of Control (LoC) – The ceasefire line in Jammu and Kashmir was recognised and renamed the Line of Control, establishing de facto borders to prevent future confrontations.
3. Commitment to peaceful coexistence – Both sides pledged to refrain from the threat or use of force and to respect the territorial integrity of the other.

While the agreement has been tested by multiple skirmishes, including Kargil in 1999 and regular cross-border firing, it nevertheless provided a diplomatic safety net, one that has now been voluntarily shredded.

What Simla agreement suspension mean

Pakistan’s move to suspend the Simla Agreement is being interpreted by analysts as a calculated signal to shift the narrative on Kashmir back to the international stage.

Implications for India

• Internationalisation of Kashmir: By discarding the bilateral framework, Pakistan appears to be creating room to invite third-party mediation, a red line for New Delhi.
• India’s decades-old position has been that Kashmir is a bilateral issue, and no external actor has locus standi.
• Diplomatic headwinds: India may now face renewed lobbying efforts by Pakistan across international platforms, UN forums, OIC (Organisation of Islamic Cooperation), and through sympathetic global voices, attempting to reopen Kashmir diplomatically.

Implications for Pakistan

• Loss of diplomatic credibility: The suspension removes the only enduring bilateral accord that legitimised Pakistan’s stake in diplomatic dialogues with India. In doing so, Islamabad risks international censure for discarding peaceful avenues of negotiation.
• Perception of escalation: In the global diplomatic arena, Pakistan’s move may be viewed as an escalation rather than a negotiation tactic, undercutting its position in multilateral diplomacy.

Indus Waters Treaty vs Simla Agreement: A Comparative Breakdown

Why the Indus Waters Treaty suspension cuts deeper

Brokered by the World Bank and signed in 1960, the Indus Waters Treaty has been hailed globally as one of the most successful water-sharing accords, surviving three wars between the two countries. It allocates the Eastern rivers (Ravi, Beas, Sutlej) to India and Western rivers (Indus, Jhelum, Chenab) to Pakistan, which form the backbone of Pakistan’s irrigation economy.

India’s suspension, announced as a punitive response to Pakistan’s role in cross-border terrorism, strikes at the heart of Pakistan’s economic stability. Without Indian guarantees under the IWT, Pakistan faces uncertainty over river flows vital for food security, hydropower, and potable water.

Moreover, India’s upper riparian status grants it the power to withhold or redirect river flows within permissible limits, particularly if the treaty remains in abeyance.

The big picture

The Modi government has increasingly signalled a recalibration of India’s doctrine, from reactive to punitive, with clear consequences for cross-border terrorism. Whether it was the surgical strikes post Uri, the Balakot airstrikes post-Pulwama, or now the treaty suspensions, India is creating a record of measurable retaliation.

Pakistan, under mounting economic distress and international scrutiny, appears to be leveraging whatever diplomatic leverage remains, however symbolic, in a bid to turn the global spotlight on Kashmir.

India’s suspension of IWT is expected to impact Pakistan more immediately and materially, whereas Pakistan’s suspension of Simla is likely to be seen as a tactical, and potentially self-harming, symbolic gesture.