Pakistan underestimated Modi; will Indus treaty suspension lead to PoK?

New Delhi: In the aftermath of the devastating Pahalgam terror attack that claimed 26 lives, India's response under Prime Minister Narendra Modi has signaled a significant departure from previous administrations' approaches toward Pakistan. 

The suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), closure of the Attari-Wagah border, and downgrading of diplomatic ties are being seen as a newfound assertiveness in India's foreign policy in addressing cross-border terrorism.​

The Indus treaty withstood several direct wars between India and Pakistan. The second Indo-Pakistan war in 1965, when Lal Bahadur Shastri was Indian prime minister, war was initiated by Pakistan's Operation Gibraltar, aiming to infiltrate forces into Jammu and Kashmir. India launched a counteroffensive, leading to intense battles. The war ended with the Tashkent Agreement, brokered by the Soviet Union, restoring pre-war boundaries.​

In the 1971 war under Indira Gandhi was triggered by the Bangladesh Liberation movement, when India intervened in support of East Pakistan's independence struggle. The conflict culminated in the creation of Bangladesh and marked a significant Indian victory.​

1999’s Kargil War, when Atal Bihari Vajpayee was the prime minister, was a direct result of Pakistan’s military misadventure in Kashmir.

Pakistani soldiers and militants infiltrated Indian positions in the Kargil sector of Jammu and Kashmir. India launched Operation Vijay to reclaim the occupied territories. The conflict ended with India regaining control over the region, and international diplomatic pressure played a crucial role in de-escalation.

Historically, India's responses to provocations from Pakistan have been marked by restraint. 

Following the 2001 Parliament attack, Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee ordered a massive troop mobilization along the border, leading to a prolonged standoff but ultimately refrained from direct military action. 

Similarly, in the wake of the 2008 Mumbai attacks, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's administration opted for diplomatic isolation of Pakistan but avoided escalating military tensions.​

These measured responses were often influenced by concerns over international opinion and the potential for nuclear escalation. While they maintained regional stability, they failed to deter future attacks or hold Pakistan accountable for its alleged support of terrorist activities.​

Balakot fell short?

Under Prime Minister Modi, India adopted a more assertive posture. The 2016 surgical strikes and the 2019 Balakot airstrikes marked a departure from previous policies, signaling a willingness to cross traditional red lines in response to terrorist provocations. 

The recent suspension of the IWT further exemplifies this shift, leveraging economic and environmental tools to exert pressure on Pakistan.​

Union Minister Hardeep Singh Puri emphasised this change, stating, "Under PM Modi Ji, the New India knows how to give it back." 

The suspension of the IWT, a treaty that has withstood multiple conflicts since its inception in 1960, indicates India's readiness to utilise all instruments of national power to safeguard its interests.​

Implications for Pakistan

The suspension of the IWT poses significant challenges for Pakistan, which relies heavily on the Indus river system for agriculture and drinking water. The treaty's abeyance removes restrictions on India's ability to develop projects on the western rivers, potentially impacting water flow into Pakistan. 

Additionally, the closure of the Attari-Wagah border and reduction in diplomatic ties further isolate Pakistan regionally and internationally.​

The PoK factor

The recent developments also bring the issue of Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) into sharper focus. India's firm stance may signal an intention to press for the reintegration of PoK, leveraging the suspension of the IWT as a bargaining chip. 

While no official statements have linked the treaty's resumption to territorial concessions, the strategic calculus suggests that India may use its newfound leverage to advance longstanding territorial claims.​