Ahmer Bilal Soofi, Head of Public International Law Advisory at ABS & Co, recently delivered a keynote address at a high-level seminar examining the legal implications of India’s decision to place the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) in abeyance and the broader consequences such action may have for international law, regional stability and the rules-based international order.
Addressing an audience comprising federal ministers, diplomats, legal practitioners and policy experts, Mr. Soofi argued that the current debate extends far beyond the operation of a bilateral water-sharing arrangement. In his view, the controversy raises fundamental questions concerning the treatment of shared natural resources, the sanctity of treaty obligations and the responsibility of states to act within established frameworks of international law.
At the outset, Mr. Soofi highlighted a foundational principle of international water law: that flowing transboundary waters are not the exclusive property of any one state. He explained that modern international law treats shared water resources as part of a broader legal framework designed to ensure equitable utilization and prevent upstream states from exercising unilateral control to the detriment of downstream populations. According to Mr. Soofi, this principle forms the legal and philosophical basis upon which international river agreements, including the Indus Waters Treaty, have historically been constructed.
Turning to India’s decision to place the treaty in abeyance, Mr. Soofi questioned the legal basis of the terminology itself. He noted that international treaty law, as reflected in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, provides established mechanisms relating to the suspension, termination and interpretation of treaties. The concept of “abeyance”, however, does not occupy a recognised position within that framework. Mr. Soofi observed that where a state ceases to perform its treaty obligations while continuing to rely on terminology not recognised by treaty law, significant concerns arise regarding compliance with international legal commitments.
Mr. Soofi further argued that attempts to justify treaty abeyance by reference to terrorism or other unrelated political disputes risk conflating distinct areas of international law. He noted that counter-terrorism obligations are governed through separate legal instruments, multilateral frameworks and Security Council mechanisms. The existence of such concerns, he suggested, does not automatically alter the legal obligations arising under a treaty specifically negotiated to regulate the management and distribution of shared water resources.
A central theme of the address was the connection between recent geopolitical developments and India’s evolving position on the treaty. Mr. Soofi observed that developments relating to Jammu and Kashmir following 2019 have increasingly intersected with discussions surrounding the Indus river system. In his assessment, the legal and strategic implications of these developments cannot be separated from the current debate concerning treaty obligations and regional water security.
Moving beyond the treaty itself, Mr. Soofi contended that the matter has now acquired dimensions that engage the broader framework of the United Nations Charter. He argued that when actions affecting shared natural resources create the potential for instability between nuclear-armed neighbours, the issue ceases to be a purely technical dispute concerning treaty interpretation. Instead, it becomes a question directly linked to international peace and security and one that warrants the attention of institutions entrusted with maintaining global stability.
Mr. Soofi also reflected on earlier efforts to promote what he described as “legal diplomacy” between Pakistan and India. Such initiatives sought to create structured legal dialogue on longstanding bilateral issues through engagement by legal experts and practitioners rather than solely through political channels. He noted that legal dialogue remains an underutilised mechanism capable of clarifying competing claims and identifying pathways toward peaceful dispute resolution.
In concluding remarks, Mr. Soofi warned that the long-term consequences of weakening treaty-based commitments extend beyond the immediate parties to a dispute. International agreements function because states accept that legal obligations must be performed in good faith and that disagreements should be addressed through recognised legal processes. According to Mr. Soofi, any departure from these principles risks undermining confidence in international agreements more broadly, particularly those governing shared resources that are critical to the economic welfare, food security and stability of millions of people.
The address forms part of the continuing international discussion on the future of the Indus Waters Treaty and the role of international law in balancing state interests, protecting shared resources and preserving regional peace and security.
This article provides a summary of the keynote address delivered by Mr. Ahmer Bilal Soofi. You can watch the full broadcast below, courtesy of Express 24-7.
