The ministry of external affairs on Friday responded to Pakistan’s threats on the suspended Indus Water Treaty and said that India’s position has been consistent. MEA spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal said the treat stands in abeyance as he cited Pakistan’s ‘continued sponsorship of cross-border terrorism’. Follow live updates on Khamenei’s funeral
“India’s position on the Indus Water Treaty is consistent. The IWT stands in abeyance in response to Pakistan’s continued sponsorship of cross-border terrorism. Pakistan must credibly and irrevocably abjure its support for cross-border terrorism,” Jaiswal said.
Pak minister’s ‘will cut off hands’ threat
The MEA’s reaction comes after a Pakistan minister early this week issued a stark warning to India over the treaty and said Islamabad would “cut off those hands” that he claimed sought to control the Indus water.
Also read: Modi, Japan PM condemn Pakistan-backed terror, call for action against LeT, JeM
“There is a tap being controlled by the prime minister of a neighbouring country. He says he will not let even a drop of water flow into Pakistan,” Pakistan’s climate change minister Musadik Malik said, according to Dawn. Several Pakistani news outlets carried clips of Malik’s statements, which also surfaced online.
‘Weaponisation of water’
Prior to Malik’s stark statement, Pakistan foreign minister Ishaq Dar warned of a war over the treaty that remains suspended following the Pahalgam terror attack in April 2025. Dar said that any attempt by India to deprive Pakistan of its share of water under the Indus Waters Treaty would amount to the “weaponization of water” and could have serious consequences for regional peace and security, AP reported.
“Shared waters must never be weaponized. They should remain a bridge between nations, guided by cooperation, dialogue, and respect for international law for the benefit of present and future generations,” Dar was quoted as saying, as he described water as essential to human dignity, food security, economic development, and environmental sustainability.
He further said that the suspension of the treat was “illegal” and that Pakistan considered the agreement to remain valid and legally binding. “No party can unilaterally suspend or terminate obligations under a treaty that contains no such provision,” he said.
