Potential for Mediation and International Arbitration
With the suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty entering international headlines, there is rising speculation that the World Bank—original guarantor of the 1960 accord—might be called upon to mediate. India, by taking the dramatic step of suspending the treaty without unilaterally abrogating it, may be leaving the door open for conditional renegotiation or third-party arbitration.
The World Bank has previously facilitated technical consultations between the two nations over India’s Kishanganga and Ratle hydroelectric projects. However, those discussions were slow, limited in scope, and politically sensitive.
Sources in diplomatic circles suggest that both Washington and Brussels are considering backchannel communications to de-escalate tensions. The Gulf nations, particularly the UAE and Saudi Arabia, may also attempt quiet mediation, leveraging their economic influence in both countries.
Yet, whether Pakistan would agree to any form of renegotiation under pressure remains unclear. Islamabad is likely to demand that India reinstate the treaty first and lift diplomatic restrictions as a precondition for talks—conditions New Delhi may be unwilling to accept without concrete action on terrorism.
Regional and Global Risk of Escalation
While the immediate risk of a full-scale war remains low, the potential for miscalculation or skirmishes along the Line of Control is elevated. Already, cross-border shelling has increased in certain sectors, with both nations accusing the other of ceasefire violations.
Intelligence agencies have reportedly intercepted chatter suggesting further attempts by extremist elements to provoke India. There is concern that such provocations could trigger localized military retaliation, risking broader escalation.
In the broader geopolitical context, the India-Pakistan standoff diverts attention from larger strategic issues in the Indo-Pacific. It complicates regional diplomacy involving the U.S., China, and Russia, particularly at a time when the global focus is shifting toward technological competition, climate resilience, and supply chain security.
The fear among many international observers is that prolonged confrontation could suck resources and focus away from these global challenges and plunge South Asia into another protracted diplomatic freeze.
Historical Parallels and Lessons
This is not the first time that India and Pakistan have faced such a severe diplomatic rupture. From the Kargil conflict in 1999 to the post-Uri “surgical strikes” in 2016 and the Pulwama-Balakot escalation in 2019, both nations have experienced cycles of violence followed by intense rhetoric, only to return to fragile dialogues.
Yet, the current crisis stands apart in one critical way: the suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty. This is the first instance of a formal bilateral agreement being halted by India in response to a terror attack, thereby setting a precedent that extends the battlefield into the diplomatic and legal arenas.
Veteran diplomat Shivshankar Menon warned in an op-ed, “Breaking a working treaty does not only send a message to your adversary—it also sends one to the international community. India must ensure that this act leads to strategic advantage, not strategic ambiguity.”
Civil Society and the Call for De-escalation
As official channels remain frozen, civil society groups, retired military officials, and conflict resolution NGOs have begun advocating for backchannel talks. Virtual conferences, track-two diplomacy initiatives, and calls for regional media dialogues are being planned to maintain a minimum level of communication between the two publics.
Some prominent voices, including former foreign secretaries and ex-intelligence chiefs from both countries, have suggested establishing a non-governmental “confidence restoration council” to open parallel communication lines. However, in the current climate of public anger and political polarization, such initiatives face challenges in gaining traction.
Human rights groups, meanwhile, are urging India and Pakistan to allow safe humanitarian crossings at the border, particularly for medical emergencies, family reunions, and religious pilgrimages.
The Road Ahead
The way forward is fraught with uncertainty. If Pakistan responds with reciprocal diplomatic measures or militarizes the situation, the region could enter another prolonged standoff. Conversely, if Islamabad acknowledges the global pressure and undertakes steps to dismantle terror networks on its soil, it could open a path to de-escalation and perhaps, eventually, treaty renegotiation.
For India, the stakes are high. This moment marks a pivot in its foreign policy—one where diplomatic agreements are no longer off-limits in the face of persistent terror threats. Yet, it also poses a risk of alienating international allies who view treaties as sacrosanct pillars of global order.
What’s clear is that this crisis has fundamentally altered the tenor of Indo-Pak relations. Trust, already in short supply, has eroded further. Water, once a shared resource and symbol of pragmatic diplomacy, has now been weaponized in a conflict where civilian lives, geopolitical rivalries, and historical grievances all intersect.
Closing Reflection
As South Asia stands at another volatile crossroads, the region—and indeed the world—must reflect on the true cost of unresolved conflict. The pain of Pahalgam must not be forgotten, but nor should it become the trigger for endless hostility. Whether this moment becomes a breaking point or a breakthrough will depend not only on what India and Pakistan do next, but also on what the international community enables—or fails to prevent.
