pscprep.ai
BlogPricingAbout

Explore category

All State PCS Exams

Exam hubs, syllabus, strategy — and public PYQ attempt + insight pages.

National exam

UPSC CSE

PYQs, mocks, AI planner — Prelims Paper I & II.

State PCS

UPSCAvailableUPSC Civil Services (CSE)BPSCAvailableBihar (BPSC - CCE)CGPSCAvailableChhattisgarh (CGPSC - SSE)MPPSCAvailableMadhya Pradesh (MPPSC - SSE)MPSCAvailableMaharashtra (MPSC - Rajyaseva)OPSCAvailableOdisha (OPSC - OCS)RPSCAvailableRajasthan (RPSC - RAS)TNPSCAvailableTamil Nadu (TNPSC - Group 1)UPPSCAvailableUttar Pradesh (UPPSC - PCS)WBCSAvailableWest Bengal (WBCS)HPSCComing soonHaryana (HPSC)JKPSCComing soonJammu and Kashmir (JKPSC)JPSCComing soonJharkhand (JPSC)KPSCComing soonKarnataka (KPSC)PPSCComing soonPunjab (PPSC)UKPSCComing soonUttarakhand (UKPSC)
Current AffairsToolsFor InstitutesDashboard
UPSCState PCSCurrent AffairsToolsPricingBlogAboutInstitutes
pscprep.ai

Smart exam prep for UPSC and State PCS aspirants with adaptive planning, daily current affairs, and exam-focused practice.

Get the weekly digest

Top current affairs + exam tips, every Monday morning.

Explore

BlogUPSCState PCS ExamsExam ScheduleAttempt PYQPYQ trendsCurrent AffairsToolsPricingAboutContactLog inFor Institutes

Connect With Us

hello@pscprep.aiFollow on FacebookFollow on Instagram

Get the App

Google PlayApp Store — coming soon

Copyright © 2026 PSCPrep.ai. All rights reserved.

Legal business name: EXAMBEES

Privacy PolicyTerms and ConditionsCancellation/Refund Policy
Current AffairsInternational Relations

Pakistan accuses India of weaponising water after treaty suspension

Thursday, 4 June 20266 min read1,003 words19

Get the weekly digest

Top current affairs + exam tips, every Monday morning.

📝 AI-generated analysis for exam preparation. This is original educational content curated for competitive exam aspirants.

International RelationsDeep Analysisneighbourhoodgeopoliticsglobal orgsclimate change

In this article

ContextBackground & Historical EvolutionKey Points & FactsMulti-Dimensional AnalysisWay Forward

Context

On June 4, 2026, Pakistan accused India of 'weaponising water' by proceeding with two projects on the Chenab River—a water transfer tunnel and sediment removal at Salal Power Station—which Pakistan claims violate the Indus Water Treaty. Pakistan's Foreign Ministry spokesperson Tahir Andrabi stated that these projects endanger Pakistan's water, food, and economic security, threatening consequences. India had suspended the treaty in 2025 after a terrorist attack in Indian-administered Kashmir, but Pakistan insists the treaty remains binding. India rejected a May 15, 2026 ruling by the Court of Arbitration that the treaty is still in effect. The dispute follows armed conflict between the two nuclear-armed neighbours in May 2025.

Background & Historical Evolution

The Indus Water Treaty was signed in 1960 between India and Pakistan, brokered by the World Bank, to allocate the waters of the Indus River system. It grants India exclusive use of the eastern rivers (Ravi, Beas, Sutlej) and Pakistan of the western rivers (Indus, Jhelum, Chenab), with limited exceptions for Indian hydroelectric projects. The treaty established a Permanent Indus Commission and a three-tier dispute resolution mechanism (Commission → Neutral Expert → Court of Arbitration). It survived the 1965, 1971, and 1999 wars. Tensions escalated in 2016 after the Uri attack, leading to India reviewing the treaty. In 2025, following a deadly attack on tourists in Kashmir (April 2025), India suspended the treaty, stating it was in abeyance. Pakistan has consistently maintained that the treaty remains in force. The current dispute involves two Indian projects: a tunnel transferring water from the Chenab to the Beas basin, and sediment removal at Salal Power Station. The Court of Arbitration ruled in May 2026 that the treaty continues to bind both nations, but India rejected the ruling, calling the court 'illegally constituted.'

Key Points & Facts

  • Pakistan's Foreign Ministry spokesperson Tahir Andrabi accused India of 'weaponising water' through two Chenab River projects.
  • The two projects are: a proposed tunnel transferring water from Chenab to Beas basin (tender issued in May 2026 by India's NHPC) and sediment removal at Salal Power Station (announced January 2026 by India's Power Ministry).
  • India announced suspension of the Indus Water Treaty in 2025 after a terrorist attack on tourists in Indian-administered Kashmir (April 2025).
  • Pakistan claims the treaty still binds both nations; India's Foreign Ministry stated 'India's decision to hold the Indus Waters Treaty in abeyance remains in force.'
  • The Court of Arbitration (Hague-based) ruled on May 15, 2026 that the treaty remains in effect; India rejected this, calling the court 'illegally constituted'.
  • Pakistan warned it retains 'all options necessary for safeguarding rights under the treaty' and considers alteration of water flow an 'act of war'.
  • Armed conflict in May 2025 (drone, missile, artillery exchanges) left nearly 70 dead on both sides.
  • The Indus Water Treaty (1960) had survived three prior armed hostilities before India's 2025 suspension.

Multi-Dimensional Analysis

Political & Constitutional Dimensions: India asserts its sovereignty to use water resources within its territory, citing Article 253 (treaty-making power) and entry 17 (water) of the State List. The 2025 suspension followed the Kashmir attack, linking water to counter-terrorism. Pakistan argues the treaty is a binding bilateral agreement under international law (Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties), and unilateral suspension is invalid. India’s rejection of the Court of Arbitration underscores its position that suspension nullifies treaty obligations. Domestic politics in both countries influence hardline stances; water is a nationalist issue.

Economic & Financial Impact: The tunnel project could supplement water for irrigation and power in the Beas basin, benefiting Indian agriculture (Punjab, Haryana). Salal Power Station (690 MW) sediment removal may restore generation capacity. Pakistan fears reduced Chenab flow threatens its agriculture (Punjab province) and hydropower (e.g., 3,690 MW Mangla Dam project). Water scarcity costs both nations; the World Bank estimates South Asia loses $2.3 billion annually from water stress. The dispute could deter international investment in water infrastructure.

Social Dimensions: 250 million Pakistanis depend on Indus waters; reduced flows could cause food insecurity and displacement. In India, projects are framed as development, but ecological concerns arise (e.g., river connectivity). Climate change exacerbates water stress; both countries face melting glaciers and erratic monsoons. The dispute stokes communal tensions; water insecurity may fuel extremism.

Governance & Administrative Aspects: The Permanent Indus Commission—the treaty's operational body—is defunct since India's suspension. No bilateral mechanism exists for consultation; Pakistan claims India failed to notify projects as per treaty provisions. Implementation of projects faces challenges: land acquisition, environmental clearances, and technological feasibility. The lack of a neutral dispute resolution forum (due to India's rejection of the Court) leaves a governance vacuum, risking unilateral actions.

International Perspective: The World Bank, as treaty guarantor, faces constraints; it cannot compel compliance. UN instruments (e.g., 1997 UN Watercourses Convention) encourage equitable use but are not binding on India or Pakistan. Similar transboundary river disputes exist globally (e.g., Nile, Mekong), but the Indus treaty is considered a model—now jeopardized. The dispute invites external powers; China (a Pakistan ally) has its own water projects upstream on the Indus. The International Court of Justice could be approached, but both countries must consent.

Way Forward

Short-term: Both nations should de-escalate rhetoric and resume technical-level talks under the Permanent Indus Commission framework, even if limited. India could share project designs under the treaty’s existing provisions for ‘run-of-the-river’ plants. Pakistan should facilitate inspection visits to verify compliance.

Medium-term: Revive the treaty’s dispute resolution mechanism by agreeing to a Neutral Expert (as per Article IX) instead of the contested Court of Arbitration. The World Bank could mediate confidence-building measures, such as joint climate resilience projects. Both countries should update the treaty to reflect climate change impacts and population growth.

Long-term: Establish a joint water management authority for the Indus basin, similar to the Mekong River Commission, incorporating data sharing and early warning systems. Encourage water conservation and alternative sources (e.g., desalination, groundwater recharge) to reduce dependence on the Indus. International best practices include the 1995 Ganges Treaty (Bangladesh-India) and the 1994 SADC Protocol on Shared Watercourses (Southern Africa). Ultimately, resolving the Kashmir dispute could remove the overarching political hurdle.

What can be asked in exam?

  • •Prelims angle: The Indus Water Treaty was signed in 1960 and brokered by the World Bank.
  • •Prelims angle: Under the treaty, India controls the eastern rivers (Ravi, Beas, Sutlej) and Pakistan the western rivers (Indus, Jhelum, Chenab).
  • •Prelims angle: The dispute resolution mechanism includes the Permanent Indus Commission, Neutral Expert, and Court of Arbitration.
  • •Mains angle: Analyse the strategic implications of India's suspension of the Indus Water Treaty on bilateral relations with Pakistan. (GS-II, 250 words)
  • •Mains angle: Discuss the role of international law in resolving transboundary water disputes with reference to the Indus Water Treaty. (GS-II, 250 words)

Test yourself · no signup needed

Attempt OPSC previous-year questions free

Try 3 real OPSC PYQs, see the answer instantly, then unlock the full set free.

OPSC PYQ 1 (2022) — Science

Genetic engineering, a revolutionary branch of biotechnology, continues to evolve rapidly, transforming the way we approach medicine, agriculture and various scientific endeavours. Recent developments in this field highlight both the immense potential and ethical considerations that come with the power to manipulate DNA. In the medical realm, gene editing technologies like CRISPR-Cas9 have gained prominence. These tools offer unprecedented precision in modifying genes, holding promise for treating genetic disorders. In a groundbreaking clinical trial, researchers successfully used gene editing to treat sickle cell anaemia. The patient’s own modified cells were reintroduced into their body, resulting in reduced symptoms and an improved quality of life. In agriculture, genetic engineering is driving advancements in crop production and food security. The development of Genetically Modified (GM) crops has enabled plants to resist pests, withstand harsh climates and improve nutritional content. For instance, GM rice has been biofortified to contain higher levels of essential vitamins, potentially combating malnutrition in regions where rice is a staple food. However, these advancements also raise ethical concerns. The potential for creating “designer babies” through gene editing has sparked debates about the boundaries of genetic manipulation. The question of whether it’s ethical to alter human DNA to enhance physical or cognitive traits continues to challenge bioethicists, policymakers and society at large. Data indicates the exponential growth of genetic engineering research. In the past decade, the number of scientific publications related to CRISPR technology has multiplied significantly. In 2010, there were approximately 150 CRISPR-related publications; by 2020, that number had soared to over 9,000. This surge demonstrates the profound impact of genetic engineering on the scientific community. As we navigate this brave new world of genetic engineering, striking a balance between innovation and ethical considerations remains paramount. The potential to cure genetic diseases, enhance food security and make leaps in scientific understanding is immense. However, careful consideration and collaboration are necessary to ensure that the benefits are realized while addressing the ethical complexities that accompany these technological breakthroughs.

Which gene editing technology has gained prominence recently?

  1. It is used for creating GM crops
  2. It is a tool for gene editing
  3. It enhances physical traits
  4. It is used in biofortification

Answer: A. It is used for creating GM crops

OPSC PYQ 2 (2022) — English Comprehension

EMBEZZLE

In the following question, choose the word which best expresses the meaning of the given word: EMBEZZLE

  1. Misappropriate
  2. Balance
  3. Remunerate
  4. Clear

Answer: A. Misappropriate

OPSC PYQ 3 (2023) — Reasoning

How many pairs of letters are there in the word 'CASTRAPHONE' which have as many letters between them in the word as in the alphabet?

  1. 3
  2. 4
  3. 5
  4. 6

Answer: D. 6

Free sample · Question 1 of 3

Science · 2022

Direction / Passage

Genetic engineering, a revolutionary branch of biotechnology, continues to evolve rapidly, transforming the way we approach medicine, agriculture and various scientific endeavours. Recent developments in this field highlight both the immense potential and ethical considerations that come with the power to manipulate DNA. In the medical realm, gene editing technologies like CRISPR-Cas9 have gained prominence. These tools offer unprecedented precision in modifying genes, holding promise for treating genetic disorders. In a groundbreaking clinical trial, researchers successfully used gene editing to treat sickle cell anaemia. The patient’s own modified cells were reintroduced into their body, resulting in reduced symptoms and an improved quality of life. In agriculture, genetic engineering is driving advancements in crop production and food security. The development of Genetically Modified (GM) crops has enabled plants to resist pests, withstand harsh climates and improve nutritional content. For instance, GM rice has been biofortified to contain higher levels of essential vitamins, potentially combating malnutrition in regions where rice is a staple food. However, these advancements also raise ethical concerns. The potential for creating “designer babies” through gene editing has sparked debates about the boundaries of genetic manipulation. The question of whether it’s ethical to alter human DNA to enhance physical or cognitive traits continues to challenge bioethicists, policymakers and society at large. Data indicates the exponential growth of genetic engineering research. In the past decade, the number of scientific publications related to CRISPR technology has multiplied significantly. In 2010, there were approximately 150 CRISPR-related publications; by 2020, that number had soared to over 9,000. This surge demonstrates the profound impact of genetic engineering on the scientific community. As we navigate this brave new world of genetic engineering, striking a balance between innovation and ethical considerations remains paramount. The potential to cure genetic diseases, enhance food security and make leaps in scientific understanding is immense. However, careful consideration and collaboration are necessary to ensure that the benefits are realized while addressing the ethical complexities that accompany these technological breakthroughs.

Which gene editing technology has gained prominence recently?

Continue with exam actions

Explore more in International RelationsOpen 4 Jun digestAttempt OPSC PYQ — free, no signupAttempt MPPSC PYQ — free, no signup

This week's CA quiz · 20 questions

Cross-topic questions from recent current affairs

Start →

More on International Relations

President Murmu's Historic Romania Visit Boosts India-Romania Trade and Strategic Ties

27 Jul

President Murmu's Romania Visit: India-Romania Business Forum 2026 Explained

25 Jul

US Rolls Out Permanent Tariffs Under Section 301, India Retains Lower 10% Rate

24 Jul

Andhra Pradesh UAE Food Cluster: APEDB's ₹100-Crore Chittoor Processing Push

23 Jul