London | July 17, 2025— In a rare and unified stance, the UK Parliament delivered a powerful rebuke on July 17, 2025, against India’s unilateral suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT). During a deeply consequential debate, lawmakers from across the political spectrum expressed grave concerns over the dangerous precedent being set by India’s actions, linking them directly to regional instability and the ongoing Kashmir conflict.

UK Parliament Slams India for Violating Indus Waters Treaty

Kicking off the heated session, Lord Hussain emphasized that the Kashmir dispute, unresolved since the 1947 Partition, remains the oldest and most volatile conflict on the United Nations’ agenda. He criticized India’s continued military occupation and human rights abuses in Indian-administered Kashmir. With stark clarity, he recalled the unilateral abrogation of Articles 370 and 35A by India, and more recently, its unilateral withdrawal from the Indus Waters Treaty, which was signed in 1960 to manage the waters of the Indus river basin shared by India and Pakistan.

Significantly, Lord Mohammad labeled India’s action “a flagrant violation of international law” and stressed that if global treaties like the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) could be unilaterally discarded, no international agreement remains safe. He urged the UK Government to treat the issue not as a bilateral spat but as a global threat to international water law, highlighting that other fragile river treaties in Africa, Central Asia, and the Middle East could follow suit.

In a direct response to India’s narrative linking the suspension to the Pahalgam terrorist attack, UK Parliamentarians reminded that no clause in the Indus Waters Treaty permits revocation based on political or security incidents. Baroness Gohir reinforced this point, calling India’s move “destabilizing and unethical,” especially given the region’s climate vulnerability and increasing water scarcity.

Debate Links Kashmir, Water Security, and Regional Violence

Throughout the debate, lawmakers repeatedly connected the dots between Kashmir’s unresolved status, India’s water politics, and the rise in regional conflict. Lord Purvis voiced alarm over emerging trends in drone warfare between the two nuclear-armed states and warned that the erosion of treaty-based trust could spiral into broader violence.

Furthermore, Baroness Chapman reaffirmed that the IWT remains foundational to South Asia’s stability. She insisted that international legal agreements must be respected, and that water must never be politicized or used as a weapon of coercion. Echoing these concerns, Lord Hussain situated the water issue within the broader Kashmir dispute, stating unequivocally: “These are not separate matters. They are interconnected crises of sovereignty and survival.”

Importantly, UK Minister of State Lord Ahmad acknowledged the urgent need for dialogue and hinted at the possibility of reviving the Four-Point Peace Framework, a proposal previously discussed between India and Pakistan. His remarks suggested that the UK sees diplomatic space opening up following the breakdown of the IWT, and that Britain may play a larger role in mediation efforts.

Britain Urged to Act on Residual Responsibility

The parliamentary debate did not merely express alarm it demanded action. Several Lords called on the UK Foreign Office to take a proactive role, beyond observing from the sidelines. As a former colonial power involved in the creation of the Kashmir conflict and the partition of the Indus Basin, Britain holds a residual responsibility to ensure peace and treaty compliance in South Asia.

Lord Mohammad went a step further, cautioning that China is already altering river flows upstream from both India and Pakistan. He warned that India’s unilateral precedent could embolden Beijing to exert even more control over vital waterways in the Tibetan Plateau and Brahmaputra basin, thereby escalating water tensions across Asia.

In conclusion, the debate made it clear that India’s breach of the Indus Waters Treaty is not merely a bilateral issue it is a global concern that touches upon environmental, legal, and geopolitical dimensions. Pakistan’s stance, reiterated by several Lords, aligns with international norms: access to water is a right, not a weapon. The fact that the Treaty survived three wars (1965, 1971, 1999) but now stands suspended under India’s majoritarian foreign policy, as one Lord observed, “sets a dangerous precedent.”

The Road Ahead: Treaty Revival and Sustainable Peace

In the aftermath of the recent India-Pakistan conflict and the 10 May 2025 ceasefire, the UK Parliament’s message was unmistakable: restoring the Indus Waters Treaty and addressing Kashmir’s unresolved status are not optional they are essential for regional peace.

Pakistan has welcomed the UK’s call for third-party mediation, especially regarding treaty modernization in the face of new challenges such as glacial melt, water theft, and upstream diversions. Moving forward, the UK Parliament urged the Foreign Office to act with urgency, ensuring that diplomacy prevails over escalation.

As the Indus Waters Treaty hangs in the balance, the international community must now recognize that what happens in the Himalayas doesn’t stay there it cascades across borders, shaping the future of peace, survival, and water security worldwide.