India Rejects Court of Arbitration’s Ruling on J&K Dam Projects, Calls it a ‘Charade at Pakistan’s Behest’

India has firmly rejected the Court of Arbitration’s recent supplemental award concerning the Kishenganga and Ratle hydroelectric projects in Jammu and Kashmir. The Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) described the process as a “charade at Pakistan’s behest,” calling the court’s authority “illegal and void.” This strong diplomatic statement comes amid a broader strategic and legal standoff over the 1960 Indus Waters Treaty, which India suspended following a deadly terror attack in April 2025.

The Kishenganga and Ratle projects, both located in Jammu and Kashmir, have been points of contention with Pakistan | News18

India’s Stand: No Legitimacy to the Tribunal

India argues that the so-called Court of Arbitration was constituted in clear violation of the Indus Waters Treaty and hence lacks any legal basis. According to the MEA, India never agreed to the tribunal’s formation, and therefore any decision it delivers carries no legitimacy. The latest ruling, which only dealt with procedural jurisdiction and not the core issues of the dam designs, is being dismissed entirely by New Delhi.

India reiterated that under the Indus Waters Treaty, there are specific mechanisms for dispute resolution, and the arbitration process initiated by Pakistan disregards those protocols. The MEA accused Pakistan of deliberately bypassing the treaty’s provisions and manipulating international legal platforms to serve its political agenda.

Background: Treaty Suspension and Escalation

The current tensions stem from India’s decision to suspend the Indus Waters Treaty on April 23, 2025. This drastic measure followed the Pahalgam terror attack, in which 26 Indian civilians were killed. India blamed Pakistan-based groups for orchestrating the attack and declared that bilateral agreements such as the Indus Waters Treaty would remain suspended until Islamabad takes verifiable action against terrorism.

In the wake of this suspension, India halted data sharing on river flows and fast-tracked the construction of several hydroelectric projects in Jammu and Kashmir. The Kishenganga and Ratle dams are at the center of this controversy, with Pakistan claiming they violate the treaty’s conditions by adversely affecting water availability downstream.

The Projects in Question: Kishenganga and Ratle

The Kishenganga hydroelectric project is built on a tributary of the Jhelum River. Pakistan has long objected to this project, claiming that it diverts water from the Neelum River and impacts its own Neelum-Jhelum hydropower plant. However, a previous ruling from a different arbitration body in 2013 largely upheld India’s right to construct the project within the treaty’s guidelines.

The Ratle project, an 850 MW plant on the Chenab River, has similarly drawn Pakistani objections. Despite several rounds of bilateral talks and third-party involvement by the World Bank, no lasting resolution has been reached. India maintains that both projects are “run-of-the-river” in nature and comply fully with the treaty’s restrictions on storage and diversion.

A Battle Over Jurisdiction

At the heart of the dispute is not just the design of the dams, but who has the authority to arbitrate. India has engaged with a neutral expert appointed by the World Bank, arguing that this is the proper mechanism under the treaty. Pakistan, however, has pushed for full arbitration, which India sees as an overreach. The supplemental award recently issued pertains only to whether the arbitration panel has jurisdiction — and India insists it does not.

India has now called on the World Bank to suspend the proceedings of the neutral expert as well, indicating that no mechanism will be recognized while the treaty remains in abeyance. This effectively stalls all multilateral engagement on the issue unless Pakistan first addresses India’s national security concerns.

Pakistan’s Position and Legal Threats

Pakistan has expressed outrage over India’s actions, warning that the suspension of the treaty is a breach of international law. Pakistani officials have hinted at seeking redress through global forums, including the International Court of Justice. Former Foreign Minister Bilawal Bhutto Zardari even threatened that if India does not “share water fairly,” Pakistan may claim full rights to all six rivers covered under the treaty.

For Pakistan, the issue is not only legal but also existential. The country is heavily dependent on the Indus system for agriculture, especially in Punjab, and any reduction in water flow could have devastating effects. Islamabad accuses New Delhi of weaponizing water and transforming a cooperative framework into a tool of coercion.

Regional and Strategic Implications

India’s firm rejection of the arbitration court’s decision signals a shift toward a more assertive water policy in its dealings with Pakistan. Beyond the Indus system, this posture could have ripple effects on India’s other water-sharing agreements, such as the Ganges pact with Bangladesh. It also raises the prospect of India pursuing more dam-building and river-management projects in sensitive border areas.

The dispute also underscores the rising importance of water as a strategic resource in South Asia. With climate change and population growth putting increasing pressure on freshwater availability, river management could become a flashpoint in regional geopolitics. The India-Pakistan water equation, long governed by treaties and diplomacy, now appears to be entering a new and uncertain phase.

Conclusion

India’s rejection of the Court of Arbitration’s supplemental award on the Kishenganga and Ratle projects marks a significant escalation in the Indo-Pak water dispute. By declaring the tribunal illegal and dismissing its rulings outright, India has made it clear that no further engagement under the Indus Waters Treaty will occur until Pakistan addresses its role in cross-border terrorism. This bold move reflects not only India’s strategic shift in water diplomacy but also the growing interlinkage between national security and environmental resources. As the region braces for further tension, the future of water-sharing in South Asia hangs in the balance.

(Sources: News18, India Today, Hindustan Times)