U.K. Lawmakers Raise Concerns Over India-Pakistan Water Dispute and Kashmir Policy
A recent debate in the British House of Lords has drawn renewed international attention to India’s handling of water-sharing agreements with Pakistan and its policies in the disputed Kashmir region, underscoring the growing diplomatic tension in South Asia.
During the session, several U.K. parliamentarians voiced concern over what they characterized as India’s increasingly unilateral actions—particularly regarding the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), a landmark 1960 agreement brokered by the World Bank that governs the distribution of the Indus River’s waters between India and Pakistan.
Lord Shasfaaq Mohammed, a member of the House of Lords and a Liberal Democrat peer, criticized India’s reported move to “unilaterally suspend” its obligations under the treaty, calling it a “dangerous and illegal precedent.”
“Agreements like the Indus Waters Treaty are pillars of international stability,” Lord Mohammed said. “Disregarding them threatens regional peace and undermines decades of diplomatic progress.”
While India has not officially withdrawn from the treaty, it has, in recent years, expressed frustration with its limitations, especially amid heightened political tensions with Pakistan.
Indian officials argue that the treaty has been interpreted too rigidly in favor of Pakistan and that discussions around its implementation are long overdue.
The British parliamentary debate also touched on the broader issue of human rights and governance in Indian-administered Kashmir, a region claimed by both countries and long at the heart of their rivalry. Several peers voiced concern about recent reports of political detentions, restrictions on press freedom, and demographic shifts in the region.
Critics say the Indian government’s approach risks inflaming tensions and alienating local populations.
The U.K. government has maintained a cautious stance, reaffirming that the Kashmir issue must be resolved bilaterally between India and Pakistan, in accordance with international law and human rights standards. British Foreign Office officials have thus far refrained from directly criticizing either side but have encouraged dialogue and restraint.
The House of Lords debate, while non-binding, reflects mounting international unease about the potential erosion of long-standing diplomatic norms in the region—and the potential for further instability if these disputes go unresolved.
