Islamabad, April 25: Pakistan and India’s decision to shut down the Wagah-Attari border crossing after the deadly Pahalgam terror attack has forced several citizens from both countries to cut short their visit and rush back home.

On Thursday, after both countries announced closure of border crossing and gave a deadline for citizens to leave for their respective countries, at least 28 Pakistanis nationals returned from India while 105 Indian citizens in Pakistan crossed over into India.

A Hindu family from Balochistan’s Sibi was reportedly denied entry into India after the closure of border crossing.

“We were on our way to Indore in Madhya Pradesh to attend a wedding. Seven members of our family were excited to join our relatives in India and take part in the celebrations. But upon reaching Wagah, we learned that the border had been sealed. We will spend the night at Dera Sahib in Lahore and head back home tomorrow,” said Akshay Kumar.

Meanwhile, a Sikh family from India, in Pakistan to attend a wedding, decided to leave for India immediately.

“We had come to Pakistan for a wedding. While the ceremony took place, several important rituals remained. Once we heard the border was closed, we decided to return immediately,” said Raminder Singh, an Indian national.

A Hindu family from Ghotki in Pakistan’s Sindh province, now residing in New Delhi, was visiting Pakistan for the last two months to meet their relatives. However, they are now unsure about getting permission to return to India.

“There are five of us, including my young son and daughter, uncle and aunt. We all hold Pakistani passports and were granted No Obligation to Return to India (NORI) certificate by India. But uncertainty looms now, said a family member named Indira.

“Families with cross-border ties often bear the brunt of rising tensions between the two neighbours. With tensions between Pakistan and India once again on the rise, human connections across borders are becoming the first casualty,” said Asif Memood, a Lahore-based journalist.

“The closure of the Wagah-Attari border has left many families in limbo, uncertain when they will next reunite with their loved ones,” he added.

New Delhi, April 25: The US government has slammed a prominent American media organisation for its coverage of the April 22 terrorist attack in Jammu and Kashmir’s Pahalgam, where 26 people were brutally killed.

The US House Foreign Affairs Committee sharply criticised The New York Times, accusing it of downplaying the gravity of the incident by using terms like “militants” and “gunmen” instead of “terrorists”.

In a post on X, the Committee rebuked the newspaper’s use of words, sharing an image of the original headline — “At Least 24 Tourists Gunned Down by Militants in Kashmir” — with the word “militants” struck out and replaced in bold red with “terrorists”.

“Hey, @nytimes we fixed it for you. This was a TERRORIST ATTACK plain and simple. Whether it’s India or Israel, when it comes to TERRORISM the NYT is removed from reality,” the US Committee wrote.

This, perhaps, unprecedented reaction comes in the wake of the brutal terror attack in J&K’s Pahalgam, where Hindus were singled out and shot dead. The attack was later claimed by ‘The Resistance Front’ — an offshoot of the banned Pakistan-based terror outfit Lashkar-e-Taiba.

Terrorists opened fire on a group of tourists in the Baisaran Valley, killing 26 and injuring several others. The casualties also included a Nepali tourist. Visuals from the scene have flooded various media, showing chaos and panic, with some of the attackers captured on video firing indiscriminately.

The New York Times, in its report, referred to the terrorists as “militants” and “gunmen”, noting that Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi “called the shooting, the worst against civilians in the region for years, a ‘terror attack’ and vowed to bring the perpetrators to justice”. The framing of the attack as merely a “shooting” has drawn strong objections from several quarters of the US government.

On Wednesday, President Donald Trump called Prime Minister Modi to express his condolences and offer full support in bringing the perpetrators to justice.

“President Trump strongly condemned the terror attack and expressed full support to India to bring to justice the perpetrators of this heinous attack. India and the United States stand together in the fight against terror,” said Randhir Jaiswal, spokesperson for the Ministry of External Affairs, in a post on X.

US Vice President JD Vance also called PM Modi, condemning the terror attack and reiterated solidarity with India in its fight against terrorism.

New Delhi, April 24: India’s suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) is not only morally justified in light of continuing cross-border terrorism but also legally defensible due to repeated procedural violations by Pakistan, several experts reckoned on Thursday.

The action, they said, is a sovereign right exercised to protect national interest, security, and the integrity of international agreements, which depend on reciprocity and mutual adherence.

“​This step signals that while India has always honoured its international commitments, it will not be taken for granted when the other party – a rogue state like Pakistan – repeatedly breaches the spirit and terms of the agreement,” an analyst opined.

Under the Indus Waters Treaty signed between India and Pakistan in 1960, waters of three rivers – Ravi, Sutlej and Beas – averaging around 33 Million Acre Feet (MAF) were allocated to India for exclusive use. The waters of Western rivers – Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab – averaging to around 135 MAF were allocated to Pakistan except for specified domestic, non-consumptive and agricultural use permitted to India as provided in the Treaty.

Last August, India had served a formal notice to Pakistan seeking a review and modification of the IWT citing “fundamental and unforeseen changes in circumstances” that require a reassessment of obligations.

In the notice, India had highlighted that, under Article XII(3) of the IWT, its provision may from time to time be modified by a duly ratified Treaty concluded for that purpose between the two governments.

India’s notification highlighted fundamental and unforeseen changes in circumstances that require a reassessment of obligations under various Articles of the Treaty. Among various concerns, important ones included change in population demographics; environmental issues – need to accelerate development of clean energy to meet India’s emission targets; impact of persistent cross border terrorism, etc.

However, despite India’s repeated warnings, Pakistan was involved in serious violation of treaty protocols.

The eventual suspension of the treaty came only after persistent violations and was triggered further by national security threats, such as Tuesday’s Pahalgam terror attack, which has claimed 26 innocent lives.

The most critical breach occurred in 2016, when Pakistan unilaterally bypassed the treaty’s graded mechanism of dispute resolution outlined under Article IX of the IWT. This article mandates a stepwise escalation — from technical discussions to neutral expert adjudication and finally, if needed, to a Court of Arbitration.

In 2015, Pakistan initially requested a neutral expert to examine technical objections to India’s Kishanganga and Ratle Hydro Electric Projects. However, it withdrew this request next year and unilaterally approached the Court of Arbitration, violating the agreed dispute-resolution protocol. This deliberate deviation undermined the legal sanctity of the treaty and indicated a pattern of weaponizing legal mechanisms for political ends.

Recognising this breach, India issued a formal notice to Pakistan on January 25, 2023, calling for the modification of the treaty to ensure that the dispute resolution process could no longer be exploited unilaterally. ​By exhausting diplomatic options and adhering to procedural fairness, India demonstrated responsibility and restraint.

​Pakistan has also invoked the treaty’s dispute resolution provisions three times, not always in good faith.

The first instance involved objections to a hydropower project on the Chenab River in India-administered Kashmir. While Pakistan raised concerns that the project could give Indian engineers undue control over river flows, the World Bank-appointed neutral expert ruled in favour of India in 2007, validating the project’s design and sediment management as being in line with international best practices.

India has already set the stage to tighten the noose around Pakistan with several projects.

The Kishanganga Hydroelectric Project on a tributary of the Jhelum was commissioned in 2018 and diverts water from the Kishanganga River to a power plant in the Jhelum basin via a 23 km tunnel.

The Ratle Hydroelectric Project on Chenab was revived in 2021 with an 850 MW capacity as Pakistan raised concerns over potential flow manipulation.

The Tulbul Navigation Project on Jhelum was also never really off the table since the Uri attack in 2016 and can regulate water flow through a navigational lock-cum-control structure.

The Shahpurkandi Dam on Ravi was cleared in 2018 and completed in early 2024. It blocks surplus water from flowing into Pakistan, enhancing irrigation and power generation in India.

Similarly, the Ujh Multipurpose Project on a tributary of the Ravi, which was announced in 2020 is currently in the planning stage, combines storage, irrigation, and hydroelectric goals to cut off water flow to Pakistan.

It clearly shows that the IWT may only be temporarily suspended but the pressure is already building on Pakistan.

These developments clearly indicate a concerted effort by India to leverage water resources as a strategic tool in its geopolitical stance towards Pakistan and can have serious implications for the terror sponsors across the border.

Pakistan relies heavily on the Indus River system for irrigation, with about 80 per cent of its cultivated land – approximately 16 million hectares – depending on these waters. The agricultural sector contributes 23 per cent to Pakistan’s national income and supports 68 per cent of its rural inhabitants. Reduced water availability could lead to lower crop yields, food shortages, and economic instability.

The Indus basin also supplies 154.3 million acre-feet of water annually, which is vital for irrigating extensive agricultural areas and ensuring food security. Pakistan’s water storage capacity is low, with major dams like Mangla and Tarbela having a combined live storage of only about 14.4 MAF, which is just 10 per cent of Pakistan’s annual water share under the treaty. The suspension exacerbates these vulnerabilities by cutting off a guaranteed water supply.

The suspension of the IWT will also have significant economic implications for Pakistan, particularly in the agricultural and industrial sectors. It may also affect the country’s power generation capabilities, as hydropower is a crucial source of electricity.