&w=3840&q=100)
Crops hit, dam water at dead levels: How Pakistan is suffering after Indus Waters Treaty suspension
Camels sit on the dry riverbed of the Indus River, with the Kotri Barrage in the background, in Jamshoro, Pakistan. File image/Reuters
Pakistan is drying up, quite literally.
Following the Pahalgam terror attack on April 22, in which 26 people lost their lives, India had taken the harsh but just step of placing the Indus Waters Treaty in abeyance, with Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri declaring that the agreement would remain 'in abeyance' until Pakistan took 'credible and irrevocable' steps to cease its support for cross-border terrorism.
At the time, many questioned if the move would hurt Pakistan. And the effects of India's decision is now being seen and felt in the neighbouring country — as river waters have reached 'dead' levels, imperilling Pakistan's kharif season.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Pakistan's waters at dead levels
Official data reveals that the total water released from the Indus River System to Pakistan is almost 20 per cent down compared to same date last year. In the Sindh region, the water flow stood at 1,33,000, cusecs compared to 1,70,000 cusecs last year. Similarly, in Pakistan's Punjab region, the water flow stood at 1,10,500 cusecs, down 20 per cent from 1,30,800 cusecs on June 20 last year.
Even in the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa region, the water flow is down to 2,600 cusecs on June 20 from 2,900 cusecs on the same day last year.
And this has been an ongoing situation since India placed the Indus Waters Treaty in abeyance. For instance, on June 16, the 'Daily Water Situation' report released by the Pakistan government's Indus River System Authority (IRSA) showed the total water released from the Indus River System to Pakistan's Sindh province was 1.33 lakh cusecs against 1.6 lakh on the same day last year — a drop of 16.87 per cent.
Furthermore, the water levels at the two major reservoirs in Pakistan — Tarbela on the Indus and Mangla on the Jhelum — have dropped to dead storage.
Fishermen clear a fishing net in the water on the partially dried up riverbed of the Indus River in Hyderabad, Pakistan. The total water released from the Indus River System to Pakistan is almost 20 per cent down compared to same date last year. File image/Reuters
Impact on Pakistan
But what does it exactly mean for Pakistan's rivers to reach dead levels and how will it hurt Pakistan? Dead storage levels refers to the water volume stored below the lowest outlet level, essentially unusable for typical water supply purposes. This limits its use for irrigation or drinking.
Pakistan's water in reservoirs reaching dead levels will have a significant impact on the country's kharif (summer crops) sowing season. In fact, an India Today report states that kharif farming has already witnessed a dip of more than 20 per cent owing to receiving 1.14 lakh cusecs of water as opposed to 1.43 lakh cusecs a day last year.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
The production of kharif crops, namely cotton and maize, has declined by over 30 per cent and 15 per cent in Pakistan, respectively. The production of wheat has also dropped by around nine per cent owing to the water shortage in the country.
This, in turn, will hurt an already beleaguered Pakistani economy that is heavily reliant on agriculture. Pakistan's agricultural sector contributes 23 per cent to the country's national income and with production of kharif crops dropping, it will hurt Pakistan's bottomline.
Experts note that the situation might improve once the monsoon rains arrive but until then Pakistan will be quenched for thirst.
Parched Pakistan writes to India
And staring at a water crisis has led Pakistan to write not one but four letters to India, asking it to reinstate the Indus Waters Treaty that was first signed in 1960.
Multiple news reports citing sources have said that the secretary of Pakistan's Ministry of Water Resources, Syed Ali Murtaza, has written four letters to India urging it to reconsider its decision to stop the Indus Waters Treaty.
The sources state that India's Jal Shakti Ministry has sent all the four letters from Pakistan to the Ministry of External Affairs. And such dire are the circumstances that Pakistan also requested the World Bank , which brokered the deal, to intervene in the matter. However, the World Bank refused to step into the issue.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Supporters of the Pakistan Markazi Muslim League (PMML), carry flags and banners, during a protest against the suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty by India, in Karachi, Pakistan. File image/Reuters
Significance of Indus Waters Treaty and India's pause on it
Pakistan's water woes arose when India announced that it was putting the Indus Waters Treaty in abeyance in response to the Pahalgam terror attack. Signed in September 1960, the agreement governed the allocation of water from the Indus River system between the two countries.
Under the arrangement, India was granted rights to the Eastern Rivers: the Ravi, Beas, and Sutlej, while Pakistan received the Western Rivers: the Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab.
Approximately 70 per cent of the water in the system was allotted to Pakistan. Under the IWT, India was obligated to allow the flow of Western Rivers to Pakistan, with limited rights for agriculture, transport, and hydroelectric projects that do not obstruct river flow.
New Delhi's decision to pause the treaty caused much outrage in Pakistan with Islamabad deeming the action to be 'an act of war', adding that it was prepared to respond, 'with full force across the complete spectrum of national power'. And on June 17, Pakistan People's Party (PPP) chief Bilawal Bhutto Zardari was quoted as telling German broadcaster DW Urdu that any attempt by India to block Pakistan's water supply would be seen as an existential threat, leaving Pakistan with no option but war.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Following India's decision to pause the treaty, New Delhi is also conducting a feasibility study for constructing a 113 km-long canal for redirecting surplus flow from the three western rivers of the Indus water system to Punjab, Haryana and Rajasthan.
With inputs from agencies
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
News18
23 minutes ago
- News18
Trump's Ukraine U-Turn: How He Went From Courting Putin To Arming Kyiv
Last Updated: From backchannel talks with Putin and pausing aid to Ukraine, to now arming Kyiv and backing sanctions on Moscow, Donald Trump's year-long shift has left NATO allies recalibrating In a dramatic reversal, US President Donald Trump, who once boasted of his close ties with Russian President Vladimir Putin and promised to end the Ukraine war within 24 hours of taking office, has now approved the delivery of Patriot missile systems to Kyiv and signalled support for harsh sanctions against Moscow. The reversal marks a sharp break from what critics long called the Trump–Putin 'bromance" and has left observers in Washington, Brussels and beyond scrambling to understand what changed, and whether it signals a long-term strategic shift or short-term political repositioning. Here's a comprehensive, timeline-based breakdown of how Trump's Ukraine policy evolved between 2024 and 2025, and what's behind the sharp reversal. Throughout his 2024 re-election campaign, Trump repeatedly criticised American military aid to Ukraine. At a rally in September, he told supporters that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy was 'maybe the greatest salesman of any politician that's ever lived," referring to how he had secured billions in funding from the West, and accused him of treating US taxpayers like an open chequebook. Trump's messaging focused on ending the war 'quickly" if elected, though he never detailed how, apart from suggesting he could 'negotiate peace" by pressuring both sides. He also hinted that aid to Ukraine would become conditional, linked to whether Kyiv agreed to a ceasefire. Speaking at rallies and interviews, Trump positioned himself as a deal-maker who would bring both Putin and Zelenskyy to the table, using America's financial leverage as a bargaining chip. Trump's outreach to Putin just days after his November 2024 electoral victory signalled what many observers saw as the beginning of a dramatic policy divergence. According to a Reuters report, Trump personally phoned the Russian President and urged him not to escalate military operations in Ukraine, even before assuming office. He also expressed interest in reviving stalled peace negotiations. The Kremlin initially denied the call, but follow-up reporting in multiple US outlets confirmed it had, in fact, taken place. What raised eyebrows globally, and especially in Kyiv, was that Ukraine had not been informed in advance. This broke with diplomatic norms: a US president-elect typically avoids direct negotiations with foreign adversaries before inauguration, especially in active conflict zones. Ukrainian officials, blindsided by the call, privately described the outreach as 'alarming," according to Washington Post sources, viewing it as a potential backchannel that could undermine their position in ongoing multilateral diplomacy. This was the first visible sign that Trump's second term would not follow the established playbook of NATO solidarity. Instead, it appeared he was trying to revive his personal rapport with Putin, possibly as a shortcut to brokering what he had promised on the campaign trail—a quick end to the war. What Was Discussed At The December 2024 Paris Meeting? In December, Trump met Zelenskyy and French President Emmanuel Macron at the reopening of Notre-Dame Cathedral in Paris. The meeting, while cordial, revealed clear fault lines. Zelenskyy reportedly urged Trump to commit to continued security assistance and warned that any push for premature peace without real security guarantees would embolden Moscow. Trump, on his part, reiterated that he wanted the war to end quickly and was open to negotiations, but stopped short of promising sustained US support. He also floated the idea that if Putin didn't cooperate, Russia could face harsh economic consequences, including new tariffs. However, these threats were still seen as rhetorical at the time. What Changed After Trump Took Office In January 2025? On February 12, Trump held a 90-minute phone call with Russian President Vladimir Putin, one he later described on Truth Social as 'very productive," covering 'ending the Ukraine War, energy, the dollar, and other big subjects." Just six days later, Trump dispatched Senator Marco Rubio and National Security Adviser Mike Waltz to Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, for closed-door talks with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov. The mission, according to US officials, was to explore a possible ceasefire framework, without any direct Ukrainian or European participation. Though no agreement was reached, the intent was clear: Trump believed he could bypass traditional NATO-led channels and personally broker a deal with Putin. This was the first concrete sign that his administration was pursuing a parallel diplomatic track, one that prioritised US–Russia negotiations over multilateral consensus. The move triggered alarm in Washington and Kyiv. Many feared Trump's eagerness to strike a deal could lead to compromises on Ukraine's sovereignty or territorial demands. Trump's Clash With Zelenskyy In February The turning point came on February 28, when Zelenskyy visited the White House, expecting a formal, ceremonial meeting. Instead, a tense showdown unfolded. Trump criticised Ukraine's 'lack of cooperation" in peace talks and raised a controversial proposal: that Ukraine share revenues from its mineral reserves, including critical raw materials used in defence and electronics, in exchange for continued US support. At one point, Trump reportedly told Zelenskyy, 'You're not acting at all thankful… You're gambling with World War Three." Zelenskyy pushed back firmly, saying, 'I'm not playing cards… I'm the president in a war." Zelenskyy refused the minerals-for-aid deal. Soon after, Trump publicly paused all US military and intelligence assistance to Ukraine, citing a need to 're-evaluate" America's role in the conflict. What Happened During The March Ceasefire Push? On March 3, just days after the Oval Office clash, Trump followed through on his threat and formally suspended all US weapons shipments and cyber-intelligence support to Ukraine. He made the resumption of aid conditional on Kyiv agreeing to a ceasefire. Ukraine, under pressure, agreed to a temporary 30-day ceasefire. US aid resumed on March 11. But the truce proved one-sided: Russian forces continued offensive operations in the Donbas and near Kharkiv, according to NATO briefings shared with Politico. Meanwhile, Senate Republicans and Democrats, increasingly uneasy with Trump's improvisational approach, began coalescing around an alternative strategy, one based on financial pressure through sanctions. Senate Pushes Trump To Act As Allies Lose Patience By April, frustration over Trump's erratic Ukraine policy had reached Capitol Hill. A bipartisan group of senators introduced the Sanctioning Russia Act, a bill that sought to impose punishing tariffs, as high as 500 per cent, on any country continuing to buy Russian oil, gas, or nuclear fuel. The proposal was designed to hit Moscow's war chest by going after its biggest revenue stream: energy exports. But its reach extended far beyond Russia. Countries like India and China, both of which ramped up imports of discounted Russian crude since 2022, were directly in the crosshairs. At first, the Trump administration stayed quiet. But as European allies like Poland and the UK began voicing concerns over the lack of clarity from Washington, the political cost of inaction mounted. Europe had already increased its financial and military aid to Ukraine, and many feared that if the US didn't step up, it would deepen fractures within NATO. Behind the scenes, several key Republican senators began urging Trump to endorse the bill, not only to regain international credibility but also to restore coherence to the US strategy. According to The Wall Street Journal, discussions within the White House intensified by mid-May, as advisers debated whether economic pressure might succeed where diplomacy had stalled. Trump's 'Breakup' With Putin The public break came on July 8, 2025. During a Cabinet meeting, Trump delivered a notably blunt rebuke of Putin: 'He's very nice all the time, but it turns out to be meaningless… a lot of bullshit thrown at us." According to Reuters, this marked the first time Trump openly described Putin's behaviour as dishonest and destabilising. On July 13, Trump formally announced that the US would send Patriot air defence systems to Ukraine—sophisticated surface-to-air missiles designed to intercept incoming drones, cruise missiles, and ballistic threats. The announcement was striking not just for its content, but for its funding model: instead of direct US expenditure, the EU and NATO allies would reimburse Washington, allowing Trump to maintain his 'America First" image while still resuming support for Ukraine. But what truly marked the flip-flop was what followed. On July 14, Trump publicly endorsed the Senate's Sanctioning Russia Act—a bipartisan bill that proposes tariffs of up to 500 per cent on countries importing Russian oil, gas, or nuclear fuel. According to The Wall Street Journal, the endorsement took even Trump's closest aides by surprise. After months of pursuing personal diplomacy with Putin—including backchannel talks and floated ceasefire deals—this sharp pivot toward military and economic pressure marked a complete reversal in tone and strategy. For European allies, it offered momentary relief. For Moscow, it signalled that Trump's second term might not be as predictable—or as friendly—as the Kremlin once expected. Trump's Ukraine Flip-Flop top videos View all From making campaign pledges to 'end the war in 24 hours" and courting Putin with early diplomacy, to halting aid after clashing with Zelenskyy, and now delivering missiles while endorsing sanctions—Trump's policy on Ukraine has zigzagged dramatically in just over a year. The U-turn raises more questions than answers: is this a strategic reset or just Trump playing to multiple audiences? For now, Trump's pivot has scrambled expectations on all sides, leaving allies guessing, adversaries watching, and the ground still shifting. About the Author Karishma Jain Karishma Jain, Chief Sub Editor at writes and edits opinion pieces on a variety of subjects, including Indian politics and policy, culture and the arts, technology and social change. Follow her @ More Get Latest Updates on Movies, Breaking News On India, World, Live Cricket Scores, And Stock Market Updates. Also Download the News18 App to stay updated! tags : donald trump russia-ukraine conflict Vladimir Putin Volodymyr Zelenskyy view comments Location : New Delhi, India, India First Published: July 14, 2025, 10:30 IST News explainers Trump's Ukraine U-Turn: How He Went From Courting Putin To Arming Kyiv Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Time of India
37 minutes ago
- Time of India
New Zealand to double foreign student market, eases work rules to attract global talent
New Zealand is aiming to double the size of its international education sector by 2034, banking on a growing global shift in student mobility caused by restrictive policies in the United States and Australia. The government on Monday announced a set of regulatory changes designed to make the country more attractive to foreign students and lift the sector's contribution to NZ$7.2 billion over the next decade. Education Minister Erica Stanford said as reported by Reuters, 'With international student enrolments steadily increasing since 2023, the government wants to supercharge that growth track.' At present, international education adds NZ$3.6 billion to New Zealand's economy. The target is to grow enrolments from 83,700 this year to 105,000 by 2027 and 119,000 by 2034. Policy shift aims at global displacement As part of the new approach, the government will raise the weekly part-time work limit for eligible international students from 20 to 25 hours. It will also extend work rights to all tertiary-level students participating in approved exchange or study abroad programmes. Officials expect these changes to enhance New Zealand's appeal at a time when some major study destinations are imposing limits on foreign student intake. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Đây có thể là thời điểm tốt nhất để giao dịch vàng trong 5 năm qua IC Markets Tìm hiểu thêm Undo Competing nations pull back The policy shift comes against the backdrop of tightening restrictions elsewhere. President Donald Trump had intensified scrutiny of student visas, particularly for Chinese nationals. In May, the White House moved to revoke Harvard University's authority to enroll international students, a decision later blocked by a federal judge. Australia has also introduced a national cap on new international student enrolments, limiting them to 270,000 for 2025, citing pressure on housing and infrastructure. New Zealand's policy is seen as a direct response to these developments, aiming to capitalise on demand displaced by tougher regulations in larger markets. Focused recruitment in strategic regions The next phase of the plan involves targeted recruitment in growth markets. 'In the short term, Education New Zealand will focus its promotional efforts on markets with the highest potential for growth,' Stanford said, though specific countries were not named. Analysts expect the government to look toward regions such as South Asia, Southeast Asia, and Latin America, where outbound student numbers remain strong and competition from other countries is expected to ease. Growth ambition faces practical tests While the policy offers a clear path to expansion, questions remain around infrastructure readiness. Housing availability, student support services, and labour market absorption will be key to ensuring the sector can scale without compromising quality or experience. The government's broader strategy, recently bolstered by visa reforms for digital nomads and investors, suggests it is leaning heavily on international engagement to stabilise its economic trajectory. If successful, the education plan may not only expand a key export sector but also reposition New Zealand as a top-tier destination for students left in limbo by policy shifts in Washington and Canberra. Ready to navigate global policies? Secure your overseas future. Get expert guidance now!
Mint
an hour ago
- Mint
Israeli missile kills eight children collecting water in Gaza as ceasefire talks stall
At least eight Palestinians, the majority of them children, were killed and over a dozen others injured in central Gaza on Sunday while they were gathering water, according to local officials. The casualties were the result of an Israeli airstrike that the military acknowledged had missed its intended target. The Israeli military stated that the strike was aimed at an Islamic Jihad militant in the area, but due to a malfunction, the missile landed "dozens of meters" away from its target, Reuters reported. "The IDF regrets any harm to uninvolved civilians," it said in a statement, adding that the incident was under review. The strike hit a water distribution point in Nuseirat refugee camp, killing six children and injuring 17 others, said Ahmed Abu Saifan, an emergency physician at Al-Awda Hospital. Water shortages in Gaza have worsened sharply in recent weeks, with fuel shortages causing desalination and sanitation facilities to close, making people dependent on collection centres where they can fill up their plastic containers. Hours later, 12 people were killed by an Israeli strike on a market in Gaza City, including a prominent hospital consultant, Ahmad Qandil, Palestinian media reported. The Israeli military did not immediately comment on the attack. Gaza's health ministry said on Sunday that more than 58,000 people had been killed since the start of the war between Israel and Hamas in October 2023, with 139 people added to the death toll over the past 24 hours. The ministry does not distinguish between civilians and fighters in its tally, but says over half of those killed are women and children. U.S. President Donald Trump's Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff said on Sunday that he was 'hopeful' that Gaza ceasefire negotiations were underway in Qatar. He told reporters in Teterboro, New Jersey, that he planned to meet senior Qatari officials on the sidelines of the FIFA Club World Cup final. However, negotiations aimed at securing a ceasefire have been stalling, with the two sides divided over the extent of an eventual Israeli withdrawal from the Palestinian enclave, Palestinian and Israeli sources told Reuters at the weekend. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was set to convene ministers late on Sunday to discuss the latest developments in the talks, an Israeli official said. The indirect talks over a U.S. proposal for a 60-day ceasefire are being held in Doha, but optimism that surfaced last week of a looming deal has largely faded, with both sides accusing each other of intransigence. Netanyahu in a video he posted on Telegram on Sunday said Israel would not back down from its core demands - releasing all the hostages still in Gaza, destroying Hamas and ensuring Gaza will never again be a threat to Israel. The war began on October 7, 2023, when Hamas-led militants stormed into Israel, killing about 1,200 people and taking 251 hostages into Gaza. At least 20 of the remaining 50 hostages are believed to still be alive. Families of hostages gathered outside Netanyahu's office in Jerusalem to call for a deal. Earlier on Saturday, a Palestinian source involved in the truce negotiations told Reuters that Hamas rejected Israeli-proposed withdrawal maps, as they would leave approximately 40% of Gaza including the entire city of Rafah under Israeli control. Israel's ongoing military campaign against Hamas has displaced nearly the entire population of over 2 million people in Gaza, with residents reporting that there are no truly safe areas left within the enclave. In the early hours of Sunday, a missile struck a house in Gaza City where a family had relocated after being ordered to evacuate from their home in the southern outskirts. (With inputs from Reuters)
