THE ASIAN INDEPENDENT UK
Bal Ram Sampla
Geopolitics
In December 2024, Pakistan found itself in an uncomfortable position – asking India for water data and explanations about sudden changes in the Chenab River flows. But this was no ordinary diplomatic request. It was what many observers call “informal begging,” and the reasons why tell us an important story about power, treaties, and consequences.
India suddenly released massive amounts of water from the Chenab River in early December – about 58,000 cusecs at midnight. Then, just as suddenly, India reduced the flow to barely 870-1,000 cusecs for four days straight. This was far below normal levels and created serious problems downstream in Pakistan.
Pakistan’s officials quickly reached out to India, asking for explanations and requesting information about the water flows. On the surface, this seemed like a reasonable request between two countries sharing river water. But the reality was far more complicated.
Why “Informal Begging”?
The term “informal begging” might sound harsh, but it accurately describes Pakistan’s weak position. Here’s why:
First, India suspended the Indus Waters Treaty in April 2025 after the Pahalgam terrorist attack. This treaty, which had governed water sharing between the two countries for decades, was put “in abeyance.” India stopped all cooperation – no more data sharing, no more joint meetings, no more advance warnings about water releases.
Second, when a treaty is suspended, formal diplomatic channels based on that treaty lose their power. Pakistan could no longer demand information as a treaty right. Instead, they could only request it as a favor – essentially begging for goodwill from India.
Third, Pakistan has no leverage. India controls the water upstream. India decides when to open the dams and when to close them. Pakistan can complain, but it cannot compel India to do anything. This is the definition of powerlessness.
The Credibility Problem
Pakistan tried to appeal to international law and UN experts. Some UN specialists said that India cannot legally suspend the treaty unilaterally. But here’s where Pakistan faces a serious credibility problem.
In 1948, the United Nations passed a resolution on Kashmir. It had three clear steps. First, Pakistan had to withdraw all its fighters and nationals from Kashmir. Second, India would then reduce its forces. Third, a plebiscite would be held to let Kashmiris decide their future.
Pakistan never completed step one. It never withdrew its forces. The resolution, which Pakistan had initially accepted, was never implemented because Pakistan didn’t follow through on its obligations.
So when Pakistan now appeals to UN authority and international law regarding water, many people ask: Why should anyone listen? Pakistan ignored UN resolutions when they didn’t suit its interests. Now it wants others to follow international law when it benefits Pakistan. This double standard destroys credibility.
The Reality of Power
This situation teaches us a simple but important lesson: international law and treaties only work when both sides want to follow them, or when there’s someone powerful enough to enforce them.
In the India-Pakistan water dispute, these conditions don’t exist:
(I) India has physical control of the water
(II) India has suspended the treaty
(III) Pakistan cannot force India to do anything
(IV) No international body can or will intervene
This leaves Pakistan in the position of a supplicant – someone who must ask politely and hope for generosity, rather than someone who can demand their rights.
The Chenab River crisis shows us the difference between formal diplomacy and informal begging. Formal diplomacy happens between equals, within established frameworks, with mutual obligations. Informal begging happens when one party has all the power and the other party can only request favors.
Pakistan’s appeals to India about the Chenab River flows are not backed by any enforcement mechanism. They are not protected by an active treaty. They cannot be supported by Pakistan’s own history of respecting international law. They are simply requests – polite at first, perhaps more desperate as water shortages continue.
Conclusion
The term “informal begging” may sound disrespectful, but it accurately captures the reality of Pakistan’s position. Without treaty protections, without enforcement mechanisms, without leverage, and without credibility from its own track record, Pakistan can only ask India for water information and hope for a positive response.
This is not about right or wrong, legal or illegal. It is about power – who has it and who doesn’t. In the Chenab River crisis, India holds all the cards. Pakistan can talk about international law and UN experts all it wants, but at the end of the day, it must still ask India for something it cannot demand. That is the essence of informal begging in international relations.
The lesson is clear: treaties and international law matter only when backed by power, goodwill, or credibility. When all three are absent, even legitimate requests become acts of supplication.
References
1.https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-05-05/pakistan-says-india-chokes-river-flow-as-fears-of-conflict-rise
2.https://www.refworld.org/legal/resolution/unsc/1948/en/112999
3.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indus_Waters_Treaty
4.https://www.youtube.com/live/55JBr8hEbdU?si=XyBplERm1AHIZkqY
