India threatens Pakistan’s water

​Students shout slogans and burn an effigy to protest the Pahalgam terror attack in Guwahati, Assam, India, on April 24, 2025. On April 22, a devastating terrorist attack occurs in Pahalgam, Jammu and Kashmir, resulting in the deaths of at least 28 tourists.
Students shout slogans and burn an effigy to protest the Pahalgam terror attack in Guwahati, Assam, India, on April 24, 2025. On April 22, a devastating terrorist attack occurs in Pahalgam, Jammu and Kashmir, resulting in the deaths of at least 28 tourists.
Photo by David Talukdar/NurPhoto

Prime Minister Narendra Modi has blamed Pakistan for Tuesday’s deadly terrorist attack in Kashmir, and he’s takenaggressive action against its government. The most striking of these moves is a decision to suspend theIndus Waters Treaty, which sets terms for the sharing of water that flows from the Indus River and its tributaries from India into Pakistan.

Pakistanis depend on water from the Indus for drinking, farming, and hydropower. Some80% of Pakistan’s water comes from these rivers, and agriculture is the only source of income for 70% of its rural population.

Water-sharing between the two countries has generated controversy in recent years. In particular, Pakistan charges that India’sconstruction of dams upstream is cheating Pakistan of much-needed volumes of water.

This is the first time the treaty has been suspended, despite multiple wars between the two nuclear-armed neighbors since the Indus River agreement, brokered by the World Bank, was signed in September 1960. Indian officials threatened to suspend the treaty following a suicide bombing in 2019, but Modi’s government didn’t follow through.

There is no evidence yet that India is restricting the flow of water, but Pakistan’s government says it will treat any diversion of water as an act of war.

More from GZERO Media

On the 80th anniversary of the United Nations, our panel of global experts will discuss the future of global cooperation and governance in the age of AI. Our livestream panel discussion, "Global Stage: Live from the 80th UN General Assembly" will examine these key issues on Tuesday, September 23 at 11:30 AM ET, live from the sidelines of UN headquarters on the first day of high-level General Debate. Watch live at gzeromedia.com/globalstage

Last Thursday, Brazil’s Supreme Court delivered a historic verdict: Jair Bolsonaro, the far-right former president who tried to overturn the 2022 election, was convicted along with seven close allies for conspiring against democracy and plotting to assassinate his rivals, including President Lula. Bolsonaro was sentenced to 27 years in prison and barred from office until 2060. At 70, he will likely spend his remaining years behind bars.
Last Thursday, Brazil’s Supreme Court delivered a historic verdict: Jair Bolsonaro, the far-right former president who tried to overturn the 2022 election.

Last Thursday, Brazil’s Supreme Court delivered a historic verdict: Jair Bolsonaro, the far-right former president who tried to overturn the 2022 election.

This summer, Microsoft released the 2025 Responsible AI Transparency Report, demonstrating Microsoft’s sustained commitment to earning trust at a pace that matches AI innovation. The report outlines new developments in how we build and deploy AI systems responsibly, how we support our customers, and how we learn, evolve, and grow. It highlights our strengthened incident response processes, enhanced risk assessments and mitigations, and proactive regulatory alignment. It also covers new tools and practices we offer our customers to support their AI risk governance efforts, as well as how we work with stakeholders around the world to work towards governance approaches that build trust. You can read the report here.

- YouTube

Brazil’s Supreme Court has sentenced former President Jair Bolsonaro to 27 years in prison for plotting to overturn the 2022 election and allegedly conspiring to assassinate President Lula. In this week's "ask ian," Ian Bremmer says the verdict highlights how “your response… has nothing to do with rule of law. It has everything to do with tribal political affiliation.”