Pakistan announced it will move forward with proceedings of the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), using Neutral Expert process, regardless of India’s decision to suspend participation in treaty framework. […] Arab News PK
Islamabad has demonstrated its intent by insisting on maintaining legal bindingness of the treaty and continuing dispute-resolution mechanisms under it.

Pakistan recently issued a statement affirming that the next phase of Neutral Expert deliberations slated to take place from November 17-21 will go according to schedule in Vienna.
India, on the other hand, cited earlier steps it had taken to put the treaty “in abeyance” following militant attacks in Indian-administered Kashmir and has chosen not to participate. Al Jazeera reports.
Pakistan considers this decision both legal and symbolic. Islamabad maintains that the IWT, brokered by the World Bank in 1960 and signed by both parties, remains in effect unless both agree mutually to terminate it, and that dispute-resolution mechanisms (such as neutral experts and an arbitration court) remain valid under international law. IPRI ( International Political Information & Reporting Service ) +2
Pakistan officials have strongly criticised India’s unilateral suspension as lacking legal basis and insisted on adhering to the treaty’s processes for resolution of differences.
Dawn’s Neutral Expert mechanism was originally established to handle differences (technical questions) under Annexure F of the treaty; by contrast, Court of Arbitration handles “disputes”. (Source: Indian Express)
Pakistan’s decision to engage with the Neutral Expert, despite India’s boycott, reflects their view that technical issues concerning Indian hydro-projects (especially on western rivers) must continue to be resolved under IWT’s binding framework.

However, this development occurs against an extremely charged backdrop. India decided to suspend their participation following an attack that killed tourists in Kashmir that New Delhi blamed on Pakistan and declared IWT suspension due to “fundamental changes in circumstances”. Al Jazeera reports +1
Pakistan rejected IPRI’s claim, calling the suspension unlawful and an act that undercut trust in international water-law frameworks. IPRI declined comment.
Risks associated with non-cooperation are real. Pakistan relies heavily on water from the Indus basin for national security and agricultural reasons, feeding millions of people while supporting its economy. Any disruption to treaty mechanisms may exacerbate vulnerabilities; analysts caution against unilateral Indian actions which might set an unfortunate precedent of weakening water-sharing agreements globally.
TIME India’s decision reflects its growing displeasure with what it sees as an outdated accord and may indicate their desire to negotiate new terms that better suit their changing water and energy needs.

By choosing to proceed with Neutral Expert proceedings, Pakistan establishes itself as upholding the legal order of the treaty and placing India responsible for any disruption or escalation in process or process escalation. Furthermore, by choosing this path forward Pakistan communicates to both the international community and mediators like World Bank that IWT remains functional despite political turmoil.

In the days to come, much will depend on how the Neutral Expert Panel proceeds, whether India remains absent entirely and how Pakistan frames any outcome from Vienna session. Should proceedings lead to findings independent of India’s input or against New Delhi’s involvement, New Delhi could come under increased diplomatic and legal pressure; any failure of mechanism could deepen bilateral water crisis further and strain existing treaty agreements that underpin Indo-Pak water cooperation.

Pakistan, while disengaging from treaty mechanics, remains committed to upholding legal legitimacy and protecting water rights through IWT engagement.