Editorial 1: The messaging from putting the IWT in ‘abeyance’

Context

Using water resources as a strategic tool may offer short-term advantages, but it could eventually harm India in the long term.

Introduction

On April 24, India declared that it would place the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) of 1960 in abeyance until Pakistan halts its support for cross-border terrorism. The term “abeyance,” as used by the Government of India, implies a temporary suspension, leaving room for reinstatement if Pakistan takes credible steps to address terrorism, especially after the Pahalgam terror attack on April 22.

The meaning of ‘abeyance’

• No Legal Recognition: The term “abeyance” is not legally recognized under the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) or the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT), 1969.
• India’s VCLT Status: India is not a party to the VCLT; Pakistan has signed but not ratified it.
• Customary International Law: Unilateral suspension of treaty obligations, like “abeyance,” is not legitimate under international law, which prioritizes water cooperation.
• Article XII(3) & (4): These require mutual ratification for any treaty modifications or termination, a process unlikely with the current India-Pakistan relations.
• Unilateral Suspension: The IWT’s provisions do not support unilateral suspension of obligations.

VCLT Provisions on Suspension

• Exceptional Circumstances: Articles 60, 61, and 62 of the VCLT allow treaty suspension only for breaches, impossibility of performance, or fundamental changes in circumstances.
• India’s Stance: India has not formally invoked these exceptions, suggesting the “abeyance” is a political move rather than a legal action.
• Operational Suspension: India can temporarily refuse to share water-related data and halt cooperation on joint mechanisms, potentially affecting Pakistan’s water security and planning.
• Possible Water Impacts: India could flush silt from reservoirs without warning, jeopardizing Pakistan’s water interests.

Previous Legal Actions

• January 25, 2023 Notice: India issued a notice to Pakistan for a material breach of the IWT after Pakistan approached the Permanent Court of Arbitration unilaterally.
• Current Use of “Abeyance”: India has invoked the term as a counter-terrorism deterrent, raising questions about the treaty’s legal framework in this context.
• Material Breach: Does Pakistan’s support for cross-border terrorism qualify as a material breach under Article 60 of the VCLT?
• Fundamental Change: Could the ongoing national security threat from terrorism fulfill the conditions for suspension under Article 62?
• Untested Legal Interpretations: There are no clear legal links between terrorism and treaty obligations, which risks escalating the already tense India-Pakistan relations.

Abeyance as a two-level game

Key aspect	Explanation
Strategic and Tactical Reasons	India’s Cabinet Committee on Security likely chose abeyance to address public sentiment quickly, providing comfort to grieving families. The limited time for full legal and diplomatic evaluation might have influenced this decision.
Relieving Legal Objections	Abeyance could be a strategic move to ease the legal challenges faced by India regarding run-of-the-river projects on western rivers, allowing India to consolidate its rights over water use.
Risk of Escalation	While beneficial for India, this strategy risks escalating tensions, as Pakistan sees such actions as an ‘act of war’ and a direct threat to its water security.
Pakistan’s Instability	Pakistan’s political and economic instability, worsened by youth dissatisfaction and internal issues, complicates India’s strategy. This uncertainty makes relations with Pakistan more challenging.
Effectiveness of Abeyance	Abeyance may not exert meaningful pressure on Pakistan, as the country, seen as a failing state, is unlikely to comply with India’s demands.
Domestic Goals	By invoking abeyance, India may gain time to push for water infrastructure projects (e.g., Kishenganga, Baglihar, and Ratle), which were delayed due to Pakistan’s legal interventions.
Uncertain Projects	Some projects, like Tulbul-Navigation and Ratle, remain uncertain, highlighting challenges in project feasibility, including issues with environmental clearances.
Two-Level Game	India and Pakistan must manage domestic expectations and engage diplomatically to safeguard their interests. Abeyance serves dual purposes: domestic (firm stance against terrorism) and international(signals frustration over Pakistan’s terrorism support).

Ramifications for India

• Emotional Resonance: In India, the decision has resonated emotionally with the public and received widespread political support, but it risks overshadowing the deeper implications of the strategy.
• International Implications: Unilaterally violating the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) may lead to India facing the Permanent Court of Arbitration or the International Court of Justice, potentially damaging its credibility as a responsible international actor.
• National Security vs. Ecological Prudence: The decision raises questions about balancing national securitywith ecological concerns, as rushing to fast-track water infrastructure projects might bypass necessary public and environmental scrutiny.
• Environmental Risks: Fast-tracking these projects could have severe consequences for the Indus basin, which is rich in biodiversity and seismically sensitive.
• Short-Term Leverage, Long-Term Risks: While using water resources as a strategic tool may provide short-term leverage, it could inadvertently harm India by undermining democratic governance and constitutional integrity.
• Public Sentiment for Stronger Action: The public demands a stronger stance against Pakistan, with some advocating for escalated military actions similar to the 2016 and 2019 surgical strikes, though such actions may not address the root cause of cross-border terrorism.
• Navigating the Path Forward: The challenge for New Delhi is to navigate a path that balances national sentiment with long-term stability and security.
• Crafting a Legal and Geopolitical Strategy: New Delhi must carefully shape its narrative and actions regarding the IWT abeyance, ensuring alignment with broader geopolitical goals and maintaining a sound legal basiswithin the IWT framework.

Conclusion

Actions should be carefully thought out, aiming to push Pakistan to rethink its support for cross-border terrorism, without damaging India’s environment or society. The focus should be on strengthening India’s reputation as a responsible global leader, by promoting its democratic values and environmental care. This approach will maintain India’s global standing and ensure its actions don’t unintentionally harm the region it aims to protect.

Editorial 2: ​ Redrawing the not-so-pretty energy footprint of AI

Context

Small modular nuclear reactors might be the solution to power the rapidly growing AI and data infrastructure.

Introduction

Generative AI has made it much easier to create art and finish tasks faster and with less effort. For example, ChatGPT-4o can make a Studio Ghibli-style portrait in just a few seconds using a simple prompt. But this convenience uses a lot of energy, which people often don’t notice — sometimes even causing GPUs to overheat or melt. As AI tools get more powerful, their harmful impact on the environment will grow, making them less sustainable. So, how can we build AI in a way that’s better for the planet? Could using nuclear energy, especially Small Modular Reactors (SMRs), be a good alternative?

The Environmental Impact and Energy Challenges of AI Adoption

• Hidden Cost of AI Use: AI tools are not free — every time someone uses ChatGPT or any other AI application, a data centre somewhere consumes a large amount of electricity, much of it generated from fossil fuels.
• Hardware Strain and Overload: OpenAI CEO Sam Altman highlighted the strain on hardware, tweeting: “It’s super fun seeing people love images in ChatGPT, but our GPUs are melting.”
• Rising Global Electricity Demand: By 2030, projections suggest that data centres could consume up to 10% of the world’s total electricity.
• India’s Present Readiness: India currently has sufficient capacity to generate electricity for its domestic AI needs, but with increasing adoption and ambitions, proactive planning is necessary.
• Carbon Emissions from AI Training: Training a single AI model — whether for conversation (like ChatGPT) or image generation (like Midjourney) — can produce as much CO₂ as five cars running across their lifetimes.
• Continuous Power Demand Post-Deployment: Even after deployment, AI tools continue to consume immense energy from data centres to serve millions of users globally.
• Sustainability Challenge: This level of energy consumption is becoming increasingly unsustainable as AI adoption grows worldwide.
• Need for Energy Transparency: AI companies should disclose three key details: how much energy they use, where it comes from, and what measures they are taking to reduce consumption.
• Regulatory Framework for AI Energy Use: Just like data privacy regulations, there should be rules requiring companies to report their environmental impact and energy usage clearly.
• Insight and Innovation for Sustainability: Energy usage data can help identify high-consumption areas, promote targeted research, and drive the development of more sustainable AI technologies.

Advantages of SMRs

Aspect	Details
Core Idea	A shift in focus is needed toward the source of energy powering technological growth — particularly nuclear energy, with emphasis on Small Modular Reactors (SMRs).
Urgency	The AI boom is expanding rapidly, and the current energy infrastructure is not equipped to keep up with its power demands.
SMRs vs Traditional Nuclear Plants	SMRs are compact, scalable, and demand less land, water, and infrastructure compared to large nuclear power plants.
Deployment Advantage	SMRs can be installed closer to data centres and other high-energy demand sites, providing consistent and reliable power.
Carbon Impact	SMRs provide 24×7, zero-carbon, baseload electricity, making them a strong alternative to intermittent renewables like solar and wind.
Construction Benefits	Their modular design allows for faster construction, lower costs, and quicker deploymentcompared to traditional plants.
Safety Features	SMRs have enhanced passive safety systems that use natural cooling processes to prevent overheating or accidents.
Public Acceptance	Safer design and smaller size make SMRs more socially acceptable, especially in areas resistant to large-scale nuclear projects.
Geographical Flexibility	SMRs can operate in a wide range of environments, from urban to remote areas, supporting energy decentralisation.
Grid Resilience	By producing energy closer to consumption points, SMRs reduce transmission losses and improve overall grid resilience.

Some of the challenges

• Challenges in SMR Adoption: The adoption of Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) is not without challenges. Significant policy shifts will be necessary to create a robust regulatory framework that addresses safety, waste management, and public perception.
• Upfront Investment and Cost Competitiveness: There is also the matter of substantial upfront investment, as the technology is still maturing and may face issues with cost competitiveness when compared to established energy sources.
• Coordinating with Renewable Energy Initiatives: Coordinating the deployment of SMRs with existing renewable energy projects will require careful planning to maximize synergies while minimizing redundancy.
• Electricity Costs in India: Despite these challenges, the cost of electricity from SMRs in India is predicted to fall from ₹10.3 to ₹5 per kWhonce the reactors are operational, which is less than the average electricity cost.

Conclusion

In conclusion, a public-private partnership model offers a realistic solution to the challenges of sustainable AI development. By leveraging the strengths of both the public and private sectors, this model can enable the efficient development of SMRs alongside other forms of renewable energy to support advancements in AI.