印度现在中断了印度和协议， 中断给巴基斯坦供水， AI 告诉我这是一种战争犯罪行为。

Cutting off water supplies to civilian populations during conflict is widely condemned under international law and may constitute a violation of humanitarian principles or even a war crime. Such actions can cause significant suffering to non-combatants and are discouraged by the Geneva Conventions and related treaties.

India’s reported suspension of the Indus Water Treaty, if it leads to restrictions on water flow to downstream populations, would represent the use of critical civilian infrastructure as a tool of pressure in a conflict. While this does not fit the strict legal definition of “terrorism,” it would be viewed by the international community as an escalation with serious humanitarian consequences.

In contemporary conflicts, states sometimes resort to targeting infrastructure—including water, electricity, and transport networks—as a means of exerting pressure without engaging in direct military confrontation, especially when the risks of escalation are high. This is a feature of so-called “hybrid warfare” and is not unique to any particular country.

It is also important to note that, contrary to some narratives, most major conflicts—including the Russia-Ukraine war—have involved attacks on civilian infrastructure by both sides. International organizations such as the United Nations and the Red Cross have repeatedly documented strikes on water, energy, and medical facilities during recent wars. Such actions are widely condemned regardless of which side carries them out.

In summary, targeting or disrupting water supplies during conflict is a grave matter and should be discussed in accordance with international law and humanitarian standards, rather than through emotional or accusatory language.