A report by the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee says that as there is an increasing danger of an Indo-Pak war over water resources, there is a need for a new treaty between the two to replace the Indus Waters Treaty. This report has been presented to the Obama Administration, and takes note of the 33 dams India is building on the Indus, supposedly power projects. However, the report does not make the inevitable connection between the water resources and the Kashmir issue, which is the core issue between the two South Asian neighbours. The report does not pay enough attention to the fact that the original IWT was only signed after Pakistan agreed to give up three rivers to India, and it provided a mechanism for the resolution of disputes. If that mechanism is not functioning properly, then that would be the fault of either the parties to the treaty, or its guarantors, failing to meet their obligations, not because the treaty itself is unworkable. A new treaty would meet one or two purposes. First, it would release the guarantors of the previous treaty from their obligations. They would not be made guarantors, or would have significantly reduced obligations, in any new treaty. Second, a new treaty might be used to force Pakistan to accept something India wants, but which it cannot have under the present treaty. It must not be ignored that Capitol Hill, where the report originates, is full of pro-Indian elements. India has this influence both because American companies want to access its supposedly huge markets, and because the USA not only wants it to be its regional counterweight against China, but because it is itself anxious to play this role. It should be noted that while the main conclusion of the report, that the conflict between Pakistan and India over water resources is serious enough to lead to war, is indisputable, its solution, a new treaty, is not. It must be kept in mind that the original treaty took well over a decade, not to mention World Bank facilitation, to negotiate after the original cause of dispute, which was an Indian attempt to cut off Pakistans water. Throwing out such a painstakingly crafted document cannot be in anyones interest, and while a replacement might be negotiated faster, it would still be very hard work, and would leave in doubt the status of the present treaty. Instead of attempting to curry favour with the USA by acceding to any demand it might make, which would build up India in the region, Pakistan must not only invoke the dispute resolution mechanisms of the treaty, but must also hold its guarantors to their commitments. A simple solution to the problem is a resolution of the Kashmir issue. While primarily about allowing the Kashmiri people the right of self-determination, a resolution would also take the Indus waters out of Indian control.