In the latest exchange of cross-border rhetoric, Indian Member of Parliament Asaduddin Owaisi has delivered a sharp and personal retort to Pakistani Foreign Minister Bilawal Bhutto Zardari’s inflammatory statements regarding the Indus Waters Treaty. Referring directly to the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, Owaisi reminded Bilawal that the terrorists responsible for her death were “born and bred in Pakistan,” calling for reflection rather than war-mongering.
Bilawal’s Controversial Statement
The controversy stems from a public speech made by Bilawal Bhutto Zardari during a rally in Sukkur, where he invoked emotional and nationalistic themes to address India’s decision to suspend the implementation of the Indus Waters Treaty—a move triggered by a recent terror attack in Jammu and Kashmir. Standing beside the Indus River, Bhutto declared, “This river was ours, is ours, and will remain ours. Either the water flows to us—or the blood of those who try to steal it will.”
While the statement was met with applause among segments of the Pakistani public, it immediately sparked backlash across the border in India, where it was seen as an unnecessary provocation during a volatile period.
Owaisi’s Stern Response
Speaking at a public event in Maharashtra, AIMIM chief Asaduddin Owaisi lashed out at Bhutto’s remarks, highlighting the dangers of using violent rhetoric in the subcontinent’s already fragile political climate.
“You talk of blood for water,” Owaisi said, “but have you forgotten whose blood already stained your land? Your mother—Benazir Bhutto—was not killed by India. She was assassinated by your own. The terrorists who did that didn’t come from across the border. They came from within.”
His statement was seen as a rare moment of cross-border accountability—a challenge to Pakistani leadership to look inward instead of fanning the flames of conflict.
The Legacy of Benazir Bhutto
Benazir Bhutto’s assassination on December 27, 2007, remains one of the most significant and tragic events in Pakistan’s modern history. As the first woman to lead a Muslim-majority country, her leadership symbolized progress and change, but also drew the ire of extremist elements who viewed her modernist and democratic ideals as a threat.
Bhutto was killed in a combined shooting and suicide bombing while leaving a campaign rally in Rawalpindi. Though Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) was widely blamed, questions surrounding the investigation have persisted for over a decade, especially concerning the possible negligence—or complicity—of elements within Pakistan’s military and intelligence communities.
Owaisi’s reminder of her death wasn’t merely political—it was deeply personal. It brought back to focus the cost of terrorism that Pakistan has itself suffered, including the loss of leaders like Bhutto to forces it once sheltered or failed to contain.
India-Pakistan Relations: A Fragile Peace
Owaisi’s criticism comes at a time when the already tenuous relationship between India and Pakistan has reached another flashpoint. The recent terror attack in Pahalgam, Jammu and Kashmir, attributed to Pakistan-based militants, prompted India to review the Indus Waters Treaty—one of the few lasting agreements that has survived war and prolonged hostility between the two nations.
The Treaty, brokered by the World Bank in 1960, governs water sharing between India and Pakistan across six rivers of the Indus basin. India’s decision to halt participation in the dispute resolution process marks a significant departure from decades of cautious cooperation, sparking fears of worsening tensions.
Rhetoric vs. Reality
Owaisi’s remarks were not merely a political counterpoint; they highlighted a broader concern within the region—that inflammatory rhetoric does not serve the people on either side of the border. “The real war should be against terrorism, not against neighbors,” Owaisi stated, urging politicians to fight against extremism and economic stagnation, rather than engage in verbal warfare.
Experts on South Asian diplomacy echoed this view. “Both countries are facing enormous internal challenges—climate change, poverty, unemployment, and extremism,” said a senior Indian foreign policy analyst. “Turning rivers into battlegrounds or using past grievances to incite hate only delays progress.”
Domestic Reception in India and Pakistan
In India, Owaisi’s comments received a mixed reception. While some political opponents accused him of interfering in foreign affairs and playing politics with sensitive matters, others—including independent observers and civil society leaders—praised his willingness to call out hypocrisy and push for a more honest dialogue.
In Pakistan, Bilawal Bhutto did not issue a direct response, but his party, the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP), dismissed Owaisi’s remarks as “Indian deflection tactics” aimed at hiding the broader issue of treaty violations.
However, Pakistani commentators on social media and in alternative press platforms acknowledged the validity of Owaisi’s statement. “We cannot forget that the monsters we created turned on us,” wrote one Pakistani journalist. “Benazir’s assassination was a turning point, and we still haven’t fully learned its lesson.”
Why Owaisi’s Words Matter
Owaisi’s interjection matters not just because of its content, but because of who he is—a Muslim political leader in India who has frequently been critical of the Indian government, particularly on issues involving minority rights and Kashmir. Yet here, he chose to speak not from a partisan or sectarian position, but from one of moral clarity.
His call for introspection challenges both countries to look beyond politics and into the human cost of their prolonged rivalry. For Pakistan, it is a reminder that the real enemy may not always be across the border. For India, it is a signal that peace and diplomacy must be pursued even when provoked.
Conclusion: Blood, Water, and Memory
The waters of the Indus are not just rivers; they are veins that run through a shared history, marked by division, war, and fragile peace. When Bilawal Bhutto spoke of blood for water, he may have sought to invoke patriotic passion. But in doing so, he was reminded by Asaduddin Owaisi of a deeper truth: that the blood of the innocent—his own mother included—was spilled not by foreign enemies, but by domestic extremists fed by years of denial, misgovernance, and political opportunism.
If the goal is to preserve peace and prosperity for the next generation, then perhaps the answer lies not in speeches made on riverbanks, but in honest reflection on the damage already done—and the courage to prevent more.
Journalist Details
