1waterrights

The Institute for Domestic and International Affairs

United Nations Environment Programme

Water Rights

Rutgers Model United Nations

16-19 November 2006

Director: Jorge Barriero

© 2006 Institute for Domestic & International Affairs, Inc. (IDIA)

This document is solely for use in preparation for Rutgers Model

United Nations 2006. Use for other purposes is not permitted without the express written consent of IDIA. For more

information, please write us at [email protected]

Introduction _________________________________________________________________ 1

Background _________________________________________________________________ 2 River Supply Management _________________________________________________________ 5 Early History by Region____________________________________________________________ 6

Africa _________________________________________________________________________________6 Middle East _____________________________________________________________________________8 Southern Asia __________________________________________________________________________10 North America__________________________________________________________________________11

Recent History___________________________________________________________________ 12 Africa ________________________________________________________________________________12 Middle East ____________________________________________________________________________13 Asia __________________________________________________________________________________14 South America__________________________________________________________________________16 North America__________________________________________________________________________18

United Nations Response to Conflicts Over Access to Water_____________________________ 18 Current Status ______________________________________________________________ 19

Key Positions _______________________________________________________________ 23 Regional Positions________________________________________________________________ 23 Non-Governmental Organizations __________________________________________________ 24 Business Interests ________________________________________________________________ 25

Summary___________________________________________________________________ 26

Discussion Questions _________________________________________________________ 27

Works Cited ________________________________________________________________ 28

Works Referenced ___________________________________________________________ 30

Rutgers Model United Nations 2006 1

Introduction With respect to water rights, much of the world is facing difficulty in allotting

water resources shared by neighboring states in an effective and fair manner. When

states share water, a sufficient division of the resource must be granted to each state and a

plan for this distribution must be devised and agreed to by all interested parties.

However, the unclear notion of what is sufficient, causes states to dispute what

constitutes a fair distribution. Also, the ambiguous definition of the term “water rights”

in international law increases misunderstanding over the sharing of water resources. The

conflicts that arise from these misunderstanding have great consequences, as disputes

over water resources have led to thousands of deaths. While many of these fatalities are

the result of a lack of access to water, others are the result of brutal warfare waged in

conquest of this precious resource. The constant growth in world population will put

water resources in even higher demand, taxing the already strained situation. This

growing competition for water access dramatically increases the probability of conflict

among states.

Water is critical to the development of any state. By tapping into a river’s water

supply, governments are able to improve the development of agriculture, health, and

many other industries. With the possibilities of great gains, nations perceive any sign of

competition over this water as a threat to

national security. Some states believe that

they may tap into rivers freely and not be at

fault – if a river flows through their state,

political leaders feel that they can exercise

sovereignty over it. The challenge of this situation is when a river crosses a national

boundary, and therefore falls under the sovereignty of more than one state. Should a

nation in the upper Nile River Basin decide to dam the river for irrigation or power

generation purposes, it would have significant affect on the multiples states further

downstream that rely upon the river for their very existence.

Sovereignty: Sovereignty refers to the power, and the right to exercise that power of self-government that all independent countries have. They can exercise the power of the state without asking permission from another state. Source: www.naiadonline.ca/book/01Glossary.htm


The limited nature of international law regulating the use of water increases the

possibilities of a state extracting more water than is their right. It is generally understood

that every human being has a right to access water. Unfortunately, many states defend

that right for their own citizens, but are less concerned for those of other states further

along the water source. They will take measures such as building dams to store excess

water or redirect the flow of the river to be more beneficial to their farmers or industry.

Such actions obviously cause grave concern to states downstream as the water supply

becomes limited, leading their citizens to suffer from malnutrition and poverty.

Usually the reason for conflict is due to severe insufficiencies of water in certain

areas. Droughts can quickly reduce the amount of water in a region, diminishing the

supply of water that precipitation usually brings. Many states store water behind dams in

order to maintain a constant flow of water in case of drought. These facilities work very

well in storing water, but they are designed to reduce the flow of water downstream, and

to states that have similar needs regarding water. The downstream states perceive this as

a threat to their national security, leading to the potential for political or armed conflict.

Background Conflict over water has been a fragile issue, especially since rights to water have

not been well defined until recently. United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan

claims that “access to safe water is a fundamental human need and, therefore, a basic

human right.”1 Every human being therefore has the right to water since it is essential to

life. A person can live without food for several weeks, but can only survive for three to

four days without water. The grave need for water is the leading reason for the current

issue of determining how a person should attain his right to water.

Approximately eighteen per cent of the world population of six billion does not

have access to useable water, meaning that water is unavailable to more than one billion

1 Gro Harlem Brundtland and Sergio Vieira de Mello, The Right to Water. (France: World Health Organization, 2003). 6


people.2 The people that do not have meaningful access to water are the same that suffer

from poverty and sickness. This lack of access to water is the primary “cause of serious

illnesses such as diarrhoeal diseases, which kill over two million people each year [the

vast majority of which are children].”3

Also, the lack of a consistent water

supply adds to the severity of droughts

when yearly precipitation is low.

These droughts cause the deaths of

thousands and destroy fertile land in a

process called desertification, reducing yearly crops and other sources of nutrition needed

address the extreme poverty and malnutrition of such areas.

The earth has enough water to provide for its entire population, but precipitation

does not allow for even distribution. According to the World Water Council, water

covers seventy per cent of the earth. “Ninety-seven [per cent] of this water is contained in

oceans, hence salty and unsuitable for drinking or irrigation. Of the remaining 3 per cent

of freshwater, only 0.3 per cent [of all water] is found in rivers and lakes.”4 With six

billion people in the world, the current amount of renewable water available per person is

roughly 5,000 liters per day.5 This amount is an ample quantity for any person, but the

problem is that rainfall does not occur evenly or at a constant pace. Some African states,

such as the Nile River Basin states, experience flooding some years, yet suffer droughts

in successive years.

The most plentiful source of freshwater comes from rivers, lakes, and other such

inland waterways. The world obtains its necessary freshwater from these waterways, and

also from rain collecting facilities. Many areas rely heavily on rivers as their sole source 2 World Health Organization, “Global Water Supply and Sanitation Assessment 2000 Report,” http://www.who.int/docstore/water_sanitation_health/Globassessment/Global1.htm#Top (accessed February 24, 2006) 3 Gro Harlem Brundtland and Sergio Vieira de Mello, The Right to Water. (France: World Health Organization, 2003). 6 4 World Water Council, “Water at a Glance”, http://www.worldwatercouncil.org/index.php?id=5 (Accessed February 24, 2006) 5 same as 4 (above)--(total renewable water is 10,000 – 12,000 km3 per year)

Desertification: Long-term damage to dry lands caused by drought and by human activities such as over cultivation, deforestation, and poor irrigation practices that turn the land into a desert, unable to grow anything. Existing dry lands, which cover over 40% of the total land area of the world, mainly in Africa and Asia, are most at risk for desertification resulting from drought caused by climate change. Source: www.climatechangenorth.ca/H1_Glossary.html


of fresh water, as they represent the least costly manner of collecting freshwater, but can

also stimulate the rise of conflicts among states. Rivers are traditionally lines upon which

geography is based, meaning that these waterways often represent borders between two

or more states, making ownership of the water that travels the course of the river difficult

to determine. States extract water from the rivers, and in so doing take water from states

that lay further downstream. This situation is manageable when the water is in plentitude

and sufficient for all the states’ inhabitants, however a river with fluctuating flow rates

can cause considerable tension. When water is scarce, the situation becomes complicated

and states will potentially resort to fighting to defend what they feel is their right to the

product of the river.

The conflict over water has been most severe when claims to waterways were not

well-defined. It is commonly accepted that any legal right to a waterway is held by the

states that lie on any of its banks. Moreover,

states through which tributaries flow maintain

rights to the water in those smaller rivers.

These riparian states hold the claim to utilize

the water or the actual waterway to their

benefit. The proportional nature to this right,

however, is unclear. Upstream states have a

position which grants them dominance over

the waterway, as changes to the flow of the river at early stages has a clear affect on the

nature of the river the further it flows. The Harmon Doctrine asserts that upstream states

hold “the right to do whatever it chooses with the water regardless of its effects on other

riparian states.”6 Downstream states usually hold a “claim to the ‘absolute territorial

integrity’ of the river.”7 This claim maintains that the upstream states have no right to

stop or impede the flow of the river, in an effort to adversely affect states downstream. A

third view of how waterway rights should be divided is the “doctrine of prior 6 Yacob 362 7 Ibid .

Riparian State: a state bordering an international river or one through which an international river flows Source: http://www.naiadonline.ca/book/01Glossary.htm Tributary: a smaller river or stream that flows into a larger river or stream. Usually, a number of smaller tributaries merge to form a river. Source: mvhs1.mbhs.edu/riverweb/glossary.html


appropriation.”8 This principle entails the right to full control of the water by states that

utilized the waterway earliest. This lack of agreement as to how ownership of rivers

should be appropriated is the cause of river-related disputes.

River Supply Management Supply mismanagement is the leading causes for the lack of water access. Macro-

management of water supply consists of the methods used to divide water among states,

such as through the legal rights of riparian states. Mismanagement occurs when one state

decides to extract more water from a system than the amount that allows for an efficient

equilibrium of benefits to all riparian states, and can result from the use of flawed storage

facilities that have an adverse affect on the entire system. State governments are also

responsible for the delivery of water to its citizens, and do so through micromanagement

strategies. The schemes require planning the necessary transit of water and sewage and

facilities for filtering and, if necessary, desalination. The inefficiencies that occur in the

micro-management of water are a major cause of poor water access, but these concerns

are typically addressed before the much more important aspects of micromanagement.

Appropriate plans for macro-management can ensure the constant flow of water into a

nation’s possession, and from their, distribution efforts can be established.

Another critical aspect of micromanagement of rivers relates to pollution.

Upstream states have a considerable responsibility not to

pollute rivers, making them unusable by states further

downstream. Upstream states do not need to divert or

dam the flow of a river in order to have an affect on

populations downstream. By polluting a river, they can

cause it to be non-potable, or not useable for human

consumption. Industry upstream is therefore given

significant control over the manner in which water is used, and is responsible for the

chemical composition of the water as it flows further downstream.

8 Yacob 362

Potable Water: Water that is free from disease-producing organisms, poisonous substances, chemical, biological, and radioactive contaminants which would make it unfit for human consumption and many other uses Source: www.gulflink.osd.mil/water_use/water use taba.htm


Early History by Region Throughout history, interstate conflicts have been common, but not secluded to

areas of northern Africa, the Middle East, and southern Asia. These disputes include

political, economical, and military threats, and sometimes resulted in armed conflict.

Africa The Nile River Basin has been the cornerstone of African culture and life. It is

relied upon heavily by the inhabitants of Egypt, the Sudan, Ethiopia, the Congo, Rwanda,

Tanzania, and Uganda. As the Nile travels

northward it collects water from many

tributaries, including the Blue Nile and the

Atbara, which originate in Ethiopia. These two

tributaries flow through the Sudan and combine

with the White Nile, accounting “for 72 per

cent of the Nile’s total flow.”9 The Nile then

flows to Egypt and flows into Lake Nasser, an

Egyptian made created by the Aswan High

Dam. Finally, it travels across Egypt and

empties into the Mediterranean Sea.

In the 1920s, when Great Britain

controlled most of the Nile River Basin, a

storage plan was devised to counteract the

sporadic flooding and drought that plagued the

region, and it was to be completed in the upper

Nile River region, the area lying south of Egypt.

It allowed water to be stored during times of

plentitude, and released during times of

scarcity. The problem that impeded its

9 Klare 151

Nile River Basin

Source: http://www.mbarron.net/Nile/newbigmap.jpg


production was the disdain the Egyptians had toward allowing the other riparian states

more control of the Nile River waters. Fearing scarcity of water, the newly independent

Egyptian state signed the Nile Waters Agreement of 1929 with Great Britain, who at that

time had jurisdiction over the Nile and its tributaries, stating that “no works would be

constructed on the upper Nile or its tributaries without Cairo’s prior approval.”10 After

Great Britain disposed of its colonial holdings in Africa, new states emerged causing

more strain on the water resources of the Nile, and the Nile Waters Agreement became

obsolete as the new states had access, and therefore control over their sections of the

river. Egypt preserved their right to the water through the doctrine of prior of

appropriation, the absolute territorial integrity of the Nile River, but also reinforced their

claim with threats of military intervention.

Egypt sought to ensure the continuous supply of water from the Nile by

constructing the Aswan High Dam. Creating Lake Nasser, the dam holds back much of

the water that would otherwise flow freely to the Mediterranean Sea. Giving Egypt

substantial control over flooding and drought, the Aswan High Dam provided Egypt with

160 billion cubic meters of water for reserve. While the dam allowed Egypt control over

how the water would flow across its soil, it was at risk of states further upriver

implementing a similar strategy. The Egyptian government sought to neutralize this risk

with military and economic threats directed primarily at the Sudan, but also at Ethiopia.

After several years, Egyptians and the Sudanese cooperated and signed the “Agreement

for the Full Utilization of the Nile Waters,” in 1959. This ameliorated the situation

between Egypt and Sudan, but it did not take into consideration the actions that might be

taken by other riparian states that lied further upstream, such as Ethiopia. When Ethiopia

was considering plans to irrigate their land with the water from the Blue Nile, Egyptian

officials threatened Ethiopia with military force if their actions would result in a

significant alteration of the flow of the river. With the fear of attack from Egypt’s

10 Klare 152


powerful military and a war being waged with neighboring Eritrea, Ethiopia backed

down.

Middle East Records of conflict over water in the Middle East date back as far as ancient times

when groups feuded over control, or simply access, to the waters in the area. A prime

example is the record in the Old Testament’s Exodus, where the Israelites fought for

control of the Jordan River Valley. These conflicts have persisted into modern times, and

include the fight over control of the major tributaries of the Jordan River that flows

through Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Israel, and the West Bank, in addition to the Tigris-

Euphrates Rivers that crosses through Turkey, Syria, Iran, and Iraq. These conflicts,

although very similar to those in the Nile River basin, have proven to be both more

unilateral and more violent.

The Tigris and Euphrates

Rivers originate in Turkey and flow

through Syria and Iraq. Iran has a

small position in the origin of the

Little Zab River, a tributary that

leads to the Tigris River. Conflict

in this area is mostly due to the

construction of dams in

southeastern Turkey and Syria. In

1975 the Syrians completed the

Tabqa (ath-Thawrah) Dam and

began to fill its attached reservoir.

Although the claim was rejected by the Syrians, the Iraqi government stated that there

was a significant reduction in the amount of water that was entering Iraq from the

Euphrates River. This occurrence compelled the Iraqi and Syrian governments to

Tigris and Euphrates Rivers


reinforce the border between the two states with military units. If it was not for the

intervention of Saudi Crown Prince Fahd, war would have been unavoidable.

In 1988, Turkey devised the South-eastern Anatolian Project (GAP), which

included the construction of several dams that would be used to store water and to

produce electricity. Collected water would provide for irrigation in southeastern Turkey

improving the income levels in that region. Fearing that the flow of water through their

territory would be greatly diminished, Iraq and Syria established an alliance of military

force to deter Turkey from altering the flow of the river. In 1990, Turkey stopped the

flow of the Euphrates for an entire month, after having been given prior consent to by

Iraq and Syria, but this successful diversion caused Iraq and Syria much concern as it

demonstrated Turkey’s ability to stop the flow

of water at any time. Iraq and Syria saw this

situation as a national security concern and

vowed to use force to ensure their access to

the river.11 Anticipating a reaction from Iraq

and Syria, Turkey signed an agreement in

1987 with Syria to ensure the continuous flow

of water at 500 cubic meters per second.

Syria in turn agreed to stop their clandestine

support of the Kurdistan Worker’s Party

(PKK), a terrorist group operating inside

Turkey.

The Jordan River has arguably caused

the most brutal of conflicts in the region. The

river, which originates in Lebanon, flows

through the Golan Heights between Israel and Syria and later between Israel and Jordan

to pour into the salty Dead Sea. The conflict that arose due to this river began when 11 Peter H. Gleick, “Water and Conflict: Fresh Water Resources and International Security” In International Security, Vol. 18, No. 1 (Summer, 1993), 79. (The MIT Press, 1993.)

Jordan River Basin


Israel approached the completion of the construction of the National Water Carrier

(NWC) which draws water from the Jordan River north of Jordan and carries it

throughout Israel. The other riparian states responded with the following actions: Viewing the NWC as an intolerable theft of shared Jordan River waters, Arab leaders …, in 1960, … agreed on a bold and provocative move: damming the Hasbani River in Lebanon and the Baniyas in Syria, and diverting their waters (via the Yarmuk) to the East Ghor Canal in Jordan—thus bypassing the upper Jordan and Lake Tiberias, the main intake site for the Israeli canal system.12

If completed, this undertaking would have undermined the Israeli’s control over the river,

not to mention the massive reduction in flow of water that would travel through the

NWC.

The Israeli government threatened the Arab leaders, “that any move to divert the

headwaters of the Jordan River would represent ‘an outright act on one of Israel’s means

of livelihood’ and would therefore be regarded as ‘a threat to peace.’”13 During the

following seven years various military incidents occurred, including Israeli fighter-planes

striking the Baniyas-Yarmuk canal and engaging in several aerial dogfights. These

conflicts, although not solely related to the water diversions, escalated into the Six-Day

war (1967), where Israel’s victory ensured that the waters would not be diverted. After

the war, Israel controlled the Golan Heights, ensuring that the Jordanians could neither

dam the Baniyas River nor divert the waters to the Yarmuk River. In addition the

Israeli’s occupied the West Bank, home to a large aquifer. The Israeli position after the

Six-Day War ensured them an improved flow of water while depriving the Jordanians of

the control for which they greatly longed.

Southern Asia In the 19th Century, Great Britain had control over the Indus River basin in what is

modern-day India and Pakistan. During its control, Great Britain constructed several

canals to connect the tributaries of the Indus River tributaries into an integrated basin-

wide management system. These canals served a dual purpose: while allowing flood 12 Klare 168 13 Klare 169


waters to be controlled, they also irrigated the land between the tributaries. This area

flourished in agriculture and allowed for the economic success of the region. In 1947,

when India and Pakistan divided into two separate states, this canal system was cut apart.

The method in which it was broken apart, gave India the control over the tributary

headwaters of the Indus River. This determination caused considerable tension between

the newly partitioned states, as India was able to control the flow of much of the Indus

River. This strain was

reduced with the Indus

Waters Treaty of 1960

which divided the various

tributaries among both

countries. This treaty

soothed tensions between

these areas, but did not take

into account the massive

population growth the area would experience. Since that time, extreme population

growth in India has demanded more access to water, and a growing renewal to old

tensions.

North America The United States did not

effectively negotiate with its

neighbors regarding access to,

and control of, waterways. In

1895, a dispute grew over

whether the U.S. or Mexico

should have control over the Rio

Grande River. The US won the

dispute, and developing what

Indus River Basin

Rio Grande


would become the Harmon Doctrine, stating that “the state [of the US] had the right to

use the fluvial waters which lie within its territory

without any limitation whatsoever.”14 The

Harmon Doctrine was never a broadly enforced

concept, as even the United States often relaxed

its demands over riparian rights to rivers to

ensure tranquility on its borders. A 1906

agreement with Mexico granted the state as much

access to the Rio Grande as it had had before the

flow was diverted upstream. The United States abandoned the Harmon Doctrine in 1958,

and has relied upon the concept of riparian rights to settle river disputes.

Recent History Africa

In the 1980s the Nile Basin began to dry out. The drier states of the Horn of

Africa, which overlaps with the states of the Nile Basin, had experienced sever droughts

for a lengthy period, and in the 1980s as flows in the

Horn of Africa ebbed, this drought began to move

downstream. In 1984, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Somalia

experienced a severe drought that killed an estimated

one million people through starvation. Reduced

precipitation caused crops to fail and famine to

increase. International humanitarian assistance in

the form of food and water, much of which came

through Live Aid, was sent to the Horn of Africa,

alleviating the severity of the drought. This drought

brought to light the fragile situation of water scarcity

14 Yacob 363

Harmon Doctrine: States that riparian states have exclusive or sovereign rights over the waters flowing through their territory. Source: http://www.unu.edu/unupress/unupbooks/80a03e/80A03E0j.htm Fluvial: of or relating to or happening in a river. Source: wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn


in Africa. While the immediate needs of Ethiopians were addressed, little was done to

bring about a quick solution to the drought problem.

The international community looked toward the Nile River and sought to solve the

recurring drought and famine problems in the region. With the increasing risk of

drought, the region recognized the need for a basin-wide water management system that

would efficiently store and disperse water. In February 1999, the ten Nile basin

countries, Burundi, Democratic Republic of Congo, Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya,

Rwanda, Sudan, Tanzania, and Uganda, formed a cooperative agreement with the signing

of the Nile Basin Initiative (NBI), and developed a forum “to achieve sustainable

socioeconomic development through the equitable utilization of, and benefit from, the

common Nile Basin water resources.”15 Through this initiative, the Nile basin region will

cooperate on a strategy to ensure the safe and predictable flow of the Nile, and to

promote sustainable growth in the reason. The primary goal of this initiative was to

increase the supply of water in order to alleviate poverty, and the NBI sees water as the

only possibility for nourishment and economic gain. This proposal called for the

utilization of Nile waters to alleviate the risk of drought that persisted in Ethiopia, Eritrea,

and Somalia, while also increasing the flow of water to other states. This collaboration of

states demonstrates the ability to find peaceful solutions to problems that previously

proved deadly.

Middle East In the Middle East, brutal conflicts over access to water were of serious concern.

The Six-Day War, although a victory for Israel, did not amount to a victory for the people

or the environment of the region. More than thirty years after the Six-Day War, Israel

and Jordan finally realized that cooperation would be the only tool that would assist in

their continuous problem of water scarcity. The population in the region grew by about

95 per cent from the end of the Six-Day War until 1990, sharply increasing the demand

15 Nile Basin Initiative, “NBI-About Us,” http://www.nilebasin.org/aboutUs.htm (accessed March 1, 2006)


for water.16 Only through cooperation could enough water to sustain the increased

numbers of people be brought to the region. On 26 October 1994, Jordan and Israel

agreed to the Israel-Jordan Treaty of Peace to end the war that existed between the two

parties. In this accord, they recognized the severity of the scarce water supply and the

contamination that improper water usage was causing. Although no concrete plan was

devised, the first step toward cooperation was taken.

Unfortunately, the peace treaty with Jordan and Israel did not take into account the

other states that were warring against Israel, specifically Lebanon and Syria. After the

Six-Day War, the Israelis occupied the Golan Heights, which to them was a strategic

move to ensure their control over the Baniyas River. To the Syrians, this occupation was

an attack on their way of life as they used the river for fishing, swimming, and most

importantly, drinking water. Also, the relationship between Israel and Lebanon was not

in good condition. In 1978 Israeli forces occupied southern Lebanon in retaliation for the

Lebanon’s harboring of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). Israel continued its

occupation of the Lebanon border until June 2000. This occupation was due in part to the

continuous cross-border attacks by the PLO and later Hezbollah, an Islamic

fundamentalist group. These tensions did not allow Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria to

form a region wide agreement on water use, and as a result, disagreement and resentment

over access to water remains, and is likely exacerbating the already tense relationship

among these states.

Asia Although a treaty was signed more than forty years ago, India and Pakistan are

again in conflict over water supply. The Indus Water Treaty entrusted India with full

control over the Ravi, Sutlej, and Beas rivers and ensured the continuous flow of the

Indus, the Chenab, and the Jhelum rivers into Pakistan. Since the agreement went into

force, India and Pakistan have built dams for irrigation and hydro-power on their rivers.

16 The World Bank, World Development Indicators database, via Countries: Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syrian Arab Republic, Series: Population, total, Years: 1967,1990, http://devdata.worldbank.org/dataonline/


In 1999, India began building another dam, the Baglihar, and Pakistan saw this as a direct

threat to the promise that was made to them in 1960 with the Indus Water Treaty.

Pakistan stated that it left them exposed to Indian control and to a reduction of the current

water flow. Pakistan relies heavily on the Chenab River for its supply of drinkable water,

and a significant change in flow of this river would result in both economic and

humanitarian catastrophe. India’s intention for the dam was to irrigate the land around

the Kashmir and to produce hydro-power, however Pakistan held that the proposed plan

to take water from the Chenab would violate the Indus Water Treaty. India disagreed and

continued to build the dam. Although this conflict seems to be escalating, a peaceful

agreement is probable.

In the past 45 years, the Aral Sea has undergone a dramatic decrease in size as the

flow of rivers in the region was diverted for irrigation and other purposes.17 Until the

1960s, those living on the periphery of the

Aral Sea depended on it for its wealth of

fish. The population of the Aral Sea

region supported itself economically and

nutritionally with the fish that the sea

provided. When the Soviet Union saw the

economic potential of the rivers that fed

into the Aral Sea, it decided to change the

flow of the river to allow for cotton

production in the region. The irrigation

process was successful, but it relied on the

two sole sources that fed into the Aral Sea: the Amu Dar’ya and the Syr Dar’ya rivers.

The water that was redirected improved cotton and rice cultivation, but destroyed the

fishing in the Aral Sea as the sea life could not be sustained due to the rise of salinity in

the water. “The first drastic increase [of salinity] occurred between 1971 and 1975 when 17 United Nations Environmental Programme, “Vital Water Graphics: Will the Aral Sea Disappear Forever,” UNEP, http://www.unep.org/vitalwater/25.htm (accessed March 1, 2006)

Aral Sea


salinity rose to 12-14 per cent. In the late 1980s the salinity reached 23 per cent.”18 The

increase of salinity caused the water to become toxic, destroying the presence of twenty

species of fish that existed in the sea. Worse, through evaporation and seepage, the

waters receded. The exposed seabed contained salt deposits that were picked up by the

winds and polluted the air and land up to 300 kilometers away. In addition to

contaminating farmland and grazing pastures, the aerosols picked up from the Aral Sea

caused the air to be toxic even to humans. Various diseases have developed in the

population due to this lack of air quality.

Finding a solution to halt the destruction of the Aral Sea has proven to be a

difficult task. Some proposed solutions to this problem include the rerouting of the

waters back into the Aral Sea. Unfortunately, this region was and still is very

economically dependent on the irrigation that caused the depletion of the Aral Sea. The

economic effects this rerouting would cause are unimaginable. The only solution to

ameliorate the negative consequences of this problem is to assist the people that have lost

their jobs and have sustained a reduction in quality of life due to this calamity. Such

relief, however, proves difficult as the local communities had a substantial reliance on

this body of water. Still, through job training and education, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan

hope to develop the population of the region while also attending to the management and

revitalization of the Aral Sea.

South America In terms of water, South America is far more blessed than other regions of the

world in that they have a wealth of the resource. The lush vegetation in South America is

due to the large amounts of precipitation and plentiful springs that water the land. When

untouched, most of this water is potable, but with the development of cities in these areas,

water contamination is becoming widespread. Also, the population growth rate in South

America, coupled with slow economic growth, has caused the demand for clean water to

increase, without an effective strategy to ensure that enough clean water is available for

18 The Water Page, “Aral Sea”, The Water Page, http://www.thewaterpage.com/aral.htm (accessed March 1, 2006)


the growing population. Bolivia decided to solve this problem by privatizing the water

supply allowing the Bolivian government to pass the burden of piping and other such

costs to a company who would in turn pass the costs to the people using the water. The

companies could more fully develop the water delivery systems through lower costs, and

without the restrictions of the strained budget of the Bolivian state. In theory,

privatization is good for a developing economy, but without competition or proper

guidelines, markets do not portray the actual price consumers are willing and able to pay.

In 1997, Bolivia received a loan

from the International Monetary Fund to

assist in the privatization of its water

supply. The Fund required that Bolivia

privatize its water and sanitation to

improve the current situation of water

contamination and to remedy the lack of

access. While the mission was noble,

the result of this effort was quite the

opposite. Attempting to make a profit,

the private water companies increased

the price of water by almost 300 per cent, causing water to be too expensive for the poor

of the country.19 Protests were held in Cochabamba, Bolivia against the unjust prices the

poor of the country had to pay in order to exercise their right to water. The Bolivian

government responded by removing the concessions to water from the two foreign

companies, Aguas del Tunari and Aguas de Illimani Although water privatization is

necessary when underdeveloped states can not afford to develop proper systems, a

balance must be set to supply every human being with the water necessary to sustain life.

19Gustavo Capdevila, “World Economic Forum: Water as a Right, Not a Commodity,” Inter Press Service/Global Information Network (2006). Lexis Nexis Academic. January 29, 2006

Amazon River Basin


North America In recent years, the U.S. has been friendly with Canada and Mexico and conflicts

over water have not been prevalent. The primary concern has been the overuse of river

waters, mostly due to the overproduction of dams. The Rio Grande has begun to dwindle

in flow and in 2001 the river actually ceased to exist around El Paso, Texas, only to

reform closer to the sea.20 The river was overused and drought in the area hurt the river’s

mass. Both Mexico and the U.S. utilize the river for farming, drinking, and washing.

Recently the increase in population on the border and the growth in use have caused the

river to shrink. This reduction in river waters is also prevalent in the Colorado River as it

is also tapped by many communities.

United Nations Response to Conflicts Over Access to Water The United Nations, in 2002, made a major breakthrough that is aiding states in

their efforts to achieve access to quality water. This innovation came in the form of the

Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), which hope to “halve, by the year 2015 … the

proportion of people who are unable to reach or to afford safe drinking water.”21 By

improving access to water, the UN hopes to encourage development, resulting in a

reduction of hunger and poverty. By communicating these goals to the various agencies

within the UN, the organization hopes to accelerate the achievement of these goals to

forward global development, as approximately twenty-four agencies within the UN are

involved in aiding the improvement of water access.22 Unfortunately, the complex web

of agencies and organizations has found cooperation to be a major hurdle in advancing

the MDGs, especially in terms of access to water.23 To bolster in the spirit of

collaboration, the UN Millennium Task Force has suggested options on how to cooperate.

20 Steve Grant, “America's Rivers: Spoken For to the Last Drop”, Los Angeles Times, December 25, 2005, Sunday Bulldog Edition. sec Metro Part B; Pg. 1 21 “Millennium Development Goals”, UNEP http://www.unep.org/dpdl/water/Management/mdg.asp (accessed April 19, 2006) 22 UN Millennium Task Force, “What Will it Take” UN Millenium Task Force http://www.unmillenniumproject.org/documents/What_Will_It_Take.pdf (accessed April 19, 2006) 23 Carius, Alexander, Dabelko, Geoffrey, and Wolf, Aaron “WATER, CONFLICT, AND COOPERATION”, UN- Global Security Initiative http://www.un-globalsecurity.org/pdf/Carius_Dabelko_Wolf.pdf (accessed April 19, 2006)


One of these recommendations is the “[assignment of] UN system task managers [to] the

various aspects of water resources and water supply and sanitation.24” This entails

assigning the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the United Nations

Education, Social, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) the task of increasing water

access, while the World Health Organization (WHO) and the United Nations Children’s

Fund (UNICEF) target the task of improving water quality.

UNEP is currently assuming its environmental role and advancing the global

understanding of “protection,

conservation, and more efficient use of

freshwater resources.25” Secondly the

agency hopes to aid in developing

governmental policy to improve the

overall access to water, including

technological, legal, and institutional guidance.26 UNEP has also targeted other sources

that lead to strife in these areas through additional research, including efforts to

ameliorate desertification, a human-induced process that leads to the degradation of

fertile land. By targeting this process UNEP hopes to improve the inefficiencies of

farming and conserve water.

Current Status Improving the quality and availability of water is the driving force that has led

countries to move away from the military conflicts for control over sources of water.

Through the process of trial and error, states have come to the conclusion that only

through collaboration can they satisfy the need of water for their neighbor while also

increasing the chances that their water needs can be reached. States come to realize that

water is a right of all people: water is a basic need and depriving an individual of this

24 IBID 24 25 “Water Policy and Strategy”, UNEP http://www.unep.org/dpdl/water/Policy_strategy/index.asp (accessed April 19, 2006) 26 IBID 27

Desertification: Long-term damage to dry lands caused by drought and by human activities such as over cultivation, deforestation, and poor irrigation practices that turn the land into a desert, unable to grow anything. Existing dry lands, which cover over 40% of the total land area of the world, mainly in Africa and Asia, are most at risk for desertification resulting from drought caused by climate change. Source: www.climatechangenorth.ca/H1_Glossary.html


vital resource severely diminishes their ability to survive. Military conflict has proven

ineffective to achieve a greater control of constant availability of water to all. With the

mediation of various international groups, like the UN and the World Bank, most states

are able to come to a peaceful conclusion on the sharing of water resources.

Through research of regional and ecological capabilities, states have devised plans

that aid in the development of the regional waterways. This research has also aided in the

exposure of the damage that heavy reliance on any one waterway causes. Of late, much

attention has been given to the impact that humans have had in polluting water systems

that feed into lakes, and the excessive tapping of non-renewable sources of water.

Although water is a renewable resource, the manner in which this renewal process

happens does not guarantee equal distribution across the world. The regions that were

once in conflict see the opportunity that can only be achieved through a collaborative

management among the regional states.

Today this cooperation is at its early stages. The immense capital that must be

obtained by these least developed countries comes with significant expense. Legal

groundwork must be made to ensure each state's sovereignty, while assuring cooperation

promotes equitable water access. In 2006, the Nile Basin Initiative has finally begun to

achieve some forward movement in their efforts to manage the Nile River for the benefit

of ten states. Their task is to deliver water sufficient for individual to all parts of the

region, and plan on doing this through the Shared Vision Program (SVP), which is

“comprised of eight projects designed by the NBI countries to build a strong foundation

for cooperative action and for future investment projects.”27 These projects include the

formation of an effective management system, and also address the utilization of

improved technologies or methods for the storage of water.

The SVP hopes to achieve its goal in order to aid the development of the region.

The program will construct water storage facilities using local labor supplies. The dams

will manage the flow of water, while also storing it for times of drought. These dams 27 Nile Basin Initiative, “NBI- Shared Vision Program Brief,” http://www.nilebasin.org/svpProgramBriefs.htm


will store water in areas where evaporation is less intense and will help to control

flooding. There are also plans to implement hydro-power dams in the Nile River region

to produce power to be used for the development of the area. Proposals have been made

to build a hydro-power dam in Ethiopia which would store water while also producing

high amounts of electricity, accessible to the people of Ethiopia and Sudan. Through

these advancements, states in the Horn of Africa could work toward reducing the civil

strife with which they are currently plagued. This region is very underdeveloped and

such improvements could also jump-start economic growth. Only through cooperation

can this region advance. With the major groundwork in place, the Nile Basin Initiative

hopes to speed up the implementation of its plans for regional development, although it

has as yet been unable to set a date for the completion of the projects.

Recently the possibility of another drought in the Horn of Africa has regenerated

concern about access to water. UNEP claims that the increased risk of drought is due to

the volatility in the climate, and believes that global climate change is increasing the

severity of droughts.28 With the situation in Africa escalating, plans to improve access to

water must be implemented immediately. Although interstate conflict is a major concern

in this region, with strife in Ethiopia, Somalia, the Sudan, and Chad, drought would bring

about even more destruction as people would suffer from malnutrition and famine.

The benefits of cooperation continue past North Africa and into the Middle East,

where Israel and Jordan realized the great need to find peaceful solutions to water

management and look ahead to problems that may cause concern in the future. Like the

Aral Sea, the Dead Sea has lost much of its volume due to a redirection of the flow of its

tributary rivers. The Jordan River now carries only a small fraction of the water it once

deposited in the Dead Sea, due in large part to Israel’s use of the river for irrigation in the

north, and Jordan’s routing water from the Yarmuk through the Ghor (King Abdullah)

Canal. This reduction of flow caused the level of the Dead Sea to fall 30 meters in the

28 British Broadcasting Corporation, “Environment digest 1 Jan to 7 Feb 06”, BBC Monitoring Africa – Political, BBC 2006. Lexis-Nexis Academic http://web.lexis-nexis.com


last 30 years and it is losing more each year. The Dead Sea could hold a fate similar to

that of the Aral Sea if nothing is done. The Dead Sea is known to be rich in minerals and

many people travel there to bath in its “curing waters.” The region would experience

economic difficulties as the Dead Sea, the region’s main attraction, began slowly

disappearing.

Jordan and Israel have teamed up to solve this problem. The most probable

solution is the construction of the Red Sea-Dead Sea ‘Peace Conduit’ (RSDSC), which

would act as “a water conveyance system designed to bring water from the Red Sea to

Dead Sea.”29 This system would extract water from the Red Sea and direct it towards the

Dead Sea while also generating hydro-power. Additionally some water would be

desalinated and pumped to the communities of both Jordan and Israel. This would restore

the wildlife in the Dead Sea, while creating more jobs, and increasing the freshwater

supply of the entire region.

Israel is excited about this plan, but is troubled by the capital that is necessary to

fund this massive $1.3 billion system as such funds are currently unavailable. In order to

facilitate construction of the conveyance system, the World Bank announced in May

2005 that “it would jointly fund a two-year feasibility study into the huge pipeline project

… The study is to take 24 months to complete and will cost $15.5 million.” This study

seeks to find the best manner in which this system could be built without damaging any

ecological aspects of the region. Although very expensive, this system will allow a more

plentitude of water to be available.

In India and Pakistan, increasing tensions that have been caused by the

construction of the Baglihar Dam are slowly defusing. When Pakistan saw that India

would not cease the construction of the dam, they reported to the World Bank that India

was violating the Indus Water Treaty. The Bank, although a mediator of the treaty, had

no power to enforce the guidelines; instead it appointed an expert to arbitrate the dispute.

Pakistan has communicated with the World Bank, and has changed its position on the 29 Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs, “Israel and Jordan Launch Global Campaign to Save the Dead Sea,” http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/MFAArchive/2000_2009/2002/8/


construction of the Baglihar. On 2 February 2006, Pakistan conceded to India “that the

construction of the Baglihar Dam in Jammu and Kashmir was as per the Indus Water

Treaty, 1960.”30 This crisis has begun to be resolved, but it demonstrates the possibility

of continued problems between the two states concerning the utilization of the Indus

River and its tributaries.

Key Positions The positions of states will reflect their relative access to water. Those that border

considerable sources of fresh water will generally support programs that they feel would

benefit their populations, while states without significant bodies of water will strongly

advocate that they should have expanded access to headwaters and tributaries. Rather the

address individual needs, it is important that future efforts regarding access to water

represent the needs of all states.

Regional Positions Water conflicts have caused conflict in Africa, the Middle East and Asia for some

time. The arid conditions in these areas have caused states to fight over a scarce water

supply, and only recently, have brought about efforts to ensure that depleted waterways

can once again flow freely. In Africa, the changing nature of the Nile River is bringing

about cooperation as states are coming together to discuss ways to improve the manner in

which the river can provide water to populations along its banks. Egypt, once the leading

power in the region, has teamed up with Sudan and Ethiopia redirect the waters of the

Nile River to achieve development throughout the region. The region views the water

scarcity as severe, but they are optimistic of their ability to adequately address the

situation.

The water situation in the Middle East is similar to that of Africa. Both developed

and underdeveloped states occupy this region, but they share the recognition that

30 Hindustan Times, “Pak admits Baglihar Dam as per Water Treaty”, (HT Media Ltd. 2006) February 2, 2006 Lexis-Nexis Academic via “Baglihar Dam, Pakistan, India”


continuous access to water is critical for their development. Although the region is not

fully cooperating, mostly due to religious divides, they recognize that people throughout

the region need continuous access to water. They hope to achieve a better balance of

water usage, by finding alternate sources. Israel and Jordan are currently exploring the

possibility of major desalinization of water from the Red Sea, while also distributing it

throughout the region, which will help replenish the Dead Sea. This shows the

cooperation that some areas are willing to demonstrate in order to lessen the impact that

water scarcity has had on the region.

Asia has seen a great influx of growth in development and population in the past

ten years, causing states to become even more dependent upon sources of water. Due to

Asia’s great size, smaller regional collaborations on water usage must occur. All states in

the region realize that some sort of peaceful negotiations must be made with one another

to better understand each of their positions. Such is the case with India and Pakistan who

have consistently tried to solve disagreements regarding water usage peacefully.

South America views their water issue more in terms of cleanliness than scarcity.

The tropical environment in this region allows for more than enough rainfall to occur, but

the necessary systems to store and distribute the water are not well-developed. The

region struggles with implementing privatization of water supplies to form profitable, yet

uniformly beneficial, systems for the entire region. This method of water distribution

offers improved water quality, but does not take into account the people who cannot

afford the higher prices that this entails.

The United States and Europe boast a well-developed water delivery system and

direct their concerns in aiding less developed regions, like Africa, South America, and

some areas of the Middle East. Countries such as Great Britain, France, and the United

States have funded programs to bring water to impoverished areas.

Non-Governmental Organizations The International Committee of the Red Cross is a leading organization that

addresses the problem of access to clean water. They urge states to develop industries


and adopt methods that are efficient in the use of water. It is usually rural communities

that lack technological advancements that suffer from the scarcity of water. The Red

Cross recommends using the most basic technological tools to reduce costs and improve

overall access and quality of water. Through the improvement of water sources, regions

will spend less time worrying about water availability, and more time working toward

rising out of poverty. Also, they target efforts that can be made to improve gender

equality, such as transporting water to villages, so as to reduce the distance women or

girls need to travel to collect water. This allows females to spend other time either going

to school or learning other skills that will help them in the future.

UNICEF supports the Red Cross in its recommendation of improving the situation

for children, especially girls. UNICEF stated that “children – and particularly girls – are

denied their right to education because they are busy fetching water.”31 Improvements in

the quality and availability of water will cause a wide-scale improvement in education

and help facilitate development. Although water is necessary for good health, the time it

takes to get it does not allow women and girls to improve their social standing.

Business Interests With the ever growing scarcity of water, and the low cost to collect the

commodity, private corporations view water as a source of immense profit. They claim

that through privatization, states can effectively reduce water conflicts and increase water

access to all the states’ citizens. By charging a fee for the water, businesses can make a

profit. With the initial investment to improve water systems, and the financial backing of

their investors, these companies can reduce the cost of access to water. Also businesses

claim that privatization would ensure that government’s water systems were running

safely, and with reduced contamination.

31 UNICEF, “Water, environment and sanitation”, http://www.unicef.org/wes/


Summary The severity of water scarcity and the probability of conflicts arising due to this

scarcity have influenced the actions of states to enact treaties and agreements. These

accords highlight the right to water that every individual holds and the possibilities of an

improved, constant supply of water to all states in question. With the assistance of

international agencies and other NGOs, states have found sources of financial support

and innovation that assist in dividing and distributing shared water resources.

The greatest concern over water disputes is the possibility of increased tensions.

The expected growth of populations and the finite amounts of fresh water increases the

probabilities for the occurrence of conflicts to materialize. States have safeguarded

themselves from these conflicts by forming alliances and other such agreement.

Unfortunately the presence of changing state regimes could alter the balance of power

and void accords made to improve overall regional water access.

The UN and its various agencies and departments provide states asssitance when

they encounter problems that they alone cannot solve. This is why initiatives and

coalitions such as the Nile Basin Initiative and the RSDSC have been formed. With the

assistance of international parties, regional programs can be formed to improve the well

being of every person.

Today the most severe problem with water is aimed at the micro-mismanagements

of water, as states must be assisted in developing efficient systems to deliver water. This

access is what deters much of the development that could occur in these poor regions.

The first step to improve intrastate water access is to complete the process of macro-

management of water. In addition, states must support efforts to conserve. Only through

the measures of water conservation, efficient water allocation, and the right of access to

water for all individuals, can the world hope to achieve a substantial increase in global

access to clean water, thus improved development.


Discussion Questions • Has your region experienced any reduction in access to water? If so, how has this

lack of access affected the population? Agriculture? Health? Development? • What is your plan of action to counteract the scarcity of water? Has your nation

worked with neighbors in any way? • Has any lack of access to water caused your nation to disagree with others? If

water rights caused a conflict within your state, how did it end and what where the conditions of the agreements?

• How does your nation perceive the importance of global water scarcity?

• What agreement or relationships has your state made with other states?

• What are the ecological damages that have occurred in your region due to the

excessive use of rivers or lakes?

• What plans does your nation have to repair these environmental damages?

• What is the water access outlook for your nation? Water? Population?


Works Cited British Broadcasting Corporation, “Environment digest 1 Jan to 7 Feb 06”, BBC

Monitoring Africa – Political, BBC 2006. Lexis-Nexis Academic http://www.lexis-nexis.com

Brundtland, Gro Harlem and Sergio Vieira de Mello, The Right to Water. World Health Organization, 2003. Capdevila, Gustavo, “World Economic Forum: Water as a Right, Not a Commodity,”

Inter Press Service/Global Information Network (2006). Lexis Nexis Academic. January 29, 2006

Carius, Alexander, Dabelko, Geoffrey, and Wolf, Aaron “WATER, CONFLICT, AND

COOPERATION”, UN- Global Security Initiative http://www.un-globalsecurity.org/pdf/Carius_Dabelko_Wolf.pdf (accessed April 19, 2006)

Gleick, Peter H. “Water and Conflict: Fresh Water Resources and International Security”

In International Security, Vol. 18, No. 1 (Summer, 1993), 79-112. The MIT Press, 1993.

Grant, Steve. “Americas Rivers: Spoken For to the Last Drop”, Los Angeles Times, 25

December 2005, Sunday Bulldog Edition. Lexis-Nexis, via Rio Grande, http://www.lexis-nexis.com

Hindustan Times, “Pak admits Baglihar Dam as per Water Treaty”, (HT Media Ltd.

2006) February 2, 2006 Lexis-Nexis Academic via “Baglihar Dam, Pakistan, India” http://web.lexis-nexis.com

Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs, “Israel and Jordan Launch Global Campaign to Save

the Dead Sea”, http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/MFAArchive/2000_2009/2002/8 Klare, Michael T. Resource Wars: The New Landscape of Global Conflict. New York: Henry Holt and Company, LLC, 2001. “Millennium Development Goals”, UNEP http://www.unep.org/dpdl/water/Management/mdg.asp (accessed April 19, 2006) Nile Basin Initiative, “NBI-About Us,” http://www.nilebasin.org/aboutUs.htm (accessed March 1, 2006)


Nile Basin Initiative, “NBI- Shared Vision Program Brief,” http://www.nilebasin.org/svpProgramBriefs.htm Pierri, Raol. “South America: Water as Human Right, Not Means to Profit”, Inter Press

Service/Global Information Network. 23 September 2005 http://www.lexis-nexis.com

United Nations Environmental Programme, “Vital Water Graphics: Will the Aral Sea Disappear Forever,” UNEP, http://www.unep.org/vitalwater/25.htm UNICEF, “Water, environment and sanitation,” http://www.unicef.org/wes/ UN Millennium Task Force, “What Will it Take” UN Millenium Task Force

http://www.unmillenniumproject.org/documents/What_Will_It_Take.pdf (accessed April 19, 2006)

The Water Page, “Aral Sea”, The Water Page, http://www.thewaterpage.com/aral.htm

“Water Policy and Strategy,” UNEP http://www.unep.org/dpdl/water/Policy_strategy/index.asp (accessed April 19, 2006)

World Bank, World Development Indicators database, via Countries: Israel, Jordan,

Lebanon, and Syrian Arab Republic, Series: Population, total, Years: 1967,1990, http://devdata.worldbank.org/dataonline/

World Health Organization, “Global Water Supply and Sanitation Assessment 2000

Report,” http://www.who.int/docstore/water_sanitation_health/Globassessment/Global1.htm#Top

World Water Council, “Water at a Glance”, http://www.worldwatercouncil.org/index.php?id=5

Yacob, Yosef “Equitable Utilization in the Blue Nile River Sub-Basin: Context,

Problems, and Prospects.” Diss. York University, 2002. Toronto, Canada


Works Referenced Bricheri-Colombi, Stephen and Bradnock, Robert. “Geopolitics, water and development

in South Asia: cooperative development in the Ganges-Brahmaputra delta” The Geographical Journal, Vol. 169, No. 1 March 2003, pp. 43-44

Kloos, Helmut “Peasant Irrigation Development and Food Production in Ethiopia” The Geographical Journal, Vol. 157, No.3 (Nov., 1991, 295-306) Revollo, Mario M. “Management issues in the Lake Titicaca and Lake Poopo system:

Importance of developing a water budget” Lakes & Reservoirs: Research and Management 2001 6:225-229

1waterrights

Documents

united nations response

term water rights

allotting water resources

sharing of water resources

north america

domestic international

international law

neighboring states