ISSN: 2158-7051 ==================== INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RUSSIAN STUDIES ==================== ISSUE NO. 7 ( 2018/1 ) |
THE ROLE OF HYDRO-POLITICS IN THE GEOPOLITICS OF CENTRAL ASIA
MEHMET ÇAĞATAY GÜLER*
Summary
Central Asian region has always been a significant geopolitical area as being a bridge between Europe and Asia. It is located in the trade ways and it connects these two regions with an ancient trade route, called as silk road (Fedorenko, 2013). Beyond its image as a bridge, it contains highly remarkable aspects of geopolitics like rich natural energy resources which having been attracted by the western and eastern countries. Along with the dissolution of Soviet Union (S.U), geopolitics of the region has started to change. Due to the crucial but limited water resources that the region has, caused water politics to play a primary role in the geopolitics of the region. Hereby, this article aims to explain, how water politics contribute and reshape the geopolitics of the Central Asia since the collapse of the Soviet Union. After a brief information about the Soviet Union’s effect and the conflicts in the Central Asia, the importance of water will be examined in order to be able to see the picture more clearly and to understand the way that is it being used as strategic tool. Subsequent to the mastering of the significance of water, Geopolitics and the Hydro-Geopolitics of the region will be investigated comprehensively.
.
Key Words: Hydro-politics of the Central Asia, Water politics, Geopolitics of Central Asia, Hydro-Geopolitics.
Introduction
Prior
to the dissolution of Soviet Union, Central Asian region had been located within
the Union’s territory. They had possessed one of the greatest territory (in terms of size) of all times and today, their
successor Russian Federation has got the largest territory. At that time Soviet
Union, beyond the Central Asia, had got numerous states and extraordinary rich
resources within her boundaries. All the resources that different states have
in the Union, are in possession of Soviet Union, hence, there were not any
conflicts due to the share of natural resources. Disputes were mainly because
of the ethnic conflicts or else. Furthermore, inside the Union, there was a
division of labor and each state was specialized in different areas (Kaufman
and Hardt, 1993, p. 34-57) which provides a great
harmony when they were together. However, after the dissolution of the Union,
all the states within the Union found themselves in trouble, because:
Before the dissolution,
every country has certain economical duty which was limited to specific task
and sates were trading by what they were producing (Kaufman and Hardt, 1993, p. 34-57). This system was decreasing the
burden on the countries and each states could afford
to buy whatever they needed from the other states within the Union. Yet, when the Union had collapsed, that system was also collapsed
with Union. Afterwards, Post-Soviet states realized that, they were
deficient in every other areas except the one that
they had specialized. Therefore, without the framework of the Union, trade
relations were destroyed which eventually caused a respectable damage on
countries’ developments (Conway, 2012, chap. 3-5). All the harmony that they
used to have, was just gone. Similar to that issue,
disputes are occurred in every single sphere between the post-soviet countries.
Specifically, the natural resources that they were sharing
during the Soviet Union, were become controversial and conflictual issues
between the countries.
Water resources are the
obvious instances for the conflicts that have been occurred and will have been
occurred in the Post-Soviet era within the region of Central Asia. Since the
dissolution of the Union, main water based conflicts have been occurred between
the Upstream and Downstream countries. Throughout the Soviet Union period,
water plenty upstream countries and water scarce downstream countries were
getting along perfectly. Upstream countries were not blocking the downstream
countries’ water flow in favor of the energy sources. It was all included into
harmony. Thereafter, through the fall of the Union, Central Asian countries:
Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan have started to
clash each other. The conflicts in the region were mainly occurred among the
Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan (upstream countries) against the Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan,
Turkmenistan (downstream countries) (Valentini,
2004). All these states are connected by two main rivers which are called as
‘Amu Darya’ and Syr Darya’. Former, has annually 40
billion cubic meter water flow and is being used by around 20 million people (Bernauer and Siegfried, 2012) and the latter has nearly 78
billion cubic meter water flow in a year and is shared by 6 countries (FAO-AQUASTAT,
2012).
Furthermore, there is
also the fact that Aral Lake, which had been one of the largest lake in the region and even in the world, was dried almost
ninety percent up. Due to the terrible water management during the Soviet Union
and as it has mentioned above, due to the specialization of the regions, states
namely: Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan, were directed to make an increase on the
cotton production which caused an over usage of Amu Darya and Syr Darya rivers’ waters for the cotton production by
cutting their ways goes through the Aral Lake (Granit, Jägerskog,
Löfgren, Bullock, De Gooijer,
Pettigrew and Lindström, 2010). Consequently,
consuming more than the annual water flow and blocking rivers’ feeding to the
lake, were eventually caused a ninety percent desiccation. Alongside already
limited water supply in the region, imagine that world’s 4th largest lake
almost dried up. Despite the increase in demand, there is a huge decrease in
the supply and therefore, crises were became
inevitable without a doubt.
These mentioned sources
form the main water resources of the Central Asia for all purposes: Potable,
for irrigation, for industry e.t.c. It affects almost
every sector including agriculture, energy, industry and shortly, the progress
level of the country and even further, survival and existence of the states are
affected by the water resources. Hence, because of their existence in danger,
states have no choice but to escalate a conflict. Moreover, in the case of
Central Asia, lower stream countries are not the only ones who were affected
negatively and suffered from the conflicts, Upper Stream states are also being
affected negatively, because they lose their trade relation with lower stream
states which also put them in danger on different areas such as: Energy
Security in the case of Central Asia (Bernauer and
Siegfried, 2012).
The main motivation of
these states that causes problems, are mostly the uneven distribution or usage
of certain water resources. It can be occur in several ways such as:
If one of the upstream country construct a dam in the basin or started to pollute
the river because of the industrial wastes, then the downstream states’ water
will be effected in a very terrible way. Moreover, over usage or consumption by
the upstream countries will also cause a huge decrease on the downstream
states’ amount of water which will eventually give rise to water scarcity.
Water Scarcity briefly
means: Shortage of the most basic human and all living things need; hunger;
environmental damage; incapable body functions and even death. Therefore,
severe consequences of water scarcity trigger escalation of conflicts among
states. All in all, these grievous facts lead us to the importance of water,
which is a must to be well mastered in order to be able to evaluate situation
in terms of water politics.
Importance of the Water
Water is one of the core elements of life. Besides being a nutrition matter, it has an incredibly active role in any kind of biochemical reactions which occurs human beings' body due to the its structure that includes different kinds of minerals and components. Moreover, water executes numerous functions i.e Protecting ph balance; providing suitable dissolution atmosphere for the molecules in the cells and for the organs. Therefore, it is not possible to think of a life without water. Water is everything for the living things.
The fact that, the ¾ of the earth has been covered by the waters, make the situation look better. It seems like, there are plenty of water in the earth however, 97.5 percent[1] of the total world water is saltwater and the rest 2.5 percent consists of the freshwater in which only 0.3 percent[2] can be drinkable.
In the last quarter of 18th century, at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, the total population of world was 1 billion. Whereas in 2015, the total population of the world has reached to 7 billion people.[3] It was an extraordinary increase. The significant point is that, while the population continues to increase, the total water resources remain the same. Throughout the 100 years, population have been septupled whereas the sources have not. Alongside all these facts, irresponsible attitudes of the humankind, have caused and are still causing pollution in the drinkable water resources. Predictions demonstrate that, curve of increment in need of water and the decreasing clean water resources will be overlapped. From this context, its highly obvious that, all these factors give signal for an upcoming global crises (Özgüler, 1997).
In
this context, the question of ''Who are going to wage a war'' or ''In which
regions such conflicts may occur or have already occurred'' rises: The answer
is complicated but identifiable.
Firstly,
the topic of water plenty and water scarce countries should be investigated. If
one country has plenty water sources while the other is dealing with the
scarcity, then it will cause a conflict without a doubt. But, how are these
countries being labelled as water scarcity or water plenty? To this end, Falkenmark has developed an indicator which divides
regions or countries according to their annual water supplies. With respect to Falkenmark indicator, if a country has annual water supply
less than 1000m3 per capita, then they regarded as water scarce. Conversely,
countries that have annual water supply more than 1700m3, considered under the
category of water plenty countries. Furthermore, provided that a country has an
annual water supply between 1000m3 and 1700m3, then they called as
water-stressed and the countries less than 500m3 named as absolute water scarce
countries (UN-Water, 2012). With regard to this classification, here are the regions’
total renewable water resources withdrawn per capita: North America
1,629m3/year; Australia and New Zealand 1113m3/year; Middle East and North
Africa 804m3/year; Europe and Central Asia 803m3/year; South Asia 666m3/year;
Western Europe 555m3/year; East Asia and Pacific 522m3/year; Latin America and
Caribbean 497m3/year; Sub-Saharan Africa 175m3/year.[4].
In this context, the water plenty, water scarce
and water stress regions can be recognized easily. I should mention that all
these data and classifications are not absolute but subjective and can be
easily manipulated (Güler, 2016) nevertheless,
it gives a general idea about the situation. In addition to that, it can work
almost flawlessly if certain factors (the subjectivity reasons) are eliminated.
There
are several reasons of their subjectivity: The first one is due to development
levels of the countries. There are more industrialized countries whom are in need of more water than the less developed or
less industrialized states. Even if they are considered as the water plenty
country according to the Falkenmark criterion, they
can define themselves as water-stressed or water-scarce because of their
differences in supply and demand. Secondly, population can be a misleading
instrument because: According to the FAO Aquastat
and World Bank Water Resources data, specified regarding the years between
1998 and 2002, given above, East Asia and Pacific has 522m3 annual water
withdrawals per capita, however their population is way more than the region of
North America or Australia, therefore this pattern may not reflect the exact
truth (Güler, 2016).
In case of the Central Asian region which is
regarded as undeveloped or under-developing area and doesn't have a population
like China or India does, hence this kind of classification works properly. According to FAO AQUSTAT statistics given above, Central Asian
region situated in the water-scarce area. Likewise Central Asia, Middle
East and North Africa region has the same quantities and adequateness of water which is regarded as
water scarcity and it causes extremely huge problems e.g
Euphrates conflict between Turkey, Iraq and Syria (Imer,
2011). Moreover ongoing operation that Turkey operates in these days (Fırat Kalkanı) has the purpose of
providing security for Euphrates. From
this context, it is not surprising that Central Asia is having conflicts
because of the Water Scarcity. It would not be wrong to posit that, crises in
the region will be increased in the near future unless the proper precautions
are taken or the proper management models are adopted. Geopolitics of the Central Asia Every country in the world has
geopolitical significance in both national and international spheres. Some of
them has more, some of them has less. According to the
Halford John Mackinder who
is regarded as one of the founders of geopolitics (Matikeeva,
2005) and had remarkable contributions to the geopolitics and geostrategy literature, Central Asian region possesses a
great geopolitical importance. He formulated a geostrategic theory which is
known as ‘Heartland Theory’. The theory is basically posits that; ''Who rules East Europe commands the Heartland; who
rules the Heartland commands the World-Island; who rules the World-Island
commands the world’’ (Mackinder, 1919). With respect to his work, taking
control of the East Europe is crucial because, in the end you could dominate
the whole world. The area, described as World-Island, includes the connected
continents of Europe, Asia and Africa. The "world-island" is the
landmass of Euro-Asia-Africa. Therefore, it was the largest, the most populated
and the richest land combination. Briefly, according to the
father of geopolitics, controlling Eurasian Region means controlling the World
politics (Mackinder, 1904). The critical point is,
Soviet Union had controlled Eurasian for so long till they were collapsed.
However, the turning point is, when they have dissolved, all these regions have
declared their independencies. As a result of that, all the Geopolitics of the
regions have changed. The most obvious
geopolitical aspects that Central Asia used to has before the collapse of S.U
and still has: Possessing great amount of energy resources mainly gas and oil (Banuazizi, 1994, 261);
sharing borders with the super powers like China and Russia; standing as a
great economic market by its approximately 70 million people. Last but utmost,
the non-shareable and conflictual ‘Water Resources’ (Banuazizi,
1994, p. 264-271) Central
Asian region supplies energy for plenty countries in terms of Oil and Natural
Gas (Islam, 2012).
Moreover, if we compare
poor natural energy resources and rich natural energy resources countries, it
is highly obvious that having rich natural energy resources provides a welfare. Even though it does not present a solid economical
assurance, nevertheless puts forth a functioning economy and provides income
compare to the countries that have nothing offer to make a trade with it i.e.
poor African countries Sudan, Senegal e.t.c.[5]
Furthermore, it also
attracts foreign countries attention which causes a danger over the maintenance
of territorial integrity in terms of the possibility of an occupation or
intervention. The case which was happened in Iraq, 2003 (Muttitt,
2011, chap. 1), can be seen as a proper
example. In that year, at the outset
United States and Britain and thereafter, Australia and Poland had intervened the territorial integrity of Iraq. There is a
diversity in scholars who have explained the issue of Iraq’s occupation (Muttitt, 2011;Whyte, 2007;
Price-Smith, 2015; Preble, 2004). None of their explanation can be accepted as
the exact truth unless being declared by state officials. Nevertheless, each
scholar includes the rich ‘Oil’ resources in their explanations as a
contributing factor. Therefore, Central Asia has the same threat and
nobody guarantees the security of their territorial integrity. As a result,
even if it is not regarded as positive feature, it is a geopolitical aspect in
either way.
Subsequently, sharing
borders with super powers put forth Central Asia both into advantageous and disadvantageous positions. Firstly, proximity
with super powers purports a great trade network. In this way, they manage to
maintain their economical existence. However, it also stands for a vulnerability for exploitation. The reason of why it is
named as economical existence but not as economical stability, is to emphasize the disadvantageous position.
This situation can be simply summarized as following: The trade relations that
have arisen because of the proximity in Central Asian case only ensures their
existence and meanwhile assuring this existence, the proximate super powers
also exploit the countries’ economy and make dependent them to themselves. This
process is being done by the core countries like China and Russia who sell
highly costed technology or manufactured goods and get less costly raw
materials in return (Wallerstein, 1974), thereby the countries, located on the
periphery like Central Asia at first started to develop with the help of technological and
industrial improvements which they import from the core countries. Afterwards,
there occurs a great trade connections by which
Central Asian countries perform both export and import action that enables
their economic existence. In this context, the peripheral countries will
eventually become foreign source dependent states in terms of costly industrial
machineries, technologies or manufactural goods because, rather than producing,
they import these goods in return their export of raw materials. As a result,
along with technological and industrial backwardness, they run up into debts at
the outcome of difference between the costs of goods and products that they
import and export. In the end, in order to pay their debts to those countries,
they’d have to keep their trade relations with these core countries. Even if
they have paid all their debts, they would be obliged to maintain their same
kind of commercial relation due to inability to produce by themselves.
The pipelines by which Central Asian countries
supply energy to Russia and China (which are specified above) are the clear
examples and furthermore, when we examine each Central Asian countries import
partners one by one, In Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan,
Russia and China do always share the first two places and in Turkmenistan they
are situated at the second and third places in the year of 2015.[6] Moreover, the goods that
Central Asian countries import from core countries like Russian and China, are
mainly machinery and equipment whereas, the main commodities, that they export
to them, are crude oil and gas.[7] These are the proofs that
how they are being exploited and how they become dependent and peripheral
state. In the light of these information, actual
picture becomes more clear.
Secondly, proximity means threat for Central
Asian countries in terms of the China’s and Russia’s national security. Lets take the example of Ukraine, who shares border with
Russian Federation and is the candidate of NATO membership (Kuzio, 2006), hence
they have faced Russian aggression in the Crimea (Mearsheimer,
2014). Possibility of deploying NATO
missiles in Ukrainian soil, caused so much trouble for
Ukraine and her citizens (Mearsheimer, 2014). In the
same manner, it would also cause the same problems for Central Asia which
depends on their attitude. As you can understand, geopolitics do not always provide a beneficial and advantageous
situations. Nevertheless, it paves a way for Central Asia to play a key role
and gives opportunity to benefit from both sides, if it is played thoroughly.
All in all, this is what geopolitics really means, while ensuring an advantage,
causes trouble and possesses disadvantage too.
Last but foremost, the
issue of water resources as geopolitical aspect of Central Asia. Although water
has always been a highly vital subject of geopolitics, it has started to occur
as a part of the geopolitics of Central Asia during the post-soviet era. Actually,
all the other geopolitical aspects, previously explained, are also become
geopolitical factors of Central Asia during the post-soviet era, however, their
importance had already been known all over the world even in Soviet times. In
contrast, water resources importance have been
realized after it has started to cause conflicts.
Hydro-geopolitics of the Central Asia: Water resources as a geopolitical aspect of Central Asia
Hydro-geopolitics of
the Central Asia is similar with the topic of geopolitics of Central Asia but
it is a more specific topic which puts hydro-politics into the center of
analyzes. Moreover, Eurasian region, according to its definition as located in
the center of the world (Mackinder, 1944), it also includes basically the Central
Asian water resources named as; Caspian and Aral Seas, Syr
Darya, Amu Darya and Yenisei (Mackinder, 1944). Which
indicates that, the borders of the world center were created by the most
important water resources of the region. Was that a coincidence?
Hydro-geopolitics deals
with the water sources, water conflicts and their effects on the geopolitics.
Likewise the Mackinder's approach towards the geopolitics,
Hydro-geopolitics consider the water resources and its management as a
tool for ruling or controlling the certain region or the whole the world.
Mackinder
put the Eurasian Region into center of the world and draw
borders which include the main water resources in the region that is briefly
indicated above within the Mackinder's Heartland theory. Which means that,
whether intentionally or not, he created a heartland by the main water
resources of the region. Furthermore, he explained the borders of the region
firstly from the water resources besides its advantageous, natural mountainous
geographical structure or else its natural energy resources. From this context,
we can assume that who controls the water resources in the region, then
commands the world. At this point, water has become a matter which has
shouldered huge importance. In today’s circumstances, rather than calling as
commanding the world, it would be more proper to say that ruling the certain
region. More delicately, who control the water resources of the region, would
have the opportunity to take whole region under control and to possess the all
other geopolitical aspects that they have.
Main Water Resources of the Region
Before
evaluating the hydro-politics of the area, first the water resources of the
region ought to be very well-known. The rivers of the region are: Amu Darya, Irtysh,
Syr Dayra, Hari River and Murghab River and also includes Aral Sea and Caspian Sea
and Lake Balkhash. Even though it seems like the region has plenty water
resources, low annual precipitation rates[8]
of the Central Asian countries and the fact that those water resources are
being shared by excessive amount of country, makes the situation problematical.
After the region’s main resources, let’s take a look at the shared and
conflictual ones:
Amu
Darya river born in Tajikistan and Afghanistan goes
through Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan and finally falls out to the Aral Sea. On
the other hand, Syr Darya river
born in Kyrgyzstan passes though Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan,
eventually being poured into the Aral Sea Basin (FAO-AQUASTAT, 2012).
In
this context, the general framework is more clear about the countries that
share the same transboundary water resources however, there is one more
important aspect, that is unequal amount of water that countries obtain from
the indicated water sources, i.e., while Kyrgyzstan is enjoying approximately
26 billion cubic meters of the Syr Darya river’s
water, Tajikistan only has 1 billion cubic meters or Kazakhstan has around 2 billion (Granit et
al.,2010, p.15). Hence, exceptionally uneven distribution of the common water resource, causes a conflictual situation.
Moreover,
the world fourth largest lake called as Aral Lake or Sea is situated within the
borders of Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan. It used to has
42 billion m3 annual water
inflow in 1960 and more than 60000 km square areas, whereas, in the year of
2001, annual water inflow declined to the 3.1 billion m3 water (B.Gaybullaev, Chen, and D.Gaybullaev, 2012). Today, the whole area has declined to 10
percent of the total area that it used to has. Even
though the increase in inflow numbers after the year of 2001, nevertheless, the
water flow goes through the Lake basin has been started to decrease again and
in the end Aral Lake has been dried nearly ninety percent up. It was one of the
main water resources in the region and except for the Kazakhstan’s recovering efforts, it has been abandoned for so long. Thus, it has
affected several sectors including mainly agriculture sector because of the
irrigation problems. As a consequence of the water shortage, irrigation systems
have become unable to be used, hence, it has caused a decline on the number of
crops and an increase on the agricultural market prices (Glantz, 1999, chap 8-9). Beyond agriculture, it has caused various problems. Here are the lists
and characteristics of the main conflicts and conflictual water resources in
the region.
What are conflicts and their fundamental reasons
There
are four basic reasons why have conflicts started to occur: Firstly, sharing or
using of a certain water resources or shortly, transboundary waters with
unequal terms. Secondly, uneven distribution of water
resources in the adjacent regions. Thirdly, the water
scarcity which covers all the water conflicts and causes almost all of it.
Lastly, foreign
countries provocation or intervention. It would be sufficient enough to
cause a conflict by only having one of these motivations. In the case of
Central Asia, three of the mentioned reasons have been seen and one of them has
not been proven, but nevertheless, it has been contributing to the conflicts.
The
first reason is the clear motivation of the conflict between Kyrgyzstan and
Uzbekistan. This is the most
significant, extended and large scale conflict that the region has ever faced
because of the water, i.e., Kyrgyzstan demanded from Uzbekistan a payment for
the Syr Darya’s water of which, they share while it
is passing throughout the Fergana Valley, located in the east borders of
Uzbekistan and west borders of the Kyrgyzstan (Chatterjee, Gugarats,
Caner, Du Jardin, Goss and Sahnai,
2013). According to the terms of the agreement, signed on 17th March 1998, on
the issue of the Use of Water and Energy Resources of the Syr
Darya Basin, and more specifically the Article IV (Word Bank, 2004) clearly
declares that; Kyrgyzstan has water flow over than their requirements,
therefore, exceeded water will be given to the Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan. As a
return, these countries shall provide energy sources to the Kyrgyzstan. Despite
the existence of their signature on the agreement, Uzbekistan refused the
Kyrgyz demand, eventually Kyrgyzstan cut the water
goes through the dam situated on the Fergana Valley. Kyrgyzstan’s action was
also a breach of another article of the same agreement,
Article III (Word Bank, 2004: 28-30) that prevents parties to take any measures
one against the other. Kyrgyz side cut the water flow however article clearly
indicates that, no measures can be taken against the other sides’ right to
obtain water. As a consequence of the Kyrgyz attitude, Uzbekistan respond it
back very roughly by sending their troops to the Kyrgyzstan’s border in 1999 to
provide the security of the dam and water flow (Bichsel, 2009, p. 20-24). There
were violations of the borders which constituted a grave danger for the
territorial integrity of Kyrgyzstan and a possibility of full-scale war. Both
sides’ have started media propaganda in their countries. Uzbekistan
has crossed the borders and occupied a territory in the border of Kyrgyzstan
and constantly refused to leave there (Karaev, 2005).
Moreover, Uzbekistan has applied strict visa regulation to the people who tries
to enter the disputed regions in the border. Even though the tensions were
mostly defused, conflict in the Fergana Valley border still continues to exist (Demirci, 2012).
Furthermore,
because of the same reason explained above, disputes have been occurred between
Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan. Kazakhstan accused Uzbekistan as violating the
Article IV (Word Bank, 2004, p. 28-30) of ‘the Use of Water and Energy
Resources of the Syr Darya Basin agreement’, by
decreasing their water flow in the year of 1997 (Chatterjee et al, 2013).
Mentioned article indicates that; Water shall be divided equally. Hence,
according to the Kazakh claims Uzbeks violating the agreement’s provisions. The attitudes that Uzbekistan showed against
Kazakhstan, was exactly the same as they did towards the Kyrgyzstan. It was not
last as long as the conflict between Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan, however Uzbeks
caused border problems and applied visa, thereby they
the trade relations were restricted (Chatterjee et al, 2013). However, at the
beginning of the 2000s, except some parts, border problems have almost been
resolved.
Slightly
less tensed conflict between Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan was occurred because of
the breach of the same agreement on ‘Use of Water and Energy Resources of the Syr Darya Basin’. This agreement was signed by the parties
of Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and obviously it
was a failure which could not able to prevent the conflicts. In the case of
Kyrgyz and Kazakhs, Kazakhstan did not supply energy resources to Kyrgyzstan as
payback of the water. Therefore, Kazakhs did not fulfill the provisions of the
agreement, particularly the Article IV (Word Bank, 2004, p. 28-30). Not
surprisingly, response of the Kyrgyz side was again cutting flow of the water
which was a breach of the Article III (Word Bank, 2004, p. 28-30) like they did
in the case of Uzbeks.
The
other conflict was occurred between the Tajikistan and Uzbekistan about the Amu
Darya river’s water. It was fundamentally the same
reason that causes the previous mentioned conflicts: Using the shared water
resources in an unequal terms. At the outset, conflict
was occurred due to the attempts of Tajikistan’s, because of their shortage of
energy ergo dependence on foreign energy resources (Mosello, 2008). Despite the shortage on energy resources, they
have plenty of water resources unlike the other countries in the region like
Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan. Their annual water
flow from Amu Darya river is approximately 56 billion meter cube which is
literally 11 times of Uzbekistan’s water flow from Amu Darya or 55 times of the
Turkmenistan’s water flow from the Amu Darya River (Granit et al.,2010, p. 15).
By this context, Tajikistan has tried to construct a dam, known as Rogun Dam, in order to generate hydroelectric energy from
the Amu Darya river’s sources. The attempts to
construct that dam had started during the Soviet Era (Kleingeld,
2016). After the dissolution of the Soviets, due to the internal problems,
project was postponed. However, the fact that their dependence of foreign
energy resources, particularly Uzbek natural gas, was not changed. Thereafter,
they wanted to finish the project that they had started. Meanwhile, they have
faced with the Uzbekistan’s protests due to the concerns on the amount of water
that they have been using, particularly for irrigation. And Unfortunately,
failure has not been stopped to follow up on Tajikistan. Because of the
disagreement on the project with the Russians, they have lost ties with Russia
at this project (Kleingeld, 2016). Energy was a and still is a must for Tajikistan that has to be resolved
immediately, thereby they have given most of their attention to the
construction of Rogun Dam. In the absence of Russia,
they have applied to the World Bank. World Bank has investigated the region and
it’s suitability, and in the year of 2014, they have approved the construction
(Kleingeld, 2016)which is
estimated to be finished in 2018.
Thus
far, all the explained conflicts have been occurred from the same first reason.
However, Turkmenistan has been affected mostly from the second cause, which is
indicated above. Turkmenistan has not have any pie
from the Syr Darya river, because it does not cross
their country. Furthermore, their annually water flow from the Amu Darya river
is just 1.5 billion meter cube (Granit et al.,2010, p. 15) which is a dramatic
scarcity. Every other country in Central Asia have more water resources than
Turkmenistan has, therefore, it makes them a perfect example for the second
reason. In this context, physically water scarce country like Turkmenistan,
would naturally like to create a
artificial lake, in order to maintain their water security, particularly for
their cotton production (Baizakova, 2013). While
constructing that artificial lake called as Golden Lake, Amu Darya river’s water will be used to fill the lake out. On the one
hand, there are strong supports for the project like, advanced sanitations or
prevented soil from flooded water (Baizakova, 2013).
On the other hand there are several concerns come along with the project such
as an increase in salinity level or chemical contamination (Baizakova,
2013). Besides the every other negative opinions, we
see the opposition of Uzbekistan with a concern of possible decrease on their
water flow in the circumstances that Turkmenistan would sustain the water level
in Golden Lake, with using up the Amu Darya river’s water. This has caused a
tension between Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan. All in all, Uzbek officials
thought that all the tensions that are happening in the region, might be turned
into an actual war.[9] This declaration is
obviously put forth the seriousness of the situations.
The
third is the main reason of the all conflicts happening in the region. However,
even in the absence of water scarcity, conflicts are very likely to occurred. Because, besides their relations
with the real scarcity, conflicts are also emerged due to the countries’ greedy
desires. Even being in a water abundance position, there is always a
desire to have more. This is not an instance for the situations occurring in
the Central Asia because all countries in the region suffer from the water
scarcity, but it is a highly obvious and worrying fact. Alongside these information, in the case of Central Asia, there is an
actual water scarcity, explained in the first chapter, that mainly causes
disputes in the end. Region’s annually water flow, is
far below the level that is supposed to be. And the awareness of the countries
about the severe consequences of the water shortage, force them to do anything
to avoid it by all manner of means. Hence, eventually conflicts like the cases of Kyrgyz-Uzbek,
Tajik-Uzbek or else Turkmenistan occur.
Last
but not least, even though it is hypothetical and not proved, there is a high
possibility of Russian or Western provocations in the region. Of course, none
of the countries leave a proof or declare it publicly that they make
provocations in order to cause a conflict or to sustain the current one.
However, given the circumstances and possibilities like, one might think that,
countries can be perfectly get along with each other
in a win-win environment. As it has been exemplified, there are different types
of countries in the region. States who possess energy
resources are in a water shortage situation and the others who has water
resources are in need of energy resources. In the win-win framework, states
could have an excellent trade relation by supplying to each other whatever
excessive commodity they have, however instead of doing that, they rather
prefer to satisfy their demands in free of charge which causes a zero-sum
situation in which, while one side is winning, the other side is losing. This
is the barrier against the co-operation. The agreement between Kazakhstan,
Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan on the ‘the Use of Water and Energy Resources of the Syr Darya Basin’ is an initiation in a way goes through the
win-win situation ergo collaboration. However, it was an unsuccessful attempt
due to the desire of countries towards zero-sum tendencies. Furthermore, while
analyzing these countries tendencies, outer effects ought to be taken into
consideration which means, why did those countries change their minds after
they had signed such agreements? An intervention from foreign countries can be
the answer. Provided that all the countries in Central Asia live in a great
harmony in which everybody wins, nobody suffers, then countries who have
interests in the region like Russia or China in terms of oil, natural gas e.t.c., will not be able to intervene the region to satisfy
their interests due to the absence of any conflictual area that they can use as
a tool. From the Russian perspective, foreign countries provocation can cause a
conflict or maintain instability in the region which eventually will estrange
foreign investors or foreign institutions who are planning to be active in the
region. In this circumstances, western institutions,
particularly NATO’s existences in the region will be prevented like the
examples of Frozen Conflicts in the South Caucasus. Therefore, provocation or a
persuasion of the leaders of the states, might be the
reason of why states have changed their minds or attitudes. This is all
hypothetical scenario but very likely to be happened.
Until
now, all the conflicts and their reasons were explained in detailed. Yet, there
are few more contributing factors which trigger the conflicts in a negative
way;
Contributing factors of the current conflicts
Water conflicts have a complex structure which
needs a multidisciplinary focus. Firstly the effects of the Global warming on
the water conflicts and secondly relations with the food security and water
disputes ought to be taken into consideration. First of all, since the 1900s,
earth’s degree has increased 1 celsius from the level
that it is supposed to be. It’s effects on the
glaciers can not be denied. The sea level has been
raised with the rate of 3.4 mm per year and annually 400 billion tons of total
glaciers have been melting since 1994.[10]
Over and above, there is an expectation that on the forthcoming years, there
will be 1 more celsius
increase in the temperature which might have a catastrophic influence on earth.
In this context, when we examine Central Asia, we can clearly posit that, with
the effects of melting glaciers and probable increase in the following years on
the melting glaciers, will cause floods in the rivers.
Furthermore, along with the increase in vaporization, there will be a decrease
on the river’s flows. Besides the vaporization, temperature increase will also
affect the amount of rains negatively. The current water scarcity in the region
has already been affected from the changes in the world temperature and given
the circumstances, the current water scarcity will be
multiplied. In the light of these information,
likelihood of a harsher and bloodier conflict is unfortunately very high.
Secondly,
there is a direct relation between the food security and water conflicts.
Particularly, conflicts, occurred in the region, contain the concerns on
irrigation that is dependent on the annual water flow of the country. Most
important aspect in the food security is sustainable irrigation, without it,
cultivating process can not be done which would cause
food shortage. Food shortage will definitely increase the food prices and in
the end, it will bring unrest among the people. Unrest will cause a uprising and this process will end in a conflict between
water plenty and water scarce countries. From this context, there is a mutual
and dependent cycle between them: Water scarcity causes food insecurity, food
insecurity brings conflicts. Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan are aware of
this cycle and all of the conflicts that they caused besides the other reasons,
included the threat of food insecurity.
How water politics become an aspect of Central Asian Geopolitics and the effects of the Water conflicts on the geopolitics of the region
Water politics have become an aspect of Central
Asian geopolitics in three ways:
I. Foreign countries
intervention tool:
Water can be used as an
intervention tool from the foreign countries whom
would like to play a key role or would like the control the whole region. This
intervention can be accomplished by abusing the ongoing conflicts. In the Central
Asian region, there are several conflicts that have been occurring. Due to the
past experiences and continuation of the water scarcity, likelihood of breaking a new conflict is also exceptionally
high makes the conflicts in the region become vulnerable for external
intervention. For instance, conflict between Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan, has
caused a violation of territorial integrity which still continues today.
European Union, NATO, United Nations, Russian Federation can intervene to the
countries internal affairs by first escalating and enlarging the conflict and
then, forcing some measures, creating a commission for investigation or sending
peacekeeping troops under the purpose of regional interests, particularly
energy resources. Furthermore, intervention can be also achieved by capturing
or at least threatening to capture the main water resources located in the
region with a
purpose of having supreme power over the whole area, thereby they would be able
to enforce anything that fits on their interests. For instance, the map, that
has been leaked by the United States military service official Ralph Peters (Peters, 2006),
contains a newly established states whose borders has been drawn by the most
important waters in the Middle East region. Iraq occupation,
rivalry in the Turkey’s eastern part, Syrian conflict are all included
to the ambition of the establishment of that state. A state which includes
every water resources in the region, would command the region and United States
as a founder of that state would rule the whole region without a doubt. In the
same context, it can be achieved in exact same way in the Central Asian region,
by controlling the water resources in the region which possess great
importance, explained above, can be used as an intervention, further than that,
becomes a commanding tool over the region. The main feature which makes it a
great tool is the indispensable characteristic that is has.
II. Sanction way of the countries to get what they would like to acquire:
As an example to clarify the statement, countries like Tajikistan or Kyrgyzstan who are upper stream countries and have plenty water flow in contrast with the rests in Central Asia and they use the water before the other countries. As a consequences, they can cut off the water flow which goes through the downstream countries or rather than cutting totally, they can decrease it. At this point, provided that Kyrgyzstan is in need of natural gas, cotton, food or else and they ask from the downstream country to sell them with a price that Kyrgyz officials determine, however, the other side deny the price that the Kyrgyz side set forth, in the end Kyrgyzstan would cut the water flow off and force them to sell in a conditions that they desire. The counter state has two options, they would accept the conditions that Kyrgyzstan formed or would deny the conditions whatever it takes and send their troops to the water resource in order to secure their flow. In the same context, Uzbekistan has chosen the second option, since they have the military capacity to that, however, if the opponent state won’t be able to take any military measures or does not have a retaliate power, then they will have no choice but to choose first option.
III. Can be used as a weapon of war:
This is a very critical aspect by which states can threaten the other by using it as a weapon. For instance: In 1986, North Korea declared their project in which they were planning to construct a dam on one of the stream that goes through the capital city of South Korea, brought conflict among two countries. South Korea was aware of the threat that North Korea can intentionally destroy the dam which would cause a flood over the Seul (Kıran, 2005, p. 256). In this example, it is very obvious that it can be used as a war weapon and furthermore, because of the existence of such threat, South Korea has taken precautions in order to prevent or minimize the consequences of that threat. In this context, reservoirs or dams in the Central Asia can be seen as a jeopardy for the countries who possess, because of the possibility of its’ usage as a war weapon by the opponent state.
Conflicts, that have been occurring in the region, open up a
way of which countries can intervene into the internal affairs of the states,
explained above. Foreign policies that countries pursue are being shaped by the
conflicts emerging in the region. Some
countries take advantage of the conflicts and the others are being harmed by
the conflicts and thereby, constitutes policies
according to their interests regarding the conflicts. Moreover, conflicts
have drawn attention on the water scarcity in the region and have underlined
the importance of water. By this context, the issue of water conflicts have become an agenda of
both internal and international politics and at the same time it becomes an
aspect of geopolitics as well. Each of these three features put forth the
importance of Water Politics and explained why and how it has become an aspect
of Central Asian geopolitics. Apart from these
information, with the emergence of the conflicts and their tendencies to
increase, water has been recognized as an aspect of geopolitics not just in
Central Asian geopolitics but in whole world.
Conclusion
Hydro-politics is one of the
most important aspect of geopolitics. But only, it’s effects does not seem clearly over some regions or
countries. Central Asia was one of them until the disintegration of Soviet
Union. Since the abolishment of Soviet
Union, we see an alteration in the Central Asian geopolitics. As being situated
in the center of Eurasian Region, Central Asia has always possess
critical, strategic features. Furthermore, it’s
natural energy resources have always been attracting for the other countries (Europe,
United States, Russia, China). Moreover, due to the significance of water and
severe consequences that it has, emphasis of Hydro-politics
have been dramatically increased. As result of the Central Asia’s
limited water resources and increased concern on water resources, conflicts
become inevitable and consequently, all the indicated features of water
politics were came along with the conflicts and were opened up a way of
malfeasance. Hereby, hydro-politics joined into the Central Asian geopolitical
arena.
Water
politics have always been underestimated by plenty of scholars and its affects over the
countries both internal and external policies have been overlooked. However,
the enforcement power that hydro-politics have, is now
more clear and neat. One of the most
important instance about its enforcement power among all given information
above, water resources could be used to rule the whole region or to become at
least one of the most influential power over region by which states would be
able to pursue their interests or maintain their interests’ stableness which
are the ultimate aims of every country (Jackson and Sørensen,
2016, p. 62-91). To conclude, though the help of water politics, countries
become able to control or command the region; enforce sanctions; threaten
opponents for its probable use as a war weapon. In the light of these information, Hydro-geopolitics has got one of the
upmost importance for the countries in their domestic and foreign policies.
[1][2]The statistical data have been reached via United
Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization: http://www.unescoetxea.org/ext/manual_EDS/pdf/04_recursos_ingles.pdf
and also from the Global Development Federation’s data: http://www.gdf.world/water/
[3]The population numbers have been taken from the United Nations’
publication, World Population Prospects:
https://esa.un.org/unpd/wpp/publications/files/key_findings_wpp_2015.pdf
[4]The statistical data have been retrieved from the followings: FAO Aquastat data from the years of 1998–2002: http://www.fao.org/nr/water/aquastat/data/query/index.html?lang=en
and World Bank Water Resources Data: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTMENA/Resources/App-all Scarcity.pdf
[5]Countries have been selected according to their
natural resources and development records from World Bank indicators: http://data.worldbank.org/region/least-developed-countries:-un-classification
[6]The data about the major export and import
partners of the indicated countries provided from the CIA factbook
data: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/fields/2061.html
[7]The data about the exported and imported
commodities of the selected countries provided from the indicators of CIA factbook:
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/fields/2058.html
[8]Kazakhstan: 250mm, Uzbekistan:206mm,
Turkmenistan:161mm, Tajikistan:691, Kyrgyzstan:533, data have been collected
from: http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/AG.LND.PRCP.MM?view=map
[9]The Uzbek official’s (former president) thoughts
and expressions were taken accordingly from the following:
http://www.reuters.com/article/centralasia-water-idUSL6E8K793I20120907
[10]The global warming data were provided from the
NASA’s global climate informations:
http://climate.nasa.gov/
Bibliography
Baizakova, Zhulduz. “Turkmenistan’s ‘Golden Age’ Lake: a Potential Environmental Disaster.” (2013).
Banuazizi, Ali. The New
geopolitics of Central Asia and its borderlands. Indiana University Press,
1994.
Bernauer, Thomas, and
Tobias Siegfried. "Climate change and international water conflict in Central
Asia." Journal of Peace Research 49.1 (2012): 227-239.
Bichsel, Christine. Conflict transformation in Central Asia: irrigation disputes in the Ferghana Valley. Routledge, 2009.
Chatterjee, Pothik, et al. "Case study 4: The Aral Sea basin." Bridges over water (2013): 339-362.
Conway, Patrick J. Crisis, stabilization and growth: economic adjustment in transition economies. Springer Science & Business Media, 2012.
Demirci, Levent.
"Özbekistan, Kırgızistan ve Tacikistan’ın kesişimindeki sorunlu vadi:
Fergana." Savunma Bilimleri Dergisi 11.2 (2012): 33-69.
FAO AQUASTAT. "The Aral Sea
transboundary river
basin http://www.fao.org/nr/water/aquastat/basins/aral-sea/aral.sea-CP_eng.pdf
Fedorenko, Vladimir. "The new Silk road initiatives
in Central Asia." Rethink Paper 10 (2013):1-36.
Gaybullaev, Behzod, Su-Chin Chen, and Dilmurod
Gaybullaev. "Changes in water volume of the Aral Sea after 1960."
Applied Water Science 2.4 (2012): 285-291.
Granit, Jakob, et al. "Regional water intelligence
report Central Asia." Stockholm, March (2010).
Glantz, Michael, ed. Creeping environmental problems and
sustainable development in the Aral Sea basin. Cambridge University Press,
1999.
Güler, Mehmet Ç. "Bulk Water Transfer", http://www.hidropolitikakademi.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Bulk-Water-Transfer-.pdf
Islam, AKM Iftekharul. "The US Role and Policy in
Central Asia: Energy and Beyond." Arts Faculty Journal 4 (2012): 33-51.
İmer, Sencer.‘‘Ortadoğu’daki Son Gelişmelerde Su Politikalarının Etkisi Dikkatten Kaçırılmamalı’’. OrtadoğuAnaliz, 30.3 (2011).
Jackson, Robert, and Georg Sørensen. Introduction to international relations: theories and approaches. Oxford University Press, 2016.
Karaev, Zainiddin. "Water Diplomacy in Central Asia." Middle East Review of International Affairs 9.1 (2005): 63-69.
Kaufman, Richard F., and John Pearce Hardt. The former Soviet Union in transition. ME Sharpe, 1993.
Kıran, Abdullah. Ortadoğu'da su: bir çatışma ya da uzlaşma alanı. Vol. 2. Kitap Yayinevi Ltd., 2005.
Kleingeld, Eva, and M. A. Russian. The Rogun Dam in Tajik-Uzbek Official Discourse. MS thesis. 2016.
Kuzio, Taras. "Is Ukraine part of Europe's future?." Washington Quarterly 29.3 (2006): 89-108.
Mackinder, Halford John. Democratic ideals and reality: A study in the politics of reconstruction. Vol. 46399. H. Holt, 1919.
“The round world and the winning of the
peace." Foreign Affairs 21.4 (1943): 595-605.
—-. ”The geographical pivot of history."
Royal Geographical Society, 1904.
Matikeeva, Sayragul. "Mackinder's legacy: was it a prophesy?." Central Asia and The Caucasus 4 (34) (2005).
Managing Water under Uncertainty and Risk: UN World water development report 2012, WWDR 4. S.l.: United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), 2012.
Mearsheimer, John J. "Why the Ukraine crisis is the
West's fault: the liberal delusions that provoked Putin." Foreign Aff. 93
(2014): 77.
Mosello, Beatrice. "Water in Central Asia: a
prospect of conflict or cooperation?." Journal of Public and International
Affairs 19 (2008): 151-174.
Muttitt, Greg. Fuel on the fire: oil and politics in
occupied Iraq. Random House, 2011.
ÖZGÜLER, Hamza. "Su, su kaynakları ve
çevresel konular." Meteoroloji Mühendisliği. TMMOB Meteoroloji
Mühendisleri Odası Yayın Organı 2 (1997): 57-63.
Peters, Ralph. "Blood
borders: How a better Middle East would look." Armed Forces Journal 6.06
(2006).
Preble, Christopher A. Exiting
Iraq: why the US must end the military occupation and renew the war against Al
Qaeda: report of a special task force. Cato institute, 2004.
Price-Smith, Andrew T. Oil,
illiberalism, and war: An analysis of energy and US foreign policy. MIT Press,
2015.
Valentini K.L. et al. "Water
problems in Central Asia", Bishkek: MISI, Socinfromburo &
Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, 2004.
Wallerstein, Immanuel. "Dependence
in an interdependent world: the limited possibilities of transformation within
the capitalist world economy." African Studies Review 17.01 (1974): 1-26.
Whyte, Dave. "The crimes of
neo-liberal rule in occupied Iraq." The British Journal of Criminology
(2007): 177-195.
World Bank. “Water energy nexus in Central Asia. Improving regional cooperation in Syr Darya Basin.”,http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTUZBEKISTAN/Resources/Water_Energy_Nexus_final.pdf
*Mehmet Cagatay Guler - Master’s student at the Department of Eurasian Studies, Middle East Technical University email: cagatay.guler@metu.edu.tr
© 2010, IJORS - INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RUSSIAN STUDIES