National First Place Winner
Callie E. Smith
Girls Preparatory School
Chattanooga, Tennessee
Coordinator: Kathleen H. Berotti

Water is a form of life. Without it, survival would be impossible. So how would the world react if this vital resource were depleted? Currently, 97.5 percent of the Earth’s water is marine with only 2.5 percent left as fresh water, 70 percent of which is locked in ice, soils, and underground aquifers. Less than 1 percent of fresh water thus remains for more than six billion people. Consequently, many countries bear the burden of conflict as their peoples clash over water usage and authority. With a projected population of 8.9 billion and an exhaustion of water supplies by 2050, these disputes must be rapidly replaced with firm, peaceful management.¹ Case studies of Central Asia and Yemen show that clashing states and peoples must develop strong centralized authorities to regulate water usage effectively, ending violent power struggles and shifting the focus toward technological experimentation in water usage efficiency.

The five Central Asian countries—Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, and Tajikistan—frequently come to blows over water distribution and power of the Syr Darya and Amu Darya rivers and the Aral Sea. The Aral Sea, ranked at one time as the world’s fourth largest lake, shrank to less than half its original size in 1960.² The United Nations Environment Program professed the tragedy to be “one of the world’s most staggering disasters of the 20th century.”³ With the reduction of the Aral Sea and the subsequent water loss of the surrounding Syr Darya and Amu Darya rivers, contention between the states escalated.

Originally under the Soviet Union, Central Asia had united under the highly centralized authority of the Ministry for Land Reclamation and Water Resources.⁴ The central rule fostered a harmonious relationship between the republics: the upstream countries released water in the summer for the cotton-farming downstream republics, while the downstream countries provided fuel and natural gas for energy to their upstream neighbors in the winter.⁵

After the five Central Asian republics established independence in 1991, the previously working method of water management collapsed in the absence of a central governing power.⁶ The 1992 Almaty Agreement ascertained quotas for water use and the continuance of a system similar to the Soviet administration.⁷ However, each nation embedded the phrase “sovereignty over resources” in their constitutions and began to act unilaterally.⁸ The downstream countries withheld energy from the upstream states during the winter so the upstream regions stemmed downward water flow during the summer. As the largest cotton exporter and fourth largest cotton producer in the world, downstream Uzbekistan aggressively protested and insisted that water is common property.⁹ As the Uzbek deputy agriculture and water resources minister said, “Water should not be seen as a commodity.”¹⁰ Upstream Kyrgyzstan retaliated by withholding 70 percent of water and using it instead for the generation of electricity, leaving more than 22 million without water.¹¹

Yemen exhibits even greater water disputes as one of the most arid countries in the world.¹² With a population of 20 million and an anticipated population of 40 million within the next 20 years, the water conflicts could expand into wars.¹³ Tribes, villages, towns, and individuals fight over water, sometimes killing and wounding people in their efforts to gain a well or spring. In 1999, a skirmish between two villages over a local spring killed 6 and wounded 60 after 700 soldiers were sent to quash the fighting, and 17 more people died in two other squabbles.¹⁴

The Yemeni capital, Sanaa, faces the likelihood of running dry within a decade and Christopher Ward of the World Bank states that “groundwater is being mined at such a rate that parts of the rural economy could disappear within a generation.”¹⁵ Yemen’s water tables fall by 2 meters every year and less than 40 percent of the Yemeni population have access to drinking water.¹⁶

Yemen attempted to resolve its water disputes through the issuance of treaties between its conflicting groups, but the Yemeni people eventually abandoned the treaties, ignoring the established water quotas and distribution regulations.¹⁷ The country’s citizens continue to war over water, refusing to heed the government.

Both Central Asia and Yemen endeavored to set up centralized organizations to oversee water-related issues, but both failed. Central Asia created the Interstate Commission for Water Coordination and the Water Basin Commission; however, the states’ legislatures refused to recognize the commissions’ authority or provide them with adequate funding.¹⁸ In addition, the commissions consisted of Uzbek majorities, which led many to suspect disparate clout. Thus, the commissions instigated little change and amassed little authority. Yemen, similarly, made the National Water and Sanitation Authority (NWSA). The NWSA reduced the amount of violent water struggles, but did not achieve the desired effects due to power and monetary inadequacies.¹⁹

In order to effectively resolve water conflicts, a strong centralized Water Authority (WA) must be established. The Organization for the Economic Co-operation and Development concurs: “Often it is the way in which water is governed and administered which leads to tensions.”²⁰ The WA must be duly fortified with funding and power to suspend these tensions. Secondly, the WA must be equipped with the power to produce binding laws and enforce such laws both on the national and local levels. The members of the authority should be drawn equally from the affiliate nations and from the agricultural, industrial, environmental, and energy sectors of the populations. A system for the review and appeal of decisions is a further necessity to ensure fair rule and consensus of the constituents.

Localized branches of the WA would allow for the personal supervision of water usage and law enforcement. These branches would provide for the specialized needs of their regions and exact meticulous rule to supplement super-national WA divisions. The WA also requires the aid of international agencies to bolster the authority’s influence, supply support, encourage dialogue between the contending countries, and ensure justice and progress. International organizations, for example, the United Nations Development Program, World Bank, International Monetary Fund, Global Environment Facility, and United Nations Economic Commission, as well as the United States Agency for International Development have started supplying aid to Yemen and Central Asia, preventing future escalated variances and supplying funds for the construction of infrastructure and other projects.²¹ The support of international groups for the WA will add to the authority’s power and signify global consent for its rule, allowing the WA to secure its position above opposing water-scarce nations. The firm rule of the WA could drastically reduce outside efforts to usurp control over the water sources, working towards eventual peace.

Financial aid is a necessary element to the disputes’ peaceful resolution. Presently, Yemen requires an estimated $5.3 billion to meet its water demands by 2020 ²² and Kyrgyzstan requires an estimated $600 million yearly for the maintenance of its water installations.²³ Individually, most nations lack the ability to accrue the essential amounts of money. International donors can furnish the compulsory funds for the WA, allowing for improvements to be made and laws to be implemented fully. Thus, WA laws will gain additional strength, with international organizations aiding in their enforcement and monitoring the laws’ effectiveness. Through random audits, the international agencies can judge the WA’s rule in concordance with international standards to guarantee successful and just development.

Additionally, under the WA, water distribution between neighboring countries must be divided in accordance to time, rather than quantity. Aaron Wolf, professor at Oregon State University, discovered that 81 percent of water treaties have specified volume provisions.²⁴ In regard to this point, the Yemeni and Central Asian treaties established quotas concerning the amount of water allotted to each country; however, these treaties fell through and failed to resolve the conflicts. Precise volume quotas fail to account for water fluctuations, which can lead to further dispute; however, fluctuations would not effect water distribution based on time. Thus, the WA should allocate water according to the equal division of days per week, weeks per month, or months per year among the involved states, based on the conditions of each state and its populace.

Through the formation of WAs, peaceful resolutions to the water conflicts of many water-scarce nations may be effectively achieved. The intentions of countries to seize power can be considerably condensed, permitting the states to direct their attentions to technological advances in efficient water usage. Currently, 10 percent of the world’s water withdrawal is allotted for domestic use, 20 percent for industrial use, and 70 percent for irrigated agricultural use.²⁵ Irrigation persists as the single most wasteful method of water delivery—90 percent of the irretrievable use of water is due to irrigation.²⁶ Thus, experiments in drip irrigation, cropping patterns, recycling waste water, efficient household appliances, desalination, and other water-saving measures can enable many countries to further stave off conflict over water.

Water has been the source of strife for centuries. It has caused human to rise up against human and country to rise up against country. Water authorities could provide a stable centralized government over conflicting nations and peoples, establishing a basis for cooperation and adherence to a common set of efficient water regulations. The WA would secure a lasting resolution to water disputes and ensure the welfare of many.

Notes

1. Zulifiquer Ahmed Amin, “The Water Problem,” Daily Star, October 8, 2007, p. 1.

2. Kemelova, Dinara, and Gennady Zhalkubaev, “Water, Conflict, and Regional Security in Central Asia Revisited,” March 29, 2003, accessed January 19, 2008.
www.law.nyu.edu/JOURNALS/ENVTLLAW/issues/vol112/kemelova.pdf

3. Amin, “The Water Problem,” p. 2.

4. Bea Hogan, “Central Asian States Wrangle over Water,” May 5, 2000.

5. “Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, and Turkmenistan,” January 15, 2008. http://www.irinnews.org/report.aspx?reportid=28206.

6. Ibid.

7. “Central Asia: Water and Conflict,” International Crisis Group Asia Report, May 30, 2002.

8. Hogan, “Central Asian States Wrangle over Water.”

9. “Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, and Turkmenistan.”

10. Amin, “The Water Problem,” p. 2.

11. Kemelova and Zhalkubaev, “Water, Conflict, and Regional Security in Central Asia Revisited.”

12. Helga Graham, “Landscaped for Rain,” World Magazine (August 1991): 46.

13. “High and Dry; Qat,” The Economist, March 30, 2002, p. 1.

14. “Water Conflict Chronology,” January 16, 2008.
http://www.worldwater.org/conflictchronology.pdf

15. “High and Dry; Qat.”

16. “Economic Sectors: Not Enough Water to Go Around,” Economist Intelligence Unit Country Profile: Yemen, September 1, 2007, p. 1.

17. “High and Dry; Qat,” p. 2.

18. Kemelova and Zhalkubaev, “Water, Conflict, and Regional Security in Central Asia Revisited.”

19. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, “Water and Violent Conflict” (2005), p. 24, accessed January 17, 2008.
http://globalpolicy.org/security/natres/water/2005/052605waterconflict.pdf.

20. Ibid.

21. Christopher Ward, “Yemen’s Water Crisis,” July 2001, accessed January 19, 2008. http://www.al-bab.com/bys/articles/ward01.htm.

22. “Yemen: Water Sector Needs $5.2 Billion Investments Until 2020,” IPR Strategic Business Information Database, May 5, 2002, p. 2.

23. Aaron T. Wolf, “Indigenous Approaches to Water Conflict Negotiations and Implications for International Waters,” International Negotiation 5 (2000): 2.

24. Kemelova and Zhalkubaev, “Water, Conflict, and Regional Security in Central Asia Revisited.”

25. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, “Water and Violent Conflict.”

26. Nancy Matthews, “A Key Resource at Risk,” UNESCO Courier (October 1992): 26.

Bibliography

Works Cited

Amin, Zulifiquer Ahmed. “The Water Problem.” Daily Star, October 8, 2007.

“Central Asia: Water and Conflict.” International Crisis Group Asia Report, May 30, 2002.

“Economic Sectors: Not Enough Water to Go Around.” Economist Intelligence Unit Country Profile: Yemen, September 1, 2007.

Graham, Helga. “Landscaped for Rain.” World Magazine, August 1991.

“High and Dry; Qat.” The Economist, March 30, 2002.

Hogan, Bea. “Central Asian States Wrangle Over Water,” May 5, 2000.
http://www.eurasianet.org/departments/environment/articles/eav040500/shtml.

Kemelova, Dinara, and Gennady Zhalkubaev. “Water, Conflict, and Regional Security in Central Asia Revisited,” March 29, 2003, accessed January 19, 2008.
http://www.law.nyu.deu/JOURNALS/ENVTLLAW/issues/vol112/kemelova.pdf.

“Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, and Turkmenistan,” January 15, 2008. http://www.irinnews.org/report.aspx?reportid=28206.

Matthews, Nancy. “A Key Resource at Risk.” UNESCO Courier, October 1992.

Organization for the Economic Co-operation and Development. “Water and Violent Conflict,” 2005.

Ward, Christopher. “Yemen’s Water Crisis,” July 2001, accessed January 19, 2008.
http://www.al-bab.com/bys/articles/ward01.htm.

“Water Conflict Chronology,” January 16, 2008.
http://www.worldwater.org/conflictchronology.pdf.

Wolf, Aaron T. “Indigenous Approaches to Water Conflict Negotiations and Implications for International Waters.” International Negotiation 5 (December 2000).

“Yemen: Water Sector Needs $5.2 Billion Investments until 2020.” IPR Strategic Business Information Database, May 5, 2002.

Works Consulted

“The Electricity and Water Ministry (Yemen).” Middle East Economic Digest, April 4, 2003, p. 15.

Environment News Service, 2005.
http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/jan2005/2005-01-06-01.asp.

Nilekani, Rohini. “Is Water the Next Oil?” Yale Global, May 31, 2007.

Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. “Recent and Ongoing Work of the CPDC,” January 19, 2008.
http://globalpolicy.org/security/natres/water/2001/1001fpol.htm.

“Water: Fuel for Conflict in the Middle East.” Washington Report on Middle East Affairs (July–August 2003): 66.

Wolf, Aaron T., and Sandra L. Postel. “Dehydrating Conflict.” Foreign Policy, September 18, 2001.

“World Bank Offers Credit: Focus on Water, Health, and Education (Yemen).” Middle East Economic Digest, March 19, 2004, p. 20.