Water Wars

The gathering clouds of water wars
The scarcity of water facing many parts of the globe has been frequently projected as the likely reason to trigger wars in this century. With the burgeoning population and reduced availability of fresh water, the crisis can occur any time since international institutions like the U.N. are not adequately equipped to resolve water disputes.


"FIERCE NATIONAL competition over water resources has prompted fears that water issues contain the seeds of violent conflict." Kofi Annan, U.N. Secretary General, had this to say in his message on the occasion of the World Water Day on March 22, 2002. Years earlier, in 1995, similar concern was also shown by Ismail Serageldin, Vice-President of the World Bank while stating that "The wars of the next century will be about water." The fears expressed by these world renowned officers cannot be brushed aside lightly since fresh water is getting exhausted day by day and 26 countries around the globe are now considered to be water scarce. Further, with the projection that by the year 2025, two-thirds of the world population is likely to live in countries with moderate or severe shortage of water, these statements have to be viewed with greater concern, all the more so since conflicts over water have become more common among competing water users. A burgeoning population, misuse of water resources and poor management practices have been causing depleted supplies, falling water tables, shrinking inland lakes and stream flows diminished to ecologically unsafe levels, leading most parts of the world to the threshold of water famine.
There are about 260 international rivers covering almost one half of the land surface of the globe and an untold number of shared aquifers providing fresh water to the people settled within these basins. Unfortunately, individual perceptions on water differ as each one sees water only by its use, thus leading to a fragmented approach in managing water. Most of the beneficiaries are obsessed by the use factor — drinking, industry, irrigation, environment, etc. — as if all are competing and not part of the whole ecological system complementing each other for sustainable development. There are also those who look at the administrative boundaries as the basis for decision making when these seldom conform to the catchment and basin areas that nature prescribes as the management units of water. They overlook the fact that water does not recognise political boundaries and it eludes legal generalisations.
Conflict resolution
Many do not subscribe to the view that water could become a source for wars in this century. According to them, once the basin states conclude treaties and establish water regimes, they are resilient enough to survive conflicts between otherwise hostile riparians engaged in skirmishes over other issues. They cite the Indus Waters Treaty which survived the two wars between India and Pakistan. They argue that there are many more such treaties and agreements entered into by some of the riparian states during the last century to utilise the water resources of their common rivers, thereby averting potential threats of war. To justify their views they quote the agreement signed in 1946 between Uruguay and Argentina regarding the Salto Grande project providing for equal rights of hydel power generated; the Itaipu Treaty of Paraguay and Brazil for the hydel development of the Parana River forming the boundary between the two; the 1959 Egyptian-Sudanese Agreement on the Nile waters emphasising on the existing uses, etc.
While these treaties/agreements were entered into under certain situations, there are also such treaties/agreements signed under compulsion. For example, in 1927 the former Soviet Union forced Turkey to enter into a treaty on equal sharing of the resource base on the river streams and brooks coinciding with the line of the frontier between the two countries. The U.S. and Mexico had signed a treaty on the Rio Grande in 1909 with the U.S. holding out the "Harmon Doctrine" that its rights as an upper riparian state were unlimited irrespective of whatever effect the unbridled exercise of these rights might have on the flow of the rivers in Mexico, the lower riparian state. However, while entering into a treaty on the water of the Columbia river with Canada (the upper riparian) in 1961-62, the U.S. (the lower riparian in this case) repudiated the same doctrine, since the application of this theory in this situation would be disadvantageous to it. As the demand for fresh water in these countries increased tremendously since the last few decades of operation of these treaties, disgruntlement is brewing among the affected parties with the feeling that their rightful share on these waters has been curtailed by past treaties/agreements. Since the beneficiaries may not like to compromise on their existing rights accumulated in the course of last many years, when these documents have to be revalidated for a further period and freshly concluded in this century it may prove to be a difficult task to continue with the provisions in the existing treaties/agreements. The resulting uncertainties may lead to an environment conducive to trigger conflicts since the international law in the present form is ineffective to arrest such a situation and the international institutions are not adequately equipped to resolve water disputes.
The Convention on the Non-Navigational Uses of International Water Courses adopted in 1997 by the U.N. General Assembly sets out many important principles for cooperation and joint management of such water courses though no practical enforcement mechanism has been provided to back up the decisions of the final arbiter — the International Court of Justice. Further, it provokes further disputes by institutionalising the two conflicting principles in the upstream-downstream uses of an International Waterway by emphasising both the "equitable use" and the "obligation not to cause significant harm." This would enable the upstream riparian to stress on the principle of "equitable use" while the downstream riparians could demand the protection of their pre-existing uses under the principle of "no significant harm." However, the Convention has been ratified by only 6 signatories so far against the requirement of 35 to make it a law.
Even within the nations, the upstream-downstream conflicts have caused embitterment among people. In India, in the case of the Cauvery river, legal battles are being fought by the upper and lower riparian States of Karnataka and Tamil Nadu, the former insisting on the principle of "equitable use" while the latter emphasising on the principle of "no significant harm" to protect their existing rights.
With the scenario of water being a non-substitutable resource, for which legal principles are vague and contradictory, which is becoming scarce with population growth and developmental activities, there is a compelling argument that the plausibility of water war in this century is not a myth but can be a reality.
The need for action
What can we do to avert such situations? How can we improve the availability of the fresh water to prevent the likelihood of water related violence? The root cause of the conflicts is the shortage of water and the solution lies in improving its availability — through storage and conservation by reducing wastage, by recycling and reuse.
Wherever the available water resources are not fully harnessed, as in the developing countries like India, there is need for major, medium and minor storages to be created on priority to tap the billions of cubic metres of the unutilised monsoon flows, which are being discharged into the sea every year. Agriculture is not only the world's largest water user in terms of volume claiming more than two-thirds of the water withdrawn from the earth's rivers, lakes and aquifers, it is also a relatively low value, low efficient and highly subsidised water user at present. In many places, as much as 60 per cent of water diverted for irrigation does not reach the crop since losses are tremendous. Cities divert precious water for distributing through leaky systems to under-paying or non-paying customers. Industries, cities and agriculture allow water to become polluted and large quantities are lost to unrecoverable contamination.
We should not allow such wastage to occur when there are means to improve the situation. Latest management practices in the irrigation system to result in better efficiency have to be adopted to save water. These would include modernisation and rehabilitation of inefficient systems and substitution of traditional systems stemming from a past era of plenty, with systems based on modern technology. Measures like demand oriented water management, adoption of improved irrigation methods and innovative water management technologies through appropriate technology transfer will help in reducing losses and thereby improving the fresh water availability. Recycling and reuse of drainage water would add to the availability of water. Transferring water from water surplus basins to water scarce regions can also enhance the availability of water in such areas.
The present mindset of a majority of the population is that water is government's business. This needs to be replaced by a model in which all major stakeholders participate at all levels. Without this change, technology solutions will be of no use. The change could be brought about by public awareness, education, identification and dissemination of best practices and incentives for action, thereby facilitating conservation of this precious resource and equitable distribution among the needy people.
Warning signals are already visible cautioning that the limit of renewable fresh water that the hydrological cycle can yield has already reached and such a situation cannot be continued forever. We should not wait for the crisis or flash point to occur since it is possible to face the problems in conserving and managing the resource though various short and long term measures, supported by action plans. It would then be easier to overwhelm the conflict inducing characteristics of water by developing a sustainable arrangement.
M.S. MENON
Former Chief Engineer, Central Water Commission

(The Hindu, 28th May, 2002)