CPDS 532: Natural Resource ConflictUnit III: Water and Minerals

a. Water Resource and Conflict at Different Levels (Local, Regional or sub-

national and International)

Prof. Hem Raj Subedi, Ph.D.Department of Conflict, Peace and Development Studies

Tribhuvan University, Kathmanduhemrsubedi@gmail.com

Water Conflict

• Water-related conflicts can take many forms, and can arise in relation to river waters or other surface water bodies or groundwater, between different uses, areas or political units: in many different contexts; and over diverse issues.• Current fashionable thesis is that water-related conflicts will increase in frequency and intensity in the future and will lead to ‘water wars’.• Pressure on the world’s finite supplies of freshwater increases for a number of reasons, which have caused conflicts between uses, areas, groups, States or provinces, or countries.

Water Conflict at Local Level

• Water flow is highly seasonal. Water is difficult for many communities, especially in the dry season.• It limits hydroelectricity, irrigation and drinking. Availability of water varies from place to place.• The competition between industrial, urban, and agricultural use for natural resources is mounting and the per capital consumption of natural resources is increasing (JHPIP, 1998).• Scarcity of water causes conflict in society which can turn into bloody fighting. • Drought has also caused fatal conflict.

Water Conflict at Regional Level

• Regional conflicts over water are brewing and could turn violent as shortages grow.• In all continents and countries, people are already bickering over access to natural resources and competition for their use can be fiercer in the future. •E.g. serious conflicts are developing concerning large dams: a. Lesotho Highlands Water Project in the Malibamatso and Little Orange Rivers in South African b. Arun Hydropower Project in the Arun River in Nepal funded by the World Bank. • There is conflict over river catchments and lakes. Dams such as the Three Gorges Dam in China have become symbols of official tyranny, with whole cities being flooded and engineers being given free reign to resettle population living inconveniently in the river valleys (Ohlsson, 1995).

Inter-country / Intra-country Conflict

• Inter-country or intra-country conflicts over water seem often to arise in the context of large projects. Within India, the Cauvery dispute arose because dams and reservoirs build by the State of Karnataka had the effect of reducing the flows into the Mettur reservoir in Tamil Nadu. • Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh have dispute over the formers Alamatti Project on the Krishna river. • Even within a State, a large project often creates conflicts of interest (sometimes acute) between different groups or areas.

Inter-country / Intra-country Conflict

• Large projects tend to become the foci of conflicts because: (a) they tend to alter geography and hydrological

regimes, sometimes drastically, and (b) they involve issues of control, power and political

relations, social justice and equity.• Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh have dispute over the formers Alamatti Project on the Krishna river. • Even within a State, a large project often creates conflicts of interest (sometimes acute) between different groups or areas.

Inter-country / Intra-country Conflict

Transboundary Conflicts: Factors and Concerns: Many instances of transboundary conflicts. Some resolved through treaties or agreements or adjudications, and some still simmering.Two basic factors:a. Structures on rivers such as dams or barrages

that interfere with natural flowsb. A wide divergence of perception between upper

and lower riparians.

Inter-country / Intra-country Conflict

Riparian Divergence• Divergence between upper and lower riparians takes many forms and varies from case to case. • Upper riparians tend to assume control over the volume of water going lower riparian. • Low riparians assert their rights to established uses and to object to reduction in the volume of water. Good examples are: India-Bangladesh and Karnataka-Tamil Nadu.

Inter-country / Intra-country Conflict

Riparian Divergence• The problem becomes more serious when the upper riparian is stronger and powerful (e.g. India-Bangladesh) • In some cases where lower riparian is more powerful is able to impose its will to relatively weaker riparian (e.g. Nepal-India, Egypt vis-à-vis Ethiopia and Sudan in relation to the Nile). There are ten riparian countries — Egypt, Sudan, Ethiopia, Uganda, Tanzania, Kenya, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Rwanda, Burundi, and Eritrea. Three of the ten — Egypt, Sudan and Ethiopia — are far more important than the remaining seven

Inter-country / Intra-country Conflict

Environmental Concerns• Reduction of flows because of upstream dams or barrages or because of heavy upstream water use can also have serious environmental / ecological impacts in the downstream areas within a country or beyond its borders, e.g. Hungary and Slovakia over the half-completed Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Project on the Danube river basin.

Inter-country / Intra-country Conflict

Security Concerns• Security concerns about water can go beyond worries about availability, and become apprehensions of deliberate harm or damage, or the use of water as a weapon of war or poisoning of water. • Lower riparians have always fear of drying up the river and denial of water or holding back the water and then releasing it suddenly in large quantity as flood causing wipeout, e.g. (a) India river linking project has given rise to acute ‘water security’ apprehension in Bangladesh (b) fear of this kind lies behind Pakistan’s objection to some of the proposed Indian projects on the Jhelum and the Chenab rivers in the Indus system.

Transboundary Water Conflicts

Principles for Transboundary Conflicts• What are the principles to resolve transboundary water disputes or conflict?- Is it the Harmon Doctrine, i.e., sovereign of the territory through? or - Is it perspective rights, i.e. rights to historic flows? or-Is it prior appropriation?None of the above has been found approving for resolution.The internationally acceptable principle is equitable sharing for beneficial uses.

Transboundary Water Conflicts

Principles for Transboundary Conflicts-Old Helsinki Rules based on the report of the Committee on the Uses of the Waters of International Rivers adopted by the International Law Association at the 52nd Conference held at Helsinki in August 1966. It contains 6 Chapters and 37 Articles.Some other provisions include:- Participation of watercourse States in use, development and protection of resources in an equitable reasonable manner- Avoidance of adverse effect or conflict by the countries whose boundary is connected to river system.

Trans-boundary Water Conflicts

Principles for Trans-boundary Conflicts- the guidance to upper riparian making it conscious about avoiding harms and conflicts to or between lower riparian while exercise power as rights

Transboundary Water Conflicts

Water and Politics- Intra country (political units, interest groups) and inter country dynamic and complex relationship water issues- Dynamics of political scenario changes time to time. There is no conflict all the time which leads to a worse situation. Water issue becomes prominent when it has a decisive impact on the political relationship.- ‘Politicisation’ of water issue is inevitable. It has negative impacts on further development or efforts to resolution, e.g. The Ganga water issue was politicised more in Bangladesh than in India. It made the Cauvery dispute more difficult hampering the working of the constitutional conflict resolution led by the Supreme Court officials of India.

Transboundary Water Conflicts

Water and Politics-The Mahakali Treaty between India and Nepal which has become non-operrative as a result of heavy politicisation.

Track II Initiatives-Refers to Initiatives taken by non-official or ‘Track II’ in the process of resolution of disputes, e.g.- Madras Institute of Development Studies brought the farmers of Karnataka and Tamil Nadu together to promote understanding and find a way out regarding the issue of Cauvery dispute.- Such initiatives help to counter the harmful effects of politicisation to some extent.

Transboundary Water Conflicts

Regional Cooperation-In the context of inter-country river water disputes, regional cooperation is often strongly urged. There are some issues that call for regional cooperation between two countries or units.

Regional Cooperation-Regional cooperation is strongly sought in the context of inter-country water disputes.- There are some problems and issues that are best dealt on a national or local level while some call for regional cooperation.

Transboundary Water Conflicts

Integration and Segmentation-When hydrological and ecological unities are cut across by political divisions, whether within a country or between countries, there are three possibilities:(a) The joint, cooperative, integrated planning and management of the river as a system(b) Separate actions by the different political entities involved but with some degree of institutional coordination(c) separate, segmented actions by the different entities without any integration or coordination, eg. The division of the river system into two segments in the Indus case- There are two aspects: First, a treaty or an agreement which is better than dispute. Second, ‘integrated river basin management’ approach which forms a natural hydrological unit.

Transboundary Water Conflicts

Adjudication (Final Judgment of a Legal Proceeding): Some Limitations- In many cases adjudication has been working as successful remedy for resolution such as in Ravi-beas and Cauvery cases. However, there are some procedural and operational difficulties: (1) Adjudication may not be the best way of resolving a dispute. It

only offer a last-resort mechanism for the settlement of disputes when other means like negotiations, conciliation or mediations have failed.

(2) It promotes maximal claims on either side, and becomes an adversarial and divisive process. (3) A more serious consequence of the adjudication process is that the concerned States might tend to build dams and barrages not because they need but intending to show they are utilizing the shares allocated to them.

Transboundary Water Conflicts

Root Cause of Conflicts- Conflicts over water often arise because of claims and counter-claims. Each party demands more and more, - e.g. In the Ravi-Bease case, Punjab feels that its water is being taken away by others, but Haryana and Rajasthan feel that river allocations are under threat.- In Cauvery case, both Karnataka and Tamil Nadu want a larger share of water.- The question is how much share each party really needs.- Supply tend to demand more supply.

Transboundary Water Conflicts

Root Cause of Conflicts- e.g. paddy in Punjab was unknown earlier. Now there is more desire to expand with multiple crops which demand more water.-There is always a demand for more and still more water. So Karnataka and Tamil Nadu fight over the Cauvery, and Punjab terminates all water accords.- But from where more water will come?- To get more water big dams and canals are constructed, and such constriction invites more conflicts.- Agreements, accords and treaties may temporarily bring peace, but conflict will again erupt unless we fail to learn the meaning of ‘development’.

THANK YOU