Water Wars Dilemma For Lower Riparian Countries – OpEd

Water scarcity has emerged as a key issue in global geopolitics, particularly for lower riparian countries—those situated downstream of river systems shared with upstream states. The dependence of these nations on the water flow from upstream countries creates a complex dynamic, where geopolitical power, economic interests, and environmental sustainability collide. Countries that control the sources of major transboundary rivers often exert immense pressure on downstream nations, giving rise to tensions that can escalate into “water wars.” This essay critically examines the plight of lower riparian states, focusing on key examples where upstream countries assert control, leading to conflicts and challenges in water governance.

The concept of riparian rights, particularly the principle of “equitable and reasonable utilization,” is central to managing shared water resources. However, upstream countries often control the narrative and the actual flow of water. Their ability to alter, dam, or divert rivers places lower riparian states at the mercy of upstream actions. In such contexts, lower riparian nations face severe disadvantages as they are highly vulnerable to upstream water projects, which can dramatically affect their agriculture, economy, and livelihoods. The competition for freshwater resources intensifies as population growth and climate change further strain available water supplies.

The Nile River is one of the most contentious transboundary rivers, with Egypt and Sudan as lower riparian countries, heavily reliant on its waters. For decades, Egypt has held hegemonic control over the Nile, based on colonial-era treaties that granted it a lion’s share of the water. However, Ethiopia, as an upstream country, has begun to challenge Egypt’s dominance with the construction of the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD). Ethiopia’s dam is expected to significantly alter the flow of the Nile, reducing the amount of water reaching Sudan and Egypt. Egypt has repeatedly voiced concerns, claiming that GERD could trigger devastating water shortages, threatening its agriculture and drinking water supplies. Ethiopia, on the other hand, asserts its sovereign right to harness its natural resources to generate hydroelectric power, accusing Egypt of clinging to outdated treaties. The diplomatic standoff between these two nations highlights the leverage that upstream countries hold over downstream ones. Ethiopia's ability to dictate the flow of the Nile through the operation of GERD places Egypt in a vulnerable position, with its entire water supply at risk. While negotiations continue, Ethiopia’s assertive stance demonstrates how upstream countries can use water as a geopolitical tool, leaving downstream states struggling to secure their water needs.

India's control over transboundary rivers such as the Indus and Brahmaputra exemplifies another scenario, where an upstream country wields substantial influence over its lower riparian neighbors. Pakistan, a lower riparian country dependent on the Indus River, faces constant water insecurity due to India’s projects upstream. The 1960 Indus Waters Treaty governs water-sharing between the two countries, yet India has frequently been accused of constructing dams and diverting water, which could impact the downstream flow to Pakistan. These actions heighten tensions, particularly given the already hostile political relationship between the two nuclear-armed neighbors.

India's upstream control over the Brahmaputra River also presents significant challenges for Bangladesh, a lower riparian state. India’s plans for building dams and diverting water from the Brahmaputra have raised alarms in Bangladesh, where agriculture and food security are closely tied to the river’s flow. These projects could reduce water availability in Bangladesh, potentially triggering droughts, disrupting fisheries, and causing environmental damage. India's dominant hydrological position in South Asia allows it to shape water access for both Pakistan and Bangladesh, creating regional instability and deepening mistrust.

China’s role as an upstream country in multiple transboundary river systems places it in a highly influential position in Asia. The Mekong River, which flows from China through several Southeast Asian countries—including Laos, Thailand, Cambodia, and Vietnam—has become a source of contention. China’s construction of a series of dams on the upper Mekong (known as the Lancang in China) has drastically altered the river’s flow, causing severe downstream impacts.

Cambodia and Vietnam, as lower riparian countries, have seen significant disruptions to agriculture and fisheries, which are critical to their economies. During dry seasons, China’s dams allow it to restrict or release water as it sees fit, controlling the downstream flow. The lack of a legally binding agreement between China and the lower Mekong countries has left these nations with limited options to challenge China’s upstream control. As China continues to develop hydropower projects, the downstream countries remain at the mercy of Chinese water policy, which prioritizes its own energy and development needs over regional cooperation.

Turkey’s control over the Tigris and Euphrates rivers has placed it at odds with downstream countries like Syria and Iraq, where water is already a scarce resource. Turkey’s Southeastern Anatolia Project, which includes the construction of numerous dams and reservoirs, has significantly reduced the flow of water downstream. This has created severe water shortages in Iraq and Syria, leading to agricultural crises, declining water quality, and public health concerns.

Iraq, as a lower riparian state, is particularly vulnerable. Turkey’s upstream actions have been accused of exacerbating droughts and undermining Iraq’s water security, with devastating effects on its agricultural sector. Water has also become a political weapon in this context, with Turkey using its control over the rivers as leverage in broader geopolitical negotiations. The situation demonstrates the enormous power that upstream countries can wield over downstream neighbors, often leaving the latter in a precarious position where diplomatic solutions are hard to find.

It is feared that next wars will be predicated on the conflicts related to water and its distribution amongst the neighbourly or adjoining countries. The dilemma of water wars for lower riparian countries like Pakistan becomes both geopolitical and humanitarian in its essence. The actions of upstream nations like India, whether driven by development, energy needs, or geopolitical strategies, often leave downstream countries at risk of severe water shortages and environmental degradation. Ethiopia, India, China, and Turkey are all examples of upstream nations that have exerted significant control over transboundary water resources, placing lower riparian states in vulnerable positions.