20.10.2014 Views

Europe - UNEP

Europe - UNEP

Europe - UNEP

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Fish market, Brugge, Belgium. Photo credit: Sandra Arbogast.<br />

diversion, or irrigation scheme—or in its political<br />

setting, especially the breakup of a nation that<br />

results in new international rivers. The second<br />

factor is that existing institutions are unable to<br />

absorb and effectively manage that change.<br />

This is typically the case when there is no treaty<br />

spelling out each nation’s rights and<br />

responsibilities with regard to the shared river,<br />

nor any implicit agreements or cooperative<br />

arrangements. Even the existence of technical<br />

working groups can provide some capability to<br />

manage contentious issues, as they have in the<br />

Middle East.<br />

The overarching lesson of the study is that<br />

unilateral actions to construct a dam or river<br />

diversion in the absence of a treaty or institutional<br />

mechanism that safeguards the interests of other<br />

countries in the basin is highly destabilizing to a<br />

region, often spurring decades of hostility before<br />

cooperation is pursued. In other words, the red<br />

flag for water-related tension between countries is<br />

not water stress per se, as it is within countries,<br />

but rather the unilateral exercise of domination of<br />

an international river, usually by a regional power.<br />

In the Jordan River Basin, for example,<br />

violence broke out in the mid-1960s over an “all-<br />

Arab” plan to divert the river’s headwaters (itself<br />

a pre-emptive move to thwart Israel’s intention to<br />

siphon water from the Sea of Galilee). Israel and<br />

Syria sporadically exchanged fire between March<br />

1965 and July 1966. Water-related tensions in<br />

the basin persisted for decades and only recently<br />

have begun to dissipate.<br />

A similar sequence of events transpired in<br />

the Nile basin, which is shared by 10 countries—<br />

of which Egypt is last in line. In the late 1950s,<br />

hostilities broke out between Egypt and Sudan<br />

over Egypt’s planned construction of the High<br />

Dam at Aswan. The signing of a treaty between<br />

the two countries in 1959 defused tensions<br />

before the dam was built. But no water-sharing<br />

agreement exists between Egypt and Ethiopia,<br />

where some 55% of the Nile’s flow originates,<br />

and a war of words has raged between these two<br />

nations for decades. As in the case of the Jordan,<br />

in recent years the Nile nations have begun to<br />

work cooperatively toward a solution thanks in<br />

part to unofficial dialogues among scientists and<br />

technical specialists that have been held since the<br />

early 1990s, and more recently a ministerial-level<br />

“Nile Basin Initiative” facilitated by the United<br />

Nations and the World Bank.<br />

1.2.2 Intranational Waters<br />

The second set of security issues occurs at the<br />

sub-national level. Much literature on trans-<br />

12 — Hydropolitical Vulnerability and Resilience along International Waters: <strong>Europe</strong>

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!