originally posted on CA-News.org (Russian)by Ryan Weber
photo credit: Flikr/Sarah Olmstead
Water is the source of life, but in the Central Asian states along the Amu Darya it has also become a source of current and future strife. Unsustainable water management policies put in place during the Soviet Union continue, without dramatic change, 20 years after independence. In that time, Amu Darya ecosystems were decimated, the Aral Sea virtually disappeared, agriculture is struggling to maintain production levels, and countries are unable to provide citizens’ basic power needs. Even worse, while many of these unprecedented impacts are irreversible, policy makers along the Amu Darya bitterly contest any changes. The predictable result is further degradation and increasing regional tensions.
A new report (PDF) by the Environment and Security Initiative of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) clarifies the nature of these tensions, and provides recommendations for how all parties involved can reach equitable, sustainable solutions. Without favoring one political or economic sector, the report describes how Soviet-level central planning and resource distribution led to the creation of immense irrigations projects in the Uzbek and Turkmen SSRs. This was made possible only by the controlled release of water from massive hydroelectric dams in the ‘upstream’ Tajik and Kyrgyz Republics. In return, these mountainous countries received electricity and fuels from their water-hungry, but energy-rich, neighbors during the harsh months of winter. There was no need to quantify or justify such exchanges, nor any need to design infrastructure for the individual Republics that could function independently. That is, not until the collapse of the Soviet Union.
In the new resource landscape of the early 1990s, former-Soviet Republics did not exercise control over the very resources necessary to make their economies functional. Without central planning, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Tajikistan each sought to protect and promote their own national interests, with no concern for regional sustainability. Tajikistan turned to hydroelectric dams to supply its power generation, and today gets 98% of its electricity from this source. The Nurek dam provides ¾ of that total, and is located along the Vakhsh river, a major tributary of the Amu Darya. In the spring and summer, the Nurek holds back water, storing it up for release in the winter to turn its hydro turbines. But spring and summer are exactly when Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan need water the most to irrigate their large cotton and food crops, which account for 25 and 28 percent of national GDP, respectively.
This is the crux of the “water-energy nexus,” a term used to describe the contentious dispute between downstream users of water for agriculture and upstream nations which rely on water for energy generation. It is a conflict both of priority and timing in which, under current circumstances, no one country can get what it needs without damaging the interests of a neighbor.
During the Soviet era, and continuing informally since 1991, priority in this balance has always been given to agriculture. Recent events have not changed this situation, though Dushanbe is increasingly willing to play a game of brinksmanship in an effort to draw out better terms. Tashkent and Ashgabat, in return, employ greater economic pressure to force Tajikistan to capitulate on water issues. With no long-term framework to guide Amu Darya water management, these recurring negotiations become more volatile each year.
While water and energy are the predominant concerns in this debate, there is a third component of this nexus: the environment. The UNEP report pays great attention to this issue, from the impacts of fortified borders on biodiversity to the shrinking turgai forests of the Amu Darya delta. It also provides recommendations for how the riparian states of Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan can resolve more permanent, balanced, and sustainable water management policies.
Unfortunately, this is where the UNEP report is at its weakest. Despite the grave consequences of continued inaction, the best recommendations it has to offer are improved dialogue, cooperation, trust-building, and modernization within and among the Amu Darya basin states. Upstream countries should employ more energy efficient technologies to reduce their total power need, while downstream countries should adopt less wasteful farming practices. If the involved governments are not able to reach mutually-acceptable terms, they should turn over the issue to international arbitration. Environmental and concerned citizen groups should be included in the negotiating process.
While all of these recommendations are laudable –even necessary to achieve a sustainable long-term symbiosis between riparian states – none of them have a remote chance of being implemented in the near term. The addition of Afghanistan as a party to any regional water management arrangement, as the UNEP report also recommends, can only further hinder such efforts.
As dire as the situation seems now, the impacts of a changing climate will heighten inter-state water tensions in the years and decades to come. The Aral Sea, now largely converted to the Aral Kum, previously played the role of a climate regulator for the region. With its disappearance, high temperatures in summer and lows in winter have become increasingly extreme. In addition, the average annual surface temperature of all 4 states (including Afghanistan) consistently increased over the past 50 years, by an average of 0.1 to 0.2 degrees Celsius per decade, while precipitation levels remained flat, or even declined over this period. Glaciers, which provide crucial Amu Darya in-flow, are melting more, and faster, than in the past, raising annual water levels, but also fears of diminished outflow in the future.
The ramifications of a future Central Asia without glaciers are even more devastating than Central Asia without the Aral Sea today.
Until all nations which share in the bounty of the Amu Darya come to terms with the dramatic changes facing the region, none are likely to adopt the radical changes to infrastructure, economy, and political process necessary to maintain current lifestyles. While the UNEP report concludes that, “in the next 5 to 10 years, the issue of water, agriculture and energy is the main political question which Central Asian states and Afghanistan will have to address,” the demonstrated history of these states since 1991 suggests otherwise. Afghan security, economic stability, and political succession are just some of the issues likely to distract policymakers.
But not the river. With each passing year, and with every wasted drop, the Amu Darya is writing the future of Central Asia. Whether the region prospers, or perishes, will be decided somewhere between the Pamir glaciers and whatever remains of the Aral Sea. The best thing local, national, and regional leaders can do is to recognize the primacy of this fact, and begin to treat the issue with appropriate urgency and priority.
No comments:
Post a Comment