Center for a New American Security

While the historical record shows that no states have ever fought a war over transboundary water resources, such resources have long served as focal points for potential conflict. But despite growing water scarcity in regions of the world – due in part to global population growth and increased drought in those regions – there are still great efforts among states to negotiate and even cooperate over many contentious and increasingly constrained water resources. 

Two examples strike me as being particularly relevant to U.S. national security: the Nile Basin Initiative and the Mekong River Commission.  The Nile Basin Initiative (NBI) is a partnership of all 10 Nile Basin riparians to develop the river in a cooperative manner, share the socio-economic benefits, such as hydropower, that the river provides and “promote regional peace and security.”  Similarly the Mekong River Commission, an agreement between Cambodia, Laos, Thailand and Vietnam and with China and Burma as “dialogue partners” but not full participants, is meant to help regional riparians to manage the Mekong River’s shared water resources and develop the economic potential of the river.  

Both organizations are good examples of integrated water resource management, a process to manage a river or body of water as a whole to maximize the development potential of an entire river.  Yet both organizations are still missing a crucial piece: that is, the cooperation of the most powerful state in the river basin and the state that has historically been able to control the river’s water resources. 

Not surprisingly, water challenges continue to exacerbate tensions between India and Pakistan. Yesterday, The New York Times reported that India, in an effort to feed the insatiable energy appetite of an economy projected to grow by 9.4 percent this fiscal year, has planned to build several hydroelectric dams over the next decade. One planned project is a hydroelectric dam on the Indian-administered side of Kashmir in an upstream valley where waters from the Himalayan glaciers eventually flow through Indian Kashmir and into Pakistan. According to the Times, “In Pakistan, the project raises fears that India, its archrival and the upriver nation, would have the power to manipulate the water flowing to its agriculture industry — a quarter of its economy and employer of half its population.”

Despite a half-century of cooperation over water in the Indus basin, increasing apprehension between India and Pakistan over those resources has added another layer of complexity to an already complex and disjointed relationship; one mired by longstanding, cultural, social and political grievances and mistrust. As the Times reported, “The fight here is adding a new layer of volatility at a critical moment to one of the most fraught relationships anywhere, one between deeply distrustful, nuclear-armed nations who have already fought three wars.”

Last week, the Water Matters @ Columbia blog at the Earth Institute at Columbia University had an interesting post on a project underway at the Columbia Water Center where researchers are working to identify the complex environmental, political and economic challenges developing in Central Asia (Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, and Kazakhstan) around water issues. “A small nutshell description of a vastly complex situation: The five states are connected by two major rivers, the Syr Darya and the Amu Darya, which are fundamental to their survival,” writes Julia Hitz.

According to Hitz, during the Cold War, the upstream (Kyrgzstan and Tajikistan) and downstream (Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan) states had viable, mutually supportive relationships by which the upstream states, during the wetter seasons, produced electricity using hydroelectric energy facilities. During the drier seasons, upstream states released more water flow to their southern neighbors to use for irrigation, reducing their own energy production. In return, downstream states provided coal and natural gas to supplement their neighbor’s energy requirements. “This worked well enough as long as the Soviet State was enforcing the transactions,” Hitz notes.

Changes in the character of warfare are accelerating the growing reliance on contractors on the battlefield. . . Long-term nation-building efforts like those in Iraq and Afghanistan require an array of functions – from advising and training foreign security forces to constructing and maintaining power plants and waterworks – that the U.S. government is not manned to carry out on its own

This is a passage under the heading “The Changing Nature of Conflict,” in CNAS’s new report, Contracting in Conflicts: The Path to Reform.

Though discussion of Natural Security issues don’t figure prominently in the report, Richard Fontaine and Dr. John Nagl, the report’s authors, have teed up an array of topics to be explored deeper by persons such as myself. In addition to the abovementioned “power plants and water works,” Contracting in Conflict explains that contractors have found themselves filling the position of agricultural technician, energy infrastructure (re)constructionist, supply convoy security and a host of other necessary roles in the modern battlefield, both during and after the actual battle.

• How is India looking to obtain Iranian natural gas without routing through Pakistan? Ironically, running the pipe through water, the source of much tension between the two states, reports Times of India.
• According to Russian news source RT, Putin has confirmed the August opening date of a Russian built nuclear power plant in Iran.
• Check out Grist's "Top 5 Things to Watch," on the climate legislation.
• Tajikistan looks to ease tensions with Uzbekistan through reaffirming its commitment to water sharing, reports The Canadian Press.
• Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty announces that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad arrived in Tajikistan looking to gain a role in energy and water projects and dialogue.

• The U.S. Army awards $3.5million in contracts for energy security initiatives on installations, reports UPI.
• Check out this interesting project idea on utilizing solar energy for U.S. Coast Guard vessels on Tech Brief's design contest.
• President Obama looks to build ties with Azerbaijan, declaring "Azerbaijan's leadership in the development for a Southern Corridor for energy has also increased regional prosperity and enhanced global energy security," according to Reuters. 
• The Business Standard discusses water issues between India and Pakistan amidst the failure of last week's water dialogue between both nations.
• China has overtaken the United States in new energy investments, reports Investor's Business Daily.

• According to Business Week, Turkmenistan will begin production of a $2billion gas pipeline to the West to provide an alternative to Russian energy.
• Pakistan and India are looking to establish a deal over two large hydroelectric plants in Kashmir, according to the Daily Times.
• Though the reference may be a bit outdated, San Fransisco's Bay News uses Avatar to frame conflict minerals in the Congo.
• China has announced even tighter controls on their strategic rare earth resources, reports China's own People's Daily.
• Reuters reports that Iran may have plans to cut national subsidies on electricity, water and food to Afghan refugees who have moved into Iran. 

A little pop analysis. Here are the number of mentions of our major natural security topics in the just-released National Security Strategy:

Energy: 49
Climate Change: 28
Food: 9
Agriculture: 3 (including specifically regarding India and Afghanistan)
Water: 1
Demographic: 1
Urbanization: 1
Commodities: 1
Conservation (forests): 1
Minerals: 0

By comparison - and this is very interesting:

Intelligence: 18
Nuclear (energy and other): 74
Engagement: 43
Development: 76
Military: 44

That's right, folks. The new NSS mentions "energy" more than "engagement" or "military." And "climate change" appears more than "intelligence."

And for full context, here is a word cloud of the document (note: removed the words "United States").

One of the things I find myself doing time and again while checking out any lengthy defense document is looking at the broad array of projects DOD branches will be, theoretically, undertaking. One of the common characteristics, however, is that due to the large volume of potential projects they often are simply listed and the really cool ones (read: Natural Security-related ones) get buried amidst projects to increase the number of portojohns at Wright-Patt AFB in Dayton, Ohio and the like (though that’s not a real project).

Check out eleven cool projects (including their costs and location in the FY 2011 NDAA), all of them are mapped out to their exact location, thanks to Google Earth!

• President Obama has extended a moratorium on offshore drilling in the Gulf of Mexico and the Arctic for the remainder of the year, according to the Associated Press.
• The Washington Post talks jet fuel for U.S. military installations in Kyrgyzstan and corruption.
• Congress is taking steps to confront the trade of conflict minerals, such as coltan, tin, gold and wolframite, in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, reports theHuffington Post. 
• A nod to our friends at Naval Air Station Fort Worth, Texas who have made strides in boosting their energy and water efficiencies, seen in this Star-Telegram article.
• The United States may extend technical assistance programs in energy to the Ukraine, reports UPI.