Water Scarcity and Climate Change: Navigating their Geopolitical Impact on regional and Global Security

In his speech delivered on the 25th anniversary of Throne Day, which took place on June 30, 2024, King Mohammed VI emphasized the critical interconnection between water, energy, and food security. He called for strategic measures to ensure the sustainable management of water resources, stating:

“The challenges facing our country require us to redouble our efforts and vigilance, to design innovative solutions, and to subordinate management models to the rules of good governance.”

One of these major challenges is the water problem, which continues to become more complex due to drought, the impact of climate change and the natural growth in demand.”

Indeed, the nexus of water resources scarcity and climate change not only shapes domestic politics and stability but also the geopolitics and international security. 

The former Egyptian Minister of State for Foreign Affairs and former UN Secretary General, Butros Butros Ghali, famously stated after the second Gulf War, “The next war in the Middle East will not be fought for oil, but for water.” This statement has been echoed by many politicians. For example, shortly before becoming president of Turkey, Süleyman Demirel declared that the waters of the Euphrates and Tigris belonged to Turkey, just as oil belongs to the Arabs (Under President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, there has been a collaborative and moderated approach to managing transboundary river issues.). Rafael Eytan, former Israeli Minister of Agriculture, declared in 1990 in full-page advertisements in the Jerusalem Post that Israel would never cede the West Bank to the Palestinians or Golan Heights to Syria because Israel’s water supply would otherwise be endangered (the “hydraulic imperative” Israeli doctrine posits that the pursuit of water resources has been a key factor driving Israeli military actions). Finally, Ismail Serageldin, vice president of the World Bank, declared in 1995 that “the wars of the next century will be over water.” These statements are reflective of the prevailing sentiment in the Middle East and other parts of the world regarding the issue of international freshwater resources.

In recent years, droughts and water scarcity have emerged as major geopolitical challenges, undermining the political, social, and economic stability of nations globally. The growing shortage of water impacts everything from food security to health and sanitation, driving competition over diminishing resources and threatening regional peace. In particular, countries sharing critical river basins, such as the Nile and Mekong, are increasingly locked in disputes over access and control. As water supplies dwindle and demand rises, these tensions are intensifying, with the potential to further destabilize regions reliant on these vital resources for their survival.

Read also: King Mohammed VI: Preserving Water is a National Responsibility

Historically, access to water has been a source of conflict. Countries have fought over water resources, especially in arid regions where fresh water supplies are scarce. While there have been many disputes over water rights and usage, few wars have been fought solely over this issue. Throughout history, major conflicts over water have significantly influenced geopolitical dynamics. For example, early disputes include the war between the Mesopotamian city-states of Lagash and Umma around 2500 B.C. over irrigation canals. In the ancient Mediterranean, control of key water sources and supply routes played a crucial role in the conflicts between the Roman Empire and Carthage during the Punic Wars (264-146 B.C.). More recent conflicts include disputes over the Nile River among East African nations, particularly intensified by the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD) in the 21st century; the Indus River between India and Pakistan since their partition in 1947; and the Jordan River in the Middle East, which has influenced regional relations since the 20th century. The Tigris-Euphrates basin has also been a source of contention among Iraq, Turkey, and Syria, with tensions ongoing in recent decades. These conflicts highlight the enduring significance of water in global politics and its role in shaping both ancient and contemporary struggles for resource control.

The literature on climate change and conflict increasingly recognizes climate change as a threat multiplier, exacerbating pre-existing tensions such as territorial and ideological disputes, as well as strategic rivalries. However, beyond climatic factors, structural drivers such as poverty, institutional fragility, mistrust, inequality, and deficits in information and infrastructure also contribute to these tensions. In contrast, resilient and well-functioning institutions are seen as threat minimizers, fostering cooperation and conflict resolution, thereby enhancing human security.

Scholars such as Aaron Wolf and Brahma Chellaney emphasize that the management of shared water resources can either lead to cooperation or conflict, highlighting the necessity of diplomatic frameworks and strategic management to prevent disputes. 

Furthermore, John Anthony Allan’s concept of “virtual water” underscores the global interconnections of water use, while Peter Gleick links water scarcity and climate variability to human security and conflict. Additionally, the impact of climate change on political stability is explored by Thomas Homer-Dixon and Marc Levy, who demonstrate how environmental stress can heighten tensions and disrupt governance. Moreover, Jon Barnett and Khalid Koser address how climate-driven displacement and migration contribute to instability. 

Climate change, water scarcity, and hydropolitics 

The concept of hydropolitics has gained prominence as climate change, population growth, and economic development increase the pressure on shared rivers, lakes, and aquifers. Water scarcity and the unequal distribution of resources are driving both cooperation and conflict, often becoming a flashpoint for disputes between nations, communities, and economic groups. Climate change exacerbates these dynamics, deepening the risk of resource-based conflict, radicalization, and political instability across the globe.

Worldwide, the gap between increasing water demand and available resources is widening. In western countries, such as Australia and USA, domestic water disputes are managed through legal processes or peaceful negotiations, however, in many regions, the severity of water scarcity and inadequate conflict-resolution mechanisms lead to more acute and often violent confrontations. Water has emerged as a key factor in global geopolitics, shaping international relations and domestic political stability in profound ways as indicated. 

Commonly, Upstream Countries view the portions of rivers within their territory as sovereign assets, asserting their right to use the water as they like. Actions such as water diversions or dam constructions can significantly impact downstream countries, sparking tensions and strong reactions. While wars over water are rare, these disputes are more accurately classified as low-intensity conflicts (i.e political, economic, or military confrontations that fall short of full-scale war but exceed peaceful competition) (US Army and US Air Force, 1991). However, in extreme cases, cutting off a nation’s water supply may be viewed as a casus belli, potentially leading to high-intensity conflict (Selina Ho, 2017).

A notable example is current tensions between Egypt and Ethiopia over the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam have increased the risk of conflict, potentially involving proxies in the Horn of Africa, including Somalia, Somaliland or Eritrea. Additionally, Russia’s bombing of a dam on the North Crimean Canal, which Ukraine had previously blocked since Russia’s 2014 annexation, highlights how water and infrastructure can be used as tools of power and conflict. Even though the war isn’t about Crimea’s water, this incident underscores the strategic use of water and infrastructure in geopolitical disputes illustrating how control over water can be used as a weapon of political leverage.

– At the domestic level, Climate change, water scarcity, and desertification combined with social, economic, and political factors can exacerbate disputes between farmers and pastoralists by intensifying competition for limited resources. In the absence of effective dispute resolution mechanisms, these tensions can escalate into violence. Violence, in turn, can lead to further livelihood deterioration when insecurity limits access to pastures and water resources. The ensuing political instability creates a favorable environment for violent actors, perpetuating a cycle of conflict and insecurity particularly in the Sahel and East Africa (Benjaminsen & Ba, Schmeier et al., 2019; Selby et al., 2017).

Moreover, water stress can be strategically exploited by non-state actors, including violent extremist organizations (VEOs), insurgents, and other belligerents. In many cases, these groups manipulate control over water resources to increase their power, recruit new members, and further their agendas. For instance, in conflicts involving VEOs across Africa and the Middle East—such as in the Sahel, Somalia (with Al-Shabaab), Yemen, Libya, and Syria and Iraq (with ISIS)—water infrastructure has been deliberately or accidentally damaged, worsening existing shortages. As a result, non-state actors exploit these conditions to control, coerce, or punish civilian populations. For example, in the Lake Chad basin, Boko Haram has thrived amidst decades of water stress and the dramatic shrinking of Lake Chad. The insurgency leverages water scarcity to attract recruits by offering economic opportunities and more stable livelihoods.

Besides, still at domestic level, water scarcity is increasingly fueling tensions both within countries. Climate change, dwindling water supplies, rapid population growth, and the politicization of water resources have exacerbated internal unrest, as seen in protests over water access in Iran’s Khuzestan, Iraq’s Basra, and across Algeria. In Algeria, severe shortages have sparked widespread dissatisfaction, with protests over water rationing and mismanagement. These domestic pressures, coupled with weak governance, risk spilling over into regional tensions, particularly in areas reliant on shared transboundary water sources. 

Water as a Geopolitical Lever and interstate Conflict Multiplier

Globally, there are 310 rivers that cross the boundaries of two or more countries. Riparian countries, both upstream and downstream, often experience more tensions than cooperation due to divergent interests related to water quantity, water quality, hydropower infrastructure development, flood management, navigation, economic development, environmental issues, and climate change consequences, among others.

Water disputes are escalating due to climate change, with notable tensions over shared rivers like the Nile, Mekong, and Indus, as well as within countries like Iran and Iraq. Additionally, conflicts over the Tigris and Euphrates rivers between Turkey and its neighbors, including Iraq and Syria, further demonstrate how water management can affect regional stability.

The worldwide distribution of water conflicts reveals notable regional disparities. Asia, with 37% of the total, faces the highest incidence of conflicts due to its dense population, transboundary rivers, and pressures from rapid industrialization and climate change. Africa follows with 28%, driven by severe water scarcity, desertification, and geopolitical tensions over shared rivers. Effective solutions for these regions require enhanced cooperative frameworks and sustainable management practices to address the complex interplay of environmental and demographic factors.

According to UNEP analysis (2016), the regional patterns across water categories reveal that Southern Asia is most at risk (Indus river, Mekong), with its river basins and Large Marine Ecosystems showing high average risks across various themes. Northern and Southern America, Northern Africa & Western Asia, and Eastern Europe each have two water categories at low risk and another two at moderate risk, while the Oceania-Micronesia Central Pacific region is at low socioeconomic and biophysical risk.

Distribution of Water Conflicts by Region

In contrast, Europe (6%), the Americas (5%), and Oceania (2%) experience fewer water conflicts. Europe benefits from established management frameworks and stable resources, while the Americas and Oceania enjoy relatively abundant water resources and effective governance. These lower conflict rates suggest that while high-conflict regions need targeted policy interventions and cooperative efforts, lower-conflict areas can continue to maintain stability through their existing management structures.

– Interstate level water conflicts  

Strategic reports and many studies consistently highlight that full-scale interstate wars over water alone are rare, with water-related violence typically occurring at the subnational level. However, while water disputes are unlikely to directly spark conventional wars, they can exacerbate tensions and contribute to conditions that may ultimately lead nations into conflict.

Upstream countries that control water access are generally unlikely to engage militarily with downstream nations over water disputes. However, only a few downstream nations possess the military advantage or leverage to threaten upstream countries, as seen with Egypt against Ethiopia, or Israel in relation to Arab nations. For most downstream countries, war is not a viable option, as it would likely worsen their own water challenges rather than secure their interests. Attacking upstream infrastructure, such as dams, could lead to catastrophic consequences like floods, pollution, or the involvement of allies, further escalating the conflict.

Very Often, Upstream states controlling water resources often use this leverage as a non-military tool to secure their interests, as demonstrated by Turkey pressuring Syria over PKK support, and India using its control over Kashmir-related water with Pakistan. On the other hand, downstream states, lacking control, turn to non-military tactics, such as influence operations or backing non-state actors, to secure water access. For example, Syria supported the PKK to negotiate with Turkey over water issues.

Even large-scale wars over water are rare and cooperation tends to be the preferred path in resolving disputes, Nevertheless, there are regions where tensions between neighboring countries—particularly upstream and downstream states—persist over water resources.

A notable example is the dispute over the Nile River, driven by Ethiopia’s construction of the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD), has escalated into a major geopolitical confrontation. While Ethiopia views the dam as crucial for its development, Egypt, heavily dependent on the Nile for its water supply, perceives it as a grave threat to its national security. This dispute involves not only Egypt, Ethiopia, and Sudan but also international mediators such as the African Union and the United States. Despite Egypt’s military strength, it has pursued diplomatic pressure and covert maneuvers to exploit Ethiopia’s internal challenges rather than resorting to direct conflict, as tensions over water security and regional stability continue to rise.

Furthermore, Namibia’s proposal to build a pipeline through the Caprivi Strip to supply drinking water to its capital. This glinted a dispute with Botswana, which was concerned about the potential negative effects on the Okavango Delta and its vital ecotourism industry. Similarly, tensions have arisen in the Amu Darya basin between Uzbekistan and Tajikistan, when Uzbekistan worried about the negative impact of Tajikistan’s Rogun Dam project particularly over its potential impact on Uzbekistan’s state-run cotton industry, a major global exporter.

In South Asia, despite ongoing political tensions, India and Pakistan have managed to uphold the Indus Water Treaty, a framework for managing the water from the Indus River system. Remarkably, this treaty has endured through multiple conflicts and serves as a model for how effective water diplomacy can prevent resource disputes from escalating into war.

In the Grand Maghreb region, tensions over water resources and farmland have flared between Morocco and Algeria in the Figuig region, along their shared eastern border. Numerous seasonal rivers (oueds) originate in Morocco, giving it an upstream advantage and control over water flow into Algeria. This strategic position has amplified tensions, further exacerbating water shortages and intensifying disputes. The recent events in Figuig underscore the potential for water and land management issues in border areas to escalate into bilateral conflict. However, the prudence and wisdom of the Moroccan leadership have played a critical role in preventing such a scenario.

Geopolitical tensions, particularly the longstanding dispute over the Moroccan Sahara, impede meaningful cooperation. The lack of collaboration poses risks for over-extraction and potential conflicts. Addressing these issues through transboundary water diplomacy could foster broader cooperation, improve resource sustainability, and promote regional stability—if political tensions were alleviated.

Projected Risk Levels for Country-Basin Units in Morocco for 2030

Source: MAPPING THE RESILIENCE OF INTERNATIONAL RIVER BASINS TO FUTURE CLIMATE CHANGE-INDUCED WATER VARIABILITY World Bank March 2010

Role of water diplomacy and Multilateral Conventions in preventing and settling water related disputes  

International institutions are not always adequately equipped to resolve water disputes. For example, more than half of the 145 treaties governing the world’s international watersheds include no monitoring provisions, and many lack clear allocations or enforcement mechanisms. This underscores the vital importance of water diplomacy, which can offer pathways to managing and preventing resource-based conflicts from spiraling into violence.

Cooperation through water diplomacy has proven effective in turning conflict into collaboration. In many regions, transboundary water disputes have been managed through treaties, agreements, and river basin organizations, such as the Mano River Union, the Mekong River Organization, the Indus Water Treaty, and the Nile Basin Initiative. These frameworks promote cooperation, foster dialogue, and prevent open conflict over water resources.

Water disputes can often be effectively resolved through third-party mediation, as demonstrated by H.M. King Mohammed VI’s intervention in the Mano River region in 2002; His diplomatic efforts played a key role in easing tensions over shared water resources. Similarly, international actors such as the United States, the World Bank, and the United Nations have been instrumental in mediating water disputes globally. For instance, the U.S. facilitated progress in Nile Basin negotiations in 2015 and 2016, while the World Bank has been active in managing water conflicts in Central Asia. These examples highlight the potential of international mediation in resolving complex water issues and fostering regional stability.

Data reveals that mediation is the preferred water dispute settlement mode worldwide, Asia and Europe have more diverse and active approaches to dispute resolution, with Asia favoring mediation and Europe balancing judicial and diplomatic methods. Africa employs a mix of arbitration and mediation, while North America leans towards judicial resolutions, and South America shows less engagement with formal and informal settlement methods. These regional differences highlight varying preferences and practices influenced by historical, political, and legal contexts in managing disputes.

As global tensions over water resources rise, key regional and multilateral agreements are gaining critical importance in shaping the management of shared freshwater systems. Central to these efforts are the 1997 UN Watercourses Convention and the 1992 UNECE Water Convention. Initially focused on Europe, the UNECE convention was expanded to include all UN member states in 2003, setting a global standard for the equitable and sustainable use of transboundary watercourses. The UN Watercourses Convention, mandates that countries sharing international watercourses use these resources fairly and reasonably, ensuring that no state inflicts significant harm on its neighbors.

Regional initiatives further complement these international frameworks. In 2010, the Arab Ministerial Water Council called for the development of a Draft Legal Framework on Shared Water Resources, aiming to establish a robust legal structure for managing and protecting transboundary water resources within the Arab world.