Why No Water Wars: An Analysis of Water Conflict Potential in the MENA Region
Date
2014
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Producer
Director
Performer
Choreographer
Costume Designer
Music
Videographer
Lighting Designer
Set Designer
Crew Member
Funder
Rehearsal Director
Concert Coordinator
Advisor
Moderator
Panelist
Alternative Title
Department
Haverford College. Department of Political Science
Type
Thesis
Original Format
Running Time
File Format
Place of Publication
Date Span
Copyright Date
Award
Language
eng
Note
Table of Contents
Terms of Use
Rights Holder
Access Restrictions
Dark Archive
Terms of Use
Tripod URL
Identifier
Abstract
This thesis is an exploration and partial refutation of the Water Wars theory; a prediction of inevitable conflict between states over diminishing water stocks and rapidly expanding, thirsty populations. While this hypothesis appears logically sound, little to no water conflict has occurred over the last forty years, leading to my puzzle. My design selects two dyads with high water conflict potential, Iraq-Syria and Egypt-Sudan, and evaluates them at peak points for measurable water conflict and for water scarcity per capita as a means of identifying most-likely conflict scenarios. Each dyad is then evaluated for each period for four my four primary hypothesis types drawn from relevant hydrological and IR literature; substitution, power asymmetry, institutional intervention, and and technical innovation. No single hypothesis proved to be an entirely comprehensive explanation. As anticipated, the de-escalation and avoidance of water conflict driven by scarcity has to do with layered mechanisms working in concert. However, my findings largely support the basic concept of water wars theory. Although the urgency of conflict risk may have been overstated, my findings demonstrate that conflict potential is generally exacerbated by increasing water stress. What the Water Wars theory gets wrong is the potential for mechanisms to mitigate immediate stress and subsequent conflict risk. While substitution is the most easily identified mechanism, other factors like power relations, institutional intervention or meditation, and even to some degree technical innovation play roles in the deescalation or mitigation of conflict potential. Unfortunately, my findings do not suggest that these extant mechanisms will allow for trends in scarcity to continue absent conflict potential; other solutions will be necessary. Finally, I have identified as an alternate explanation the potential for water-stress having been expressed via intra-state conflict; the Arab Spring the most relevant example.