My Brief Career as a Foreign-Policy Pawn in the New Great Game:

Conflict, Gas, Oil, and Water in the South Caucasus

Fall Water Policy Seminar Oregon State University 20 October 2010 Michael E. Campana

Professor of GeosciencesOregon State University , USA

andUniversities Partnership

for Transboundary Watershttp://waterpartners.geo.orst.edu

Intl. Center for Integrated Water Resources Mgmt.http://www.iciwarm.org

“So, how does it feel to be a pawn in the new Great Game, my friend?”-Russian water resources engineer

Meeting in Kazakhstan(2006)

•The New Great Game•The South Caucasus•Kura-Araks Basin•Water Availability, Use, Problems•Conflict•Important Issues•South Caucasus River Monitoring Project•Bottom Line•Recommendations

Talk Organization

•OldStrategic rivalry and competition between Russia and the British Empire for primacy in Central Asia during the 19th century.

•New and ImprovedCompetition between the Russian-Chineseaxis and the West (USA, EU, NATO) for favor with and influence over Central Asian and South Caucasus countries, especially with respect to natural resources.

The Great Game: ‘Old’ and ‘New and Improved’

Central Asia and the South Caucasus

•Access to energy and other resources are at the center of the game

•Central Asia and South Caucasus are not passive observers – have clout via location, energy, and other resources

•More players

•Individual members of each competing group do not always have aligned interests

Some Differences between ‘Old’ and ‘New’ Great Games

The South Caucasus: A Nice Place to Visit, But…“Handguns are acceptable; semi-

automatic weapons must be checked at reception.”

-- sign on the door, Metechi Palace Hotel, Tbilisi, Georgia (removed when it became a

Sheraton)

“He who shoots first, laughs last.”-- Aleksandr Lebed (Yeltsin advisor)

Georgian Military Highway

Kura – Araks River Basin

•Kura mean discharge (ds from Araks): 443 m3/s (15,600 cfs); max: 2,250 m3/s; min: 206 m3/s.•Total basin area: 188 200 km2

•Basin area in SC countries: 122 200 km2

•Kura: 1 360 km Araks: 1 070 km •Both streams rise in Turkey, join in

Azerbaijan, flow to Caspian Sea•No formal agreements among riparians

regarding water allocation, quality,ecosystem maintenance

Kura-Araks Basin: Some Facts

WastewaterReceives storm water discharge and industrial and domestic sewage •100% of Armenia’s•60% of Georgia’s•50% of Azerbaijan’s

Water Supply and Wastewater - Kura-Araks

Water Supply•None of Armenia’s and Georgia’s drinking water, but provides most water for agricultural production and industry

•Provides over 50% of Azerbaijan’s drinking water and 60% of its water for agricultural production

•Since the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the Kura-Araks is now a transboundary, transnationalriver basin with respect to the three South Caucasus republics.

•Water-related problems in the Kura-Araks Basin have since been exacerbated.

•It is in the region’s and (presumably) the world’s best interests to solve these problems.

Why?

The Kura-Araks: So What?

AGO: Altruism, Gas, and Oil

•Water resource problems could threaten the stability of the region.

•Azerbaijan is especially vulnerable it is farthest downstream and relies on the Kura-Araks for over 50% of its drinking water and about 60% of its water for agricultural production. It is energy-rich.

•Kura-Araks discharges into Caspian Sea Azerbaijan is often blamed for pollution contributed by all three.

Transnational River Basin –Water Problems

GeorgiaGenerally, there is a surplus of water. Kura

River water is used mainly for agriculture, some industry. Groundwater provides drinking water.

ArmeniaWater shortages at times, which are more

likely due to management practices. AraksRiver water used for agriculture and industry. Groundwater used for drinking.

Water Availability/Use - I

AzerbaijanRelies on Kura-Araks water for drinking water,

agriculture, and industry. Limited groundwater compared to Georgia and Armenia.

More susceptible to poor water quality in Kura-Araks and reductions in availability due to upstream uses or droughts (serious drought in 2000).

Water Availability/Use - II

•Water quantity•Water quality•Ecosystem degradation•Effects of climate change•Poor management and regulation•Infrastructure decrepit or lacking

Water Resource Problems

• Sediments from erosion due todeforestation and land-use practices

• Heavy metals from mining and industry• Discharge of untreated sewage and

industrial waste• Nitrogen, phosphorus from agriculture• Pathogenic organisms• Radionuclides• POPs – Persistent Organic Pollutants

(pesticides, etc.)

Water Quality - Pollution

• Organochlorine pesticides:lindane, aldrin, DDT, mirex, chlordane, dieldrin, heptachlor, hexachlorobenzene, toxaphene

• PCBs

POPs

• Dysentery• Cholera• Malaria• Typhoid• High mortality of children under 5

due to diarrheal diseases, especially in Azerbaijan

• Others

Waterborne Diseases

• ‘Autonomous’ (‘breakaway’)republics – South Ossetia,Abkhazia (Georgia)

•Nagorno-Karabakh [Ar-Az]•Javakheti (Georgia-Armenia)•Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (oil) and

Baku-Tbilisi-Erzurum (gas)pipelines (terrorist targets?)

Sources of Conflict

South Caucasus Pipelines

•Corruption•Internal strife (distribution of wealth,

desire for autonomy, etc.)•Deteriorating water quality•Reduction in water supply (whether

anthropogenic, climate-induced, etc.)•Economic conditions•Hegemony (Russian Federation, USA,

EU) – the new “Great Game”

Contributing Factors to Conflict

ArmeniaNeed for an “Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM)”

[http://www.gwpforum.org] and/or a “Transboundary Water Resources Management” mechanism. Also emphasized public awareness and participation and rehabilitation of existing and construction of new waste-water treatment plants.

Most Important Issues(survey of 30 water professionals; Vener, 2006 and

Vener and Campana, 2010)

AzerbaijanMost important issue was “water contamination problems” followed by “ecological issues” and the need for an “IWRM mechanism” in their country.

GeorgiaNeed for “legal and regulatory measures” and an “IWRM mechanism”. The second issue for the Georgians was funding sources for the water related projects.

Interviews: Countries’ Viewpoints

•35%: other two countries are not ready to cooperate over water.

•16%: Armenia and Azerbaijan will not cooperate at the official level until Nagorno-Karabakh issue is resolved.

•97%: Important to have reliable, accurate information about Kura-Araks in other countries.

•93%: An IWRM agreement among countries could lead to peace and improved welfare in the region.

(1 November 2002 – 31 December 2008)Partner Country Project Director (PPD)

Prof. Nodar Kekelidze, GeorgiaPartner Country Co-Directors

Dr. Armen Saghatelyan, ArmeniaDr. Bahruz Suleymanov, Azerbaijan

NATO Project Director (NPD)Prof. Michael E. Campana, USA

NATO Project Co-DirectorsProf. Freddy Adams, BelgiumProf. Eiliv Steinnes, Norway

South Caucasus River Monitoring Project

NATO Science for Peace Programme

Black SeaCaspian SeaCaucasus Mountains

LakeUrmia

Araks River

Kura River

Van Golu

SevanaLich

MingacevirSu AnbariCildir Golu

Batman Baraji

Silvan Baraji

Russia

Iran

Turkey

Azerbaijan

Georgia

Armenia

Iraq

BakuYerevan

Tbilisi

0 50 100Miles

N

Kura-Araks River Basin

To build trust and establish the social and technical bases for a transboundary,

cooperative, and transparent water resources management agreement among the Republics

of Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia. The agreement will cover water quantity and

quality and stream ecosystem maintenance.Bottom-up project!

(http://www.kura-araks-natosfp.org)

Project Overall Objective

Technical cooperation will“diffuse upward” into the

highest levels of government in the three republics, leading to

peace and stability (and uninterrupted flows of gas and

oil! – my cynical comment)

Project Goal

Young experts in training at the

Norwegian Universityof Science and

Technology and the University of Antwerp

Increasing Technical Capabilities

Increasing Technical Capabilities (more!)

AAS for heavy metals

System for producing high-purity waters

Water samplers

Water quality testers

Radon analyzer Gamma spectrometer

Water Quality Sampling - KuraRiver, Vakhushti Bagrationi Bridge, Tbilisi

Preparation Measurement

Metal Concentration WHO CountryMetal Concentration WHO CountryMercury Mercury 26 26 µµg/L g/L 6 6 µµg/L g/L ArArNickelNickel 45 45 µµg/L g/L 70 70 µµg/L g/L ArArCadmium 302 Cadmium 302 µµg/L g/L 3 3 µµg/L g/L GeGeCopperCopper 8 8 µµg/L 2,000 g/L 2,000 µµg/L g/L GeGeLeadLead 85 85 µµg/L g/L 10 10 µµg/L g/L GeGeZincZinc 425 425 µµg/L 3,000 g/L 3,000 µµg/L g/L GeGe

Metals: Maximum Concentrations

CompoundCompound MeanMean MaxMax Std.Std.

DDT DDT 812812 7,400 4,7707,400 4,770DDEDDE 659 1,300 1,220659 1,300 1,220DDD DDD 866 3,400 2,070866 3,400 2,070PetroPetro. . HCsHCs ---- 1,820 5001,820 500

DDT and Related Compounds –Concentrations in Caspian Sea

Sediments(pg/g)

MetalMetal MaximumMaximum StandardStandard

CopperCopper 5858 34.034.0Nickel 68 21.0 Nickel 68 21.0 Mercury Mercury 0.5 0.150.5 0.15

Metals – Maximum Concentrations in Caspian Sea

Sediments(µg/g)

•Project promoted and developed stronger technical ties among professional colleagues

•Government agencies were involved as end users, but no civil society representation

•Political situation among the countries made it impossible to meet with all end users at once

•Unsure the project has led to improved intergovernmental relations

•Significance for NATO – funded environmental project

•Better characterization of Kura-Araks water quality

So What’s The Bottom Line?

•Establish committee to coordinate various projects •Form basin commission to provide water resources

coordination; involve Turkey and Iran•Develop “shared vision” model•Update country water codes, allowing for changes

in light of new information/changing conditions.Manage water quantity, water quality, land use, and ecosystem health simultaneously

•Stakeholder involvement – watershed councils•Continue to address “non-water” problems that

could lead to conflict

Recommendations

The Region’s Future?

“The optimist learns English. The pessimist learns Chinese.

The realist learns Kalashnikov.”

-- Armenian colleague

Van Harten, M. 2002. Europe’s troubled waters. A role for the OSCE: the case of the Kura-Araks. Helsinki Monitor, 13(4): 338-349.

Ewing, Amy, 2003. Water Quality and Public Health Monitoring of Surface Waters in the Kura-Araks River Basin of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia. Publication No. WRP-8, Water Resources Program, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM[http://water.oregonstate.edu/projects/caucasus.htm]

Vener, Berrin Basak, 2006. The The KuraKura--AraksAraks Basin: Common Objectives and Basin: Common Objectives and Obstacles for an Integrated Water Resources Management Model amoObstacles for an Integrated Water Resources Management Model among Armenia, ng Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia.Azerbaijan, and Georgia. Master’s Professional Project, Water Resources Program, Master’s Professional Project, Water Resources Program, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM. University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM. [http://water.oregonstate.edu/projects/caucasus.htm]

VenerVener, , BerrinBerrin BasakBasak and Michael E. Campana, 2010and Michael E. Campana, 2010.. Conflict and cooperation in Conflict and cooperation in the South Caucasus: the the South Caucasus: the KuraKura--AraksAraks Basin of Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia. Basin of Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia. In In M. M. ArselArsel and M. Spoor (eds.), and M. Spoor (eds.), Water, Environmental Security and Sustainable Water, Environmental Security and Sustainable Rural Development: Conflict and Cooperation in Central EurasiaRural Development: Conflict and Cooperation in Central Eurasia. Oxford, UK: . Oxford, UK: RoutledgeRoutledge, pp. 144, pp. 144--174. 174. [[http://bit.ly/a6kDZY]

Sources

Thank You!(Kura River, Tbilisi)

Questions?“In theory, there is no difference between practice and

theory. In practice, there is.” – Yogi Berra