Valentin Bogatyrev, specially for the IPP

Central Asia stopped being an integrated region long ago. The best demonstration of this fragmentation is to see the countries solving their water issues.

The joint water system is the only region-forming factor in Central Asia. Glaciers in the mountains and water flows form some sort of a regional center, diffusing outwards along water lines in various directions towards other parts of Asia: to the East – China, to the South – Afghanistan, and the widest direction of North and North-West, where Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan lie. In the same natural way, Tajikistan and the Kyrgyz Republic serve as the two main water-originating states for the region. Part of the water resources of the region spring from China and subsequently stream into Eastern Kazakhstan.

With each decade, the issue of water provision in Central Asia becomes more and more critical. It would be more accurate to say it is a set of issues. These include water for agricultural needs, the lack of drinkable water, issues of water-ecology, social issues related to the allocation of inhabited lands under water reservoirs, etc.

Water flow is turning into an increasingly scarce commodity. The Amudarya River used to bring 63-65 cubical kilometers of water into the Aral River until the 1960s. However, Turkmen and Uzbek cotton have had a significant effect – water used for irrigation purposes increased, so that the volume of the Aral River decreased to 140 cubical kilometers in 2004, vs. 1145 cubical kilometers in 1960, i.e. one tenth of its former volume.

Designed by American experts, a project is currently being implemented to supply water to the northern regions of Afghanistan by drawing off waters from the Amudarya River. Completion of the project will lead to a further significant decrease of water level in this largest Central Asian water artery, and will seriously affect the economical interests of adjacent states, first of all Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan.

Incidentally, it is not clear why the Kyrgyz Republic is not participating in the decision-making process about using the waters of the Amudarya River. Based on the calculations of experts, at least three percent of the water of this river forms on the territory of Kyrgyzstan.

Due to limited water resources, the usage of water per capita has been decreasing annually since the 1980s. The Situation in Turkmenistan is the worst. From 1996 to 2000, water consumption decreased by 10 percent, making up 3246 cubic meters. At the current rate of population growth and inability to increase the amount of fresh surface water, this indicator could decrease down to 2134 cubic meters by 2010.

Another issue is the flooding of plough and pasture lands. In 1948, at the inception of the Farhad water reservoir in the Northern Tajikistan, about a dozen villages were transferred to new places. During the construction of the Kairakkumskiy water reservoir in 1956, approximately twenty villages were flooded. The same situation occurred during the construction of the Nurek Power Plant. The construction of the Rogun Power Plant foresees the flooding over forty villages. Researchers relate this project not only to the growth of social tension in the region, but even with the possibility of partisan war in Karategin. In the Kyrgyz Republic, the residents of Toktogul valley still raise the issue of compensating expenses related to the construction of the water reservoir and the flooding of agricultural lands.

It is impossible to ignore the correlation between the construction of water reservoirs in mountainous areas and the increasing risk of earthquakes. Central Asia has already experienced the consequences of the construction of dams. In October of 1985, a nine-point earthquake, the epicenter of which was located in the region of the Kairakkum Water reservoir, led to almost total destruction of Kuntullyuk, Ispisar, and Katagan villages, as well as Kairakkum, Chkalovsk and Gafurov cities. Research shows that over seventy cases of increased seismic activity have been observed in regions of dams and dikes.

The problem of the Aral Sea is especially critical. Due to projects implemented with the support of international organizations, the Syrdarya River allowed a flow of up to 900 cubic meters per second during this fall-winter period, which largely eliminated the threat of the impoundment of Kyzylorda oblast, and moreover filled up the Small Aral (Malyi Aral) “in advance.” The area of the northern region of the Aral has increased by one third. Today, water is already flowing from Small to Big Aral through the Kok-Aral dam, spreading for 1280 meters. This accomplishment is a doubtless success, which will be reinforced by the further expansion of the riverbed of Syrdarya in Kazakhstan’s territory. However, it is overshadowed by issues of the other “Aralian” river – Amudarya. Experts estimate that the critical threshold, up until which it was possible to rehabilitate the Aral, has already passed. The matter is no longer merely monetary, but also centers on the water level, which is continually decreasing.

The Aral Sea issue is just one of multiple high priority water-related issues. Nevertheless, the reality is that states still fail to coordinate their efforts in the resolution of water issues. What causes such difficulties?

Let us examine what specific issues the region should join its efforts to face. Firstly and most importantly is the issue of regulating water flow. This issue is directly related to the development of hydroelectric power complexes.  For Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan, the development of hydroelectric power engineering is a key issue not only for economic growth, but for energy security as well. These states have almost no other sources of energy.

Water-using countries have to face this fact. One should not expect any progress on the issue until they recognize the unique, exclusive right of Tajikistan and the Kyrgyz Republic, and their special place in the entire water-energy alliance.

Currently, Tajikistan and the Kyrgyz Republic are trying to promote the development of their energy industries, the former being more successful, and the latter less. They require investors, as it is not possible to accomplish such development with their own resources: the cost of hydroelectric power plants is too high, especially in the mountains. Despite resistance to privatization from domestic opponents, private investment is currently the only way of building new power stations.

The most natural way of coordinating efforts in this sphere would be the investment participation of Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, China, and Afghanistan in constructing new power plants and water reservoirs. We see that this understanding exists. China intends to give credit for the construction of power lines in Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan; the Kazakh party is also expressing their willingness to participate in the construction of energy facilities in these countries.

Moreover, the USA is showing high interest. Within the Partnership of the Development of Greater Central Asia, a project supported by the US State Department, American companies are ready to invest in the construction of power plants, as well as the installation of power lines in the southern direction to Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Created within the scope of the CAREC (Central Asian Regional Economic Cooperation Program), the Forum of Power Energy Regulating Bodies (FPERB) is also working on implementing some projects in this sphere directed toward forming a joint energy network in the region.

It is expected that the Uzbek party is also going to express interest in such projects.

In general, there is a certain basis for the creation of a joint hydroelectric complex. However, we see that progress is really moving in areas where business and private capital get involved. When it comes to governmental action, there are no visible results.

At the summit in Sochi, presidents of the states participating in EvrazES failed to agree on criteria for creating a joint energy market and dealing with hydropower issues in Central Asia. The same happened at the recent informal meeting of the presidents of the Central Asian states in Astana. Projects already developed by the Water Energy Consortium with the support of International Financial Institutes do not yet suit politicians.

This is not just an issue of political will. State leadership cannot reach agreements due to fairly legitimate reasons. The most important one is the high demand for irrigation water required under the current mode.

There are three methods of resolving this problem.

The first method is the one that countries have been using for several decades – the option of coordinating water quotas. Today, such distribution happens based on the agreement of 1992, which defines the norms of water use according to those established back in 1984. While the countries were working within one economic unit, these quotas suited everyone. However, such norms of use are seriously jeopardized now, because the needs of water supplying countries for electric power are continually growing. It is hard for them to consider their neighbors if they have to use their turbines at full capacity in winter, and hence must save water in summer. Moreover, these countries lack their own organic energy resources. Therefore, each year it becomes more challenging to agree on quotas of water use. To regulate the issue, states are forced to tie other energy sectors to this issue, or simply to bargain using various economic resources. The challenges of regulation in this way will continue to build. Many in the Kyrgyz Republic consider the system of water redistribution passed in 1992 unfair and illegitimate.

A Second path lies in the fundamental reorganization of agriculture, the use of water saving and recycling technologies in industry, and the introduction of water desalination technology (for salt water ponds) and modern cleaning units. Considering the existing culture of agrarian activity and its infrastructure, this solution requires enormous financial investment. It is obvious that the resolution of this problem lies well ahead.

Finally, the third alternative involves creating a single mechanism for hydroelectric management, making it a coherent system that provides effective decision-making on issues of water and energy use. This option, in our opinion, is only possible in the event of the creation of a hydroelectric consortium that is autonomous from interference by any state in its operation, forcible or otherwise. The only issue is to agree on the principles and conditions of the participation of states in the establishment of such a consortium. However, this work has not been initiated yet due to serious discrepancies in the approaches and positions of the participating countries. A draft Agreement about the principles of exploitation of economically viable hydro facilities located on the territory of adjacent states was developed by experts of the Kyrgyz Republic and submitted to the steering committee of the inter-state commission in December of 2000, but has yet to be discussed.

In August of this year in Tashkent, the water and energy experts of Central Asia discussed issues of the water-energy balance at the regular session of the intergovernmental committee on the creation of the hydroelectric consortium, which aims to finally resolve the water issues of the region. However, the results of these negotiations are still not consoling; a viable project has yet to be developed.

Some experts hope that the situation will change due to the entrance of the Central Asian states to EvrazES. This move should change the “political geography” of the region; it should be easier to solve issues as Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Russia, Tajikistan, and Kyrgyzstan became partners. However, these hopes are mostly groundless in the meantime. By now, the states of the region have been partners in various organizations for fifteen years, but such “partnership” has not increased the chances of creating a hydroelectric consortium. Political decisions, as it turns out, are not enough.

While speaking about the water energy consortium in Central Asia, Western experts like to bring up the example of the Coal and Steel Community which became the heart of creation of the European Union. The comparison is motivating, but it omits one very important circumstance. In Europe, not only governments made such an economic union possible, and not to such a large degree either, but instead mostly large private businessmen did. Here, we have such entrepreneurs only in the Kazakh energy industry. Considering the regional specifics of state property management, we can’t help but draw a fairly unfortunate conclusion: resolution of regional hydroelectric consortium issue must be postponed until assets are transferred to private companies in the other states.

This step requires the resolution of a different important issue – the issue of recognizing irrigation and drinking water as a commodity. The core concern here is the lack of a legislative framework. Existing international conventions on intergovernmental water use touch upon the issue only indirectly, and are not very convincing. Nevertheless, even they foresee the fair participation of upstream and downstream states in the construction and maintenance of hydro technical objects regulating water flow or compensating their expenses. This framework alone already provides a basis for raising the issue of the price for supplying water for irrigation to other states.

Several years ago, the Institute of Water and Hydroelectricity of the National Academy of Science, led by major Kyrgyz scholar Duyshen Mamatkanov, evaluated the annual expenses of Kyrgyzstan resulting from the creation and maintenance of the Toktogul Water reservoir in irrigation mode. The conclusion is alarming: during the work of the Lower Naryn Cascade of Power plants in the irrigation mode of the Toktogul Water Reservoir, Kyrgyzstan annually loses 159.4 million US dollars. At the same time, this water brings the neighboring states economic benefits that exceed that figure five-fold.

An economic evaluation of water as a natural resource of the Kyrgyz Republic has also been carried out using strict methodology. Based on this evaluation, the sum of costs related to water as a natural resource, including all maintenance and renovation work, made up 8.36 million US dollars in 2001. Based on this figure, rates were set at the price of 0.3 US dollars per thousand cubic meters of water. The research of the Institute shows that water rates will increase up to 0.9 US dollars per thousand cubic meters in 2010, and up to 1.23 US dollars in 2015. Considering that neighboring states receive about 22 cubic kilometers of water annually, the amount of annual income for the current year should have made up more than twelve million US dollars (All data belongs to the Institute of Water Issues and Hydro Resources of the National Academy of the KR).

Recognition of the necessity of paying for the supply of irrigation and drinking water could fundamentally advance the resolution of issues about the efficient joint use of the hydroelectric capacity of the states in the region.

The highest risk is that, with the growth of the demand for water and its shortage for the economies of the states in the region, it will be used more often for political means. Regarding lands and borders, the governments will soon reach an agreement. For now however, the controversial capacity of water issues still remains a stumbling block in the relations of neighboring countries.

Valentin Bogatyrev, expert of the IPP