Environmental Peacebuilding in Central Asia: Reducing conflicts through cross-border ecological cooperation

art by Nina Montenegro (USA)

Mirza Sadaqat Hudai (Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe Academy)

Cooperation on transnational natural resources can reduce tensions between states and communities.

Context

The economic potential of the Central Asian region is greatly constrained by environmental degradation and a plethora of inter-state and intra-state conflicts. Ethnic and territorial conflicts dominate the geopolitical landscape of Central Asia, despite ecological linkages such as shared rivers and mountain ranges and commonalities in culture and history. These conflicts have led politicians in Central Asian countries to perceive natural resources from the perspective of sovereignty and national security. Myopic policies and poor governance have stymied regional approaches to water, energy, and climate change, and triggered multiple resource-based conflicts.

What’s been done

One of the many resources shared by the countries of Central Asia are the Amu Darya and Syr Darya river basins. Under the centralized system of the Soviet Union, the upstream countries of Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan provided water to the downstream countries of Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, and Kazakhstan for the irrigation of crops in the summer months. In turn, downstream countries provided electricity and fossil fuels to the upstream countries. This system of resource sharing collapsed with the dissolution of the Soviet Union. Without guaranteed supplies of energy from downstream countries, the upstream countries became increasingly dependent on hydroelectric generation throughout the year, which meant that water release patterns changed from predominantly summer to winter. This resulted in less water for irrigation in the summer and increased flooding in the winter in downstream countries,[i] which led to multiple violent conflicts between regional states. In addition, proposals by Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan to develop multiple hydroelectric dams have led to incendiary political rhetoric between upstream and downstream countries.

The poorly demarcated borders of Central Asia also cause communities to fight over water and pastoral land.[ii] Ethnic cleavages in Central Asia often intersect with competition over scare resources, leading to violent conflict. For example, the Ferghana Valley shared by three Central Asian countries has seen multiple ethnic clashes over water and land. These ethnic conflicts are expected to increase due to the effects of climate change and political rhetoric and can spill over into cross-border violence.[iii]

In recent years, conflicts over natural resources in Central Asia have influenced and been influenced by rising ethno-nationalistic populism, migrant flows, the breakdown of inter-communal relations, increasing Islamist extremism, and a securitized approach to international borders, creating a volatile and conflict-prone region.[iv] The environment is thus one of the many compounding sources of conflicts in Central Asia. Scholars of environmental peacebuilding propose that if environmental issues can cause conflicts, cooperation over the environment can also reduce tensions and enhance trust and understanding. In this context, two broad pathways on environmental peacebuilding can be examined in Central Asia: cooperation between state-level actors and grassroots engagement between community members.

Looking ahead

State-level actors in Central Asia must actively engage in cooperation on shared rivers. In the past, state-level actors have utilized water and energy as bargaining chips in geopolitical conflicts, leading to the ineffectiveness of initiatives such as the Interstate Fund for saving the Aral Sea (IFAS) and the Almaty Agreement. In this context, state actors can use proposals for hydroelectric dams and transnational grids in Central Asia to create consensus on integrated approaches to water and energy.

While dams in Central Asia have created political controversy, they are an important element to energy transition as well as regional integration through initiatives such as the under-construction Central Asia-South Asia Power Project and the rejuvenation of the Central Asian Power System. Some studies propose that if hydroelectric development is used as an entry point for broader cooperation on flood and drought management, wastewater treatment, river erosion, and irrigation, it could enhance the potential for sustainable development as well as reduce conflicts between co-riparians.[v] For hydroelectric cooperation to spill over into broader forms of environmental peacebuilding, state-level actors must engage in the design and maintenance of dams; share the costs and benefits of hydroelectric generation; and collaborate on the development of technical expertise, exchange of data and the formalization of early warning systems.[vi] Successful cooperation on water and hydroelectricity at the bilateral level can lead to the creation of long-term, regional agreements on river basin management.[vii]

Environmental programmes can also be used to address ethnic-conflict and societal tensions in Central Asia. Grassroots environmental programmes that focus on youth have been used to reduce xenophobia, deconstruct ethnic and religious stereotypes, and build relationships between members of different communities.[viii] This can involve the development of experiential learning programmes that bring together youth from multiple ethnic communities to contribute to the conservation of water and the protection of wildlife and natural ecosystems. As demonstrated by similar initiatives in other regions,[ix] educational programmes that enable youth from different communities to live together and work collaboratively on ecological conservation projects can build societal resilience to ethno-nationalistic rhetoric while also enhancing environmental leadership in Central Asia. The impact of these programmes can be enhanced through social media and the development of educational curricula that emphasize the ecological interdependence of the region.

State-level and grassroots approaches to environmental peacebuilding in Central Asia can benefit from drawing on existing regional arrangements. For example, the Chu-Talas Commission is considered a successful example of water cooperation between Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan. Regional educational institutions, such as the American University of Central Asia, have brought together young people from diverse nationalities and ethnic backgrounds to engage with each other on common challenges and aspirations. The international community can engage with domestic institutions to facilitate local ownership of efforts to promote the ecological integrity and political stability of Central Asia. 

[i] Adelphi and CAREC (2017) Rethinking Water in Central Asia: The Costs of Inaction and Benefits of Water Cooperation

[ii] Kurmanalieva, G. (2019) ‘Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan: Endless Border Conflicts’, The EU, Central Asia and the Caucasus in the International System. Paper no 4.

[iii] International Crisis Group (2014) ‘Water Pressures in Central Asia. Europe and Central Asia’, Report No 233.

[iv] Matveeva, A. (2015) ‘Central Asia: Regional perspectives for the White Paper on Peacebuilding’, White Paper Series No.7., Geneva Peacebuilding Platform

[v] Huda, M.S. (2017) ‘Envisioning the Future of Cooperation on Common Rivers in South Asia: A Cooperative Security Approach by Bangladesh and India to the Tipaimukh Dam’, Water International 42(1): 54-72.

[vi] Huda, M.S. (2020) Energy Cooperation in South Asia: Utilizing Natural Resources for Peace and Sustainable Development, Abingdon: Routledge

[vii] Huda, M.S. and Ali, S. (2018) ‘Environmental Peacebuilding in South Asia: Establishing Consensus on Hydroelectric Projects in the Ganges-Brahmaputra-Meghna (GBM) Basin’, Geoforum 96: 160–71.

[viii] Huda, M.S. (2021) ‘An Ecological Response to Ethno-Nationalistic Populism: Grassroots Environmental Peacebuilding in South Asia’, International Affairs 97(1): 119-38.

[ix] Ibid.