Advanced International Relations - Copyright Jill Margerison 2003

3: Scripts for Conflict - Resources and Securityby Jill Margerison

• Lecture objectives – 3 fold

• To provide insight into a debate over a possible causal aspect of conflict : resources are they scripts for conflict?

• Also to highlight how the perception of security has changed since end of Cold War

• To introduce a new security term – human security – what does this mean in relation to resource scarcity – how has recognition of human security prompted greater cooperation between states on resource issues?

The Debate

• Question : • Do you believe that scarcity of resources in the

future will lead to greater conflict between states? • Or do you argue the contrary – that the common

concern over the scarcity of resources in particular areas will promote greater cooperation due to recognition of human security?

The Debate (b)

• Others claim conflicts occur regardless of scarcity of resources

• What type of causes can you suggest for conflict, violence, war?

• What type of conflicts have seen in the past decade?

• How have they been caused?

Conceptualizing Security

Post Cold War era… How has the way we conceptualize security changed?

•No longer bipolar•No longer conflict based on ideological lines•Greater number of issues prioritized as security issues

Conceptualizing Security (b)

•Globalization changed expectations

•Greater concerns over factors such as the environment

•Recognition that some security aspects do not heed boundaries

= different ways of determining security ?

Environmental Security

• Suggestion that environment = cause of conflict• What type of environmental problems could

cause tension? Environmental degradation, food shortages, uncontrolled refugee flows + pandemics

• The scarcity of resources is also seen as a direct cause of aggravation…. Leading to possible conflict situations

What is human security?

• Problems that arise highlight a difficulty in governance…. Who is in control of the environment? How are environmental resources that affect a number of countries monitored? The result of poor management of resources results in a threat to individuals --- human security problem

• What is human security --Individual security • Based on its concern for the violence emanating

from non-territorial security threats as opposed to state centric ones

Human Security (b)• Protection of environment - crucial to human

security• A secure environment - fundamental to individual

+ community health + well being, even survival• Currently = ‘environmental insecurity’ – Gwyn

Prins• Michael Klare agrees that the environment is

insecure but builds a realist argument - suggests regardless of concern for human security issues IR ‘game’ - one of power - new geography of conflict - along fault lines - around interest in resources

Klare’s Map of the World• How do we work out where and why conflict will occur in

the international system?

• Klare – suggests that better predictor of conflict is to view international relations through lens of the world’s contested resources + focus on those areas where conflict is likely to erupt over access to or the possession of vital materials

• He claims that these zones of potential trouble point to areas in which major deposits of oil and natural gas lead to contested or unstable area

• Persian Gulf, Caspian Sea basin, South China Sea, Indonesia, the Caucasus region

Importance + regions?

• Klare argues that a map of contested resource zones would show all major water systems shared by two or more countries in arid or semi arid areas

• Nile, the Jordan, Tigris and Euphrates, Indus Amu Darya

• Also argues – include major concentrations of gems, minerals and old growth timber in developing world

• Examples = Angola, Sierra Leone, PNG, Colombia Fiji to name a few…

• He claims that danger lies in the fact that many vital resources are located in contested or chronically unstable areas

Water as a scarce resource• Global water system – fraught • Water is renewable resource but amount of

replaceable water – limited• Threats to water supplies – cause concern• Many important sources of water in the Middle

East and Asia are shared by 2 or more countries.• Need to ensure mutually acceptable agreements

for the allocation of supplies but often difficult to obtain cooperation

Euphrates + Water - a security issue

• Problem = Iraq and Syria – agreement on Euphrates… but Turkey refused to sign water sharing agreement

• Some notes? – I will ask you for some comments after the video – jot down some observations

Video Footage

Indus + relations vs India and Pakistan

Following Klare’s argument 2 countries that should have gone to war over water = India and Pakistan

Rivals + partition =Pakistan dep.on canals - Indian control Wider conflict – religious lines, currency exchange ratesPakistan dependent upon Indus – unlike India which has

Ganges-Jumna and Cauvery RiverWater scarcity despite large average runoffsPoverty stops construction of infrastructure to offset scarcityBut 1960 treaty still lasting – why?

Another perspective

• Counter argued that not all conflicts fall into category of conflict over resource as Klare suggests

• Ethiopia and Eritrea –war

• Rwanda- genocide

• Dissolution of Yugoslavia

• Nor do stable diamond producing states of South Africa Namibia and Botswana

• Suggestion that political and social instability –major role

1960 Treaty

• Despite indications to contrary India and Pakistan eventually signed international water treaty in 1960

• Critical to disputes resolution was the intervention of the World Bank

• Both countries had applied to W.B. for development loans

• Dispute arose in 1948 – Stulej River – India had control of water that could turn entire Punjab region in desert – result - security powder keg

• WB decided to refuse develop. loans to India and Pakistan

1960 Treaty

• WB would approve loans if 3 conditions were met:

• 1)Indus basin had enough water for both countries• 2) The basin was treated as a single unit implying

all the rivers were to be discussed• 3) Past grievances put aside and technical rather

than a political focus retained

1960 Treaty• WB plan = divide Indus basin – India = 3 eastern

rivers = Sutlej Beas Ravi• Pakistan – Chenab , jhelum and the Indus• Infrastructure needed to divide the basin – paid

for by the party benefiting under the beneficiary pays principle

• Pakistan – not fully convinced refused to sign until 1958

• Treaty formalized 1960

Mekong River

• Established in 1995

• Example of a multilateral project and attempts to coordinate water resources, planning and development in SEA

• Challenges include tackling widespread poverty in basin

• Avoiding regional instability

• Problem with river is that it floods – thus need cooperation on flood forecasting … different problem to that of scarcity but still a threat to human security

Mekong (2)

– Discussions – lasted 50 years and during this time the problems of the river has offered a forum for for international dialogue on a common issue in a region that has been plagued by war and conflict

– What countries are involved? – Cambodia, Laos South Vietnam and Thailand– Would like to involve China – Myanmar

Conclusion• Environmental security• Do we look at the environment as a way of

indicating where the next conflicts will occur?• Do we look at these type of environmental

concerns and suggest that they offer a common issue on which states can cooperate to help solve human security issues?

• Or do we suggest that conflicts occur regardless of scarcity of resources?

Some Readings

• Gwyn Prins, “Putting Environmental Security in Context” in Gwyn Prins (ed) Threats without Enemies, (London :Earthscan, 1993 )

• Michael T. Klare, “The New Geography of Conflict”, Foreign Affairs May-June, 2001 80 3

• Undala Z Alam, “Questioning the water wars rationale: a case study of the Indus Waters Treaty”, The Geographical Journal, December 2002 168 4