The Mediterranean is emerging as a climate hotspot: It is warming 20% faster than the global average and has already exceeded the 1.5°C threshold , posing a serious threat to the prosperity and development of the region as a whole, particularly for the Eastern Mediterranean, the Middle East and North Africa (MENA). This warming is expected to lead to hotter, longer, more frequent, and more intense droughts, and fewer but more extreme rain events, accompanied by an expanded wildfire risk and season.
While the direst outcomes can only be avoided with rapid climate action and aggressive reductions to greenhouse gas emissions, it is also crucial for the region to brace for and adapt to the changing climate. Considering the accelerating pace and the far-reaching effects of climate change both globally and regionally, transnational cooperation and climate diplomacy will be key to bolstering resilience. This will require the countries in the region to acknowledge climate change as a common existential threat whose impacts on one country could easily spill over to another and threaten the socioeconomic stability of the region. This is not an easy undertaking, given the ongoing conflicts and animosity between various countries in the region, but it is urgently needed to ensure the prosperity of nearly 500 million people.
One of the examples that patently demonstrates the urgency of building climate and water resilience in the Mediterranean is the Euphrates-Tigris River Basin (ETRB). The basin, also known as Mesopotamia or the Fertile Crescent , has been a cradle of various civilizations for millennia. It is formed by the Euphrates and the Tigris rivers, both of which originate in Turkey, and spans Iraq, Syria, and parts of western Iran. It plays a critical role in the region’s water security and is an invaluable resource for millions of people who rely on the rivers’ flows for cities and farming, as well as hydropower. The twin rivers generate more than $8 billion worth of economic value in agriculture and energy and support the livelihoods of 60 million people.
Despite its critical role in the region’s development, ETRB suffers from a myriad of chronic water quality issues such as heavy pollution, high salinity, and waterlogging. Ecosystem degradation has been particularly severe in the Mesopotamian marshes in Southern Iraq. Groundwater pumping, which is mostly unregulated, has been unsustainably high , especially in drought years. Iraq and Syria, both of which are already under extreme water stress , continue to see their populations grow, putting further pressure on available water sources.
Compounding the current challenges, the ETRB is already experiencing the impacts of climate change: Water storage across the basin is dwindling due to increased water use, as well as changing climate conditions like harsher droughts, less rainfall, and more evaporation. The basin is forecast to experience even more serious water shortages in the coming decades due to climate change: It could lose as much as 87% of its snow-water availability under a high emission scenario. Surface runoff in the main headwaters could decline by more than half by the end of this century. As the primary water user and a critical economic sector in the Middle East, agriculture is exposed to additional climate risks such as extreme heat and higher water demand due to less rainfall and higher temperatures. Further loss of water resources will only amplify these risk factors, with potentially devastating consequences for the region’s agrarian economies and food security.
Despite its significance for Iraq, Syria, and Turkey as a vital water source, ETRB currently does not have a centralized governance structure, or a clear allocation plan due to long-standing disagreements over the interpretation of international water law. One disagreement concerns the amount of water to which each country is entitled. While Turkey asks for a “need based” allocation plan , Iraq and Syria advocate for equal volumes for all three countries. The countries also disagree over the basin’s hydrology. Turkey argues that the two rivers should be treated as a single system, whereas Iraq and Syria claim that they are separate systems, arguing that a single system allocation model would disproportionately benefit Turkey.
In the absence of a clear allocation plan, Turkey has leveraged its upstream advantage to control the river flows via a vast network of dams. From the 1960s to 1980s, the country agreed to varying amounts of minimum flows with Syria and Iraq, both jointly and separately, in response to their objections to Turkey’s dam projects and as part of greater diplomatic efforts. However, it is unclear to what extent the minimum flow standards are followed. There is no shared monitoring system or enforcement mechanism, and both Iraq and Syria have raised concerns about low flows over the years.
ETRB is arguably the Middle East’s most important watershed and key to bolstering climate and water resilience. An allocation plan and an independent, transnational governance body would greatly benefit all three basin countries by providing certainty and stability, not only for the basin but also for the rest of the region in an increasingly uncertain climate future. Before discussing any governance plans, however, the countries should first commit to the following principles:
• Desecuritization of water: In the past, the basin countries have opted to securitize water and leveraged it in national security negotiations like military activity and terrorism. This has led to deadlocked negotiations and obstructed dialogue. To avoid this problem, water should be decoupled from other geopolitical events and regarded as a separate socioeconomic policy issue.
• Consensus building: Given the current lack of trust, the countries should commit to building consensus for all decisions concerning the basin in the future. Any governance plans should also incorporate consensus into their decision-making model and involve science advisors from all three countries.
• Science-based decision making: No allocation plan will be truly effective unless backed by science and data. However, the countries currently do not share their data with each other, which has also limited scientific research in the basin. Going forward, the countries should commit to data transparency and building a shared flow monitoring system. All allocation plans should be based on current climate change scenarios and drought contingencies and updated regularly.
• Equitable and adaptive distribution of resources: Any allocation plan should account for the countries’ differing needs and uses for the water from the Euphrates and the Tigris and prioritize human needs for water. The allocation plan should be nimble and adaptive to both long- and short-term climate trends.
• Acceptance of the new climate reality and increasing scarcity in the basin: All three countries should accept that the current water demand in the basin is neither feasible nor sustainable given climate change. Going forward, all countries will need to embrace water conservation in agriculture and cities and invest in alternative water sources such as water recycling, stormwater capture, and desalination.
Once an allocation plan is created, the countries will need to plan for investments in climate and water resilience projects, both within and across their borders. Such projects would primarily include (1) managing demand, (2) investing in alternative water supplies and green infrastructure, and (3) restoring the lost wetlands and riparian habitats:
• Demand management includes conservation efforts such as restrictions on wasteful agricultural irrigation practices such as flood irrigation, and the promotion of more efficient methods such as drip irrigation. Repairing the leaks in the water infrastructure, particularly in urban pipelines, could allow for significant water savings. Rebates for water-efficient appliances (such as dishwasher and laundry machines) and fixtures (such as toilets, sinks, and showers) can aid urban water efficiency. The modernization of water infrastructure can also give the governments an opportunity to connect houses without running water to the grid, both in cities and rural areas, and expand access to safe, clean, and affordable water.
• For water supply alternatives, water recycling and desalination could bolster the region’s water source portfolio and provide a drought-resilient and reliable water source. Recycling could also address chronic water pollution problems and improve sewage treatment capacity, especially in urban areas. Green infrastructure such as stormwater capture and treatment can increase water supplies while managing flood risks, especially in cities. Groundwater recharge can boost the sinking groundwater levels in the basin and provide a less disruptive alternative to large dam projects.
• Restoring the wetlands of the basin would require a concerted effort by all countries to both improve the water quality and quantity in the rivers. This would replenish and rejuvenate the wetlands and riparian habitats and protect the basin’s various endemic endangered species, such as migratory birds, fish and reptiles (e.g. the Euphrates softshell turtle).
Already mired in various socioeconomic, diplomatic, and political challenges, the MENA region is vulnerable to novel risk factors, and the looming changes will only compound the ongoing problems in water management. Therefore, the region is in dire need of science-based climate diplomacy and cooperation. Building climate resilience in the Euphrates Tigris Basin presents a valuable opportunity for the three basin countries to fill the climate leadership void and resolve a long-standing water dispute, while also serving as an example to the rest of the region. The basin countries can unlock new opportunities to build climate and water resilience by promoting conservation, investing in alternative water supplies and green infrastructure, and restoring the region’s heavily degraded ecosystems. But just as important as these technical solutions is improved transnational cooperation, which can be achieved by adapting key principles such as desecuritization of water, consensus building, science-based decision making, and equitable and adaptive distribution of resources.