Analysis | Has Mearsheimer’s “Stopping Power of Water” Reached its Limit? How the water security dilemma is a silent threat to international security
“Mearsheimer argues that global hegemony is made difficult by the “stopping power of water.” Yet as belligerent powers endure domestic water insecurity, what happens once states are so water desperate they seek to control international waters?”
Nicole Butler
Water security is quickly becoming one of the most pressing international security threats, yet few are discussing it. Although water security may not be the direct cause of major security threats, it is a key catalyst in the negative feedback loop between environmental and human security challenges and state capacity and governance, causing weakened infrastructure and internal security in states and diminishing the effectiveness of conflict management. The international system’s laws, norms, and institutions collectively are not designed to address this conflict catalyst because short-term threats take priority. Water security must gain the necessary attention to thwart future international security consequences.
Previous generations assumed that water was an infinite resource. In the twentieth century, the rate of water use grew two times faster than the population increase. Climate change and an increasing worldwide population caused water resources to grow scarcer. Consequently, environmental and human security threats have worsened, giving rise to unpredictable floods and droughts, rising sea levels, and depleted agriculture and food systems. In response, populations have migrated, response capacity to global health crises has been strained, and global food insecurity has increased. Today, water scarcity affects nearly half of the world’s population and the United Nations and World Bank predict droughts may displace nearly 700 million worldwide by 2030. Despite this being a global problem, international cooperation is lacking. Unilateral government regulations, privatization, and allocated resource ownership have developed in response, but nations are shirking collective responsibility to adequately contribute to a long-term global solution. Even worse, nations are actively using water against each other.
What makes matters worse is that water security is a threat multiplier. The environmental and human security challenges that stem from water insecurity directly affect state capacity and governance. Worsening environmental and human security threats due to increased water insecurity directly degrade citizen welfare as basic needs are less often met. Consequently, this influences social, political, and economic conditions which when weakened, create space for domestic challenges like increased sub-state violence, organized crime, and diminished state capacity and governance. The Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) is a clear example of how complicated this dilemma is. Despite being located in a region containing more than half of Africa’s water reserves, poor infrastructure and political mismanagement leave millions of Congolese in extreme poverty and poor health, contributing to decades of prolonged conflict.
With weakened capacity, states are ill-equipped to manage other consequences such as economic downturns or migration. Migration diplomacy — states’ use of diplomatic tools, processes, and procedures to manage cross-border population mobility — often becomes weaponized in an attempt to regain internal security while diminished economic conditions contribute to social resentment and an increased propensity towards populism. With water security as the catalyst, these combined challenges fuel increased cross-border disputes, subnational conflicts, and broader geopolitics and international insecurity. This feeds back and fuels transnational and subnational challenges. This is the water security dilemma.
Just look at the Syrian war. Although often overlooked, a significant contributing factor to the civil war in Syria was the unprecedented ongoing drought. This water insecurity in the region contributed to rising domestic unrest, which combined with other factors, developed into today’s devastating and ongoing conflict. As a result, many states experienced a significant increase in migration, especially in Europe, impacting state capacities and eliciting domestic political opposition. In response, many states demonstrated weaponized migration diplomacy in their politics. The Syrian case fundamentally demonstrates that water security influences nearly all manners of conflict, which often directly hinders conflict resolution and threatens international security.
Water security is also permanently intertwined with a race for resources — like freshwater, marine life, oil, and now critical minerals — which exacerbates its threat to international security by deepening major power competition. Russia and China are actively extending their reach to ensure greater access to domestic and foreign water resources. Mearsheimer argues that global hegemony is made difficult by the “stopping power of water.” Yet as belligerent powers endure domestic water insecurity, what happens once states are so water desperate they seek to control international waters? The standing legal doctrine on international waters–UNCLOS–is only as strong as its most influential signatory but the “leader” in international norm-building, the United States, still refuses to sign. This jeopardizes international security as aggressive states test the enforceability of sovereign maritime borders and target gaps in international laws.
The influence of water security on the development of these security challenges remains unprioritized in academia and policymaking, meaning this problem will continue because the source is not being effectively recognized or mitigated. The worst part, though, is that the future of water insecurity is already here and water is being weaponized now. Since October 7, Israel and Hamas have weaponized and militarized water, hampering humanitarian support efforts and prolonging future physical and economic post-conflict reconstruction. By February 2024, Russian forces had destroyed one-third of Ukraine’s freshwater storage. Rivers and dams are simultaneously being used, targeted, or destroyed — a clear violation of international law according to the Geneva Convention. Russian cyber-attacks target water infrastructure in Ukraine and even in the United States. With limited legal recourse, a dangerous new norm is being established. Despite access to water established as a human right by the UN, water weaponization is becoming an accepted modern warfare tactic. This will have devastating consequences for international security as water insecurity continues to grow.
It is unlikely states will align and work together to solve water security threats in the near future — anticipating problems of burden-sharing and free-riding which limits cooperation. Regional organizations are addressing baseline water challenges that benefit the management of water security consequences; however, these organizations lack the necessary resources or influence to combat the problem at its core. Considering that water security is only now being added to the agendas of international organizations, it is clear that they are unprepared to tackle the dilemma. Due to a lack of interest, and innate structuring, international organizations are using band-aid solutions to combat immediate threats, leaving the underlying catalyst of water insecurity as an unabated threat to international security.
By focusing only on short-term events, long-term international security threat prevention becomes neglected. Unfortunately, this is the dilemma surrounding water security. Since short-term crises require immediate attention, the underlying catalyst rarely receives the necessary attention because the international system is not designed to manage short and long-term threats simultaneously. Until this dilemma can be solved and water security is recognized as a threat catalyst, it will continue to fuel conflicts and crises into the foreseeable future, quietly looming as international security’s silent threat.
Nicole Butler is a research assistant at the Institute for the Study of Diplomacy and an intern with the Canadian Arctic think tank, Arctic360. She is also a graduate student in the Security Studies Program at the Walsh School of Foreign Service concentrating in international security.
Interested in learning more about international security, maritime law, and water security? Check out ISD’s in-depth case studies library and join the faculty lounge to access free instructor copies:
