The Iranian Ministry of Water and Energy, headed by Ali Akbar Mehrabian, has acknowledged the evidence of drought in Afghanistan, substantiated by data from the Dih-Ravud station. However, Iran continues to assert its entitlement to a portion of the precipitation that fell on Afghan territory in the Helmand river basin, while simultaneously pursuing unrelated water supply projects, Sputnik Afghanistan reports.
Drought and precipitation dynamics
Iran's recognition of drought in Afghanistan underscores the climatic challenges impacting the region. The data from the Dih-Ravud station highlights the decreased levels of water flow, particularly in the Helmand river basin. The 1973 treaty outlines provisions for adjusting watercourse values in cases of subnormal water flow due to weather conditions. This adjustment mechanism aims to address fluctuations in water availability based on historical data.
Despite acknowledging the drought's impact, Iran upholds its claim to a share of the precipitation that fell on Afghan territory within the Helmand river basin. This contentious matter is rooted in historical agreements between the two nations regarding water rights and distribution. Iran's pursuit of its water share coincides with the implementation of unrelated water supply projects, reflecting its commitment to bolstering its water resources amid changing dynamics.
Treaty provisions and precipitation adjustments
The 1973 treaty's stipulation, specifically in Section 4, addresses situations where watercourse values fall below normal due to weather conditions. The adjustment involves recalculating values based on historical data, ultimately impacting water allocations. In the case of the Helmand river basin, where water flow was significantly lower than the norm, Iran's quota adjustment requires data from preceding months. However, the reported receipt of 3.3% of its expected quota suggests complexities in assessing adequacy.
The reported measurement results for August reflect a water flow of less than 7 m³/s, considerably lower than the normal value of 63 m³/s. While the received amount appears inadequate, its evaluation must consider broader factors, including regional climatic patterns, historical water distribution, and changing environmental dynamics. Such complexities contribute to nuanced assessments of water availability.
Comments (0)