SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Dicle Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 16 Sayı: 31

THE ROLE OF TRANSBOUNDARY WATER RESOURCES IN PEACEBUILDING: A CONCEPTUAL ANALYSIS OF THE BLUE DIPLOMACY APPROACH

SINIR AŞAN SU KAYNAKLARININ BARIŞ İNŞASINDAKI YERI: MAVİ DİPLOMASİ YAKLAŞIMININ KAVRAMSAL BİR ANALİZİ

Gülşah Özdemir(BALIKESIR UNIVERSITY)0000-0001-8900-2560
Pages
446–473
Publication Date
2026-05-31
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Overall, the study argues that blue diplomacy represents a multidimensional approach aligned not only with foreign policy priorities but also with the Sustainable Development Goals.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Climate change, demographic pressures, and the uneven distribution of water resources have elevated water from a basic natural asset to an issue with clear geopolitical and diplomatic implications.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Methodologically, it employs a qualitative and comparative case study design, focusing on three critical basins: the Euphrates–Tigris and Jordan Rivers in the Middle East, the Nile Basin in Africa, and the Amu Darya–Sir Darya system in Central Asia.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Overall, the study argues that blue diplomacy represents a multidimensional approach aligned not only with foreign policy priorities but also with the Sustainable Development Goals.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Mavi Diplomasi · Çevresel Barış · Su Yönetimi

Abstract

Climate change, demographic pressures, and the uneven distribution of water resources have elevated water from a basic natural asset to an issue with clear geopolitical and diplomatic implications. Rather than viewing water solely as a source of tension, this study examines its constructive potential in peacebuilding through the lens of blue diplomacy. The central question addressed is how the governance of transboundary water systems can support international cooperation and contribute to sustainable peace. To explore this, the study adopts a theoretical framework grounded in environmental peacebuilding, regime theory, and the collective security approach. Methodologically, it employs a qualitative and comparative case study design, focusing on three critical basins: the Euphrates–Tigris and Jordan Rivers in the Middle East, the Nile Basin in Africa, and the Amu Darya–Sir Darya system in Central Asia. The analysis indicates that water can function as an instrument of stability when accompanied by effective governance, transparent data exchange, and cooperative mechanisms that foster mutual confidence. Turkey’s initiatives—particularly those implemented through the GAP project and the technical assistance efforts of TİKA—illustrate how water diplomacy can operate as part of a broader soft-power strategy. Overall, the study argues that blue diplomacy represents a multidimensional approach aligned not only with foreign policy priorities but also with the Sustainable Development Goals. When supported by institutionalized cooperation and equitable management practices, transboundary waters can evolve from potential flashpoints into drivers of long-term regional peace.

Özet

İklim değişikliği, hızlı nüfus artışı ve su kaynaklarının dengesiz dağılımı, suyu yalnızca bir doğal kaynak değil, aynı zamanda jeopolitik ve diplomatik bir unsur haline getirmiştir. Bu çalışma, suyun çatışma potansiyeli kadar barış inşasındaki yapıcı rolüne odaklanarak “mavi diplomasi” kavramını incelemektedir. Araştırmanın temel sorusu, sınır aşan su kaynaklarının yönetiminin uluslararası barış ve iş birliği süreçlerine nasıl katkı sunduğudur. Bu kapsamda çalışma, çevresel barış inşası, rejim teorisi ve kolektif güvenlik yaklaşımını kuramsal çerçeve olarak benimsemektedir. Yöntem açısından nitel bir karşılaştırmalı vaka analizi kullanılmış; Ortadoğu’da Fırat–Dicle ve Ürdün Nehri, Afrika’da Nil Havzası ve Orta Asya’da Amu Derya–Sir Derya sistemi incelenmiştir. Bulgular, suyun etkin yönetişim, veri paylaşımı ve güven artırıcı iş birlikleri sayesinde çatışma yerine barış ve iş birliği aracı olarak kullanılabileceğini ortaya koymaktadır. Türkiye’nin GAP ve TİKA uygulamaları, su diplomasisinin yumuşak güç stratejileriyle nasıl kesiştiğini göstermektedir. Bu bağlamda mavi diplomasi, hem dış politika hem de sürdürülebilir kalkınma hedefleriyle uyumlu çok yönlü bir strateji olarak değerlendirilmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Özdemir, G. (2026). THE ROLE OF TRANSBOUNDARY WATER RESOURCES IN PEACEBUILDING: A CONCEPTUAL ANALYSIS OF THE BLUE DIPLOMACY APPROACH. Dicle Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 16 Sayı: 31, 446–473. https://doi.org/10.53092/duiibfd.1834534

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (64)

  1. Abdelkader, A., Elshorbagy, A., Elshamy, M., & Wheater, H. S. (2024). Future pathways of water, energy, and food in the eastern Nile Basin. Earth’s Future, 12(12). https://doi.org/10.1029/2023ef003979
  2. Almesafri, A., Abdulsattar, S., Alblooshi, A., Al-Juboori, R. A., Jephson, N., & Hilal, N. (2024). Waters of contention: The GERD and its impact on the Nile Basin. Cooperation and Conflict. Water, 16(15), 2174. https://doi.org/10.3390/w16152174
  3. Al-Muqdadi, S. W. (2019). Developing strategy for water conflict management and transformation at Euphrates–Tigris basin. Water, 11(10), 2037. https://doi.org/10.3390/W11102037
  4. Altinbilek, D. (2004). Development and management of the Euphrates–Tigris Basin. International Journal of Water Resources Development, 20(1), 15–33. https://doi.org/10.1080/07900620310001635584
  5. Argalı, M. (2024). Scarce resources, great challenge: Central Asia’s water crisis and environmental sustainability. Marmara Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 46(2), 468-490. https://doi.org/10.14780/muiibd.1528710
  6. Bacik, G. (2001). The blue stream project, energy co-operation and conflicting interests. Turkish Studies, 2(2), 85–93. https://doi.org/10.1080/714005686
  7. Baruah, A. D. (2024). Influence of soft power in shaping diplomacy and foreign policy. Electronic Journal of Social & Strategic Studies, 05(02), 363–389. https://doi.org/10.47362/ejsss.2024.5214
  8. Beck, A. (2015). The UN Peacebuilding Commission and the potential of water in post-conflict development, governance and reconciliation. Water International, 40(2), 215–230. https://doi.org/10.1080/02508060.2015.1012284
  9. Blue Peace Initiative. (n.d.). Water diplomacy and mediation. Retrieved from: https://www.thebluepeaceinitiative.org/water-diplomacy.html
  10. Bolgov, M.V. (2021). Assessment of Amu Darya runoff changes as a result of predicted climate change and reduced glaciation. In Z.E. Kulenbekov & B.D. Asanov (Eds.). Water resource management in Central Asia and Afghanistan, (pp.27-35). Springer Water. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-68337-5_4
  11. Burt, M., & Keiru, B. J. (2011). Strengthening post-conflict peacebuilding through community water-resource management: Case studies from Democratic Republic of Congo, Afghanistan and Liberia. Water International, 36(2), 232–241. https://doi.org/10.1080/02508060.2011.558885
  12. Brljavac, B. (2011). Turkey entering the European Union through the Balkan doors: In the style of a great power?, Turkish Yearbook of International Relations, 42, 61-75. https://doi.org/10.1501/Intrel_0000000272
  13. Conca, K. (2002). The keys for environmental peacekeeping, In K. Conca & G.D. Dabelko (Eds.). Environmental peacemaking, (pp.1-23), Woodrow Wilson Center Press.
  14. Conker, A., & Hussein, H. (2019). Hydraulic mission at home, hydraulic mission abroad? Examining Turkey’s regional ‘pax-aquarum’ and ıts limits. Sustainability, 11(1), 228. https://doi.org/10.3390/SU11010228
  15. Coskun, B. B. (2004). Hydropolitics in Central Asia: Towards a regional water regime? The Journal of International Studies, 2, 79–101. https://doi.org/10.5278/OJS.IJIS.V2I0.192
  16. Council of the European Union. (2018). Water diplomacy – Council conclusions (Doc. No. 13991/18). Retrieved from: https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/37022/st13991-en18.pdf
  17. Cull, N. J. (2008). Public diplomacy: Taxonomies and histories. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 616(1), 31–54.
  18. Demirbilek, B. (2023). Su diplomasisi ve uygulamaları üzerine bir değerlendirme. Çankırı Karatekin Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 13(3), 1275–1294. https://doi.org/10.18074/ckuiibfd.1355331
  19. Dudlák, T. (2024). Southern opening: Turkish soft power in Sub-Saharan Africa. Journal of Balkan and Black Sea Studies, 7(13), 89-114. https://doi.org/10.56679/balkar.1522642
  20. Emerson, K., Orr, P. J., Keyes, D. L., & Mcknight, K. M. (2009). Environmental conflict resolution: Evaluating performance outcomes and contributing factors. Conflict Resolution Quarterly, 27(1), 27–64. https://doi.org/10.1002/CRQ.247
  21. European Commission, & High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. (2022). Setting the course for a sustainable blue planet: Joint communication on the EU’s international ocean governance agenda (JOIN(2022) 28 final). Retrieved from https://oceans-and-fisheries.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2022-06/join-2022-28_en.pdf
  22. European Economic and Social Committee. (2026). Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee – Blue diplomacy and water cooperation: Solutions to relieve the pressure of climate induced migration (OJ C/2026/18). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ%3AC_202600018
  23. French Ministry for Europe and Foreign Affairs. (2025). UNOC3 press kit – United Nations Ocean Conference (Nice 2025). Retrieved from https://www.diplomatie.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/unoc3_-_press_-_en_cle84cf4c.pdf
  24. Galtung, J. (1996). Peace by peaceful means: Peace and conflict, development and civilization. SAGE Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446221631
  25. Geneva Water Hub. (2023). Webinar: Conflict analysis as a tool for water diplomacy. Retrieved from https://www.genevawaterhub.org/news/webinar-conflict-analysis-tool-water-diplomacy
  26. Giritlioglu, S., & Tsoy, N. (2024). Water security and regional stability in Central Asia: The case of Uzbekistan and Afghanistan, Eurasian Research Journal, 6(2), 113-137.
  27. Gleick, P. H. (2009). The world's water 2008–2009: The biennial report on freshwater resources. Island Press.
  28. Gruen, G. (2000). Sharing Turkish waters: Moving from conflict to regional cooperation. In 10th World Water Congress: Water, the Worlds Most Important Resource. International Water Resources Association. Retrieved from https://search.informit.org/doi/10.3316/informit.490675960537325
  29. Gutu, I. (2016). The Transatlantic blue diplomacy. Research Papers in Economics, 8(4), 666–680. Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/10419/198485
  30. Haddadin, M. J. (2002). Water in the Middle East peace process. The Geographical Journal, 168(4), 324–340. https://doi.org/10.1111/J.0016-7398.2002.00059.X
  31. Hansbrough, J., & Singh, A. (2014). Mediation in coastal and water resource disputes. Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction, 6(4), 05014002. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)LA.1943-4170.0000144
  32. Hansen, R. L. (2012). Civilization’s drying cradle: Water politics in the Tigris-Euphrates River Basin (Unpublished master’s thesis). U.S. Army War College. Retrieved from https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA561194.pdf
  33. Hilal, J., Ashhab, S. (2006). The H2O factor. In P. Misselwitz, T. Rieniets, Z. Efrat, R. Khamaisi, & R. Nasrallah, (Eds.), City of Collision. (pp.185-208). Birkhäuser Basel. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-7643-7868-9_13
  34. Huijgh, E. (2016). Public diplomacy. In N. Snow & N. J. Cull (Eds.), Routledge handbook of public diplomacy (pp. 437–450). London: Routledge.
  35. International Maritime Organization. (n.d.). United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. Retrieved from https://www.imo.org/en/ourwork/legal/pages/unitednationsconventiononthelawofthesea.aspx
  36. Karacasulu, N., & Aşkar Karakır, İ. (2022). Humanitarian foreign policy as soft power: Türkiye as an emerging global actor. ULISA: Uluslararası Çalışmalar Dergisi, 6(2), 121-135.
  37. Karthe, D., Karthe, D., Chalov, S., Borchardt, D., & Borchardt, D. (2015). Water resources and their management in Central Asia in the early twenty first century: Status, challenges and future prospects. Environmental Earth Sciences, 73(2), 487–499. https://doi.org/10.1007/S12665-014-3789-1
  38. Kibaroglu, A. (2015). An analysis of Turkey’s water diplomacy and its evolving position vis-à-vis international water law. Water International, 40(1), 153–167. https://doi.org/10.1080/02508060.2014.978971
  39. Krasner, S. D. (1983).Structural causes and regime consequences: Regimes as intervening variables, In S.D. Krasner (Ed.). International Regimes, (pp.1-22) Cornell University Press.
  40. Legault, A., Desmartis, I., Fournier, J., & Thumerelle, C. (1994). The United Nations at fifty: regime theory and collective security. International Journal, 50(1), 71–102. https://doi.org/10.1177/002070209505000104
  41. Mitzen, J. (2006). Ontological security in world politics: State identity and the security dilemma. European Journal of International Relations, 12(3), 341–370.
  42. Møller, B. (1997). A common security and NOD regime for the Asia‐pacific? Global Change, Peace & Security, 9(1), 23–43. https://doi.org/10.1080/14781159708412829
  43. Mourad, K. A., Berndtsson, R., & Aggestam, K. (2013). Can integrated water resources management contribute to sustainable peace in the Middle East. Journal of Geoscience and Environment Protection, 1(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.4236/GEP.2013.11001
  44. Narzullaev, O., & Bekov, I. (2024). Contemporary analysis of the use of transboundary waters in Central Asia. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 1420, 012035. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/1420/1/012035
  45. Nyakomitah, K. (2023). Rethinking the role of diplomacy in shaping world politics. Journal of Research in Social Science and Humanities, 2(12), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.56397/jrssh.2023.12.01
  46. Nye, J. S. (2004). Soft power: The means to success in world politics. New York: PublicAffairs.
  47. Olsson, O., Bauer, M., Ikramova, M., Froebrich, J. (2008). The role of the Amu Darya Dams and reservoirs in future water supply in the Amu Darya Basin. In J. Qi & K.T. Evered (Eds.). Environmental Problems of Central Asia and their Economic, Social and Security Impacts. NATO Science for Peace and Security Series C: Environmental Security, (pp 277–292). Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-8960-2_20
  48. Orlando, L. (2015). Fighting water wars: Regional environmental cooperation as a roadmap for peace. The Fletcher Forum of World Affairs, 39(2), 101–110. Retrieved from https://spire.sciencespo.fr/notice/2441/3s6c3f8u7f9d1ofrnpi09qn7k8
  49. Otinov, D. (2023). Water security in Egypt amid the crisis around the Renaissance Dam in Ethiopia. Vostok, 6(18). https://doi.org/10.31857/s086919080027069-2
  50. Pohl, B., Wolf, A. T., Kramer, A., Carius, A., & Dombrowsky, I. (2014). The rise of hydro-diplomacy: Strengthening foreign policy for transboundary waters. Adelphi/Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC). Retrieved from https://www.adelphi.de/en/publication/rise-hydro-diplomacy
  51. Roach, A. (2008). PSI and SUA: An update. In M. H. Nordquist, R. Wolfrum, J. N. Moore, & R. Long (Eds.). Legal challenges in maritime security, 12, (pp. 279–326). Brill | Nijhoff. https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004164277.v-594.41
  52. Sommer, U., & Fassbender, F. (2024). Environmental peacebuilding: Moving beyond resolving violence-ridden conflicts to sustaining peace. World Development, 178, Article 105554. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2024.106555
  53. Swain, A. (2016). Water and post-conflict peacebuilding. Hydrological Sciences Journal-Journal Des Sciences Hydrologiques, 61(7), 1313–1322. https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2015.1081390
  54. Tawfik, R. (2016). The Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam: A benefit-sharing project in the Eastern Nile? Water International, 41(4), 574–592. https://doi.org/10.1080/02508060.2016.1145573
  55. Tignino, M., & Kebebew, T. (2023). Access to water and peacebuilding. In D. Jensen & J. E. D. T. McQuistan (Eds.). Research handbook on international law and environmental peacebuilding (pp. 328–354). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781789906929.00024
  56. Türk İşbirliği ve Koordinasyon Ajansı/TİKA. (2021, 19 June). Annual Report 2021. Turkish Cooperation and Coordination Agency. Retrieved from https://www.tika.gov.tr/en/publications
  57. Turgul, A., Rosenblum, Z., McCracken, M., Schmeier, S., & Wolf, A. T. (2023). Can water help quench the flames of hostility? How shared waters can promote dialogue during conflict. SAIS Review. https://doi.org/10.1353/sais.2023.a918646
  58. United Nations Water. (2021, July 11). Water and peace: A strategic perspective. United Nations. Retrieved from https://www.unwater.org/publications
  59. Warner, J. (2012). The struggle over Turkey’s Ilisu Dam: Domestic and international security linkages. International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 12(3), 231–250. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-012-9174-2
  60. Wegerich, K. (2008). Passing over the conflict: The Chu-Talas Basin agreement as a model for Central Asia? International Negotiation, 13(2), 223–240.
  61. Weinthal, E., Troell, J., & Nakayama, M. (2011). Water and post-conflict peacebuilding: Introduction. Water International, 36(2), 143–153. https://doi.org/10.1080/02508060.2011.561772
  62. Vink, M. (2018). The role of water diplomacy in peacebuilding. In A. Swain & J. Öjendal (Eds.). Routledge handbook of environmental conflict and peacebuilding, (pp. 283–294). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315473772-20
  63. Vreÿ, F., & Blaine, M. (2023). Exploring the maritime nexus in Turkey’s African agenda. Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies, 26(3), 346–359. https://doi.org/10.1080/19448953.2023.2236513
  64. Yadav, A. (2023). Navigating the blue diplomacy: Indo-pacific oceans and the geopolitical chessboard of India and China. International Journal for Multidisciplinary Research. https://doi.org/10.36948/ijfmr.2023.v05i06.11472