28>
28
>
Analysis
According to the DSI, Euro 25 million will be spent on the preservation and salvage of the cultural heritages of Hasankeyf.
Analysis
>
Simla Yasemin ÖZKAYA, MSc.
Advisor, Transboundary Water Resources Department
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Turkey
TURKEY’S ATTITUDE ON TRANSBOUNDARY WATERS ILISU DAM: WILL IT BE A DISASTER OR A MIRACLE?*
Abstract
Industrialization, population growth and climate change have highlighted the necessity to use water
resources more efficiently, especially for countries with arid climates, like Turkey. Therefore, Turkey
needs to intensify her efforts to ensure the sustainable management of water resources. The Ilısu Dam
and Hydroelectric Power Plant, which will be constructed by Turkey on the River Tigris, is one of the biggest of the projects developed in the context of the Southeastern Anatolia Project. This project will be a
milestone for utilization of water resources of Turkey. Although the project has been criticized for many
years, Turkey has continued to express its determination to construct the dam. The arguments voiced
by the detractors of the project are various. However, this paper focuses primarily on the main arguments in favour of the project by giving some examples of its positive impacts in the context of Turkey’s
transboundary water policy.
*Assessments and observations expressed in this article reflect only the opinions of its author and do not represent the official opinion of Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Turkey.
Ortadoğu Analiz
December’10 Volume 2 - No 24
>
29
Analysis
Significant tributaries within Iraq have been contributing more water in
total supply than the main stream of the Tigris. The effect of any temporary stoppage at Ilısu would therefore be substantially diluted, and would be unlikely to be significant below the Mosul Dam in Northern Iraq.
Introduction
Of all the world’s renewable energy resources,
water may be the most vital. Water is essential
for food, for socio-economic development and
more importantly for life itself.
In addition to rapid industrialization and population growth, climate change has highlighted
the necessity to use water resources more efficiently, especially for countries with arid and
semi arid climates.
Turkey is one of the most striking examples. Water availability can vary tremendously from season to season and region to region, and Turkey
has become more and more vulnerable to dry
years. According to data provided by the General Directorate of the State Hydraulic Works
(DSI), which is the primary executive agency of
Turkey in overall water resources planning, the
amount of available water per capita per year is
around 1,600 cubic meters. This is far below the
European average of around 10,000 cubic meters. This figure clearly indicates that Turkey is
not a water-rich country. Indeed, it is expected
to become a water-stressed country in the years
to come. The Third Assessment Report (2007) of
the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC) confirms that drought and water scarcity are expected to increase. As a country in the
Mediterranean region, Turkey will be severely
affected by climate change, says the IPCC’s latest report. In fact, Turkey has already been experiencing the impacts of climate change, such
as flash floods and a declining trend in precipitation, resulting in drought. Due to these pressing
conditions, Turkey needs to intensify her efforts
to ensure the sustainable management of water
resources.
With regard to water resources, Turkey has considerable hydropower potential, which is among
the highest in Europe. According to the statistics
of the DSI (2007), the hydropower potential of
Turkey is 125.3 Terawatt-hours (TWh), of which
33.7% is currently in use. (For comparison, the
hydropower potential of Sweden is 130TWh,
Italy 65TWh, and Greece 20.7TWh) The same
statistics also indicates that energy consumption
per capita in Turkey is around 1,382 Kilowatthours (KWh). This is far below the level of developed countries, which consume an average
of 4,000KWh per head (Energy consumption in
Norway is 25,105KWh per year per capita).
The Euphrates and the Tigris, with their erratic
flows, which constitute around 28.4% of the water resources of Turkey, and play a crucial role
in its energy production, drinking water supply,
irrigation networks and sanitation systems, as
well as in the eradication of poverty and sustainable economic growth. With energy demand
rising by 6-8% per year on average, it is easy to
understand the increasingly vital importance of
hydroelectric energy for the country. Hydroelectric power plants have long been major instruments not only for regulation of the erratic flows
of rivers but also for avoiding the emission of
millions of tons of greenhouse gases from thermal power plants, the main alternative source of
power production for Turkey.
Sustainable development has become a popular
slogan in recent years. In this context, the Millennium Development Goals are frequently cited as human needs and basic rights which every
individual should be able to enjoy. Among these
are as reliable and affordable drinking water, sufficient food and some basic standards for human
life. The efforts of any state to reach these goals
Ortadoğu Analiz
December’10 Volume 2 - No 24
>
30
Analysis
Claims that the Ilısu may deprive Syria and Iraq of water are totally baseless.
through the sustainable utilization of its natural resources, without damaging its neighbors,
its citizens or the balance of nature, is therefore
worthy of support.
Given the practical imperative for Turkey to utilize its hydroelectric energy production potential, is it possible to argue that Turkey’s efforts to
make full use of the Euphrates and the Tigris are
in contravention of the “right to development”
proclaimed by the United Nations in 1986? 1
The question to be asked then is this: Would it
be appropriate to examine the Ilısu Dam, which
Turkey is going to construct, within the context
outlined above? Or would it be realistic to join
the voices of those who appear to have the firm
belief that the dam will be a catastrophe for historically important landscapes, for thousands of
local people and in particular for Iraq and Syria?
The Main Arguments for the Ilısu Dam and
Hydroelectric Power Plant (HEPP)
The Ilısu Dam and Hydroelectric Power Plant
(HEPP) Project, developed within the scope of
the Southeastern Anatolia Project (GAP), is located on the River Tigris. The Dam and HEPP is
45 km from the Syrian border, and the Project
area covers the provinces of Diyarbakır, Batman,
Mardin, Siirt and Şırnak.
The Ilısu Dam and Hydroelectric Power Plant
Project was initiated in 1954. When completed,
it will be the second largest dam in Turkey after the Atatürk Dam with an embankment volume of 45 million cubic metres. The installed
capacity of the power station will be 1,200MW
and annual energy generation will be 3.8 billion
kWh.
One of the main arguments used by the detrac-
Ortadoğu Analiz
December’10 Volume 2 - No 24
>
Analysis
Only the lower part of Hasankeyf will in fact be affected by the Project.
One of the most famous monuments of the part of Hasankeyf which will
be submerged will be transferred and exhibited in a Cultural Park to be
located near the new Hasankeyf.
tors of the Ilısu Dam project is that Turkey could
use it maliciously to cut off the waters of the
Tigris. Some NGOs have stated that “The construction and operation of the Ilısu Dam by itself will significantly affect the hydrology of the
Tigris River. It will alter the seasonal flow pattern by capturing all except large flood flows in
the spring and releasing them in the autumn and
it will create large daily flow fluctuations whose
influence would be felt more than 65 km downstream at the Syrian border; The operation of the
Ilısu Dam in combination with diversions from
the future downstream Cizre project would
probably significantly reduce summer flows
in Syria and Iraq below historic level”23 These
circles claim that Ilısu Dam will be a dangerous
weapon or “sword of Damocles” which can Turkey will be able to use against Iraq and Syria by
controlling the flow of water in the Tigris.
The truth is that the Ilısu is mainly a hydroelectricity project, and that water has to flow
through the turbines to generate electricity. The
River Tigris forms part of the border between
Turkey and Syria and thenflows through Iraq.
More than half the water of the river in Iraq does
not come from Turkey but from other tributaries in Iraq not affected by the Ilısu Dam. As a
matter of fact, significant tributaries within Iraq
have been contributing more water in total supply than the main stream of the Tigris. The effect of any temporary stoppage at Ilısu would
therefore be substantially diluted, and would be
unlikely to be significant below the Mosul Dam
in Northern Iraq. In other words, claims that the
Ilısu may deprive Syria and Iraq of water are totally baseless.
From the technical point of view, Ilısu can
smooth out the irregular flow of the river to provide a dependable year-round flow downstream.
The dams constructed by Turkey on the River
Euphrates can be used as evidence of this. Thirty
years ago, before the construction of the Keban
and Atatürk dams, floods were a natural disaster which threatened the lives and livelihoods
of people in downstream countries. Few people
know that the flood which occurred in Iraq in
1946 caused the inundation of around 90,000
hectars of land and left many people dead and
injured.
In recent times, the character of the problem has
changed. Continued droughts have become the
main challenge that has to be overcome. Nonetheless, Turkey has been trying to do its best to
release sufficient water downstream taking in
consideration of the humanitarian aspects of
this precious resource. For instance, 1988 and
1989 were the dryest years of the last half century. At the height of the summer, the flow of the
Euphrates was only around 100 cubic meters per
second. In spite of the unexpectedly low natural
flow, Turkey was able to go on releasing water to
downstream neighbors at more than 500 cubic
meters per second thanks to its dams. This has
also been the reality for the past 10 years.
The importance of dams not only for Turkey but
also for its downstream neighbors is acknowledged by the Environmental Impact Assessment
Report of Ilısu Dam.
“Because of the extremely high seasonal and
annual fluctuations of the Euphrates and Tigris flows, storage facilities represent the key
elements of water resources management, for
Turkey as well as for the downstream riparian
Ortadoğu Analiz
December’10 Volume 2 - No 24
31
>
32
Analysis
Ilısu can smooth out the irregular flow of the river to provide a dependable year-round flow downstream.
Keban and Atatürk are the best examples for this.
countries. For topographical reasons, however,
the water can more easily be stored in the upper
catchment for regulating the flows throughout
the year and over the years.”3 4
Another Criticism of the Ilısu Dam project concerns the displacement of local people, especially
people of Kurdish origin. The records concerning the number of people who will be displaced
because of the project are various. According
to the data indicated in the Resettlement Action Plan based on data collected in 2000,71,186
people will be affected by the project. However,
based on the 1990 census, the number of people
affected would be 55,217. The Environmental
Impact Assessment Report states that, in the
spring of 2005, 6,249 households lived in the 199
settlements to be totally and partially flooded
by the reservoir, representing a population of
43,733. In any case, the total number of people
to be affected by the project makes up a maximum of 1.9 % of the population of the South
Eastern Anatolia Region according to the 2008
population figures.
Since it will be at least 7-8 years until the reservoir
is created, there is still ample time for settlement
plans to be completed. The Turkish authorities
have been stating in their reports that everybody
will be eligible for resettlement and compensation. People will be resettled, in accordance with
their own wishes, either in an agricultural settle-
Ortadoğu Analiz
December’10 Volume 2 - No 24
>
33
Analysis
The parties concerned should first and foremost free themselves from
nationalist emotions and prejudices. Confidence-building measures
should be taken in order to dispel mistrust and create the appropriate
environment for meaningful cooperation.
ment or in an urban settlement. Those who are
not satisfied with the compensation will have the
right to seek further compensation by referring
the matter to the courts including the European
Court of Human Rights.
DSI statistics indicate that 4,000 people will be
employed during the construction of the Ilısu
Dam. Taking families into consideration, 80,000
people will benefit from the economic activity
generated by the construction work, and the resulting commercial activity in the region will be
of the order of USD100-150 million per year..
The most notorious claim related to the project
concerns the “inundation of Hasankeyf ”. The location of the dam was determined after 12 years
of hard work during which ten alternative locations were eliminated due to technical concerns.
Contrary to the general belief that the whole of
the ancient town of Hasankeyf will be flooded,
only the lower part will in fact be affected by the
Project. One of the most famous monuments of
the part of Hasankeyf which will be submerged
will be transferred and exhibited in a Cultural Park to be located near the new Hasankeyf.
Some of the monuments will be replaced and
exhibited in an open museum. The salvage work
which is being carried out by the Turkish Government for the preservation of the archeological heritage is not a “low hanging fruit”. On the
contrary, Turkey has in good faith been trying
to do its best to rescue the archeological heritage which can be preserved on site, to transport movable cultural heritages to appropriate
locations, and to document non-transportable
cultural heritage. According to the DSI, Euro 25
million will be spent on the preservation and salvage of the cultural heritages of Hasankeyf.
Work to identify, document, and rescue the cultural assets in the areas that will be flooded by
the Ilisu Dam Body and Reservoir, and to relocate movable cultural assets to the museums
have been carried out by national government
ministries. Survey work was initiated in 1980
and continued intensely between the years 1990
and 1993. The Hasankeyf excavations were started in 1986, and systematic excavations were initiated in the whole area in 1998. These excavations are still going on. However, there is a need
to accelerate the excavations and archaeological
research.
The living conditions of people directly affect
their priorities and perspectives. Tourists who
have visited Hasankeyf have some idea about the
physical condition of the area. Due to the low
levels of income and education of the citizens,
the existing historical monuments have not been
protected efficiently. No one can blame them
for that. It is true that Hasankeyf will be negatively affected by the project to some extent, but
if we consider that the preservation of cultural
heritage is a shared responsibility for everybody,
would it not be more useful for the critics to
concentrate on extending technical and financial
support to the effort to rescue the archeological
and historical heritage of the area? A speech of
the former South Sudanese Minister Abel Alier
summarizes this perspective. While expressing
his grievances against the European Greens,
who had campaigned against the construction
of the Jonglei canal to reduce evaporation losses
in the Sud Swamp Area, he declared:5
“The people (in the South) cannot even one full
meal a day, and children of school age cannot
go to school because of our underdevelopment,
backwardness and poverty. Yet we are asked to
accept all this. ..and remain in a sort of human
zoo for anthropologists, tourists, environmentalists and adventures from developed countries
of Europe to study us, our origin, our plights, the
Ortadoğu Analiz
December’10 Volume 2 - No 24
>
34
Analysis
sizes of our skulls and the shape and length of
our customary scars..”4
Had the rescue works not been carried out, the
ancient monuments could not possibly have
been recognized. From an optimistic point of
view, the project itself will become a real opportunity to bring the archeologically important
areas to light.
There are several other ways of producing energy which might be considered as alternatives to
Ilısu Dam, such as fossil fuel plants based on lignite, coal, oil or gas. The Environmental Impact
Assessment Report of the dam shows us that the
operation of an oil-fired single-cycle gas turbine
generating 3.6TWh/year (1TWh/year=1,000
gigawatt-hours/year) would produce over the
life-cycle of the project 775kt CO2/TWh, 8,000t
SO2/TWh and 1,500 t NOx/TWh. As for wind
generators, between 2,400 and 6,000 wind generators (of 500kW to 2MW) would be needed to
have an installed capacity equal to that of Ilısu.
However, this capacity could not be considered
as firm power due to the random character of
wind. It also seems that photovoltaic installations cannot solve the problem. An equivalent
installed capacity of 1,200MW would require
numerous photovoltaic installations generating
between 1 and 4MW each and including maintenance and auxiliary facilities, would require a
surface area of 20,000 m2 per installed MW.
Conclusion
It is the view of the author that water is not necessarily a source of conflict. On the contrary, it
can be used as a bridge-builder. History suggests
that there is a greater tendency to cooperate for
water than to struggle for it. However, the use
of water as a catalyzer to further improve existing cooperation among riparian states requires
visionary thinking.
It is a fact that water issues are not only technical in nature; they also have certain political and
social aspects. It follows that water issues among
riparian states and their people cannot be resolved without building mutual trust and confidence among the riparian states. The parties
concerned should first and foremost free themselves from nationalist emotions and prejudices.
Confidence-building measures should be taken
in order to dispel mistrust and create the appropriate environment for meaningful cooperation.
As a starting point, riparian states should express at the highest level their political will to
engage in meaningful cooperation, and state
their readiness to address the situation in the
light of the technical facts. This political will
should be complemented by actions designed to
further enhance confidence and trust, which in
turn can pave the way for result-oriented cooperation. The riparian states should adopt a new
comprehensive approach based on the resolve to
discuss all water-related issues in a transboundary context, and to share both the responsibility
and the benefits.
In the light of these facts, realistic and rational
assessments, and not sentiments, should play
the dominant role in transboundary water issues.
On the other hand, it has to be accepted that all
human activity has a negative effect on the environment to some extent. In this context, the
construction of a dam, whether its purpose is
hydroelectricity production, flood control or irrigation, will always affect the natural environment somehow. However, the “radical environmentalist approach” or “green blindness” within
a radical development attitude is doomed to fail.
The author of this article believes that the best
way is to adopt a balanced approach following
the evaluation of the results of a “cost-benefit
analysis” in the context of sustainable development.
There may be gaps in the rescue works undertaken to preserve historical monuments in the Ilısu
dam project area. Likewise, resettlement activities may be imperfect. However, the best path is
one which seeks economic development and the
spread of prosperity to all people while taking
environmental concerns into consideration. In a
wider context, criticism is always beneficial for
obtaining better result. However, it should not
be allowed to distort fruitful works.
Ortadoğu Analiz
December’10 Volume 2 - No 24
>
35
Analysis
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bilen, Özden. “Turkey and Water Issues in the Middle East, An Examination of the Indus, Colorado, Danube and
Jordan-Israel Water Treaties and the Water Agenda of the 21st Century”, Ankara, 2002, pp 31-83.
Bilen, Özden. “Çevre Emperyalizmi ve Ilısu Barajı Örneği”, Ankara, ASAM Yayınları, 2003, pp-195-210.
Çevre ve Orman Bakanlığı, Devlet Su İşleri Genel Müdürlüğü, “Haritalı İstatistik Bülteni”, Ankara, 2009, pp 7-13
Ilısu Environment Group Ilısu Consortium,”Environmental Impact Assessment Report of the Ilısu Dam and
HEPP”, update 31st July, 2005, at : http://www.dsi.gov.tr/ilisu/ilisu_ced_eng.pdf.
Kibaroğlu A., “Building a Regime for the Waters of the Euphrates-Tigris River Basin”, Kluwer Law International,
London, The Hague, New York, (2002).
Kibaroğlu Ayşegül and Ünver Olcay., “An Institutional Framework for Facilitating Cooperation in the EuphratesTigris River Basin,” International Negotiation: A Journal of Theory and Practice, Vol. 5, No. 2, (2000), pp. 311 – 330.
Kolars, John. “Defining the Political/Ecological Threshold for the Euphrates and Tigris Rivers” 2000, Vol.22, pp.
101-112
Review of EIAR for the Ilısu Dam and HEPP summary, 2001, Corner House Research, Ilısu Dam Campaign, Kurdish Human Rights Project, Friends of the Earth, Berne Declaration, Campaign eye on SACE, Pacific Environment,
World Economy, Ecology and Development (WEED)
World Commission on Dams, “Dams and Development: A New Framework for Decision Making-The Report of
the World Commission on Dams” 2000, at:http://www.dams.org//docs/report/wcdreport.pdf.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Turkey, “Turkey’s Energy Strategy”, 2009, at: http://www.mfa.gov.
tr/data/DISPOLITIKA/EnerjiPolitikasi/Turkey’s%20Energy%20Strategy%20(Ocak%202009).pdf
TBMM, “T.C.Anayasası” pp 1-15
1
2
3
4
United Nations, “Declaration on Right to Development”, at http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/41/
a41r128.htm The definition of the right to development is given in the Preamble of the Declaration
and states that “development is a comprehensive economic, social, cultural and political process,
which aims at the constant improvement of the well-being of the entire population and of all individuals on the basis of their active, free and meaningful participation in development and in the fair
distribution of benefits resulting therefrom.”
Review of EIAR for the Ilısu Dam and HEPP summary, 2001, Corner House Research, Ilısu Dam
Campaign, Kurdish Human Rights Project, Friends of the Earth, Berne Declaration, Campaign Eye
on SACE, Pacific Environment, World Economy, Ecology and Development (WEED) pp 3, at: http://
www.foe.co.uk/resource/reports/ilisu_eia_summary.pdf
Ilısu Environment Group Ilısu Consortium, Environmental Impact Assessment Report of Ilısu Dam
and HEPP, update 31st July 2005, at http://www.designconsult.com/ilisu/themes/blue_style/images/umwelt/pdf/EMP060604.pdf
Waterburry, J. (1979), Hydropolitics of the Nile Valley, Syracuse University Press, NewYork
Ortadoğu Analiz
December’10 Volume 2 - No 24
DİPNOTLAR