The Aral Sea Disaster The “quiet Chernobyl” –Since 1960, the Aral Sea has: lost 50% of its surface area lost 66% of its volume left behind 3.6 mln ha of polluted soil contributed to the environmental degradation of water quality, air quality, and the melting of glaciers –Central Asia has lost its fishing industry and other supporting industries had an increase in public health problems decreased its agricultural production experienced changes in climate (longer, colder winters and shorter, hotter summers photo_pages/kohn1.html

Desiccation of the Aral Sea

Aral Sea Basin: Central Asia Kazakhstan Kyrgyzstan Tajikistan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan Afghanistan Rivers: Syr Darya Amu Darya

Central Asia Population (million) GDP (US$) % GDP from Ag / % employed by Ag LandRiver Basin Kazakhstan B1023SteppeSyr Darya Kyrgyzstan51.5B3955Mountainous Syr Darya & Amu Darya Tajikistan B2050Mountainous Syr Darya & Amu Darya Turkmenistan5.55.9B2544DesertAmu Darya Uzbekistan257.5B2544 Desert steppe Syr Darya & Amu Darya

History Soviet-rule –Direct water in the basin to lower riparians (Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, and Turkmenistan) for irrigation of cotton fields Post-Soviet Era –Each republic trying to establish its self-sufficiency in government and economy Developing agriculture and hydroelectric potential –Several different funding organizations have offered assistance Building a free-market democracy Actualizing energy potential (hydroelectric, oil) Improving water management Improving health

Socio-economic Agriculture –Largest percentage of countries’ GDPs –Largest consumer of water –Land has decreased in productivity due to water logged and high saline soils Fishing –Was once a profitable industry, but is now virtually non-existent Industry –Some textile factories – now closed or working at reduced loads Soviet influence is still felt –Bureaucracy used to be Soiviet officials and are not open to change –Citizens often still act as subjects as opposed to participants in democracy

Discussion The republics are moving from a centralized government to free market democracies. What avenues should be taken to help the populace move from the Soviet culture (citizens as subjects) to this new culture (citizens have an active voice)?

Hydropolitics Central Asian republics have recognized they needed to cooperate on water management issues –1992, Interstate Coordination Water Commission (ICWC) – for control, rational use and protection of interstate waters Continue to use existing Soviet structures and principles for resource management World Bank / UN –1993, International Fund for the Aral Sea (IFAS) – attract funding for programs to overcome the desiccation of the Aral Sea –1993, Interstate Council for the Aral Sea (ICAS) – manage programs of IFAS –1997, merger of IFAS and ICAS

Hydropolitics USAID –1998, Executive Committee of the Interstate Council of the Central Asian Economic Community (EC CAEC) - barter system agreement between Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Uzbekistan on the use of water and energy resources

Discussion USAID has focused on working separately in the two river basins, as opposed to the Aral Sea basin-wide approach that other donor organizations have taken. Which is more effective, given that each river basin has global and local concerns? If the World Bank is funded by the United States, why does USAID not cooperate with World Bank and other donor organizations? If donors get frustrated with inter-donor conflict, will the donors leave the region?

Discussion USAID’s goals are broader than just environmental protection; therefore several of its other aid programs have conflicted with its water and environment programs. How should USAID balance its interests with that of the basin? Whose responsibility is it to justify the soundness of each project? Are donor agencies playing too big of a role in the development of these republics (replacing Soviet control over the decisions of the region with donor control)?

Discussion Will the barter agreement developed in the Syr Darya basin have longevity? Three attempts have been made to create a dike to separate the Small Aral Sea from the Large Aral Sea, however it keeps getting washed away. When the dike is in operation, positive results are seen in the Small Aral Sea – increases in water levels, moderation of the climate, increases in biodiversity and decreases in salinity. Should efforts be made to create a permanent dike? Is it feasible to restore the Aral Sea (in part or whole) or should it be considered a loss? Should the focus of donor money be placed on development of water resources and energy in the river basins, or to preserve and restore the Aral Sea?