Home > Regionen > Russland und Zentralasien > Zentralasien > Analysen > Agricultural Crisis prompts Uz...

Agricultural Crisis prompts Uzbek Officials to revive interest in Plan to divert Siberian Rivers

Elena Dubrovskaya

As Central Asian states continue to haggle over the use of water resources, the Uzbek government is reviving the possibility of diverting Siberian rivers with the aim of bolstering the region’s agricultural infrastructure. Proponents see the project as necessary to prevent an economic disaster, while adversaries warn that diverting Siberian rivers could cause new ecological damage in a region already ravaged by environmental catastrophes.

The diversion of waters from the Ob and Irtysh rivers in not a new idea. In the 1980s, about 150 scientific and research institutes in the former Soviet Union collaborated on developing a water diversion blueprint, which would supposedly enlarge the amount of arable land in Central Asia, Ural and Siberia by 4.5 million hectares. The plan ultimately was never implemented, reportedly because of stiff opposition from within elements of the Soviet political and academic hierarchies.

These days, Central Asian states are having difficulties sharing scarce water resources. Uzbekistan, in particular, is facing shortages. Uzbekistan’s agricultural infrastructure is dependent on irrigation, which consumes about 90 percent of the country’s water resources. Drought and mismanagement has compounded the country’s agricultural woes. In 2001, for example, the country’s rice harvest was 67,800 tons – a 56 percent decrease over the harvest in 2000, according to the UzReport.com website. In 1999, Uzbekistan reported a rice harvest of 420,800 tons.

The drastic decline of agricultural yields provided the impetus for renewed interest in the long-forgotten project to divert Siberian rivers in both Uzbek government circles and in the country’s scientific community.

"This project is of great importance not only for Uzbekistan but also for other countries in the region of Central Asia," said the First Deputy Minister of Agriculture and Water Resources of the Republic of Uzbekistan, Abdurakhim Jalalov. "It becomes especially apparent in dry years when the level of water in the region’s rivers is very low. In 2000-2001 as well as this year we can witness shortage of water in Amu Darya. Khorezm, Bukhara and Kashkadaria Regions as well as Karakalpakstan have seriously suffered from the lack of water."

Uzbek farmers are also desperate to explore any option that would prevent widespread crop failure. They report that many once fertile areas - especially in Karakalpakstan, which has emerged as an environmental disaster zone because of the rapidly dwindling Aral Sea [for additional information see the Eurasia Insight archive] – are now unable to sustain agriculture.

"We have not had enough water for three years," says Berdibay Naurizbayev, a farmer working in Chimbay District of Karakalpakstan. "A considerable portion of land has been damaged by desertification; my fellow-countrymen are in sore distress. No cotton, no rice, no wheat. For many years we have not received salaries from the government."

The last time Berdibay Naurizbayev gathered a crop of rice was three years ago. Once rice crops in Chimbay District were among the richest in Uzbekistan. Today lands in Chimbay like in many other districts in the Aral Sea area are heavily salted and poisoned with herbicides and pesticides.

In 2000, according to the Pravda Vostoka newspaper, Karakalpakstan received only 42 percent of the average annual amount of water. In addition, 40 percent of the region’s population obtained drinking water from reservoirs that did not meet minimum sanitary standards. Over 270,000 people have left Karakalpakstan over the past 10 years and others continue to leave.

The Siberian river diversion plan calls for the construction of a 2,000-kilometer-long Siberia-Central Asia Canal, which would bring additional water to Amu Darya and Syr Darya rivers, which feed the Aral Sea. In recent decades, irrigation has so depleted both rivers that in most years no water reached the Aral Sea. Estimates on construction costs vary. Some say the project could cost as much as $16 billion USD, an amount far beyond the reach of states in the region.

A recent ecological forum in Tashkent focused on the issue of the Siberian river diversion concept. Participants decided to establish an international consortium to develop the project and then present it to the political leaders of Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and Russia for discussion. There has been no reaction from the Russian government so far.

Some experts suggest that the enormous cost is not the largest obstacle to realization of the project. The fact that Central Asian states have been unable to work out a comprehensive framework for managing existing water resources would seem to indicate that the countries would be unable to cooperate on such a vast infrastructure venture, they say.

"None of the numerous agreements signed by the CIS states has been properly implemented yet," says Faizulla Iskhakov, political expert and Doctor of Historical Studies. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive]. "This is a gigantic project. Who is going to pay then? Turkmenistan does not need the water; neither does Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan. It means it is Uzbekistan that needs the water. We do not have so much money and no one is going to invest in the project as no one has any clear idea of what benefits it will give."

Even if the logistical and financing details can be arranged, some scientists today, like their counterparts in the 1980s, argue that implementing the river diversion plan would prove disastrous. A study produced under the auspices of the Russian Academy of Sciences’ Siberian Branch showed that diverting river waters could upset the global environmental balance, and cause considerable damage to Siberia’s ecosystem.

But not all Russian scientists involved in the development of the project share the opinion that diverting the rivers is environmentally unsound. Oleg Vasilyev, hydrology academician from Novosibirsk, said: "Water unlike natural gas and oil is a renewable resource." He claimed that diverting about 5 percent of the rivers’ waters would not have severe environmental repercussions.

Whether such an amount, however, could relieve Central Asia’s agricultural distress is debatable. Some environmental advocates argue that a major factor in the current agricultural crisis is poor management and waste.

Veröffentlichung mit freundlicher Genehmigung von Eurasianet:
Posted May 30, 2002 © Eurasianet
http://www.eurasianet.org

bookmarken bei...