Patricia Wouters

This special issue of Water International presents a selection of papers from the Xiamen Law School (China) symposium on "Promoting Transboundary Water Cooperation - a focus on China", convened in Xiamen in May 2014. Through legal and governance analysis looking at China  / Asia / comparative transboundary state practice, this collection of papers provides new insights for how China might go forward with managing its significant transboundary water resources.

Theme:  “Promoting Transboundary Water Cooperation in Asia – Law, governance and institutions explored”
This special collection of papers, ‘The China Water Papers’ aims at exploring how law/governance/institutions promote (or prevent) transboundary water cooperation, with a regional focus on Asia. Comparative regional state practice is examined with a view to distilling possible lessons for Asia, in general, and China, in particular.

The duty to cooperate – the bedrock of international law continues to evolve as new global challenges emerge that test the boundaries of state sovereignty. This article explores the duty to cooperate through the prism of transboundary waters in the context of impending conflicts-of-use as demands increase to meet growing economic, social, cultural and environmental needs. What are the obligations on sovereign nation states as they develop and manage their shared water resources? This article argues that a norm of ‘dynamic cooperation’ is emerging in the field, with its origins at the very core of international law, and which provides a platform for the continued peaceful management of the world’s shared fresh waters. The declaration of  2013 as the UN International Year of Water Cooperation has helped to provide the impetus to explore more fully the ‘duty to cooperate’ as it relates to the development and management of the world’s shared freshwater resources.

Professor Wouters: How does President Xi’s speech in Brazil (and across Latin America) during his recent tour across the region (following a similar tour across Europe) reveal China’s approach to international law? And… how might this translate into China’s transboundary water treaty-making and state practice. With China upstream on more than 40 major transboundary waters, and with only a handful of water-related treaties, it faces a wide range of issues with its 14 riparian neighbours. Transboundary water cooperation, even founded on principles of limited territorial sovereignty, can be facilitated through treaties and functioning river basin commissions or regional organisations. In China’s quest to be ‘the good neighbour’, taking into account the reasonable needs of its neighbours, with a view to sharing benefits, how can it make progress in the domain of shared transboundary water resources?

Professor Wouters: The following press release announces a new SEA global tool, prepared under the auspices of the UNECE and open as a global instrument.
How might this SEA Protocol support the peaceful development of transboundary water resources? Given the current trend of the ‘proceduralisation’ of international water law, a fact that facilitates transboundary water cooperation by providing the means for concrete (and mostly technical) cooperation, and the assertion by the ICJ that conducting an EIA  is a rule of customary law, how does this new SEA Protocol help? We would welcome research papers on this topic as we work on exploring China’s transboundary water issues, specifically in the context of its ‘upstream dilemma’. Can an SEA help with the matter of eco-compensation strategies across transboundary watercourses, where upstream/downstream benefits need to be more clearly identified and shared?

Just received this news about our joint paper

A joint paper by Prof Chen, Prof Wouters (Xiamen CIWL) and Dr Alistair Rieu-Clarke,  ‘Exploring China’s transboundary water treaty practice through the prism of the UN Watercourses Convention’ has reached the ‘Most Read Articles’ of Water International with 740 views;  and one of only two papers from 2013 to make the list.

Delighted! (great co-authors)

See http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showMostReadArticles?journalCode=rwin20#.U8P5Nl7u8Xc.

The CIWL symposium is an academic forum convened to explore current issues related to water resources, with a focus on water law. The symposium explores international law and transboundary governance models and their contribution to promoting transboundary water cooperation in Asia. The symposium will bring together leading experts in the field from across China, Asia, Europe and the Americas. Selected papers from the events will be published in peer-reviewed journals and in a book. "

Water security has become a new global and regional challenge. Control over increasingly scarce water resources, especially those that cross international borders, has the potential to cause tensions and conflicts between states sharing them. Rapid economic development in Northeast Asia has already put under serious pressure available water resources, including those belonging to some major transboundary river basins, shared by China and Russia. While Sino-Russian interaction related to the management and use of transboundary water resources has experienced ups and downs, generally in accordance with political relations between the two states, over the last few years water-related cooperation has become increasingly active. Accordingly, the latter is governed by various international legal instruments, bilateral and multilateral, and is carried out under the auspices of different joint institutions. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the existing legal and institutional frameworks, which form the basis of the Sino-Russian cooperation in this field, and to determine whether and to what extent they are adequate in dealing with new water security challenges facing the two states.

Water security is rapidly becoming one of the most
pressing global issues and it is increasingly evident
that the world's capacity to respond meaningfully to
water security risks is in serious doubt. The growing
tension over access to water resources manifests itself
at all levels - local, national and international - with
the potential for water-related conflicts most apparent
in transboundary (or shared) water systems (rivers,
basins or aquifers), which cross administrative or international
borders.

Management and utilisation of transboundary water
resources is a multi-dimensional phenomenon where
economic and environmental factors are intertwined
with geopolitical and legal concerns. At the heart of
this tangle is the problem of how to resolve the
inherent contradiction between the physical integrity
of an international watercourse (basin) and the
sovereign right to use its waters by each state sharing
it. The evident reduction in the amount and decline of
the quality of freshwater resources intensifies competition
between various uses and users across borders,
which creates the potential to turn it into open rivalry.

Interstate tensions and disputes over water resources
are becoming increasingly common in different geographical
regions, such as the Middle East, Northern
Africa and Southeast Asia, and are now considered as a
new emerging threat to regional and even global
security. Water controversies usually arise either from
water shortage, where existing and projected needs
cannot be satisfied by available resources, or from
transboundary impacts, first and foremost pollution. In
order to prevent such conflicts it is important to strike
a balance between the competing interests of different
states sharing an international watercourse, while also
taking into account the requirements of ecosystems.
This objective can be achieved only through interstate
cooperation, with appropriate legal and institutional
frameworks being its central piece.

It is within this context that the article explores an
important issue for Northeast Asia: how China and
Russia `cooperate' in the management of their shared
water resources.

The duty to cooperate – the bedrock of international law –
continues to evolve as new global challenges emerge that test the
boundaries of state sovereignty. This article explores the duty to
cooperate through the prism of transboundary waters in the context of impending conflicts-of-use as demands increase to meet growing economic, social, cultural and environmental needs. What are the obligations on sovereign nation states as they develop and manage their shared water resources? This article argues that a norm of ‘dynamic cooperation’ is emerging in the field, with its origins at the very core of international law, and which provides a platform for the continued peaceful management of the world’s shared fresh waters. The declaration of 2013 as the UN International Year of Water Cooperation has helped to provide the impetus to explore more fully the ‘duty to cooperate’ as it relates to the development and management of the world’s shared freshwater resources.

Given the universal acknowledgement of the compelling need to address pressing natural resources issues and the current global discourse on agreeing Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs),  it is timely to revisit the rules that govern freshwater resources, as one of the most important challenges facing the global community. This work considers the evolution of the duty to cooperate in the context of shared transboundary waters and argues that we now witness the emergence of the duty to cooperate in the peaceful management of the world’s water resources as an obligation erga omnes opposable on all States.

At the heart of our argument are three fundamental tenets: (i)  international  law has the inherent capacity to, and is in the process of, transforming to address global water-related imperatives;  (ii) the rules of international law that apply to shared water resources require a consolidated,  and a consolidating, framework in order to address the global water crisis within and across national borders; (iii) the very notion of State sovereignty, recast in our contemporary setting, supports and provides the legal parameters for the crystallisation of an obligation erga omnes to ensure ‘water for all’, as duty and entitlement of the international community as a whole.

THE ROLE OF INTERNATIONAL WATER LAW
International river basins cover more than half of the land’s surface. With close to 300 major watercourses shared by two or more states and an ever-increasing demand on the world’s diminishing water resources, there may be some justification in the assertion by certain commentators that “water wars” are imminent. The UN forecasts that more than half of the world’s population will suffer direct consequences of water
scarcity if the current development patterns continue. The situation is particularly critical in developing countries, leading the world’s governments to commit themselves to “halve by 2015, the proportion of people without access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation,” and also to “develop integrated water resources management and water efficiency plans by 2005” (UN Summit on Development, Johannesburg, 2002). Commendable as these plans may be, what solutions will states find in their competition over shared water resources? This is particularly crucial for states that depend on water supplies that cross their national borders.
This study discusses the relevance and role of international water law in the promotion of cooperation over shared transboundary watercourses. With its focus on
actual case studies and through examination of contemporary state practice and detailed analysis of the 1997 UN Watercourses Convention, this work aims to provide
water resource experts from all disciplines with an overview of the rules of international law that govern interstate relations over water.

This special issue of the Journal of Water Law presents
a collection of articles derived from research currently
being undertaken at our Dundee UNESCO Centre.
The works examine a range of water-related problems
at various scales ± from global to local, and across a
spectrum of disciplines. In tackling the complex challenges
arising in this area, it is proposed that a more
integrated approach, combining water law, policy and
science in constructive ways, will promote innovative
contributions to achieving `water for all'.
During times of unprecedented uncertainty and rapid
change, the need to manage the world's water
resources in ways that enhance the (often divergent)
social, economic and environmental objectives, provides
myriad challenges at all levels. In such a context,
it is especially important to understand the `rules of
the game'. Where there are insufficient quantities or
qualities of water to meet national requirements on
shared transboundary watercourses, or to irrigate the
fields for local farmers; or where raging floods
adversely affect human and ecosystem populations,
the need for robust and responsive legal frameworks is
readily apparent. It is interesting to note, however, that
despite the recent proliferation of global policy
statements, experts' reports and projects aimed at
addressing the global water crisis, most have failed to
integrate effectively water law, policy and science in
their proposed solutions. The next World Water
Development Report (produced by the UN agencies
working on water and released every three years at the
World Water Forum), already a work-in-progress, will
focus on the theme of uncertainty and risk, and
provides yet one more opportunity for such a joinedup
approach.

Guest Editors: Professor Patricia Wouters and Dr Sarah Hendry

“The Water Security Paradox and International Law:
Securitisation as an  Obstacle to Achieving Water Security and the Role of Law in  De-Securitising the World’s Most Precious Resource”

Christina Leb and Patricia Wouters

Introduction
Water is life.
Lack of access to adequate quantities and qualities of water resources is linked to most, if not all, development issues – poverty, poor health, diminished livelihoods, child mortality and conflict. It is within this context that we explore the issue of water security. ‘Water insecurity’ derails pathways to economic efficiency, social equity and environmental sustainability, all necessary for national security (GWP). Growing water scarcity and competition for shared water resources driven by population growth, expansion of human economic activity and climate change is at the heart of the debate over the securitisation of water and water security. 
National security threats linked to water, or the ‘securitisation of water’, is one strand of the debate. In that domain, the lack of access to water is viewed primarily as a political issue, as the very object of securitisation. Distinct, but connected to this discourse, is the notion of ‘water security’, which is concerned primarily with resource management. The former approach places water at the centre of the politicisation process and favours isolationist resource planning and potential zero-sum games, while the latter approach, the achievement of water security, revolves around resource management objectives and evokes a range of environmental, economic and social equity considerations best addressed jointly among the nation-States sharing the resource.

This paper examines Chinese transboundary water cooperation specifically through the prism of the rules of international law that govern the uses of transboundary water resources. China’s state practice will be considered in the light of the principal legal instruments in this field – the UN Watercourses Convention (UNWC)  and the UNECE Transboundary Water Convention (UNECE TWC), each a result of codification and progressive development of the rules in this field.  Increasing transboundary water cooperation is a global theme as the international community seeks new ways to tackle serious water problems, witnessed at the recent UN Security Council meeting that concluded emphasizing this very topic.  As one of the largest players in the international arena, China has an opportunity to build upon and enhance its cooperation on transboundary waters.

The UN  Watercourses  Convention, adopted  in May 1997, and ratified to date by six Parties/ is a global framework agreement with the goal to "ensure the utilization, development, conservation, management  and protection of international watercourses"  and  the promotion of their  optimal  and sustainable  utilization  for present and future generations.  In line with this, the Convention requires that "an international watercourse shall be used and developed by watercourse  States with a view to attaining optimal and sustainable utilization  thereof and benefits therefrom, taking into  account  the interests  of the  watercourse States concerned, consistent with adequate  protection of the watercourse."  This  paper addresses the question whether  the UN  Watercourses Convention facilitates achievement  of these aims, specifically in the context  of conflicts-of-uses and water scarcity.

The paper (2,52 MB) explores how international law facilitates transboundary cooperation in a manner that is accessible to the wider transboundary water community. It discusses the norms and principles contained in treaties and rules of customary law and examines how these work in selected case studies from across the GWP network.

Key messages
More than 260 internationally shared watercourses contribute to the economic, social, and environmental wellbeing of over 70 per cent of the world’s population. When water crosses national borders, states need to cooperate to resolve problems and share limited resources.

International law provides the rules that govern the use of transboundary water resources and facilitate cooperation. Central to these is the duty to cooperate – one of the main normative pillars of international law.

International agreements and rules of customary law can help sovereign states reconcile competing claims. The UN has produced three key instruments which provide guidance for states.

When transboundary waters are not governed by treaty, customary international law guides state actions. Each state is entitled to, and obliged to ensure, equitable and reasonable use of shared waters, which includes a due diligence obligation not to cause significant harm.

Transboundary watercourse treaty regimes should address the core elements of scope, substantive rules, procedural rules, institutional mechanisms, and dispute settlement.

The potential for effective cooperation is increased when relevant institutional mechanisms, like river-basin organisations and commissions, are established, supported, and fully functional

The challenge of transboundary water management is geographically widespread throughout the world, but the responses towards it, and policies to address it can be quite different. There are few places in the world where the current approach can be said to be comprehensive, ...

The Mackenzie River is the largest north-flowing river in North America. It is the longest river in Canada and it drains a
watershed that occupies nearly 20 per cent of the country. The river is big and complex.

It is also jurisdictionally intricate with tributary rivers running through three provinces – British Columbia, Alberta and Saskatchewan – two territories – Yukon and the Northwest Territories – and areas which fall under the jurisdiction of
numerous independent indigenous governments. Large tributary rivers, the Liard, Peace and Athabasca drain much of north central Alberta and parts of the Rocky Mountains in northern
British Columbia. The Peace and Athabasca Rivers flow to Lake Athabasca, which is drained by the Slave River, the primary feeder to Great Slave Lake. The Mackenzie River itself flows from Great Slave Lake to the Arctic and lies wholly within the
Northwest Territories.

The Basin’s governance is complicated by jurisdictional fragmentation. The need to address this problem arose in the 1990s with the development of the Mackenzie River Basin
Transboundary Waters Master Agreement of 1997.

The Master Agreement required multi-party collaboration and co-operation in managing the land and water resources of the Basin. There has been little effective follow-through on this
Master Agreement. This report includes a careful consideration of the obstacles to governance and offers recommendations for an appropriate governance structure for the Basin.

One major recommendation is that the Mackenzie River Basin Board (MRBB), originally created by the Master Agreement, be
reinvigorated as an independent body charged with managing and protecting the Basin.

The beneficial use of the world's transboundary waters raises difficult issues for drainage basin management. International law provides that each transboundary watercourse State is entitled to, and obliged to ensure, an "equitable and reasonable use" of these shared waters (Report of the Work of the International Law Commission on the Work of its Forty-sixth Session, 1994). The International Water Law

China shares 40 major transboundary watercourses with 16 countries. This paper surveys China’s transboundary water treaty practice and compares it to the core principles of the 1997 UN Watercourses Convention (UNWC). Despite a growing atercourse
treaty practice stretching back some 60 years, China’s agreements in this field are relatively unsophisticated. The authors conclude that China’s transboundary water treaty
practice would benefit from some of the guidelines set forth under the UNWC.

To cite this article: Huiping Chen , Alistair Rieu-Clarke & Patricia Wouters (2013): Exploring China's transboundary water treaty practice through the prism of the UN Watercourses Convention,
Water International, 38:2, 217-230

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02508060.2013.782134

"In a report released today to mark World Water Day and 2013 as the International Year of Water Cooperation, UN-Water is proposing a common definition of water security. UN-Water, which coordinates water programs within the United Nations system, claims that a single description of the problem will help global collaboration around water, one of the world’s most vital needs.
world water day 2013 united nations un-water water security paper report analytical brief
Image courtesy of UN-Water
‘Water Security and the Global Agenda’ is the title of an analytical brief published by the United Nations for World Water Day 2013. Click image to enlarge.

The authors define water security as: “The capacity of a population to safeguard sustainable access to adequate quantities of acceptable quality water for sustaining livelihoods, human well-being, and socio-economic development; for ensuring protection against water-borne pollution and water-related disasters; and for preserving ecosystems in a climate of peace and political stability.”

This work builds on the UN High Level Expert Panel convened at the UN in New York (Sept 2012) where I was invited as a panellist. (see my earlier post on this). I was invited to peer review this Analytical Brief.

"While the notion of security, and water security in particular, may have different meanings and acquire various forms (that is, at the individual, local, national, regional, and global levels), the primary focus of this study is on its international dimension and, more specifi cally, at the regional or international basin level. This is where the water security challenges have manifested themselves most visibly and where the international legal response has been particularly pronounced. The central hypothesis of this article is
that the evolving international legal frameworks that govern transboundary water resources provide an appropriate platform for addressing water security concerns. The notions of equity, reasonableness, fairness, and sustainability, which are enshrined in the key principles of international water law, properly reflect the core objectives of the fair and effective management of the world’s shared water resources and thus of the promotion of regional and global peace and security."

This book chapter explores the notion of 'benefits-sharing' in the context of transboundary watercourses and reveals its legal foundation within the international law rule of 'equitable and reasonable utilisation'. The paper discusses the theoretical and state practice relevant to this topic through a legal lens.

International watercourses cross sovereign nation States who pursue national interests. What are the rules of international law that prescribe the limits of state sovereignty in the context of shared transboundary water resources? This paper surveys treaty and state practice with a focus on the upstream-downstream paradigm, with a view to identifying any lessons that might be learned for the Euphrates-Tigris regime.

This chapter identifies and addresses the ‘water security paradox’ in the context of the current water security discourse and demonstrates the important role of international law in de-securitising this debate.  The work considers state practice, relevant treaties and case studies to support their position.

How is China managing its considerable transboundary water resources? This study explores China's treaty practice through the prism of the 1997 UN Watercourses Convention and rules of international law. (article to appear in 2013). The paper surveys the range of legal rules and institutional mechanisms in place under the treaties concluded by China.

"

-- Wouters, Patricia. "International Watercourses." In Oxford Bibliographies Online: International Law. Ed. Tony Carty. New York: Oxford University Press, forthcoming. Oxford University Press (2012)

-- The Collected Courses of the Xiamen Academy of International Law contain the Summer Courses taught at the Xiamen Academy of International Law (2010)  -- The International Law of Watercourses: New Dimensions, by Patricia Wouters

Sharing the world’s freshwater resources across national boundaries presents complex challenges, especially in the current reality of growing uncertainties (economic, social, and environmental) around the globe. How does international law support the management of transboundary waters in ways that promote regional peace and security and the fundamental freedoms of all? This work provides an overview of the evolution and current statues of international water law, introducing a legal analytical framework for examining state practice in this field of law, with a focus on Asia – where emerging water insecurity threatens more than half of the world’s total population. Following an examination of the legal regimes covering shared watercourses across this diverse region, the study highlights current issues around water security.

http://www.brill.nl/collected-courses-xiamen-academy-international-law-volume-3-2010

Editors’ Summary: Rivers, lakes, and aquifers cross national borders around the world creating international interdependencies related to one of the world’s most precious resources. More than one-half of the world’s population derives their water from international sources, located beyond the jurisdiction and
control of the country where they live. What are the rules of international law that govern these shared waters, and how can national water policy objectives be pursued in light of such interdependency, especially in a world of sovereign
states? In this Article, Dr. PatriciaWouters identifies the legal regimes that apply to international watercourses and uses Europe as a regional case study to compare these different regimes. She uses a five-point analytical framework to
identify, examine, and compare the rules of international law that govern these shared waters. The Article concludes by highlighting the legal innovations at the heart of the dual-track  governance regime that has evolved to regulate Europe’s
transboundary waters and embeds this study in the global context.

Xi Woos Modi With ‘Peace Through Development’ Approach
Publication: China Brief Volume: 14 Issue: 14
July 17, 2014 04:38 PM Age: 8 hrs
By: David Cohen

Xi met India’s new prime minister at a BRICS summit and said that China and India are both seeking “national renewal” (Source: Deccan Chronicle)

On July 14, Chinese President Xi Jinping became the second national leader to meet newly elected Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi (who has paid a state visit to Bhutan), beating Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe in an 80-minute face-to-face meeting at the BRICS Summit in Fortaleza, Brazil (qstheory.cn, July 16). The message he delivered, focusing on China and India’s shared development ambitions, is an application of a theory of development-led diplomacy that Chinese leaders have put forth over the past year.

Xi’s meeting edges out Abe, who had earlier been promised Modi’s first overseas trip. While Modi may still make Japan his first state visit outside the Indian subcontinent, he has delayed a trip planned for early July to September (The Hindu, July 14). In the meantime, with the Xi meeting and a previous visit by Wang Yi, China has been making a pitch to India for a closer relationship built upon expanding economic cooperation—with two new banks to support Indian infrastructure and hints of a trade in services deal, which could help to rebalance India’s $31 billion trade deficit with China (Times of India, June 8). China currently puts strict limits on trade in services, an area in which India has an advantage.

Both Xi and Wang have drawn upon an approach to regional foreign policy first expounded at last year’s Work Forum on Peripheral Diplomacy, and since elaborated in Xi’s speech at the Conference on Interaction and Confidence Building in Asia. This approach seeks to persuade China’s neighbors that “for Asians, development is the greatest form of security”—promoting a conception of security that privileges development above other concerns and allows China to argue that its own economic growth is a major contribution to regional security (see China Brief, May 23 and June 19). The goal of this approach seems to be to ensure that economic integration outweighs territorial disputes in the strategic calculus of China’s neighbors.

India’s new government, as Jonathan Ward wrote in China Brief last month, presents China with a test of this theory: Modi harshly criticized China’s territorial claims on the campaign trail, accusing it of having an “expansionist mindset,” but has also made economic development a centerpiece of his government and evinced an interest in learning from China’s reform process (see China Brief, June 19). Both Xi and Wang have seized on the latter focus to argue that the two countries are united by their status as developing nations, and have sought to address Indian economic concerns.

At their meeting, Xi said that both countries are currently “striving for national rejuvenation,” and called for increased services trade, investment and tourism, noting that trade must be balanced to be sustainable—an observation happily endorsed by India’s foreign ministry spokesman (qstheory.cn, July 16; Indian Ministry of External Affairs press briefing, July 15). Wang likewise emphasized shared dreams of national renewal (PRC Foreign Ministry, June 9). Both mentioned the territorial disputes, but did not offer anything new—relegating the issue to the end of their speeches and saying that existing frameworks are sufficient to manage the dispute.

China has also deployed international organizations to woo India, inviting it to join the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, proposed last year, which will further economic ties both by direct investment and by facilitating further trade in physical goods (qstheory.cn, July 16). A deal announced at the summit to create a BRICS development bank headquartered in Shanghai and initially led by an Indian President will help with the same goals (Times of India, July 16). Xi also invited Modi to attend a November APEC summit hosted by China, which will be India’s first appearance at that forum, and reportedly told Modi that he “looks forward to working more closely with India at the Shanghai Cooperation Forum,” a China-initiated organization at which India has been denied full membership (Indian Ministry of External Affairs press briefing, July 15).

But Modi is also clearly concerned about traditional security issues, focusing on them in a statement released at the opening of the BRICS summit. He mentioned terrorism, Afghanistan, the current wars in the Middle East and North Africa and cyber-security, but not territorial disputes (NDTV, July 15). Likewise, he is apparently interested in maintaining a close relationship with Abe despite the growing tensions in Sino-Japanese ties.

China is unlikely to shelve its territorial disputes in pursuit of trade—while rolling out the peripheral diplomacy strategy in Southeast Asia, China has not avoided confrontations in the South China Sea, placing an oil rig in Vietnamese-claimed waters and sending navy ships to visit a reef in waters disputed with Malaysia during an exercise in February. The oil rig ended drilling on July 15, somewhat earlier than the originally stated schedule of drilling into the middle of August. Instead, Xi argues that the benefits of development will simply outweigh other types of security.

But this theory may work both ways: Xi has argued that it is possible to decouple economic cooperation from territorial and strategic confrontation. While he has made progress toward forging a close business relationship with Modi, there is no guarantee that it will translate into politics.

By Wasbir Hussain

India and China signed three Memoranda of Understanding (MoU) during the Indian Vice President Hamid Ansari’s recent five-day visit to Beijing from 26 June– 1 July. One of them was on the ‘flood data’ of the Brahmaputra River – also called the Yarlung Tsangpo in China. In the past, we have heard of similar MoUs between the two neighbours on the Brahmaputra, and it is all about the sharing of the hydrological data of Brahmaputra River during monsoons. In the latest MoU on the subject that was signed on 30 June – in presence of Indian Vice President Ansari and his Chinese counterpart Li Yuanchao – Beijing agreed to provide 15 days’ additional hydrological data—from 15 May 15 to 15 October each year.

Bluntly put, the latest MoU on the Brahmaputra flood data means nothing as an additional 15 days worth of hydrological information will not enable India to deal with the problem any differently. What India needs is input from the Chinese side on dams and other projects Beijing is pursuing or intends to pursue based on the waters of the Yarlung Tsangpo. The 510 MW Zangmu dam built at the Gyaca County in the Shannan Prefecture of China’s Tibet Autonomous Region is expected to be commissioned next year. What must be noted is that Beijing has given clearance for the construction of 27 other dams on the Yarlung Tsangpo River that flows 1625 kilometres across China, and 918 kilometres through India in its downstream course.

Moreover, China actually plans to divert water at the Great Bend, located just before where the river enters India, also known as the Shoumatan Point; and also intends to build hydroelectric power projects that could generate 40,000 MWs of power. The plan to divert the Brahmaputra is a reality because China wants to solve the water scarcity in its arid northern areas. The diversion of the water is part of a larger hydro-engineering project, the South-North water diversion scheme, which involves three man-made rivers carrying water to its northern parts. If the water is diverted, the water levels of the Brahmaputra will drop significantly, affecting India’s Northeastern region, and Bangladesh. Estimates suggest that the total water flow will fall by roughly 60 per cent if China successfully diverts the Brahmaputra. Besides, it will severely impact agriculture and fishing as the salinity of water will increase, as will silting in the downstream area.

With an unprecedented mandate and a demonstrated policy to improve ties with its neighbours, the new Narendra Modi government in New Delhi can initiate setting up of something like a South Asia Shared Rivers Commission or Authority by bringing Bangladesh, Myanmar, Bhutan and Nepal on board. The Commission can begin by formulating a framework agreement among the states that share rivers for their use, development, protection, conservation and management of the water and related resources, and establish an institutional mechanism for cooperation among these states. Once such a commission emerges and a cooperative framework on the shared rivers is agreed upon by the concerned states, it can engage with China and try to bring Beijing on board. After all, eleven major rivers flow out of China to countries in its neighbourhood and there is enough commonality of interest.

Cooperation on the Brahmaputra with China is of utmost importance to India and Bangladesh. The principle of cooperation between China, India and Bangladesh—the Brahmaputra basin states—can be on the basis of sovereign equality, territorial integrity, mutual benefit and good faith in order to attain optimal utilisation and adequate protection; conservation of the Brahmaputra River Basin; and to promote joint efforts to achieve social and economic development. These actually are the guiding principles of an effective and successful Nile River Valley Cooperative Framework (NRVCF) involving Egypt, Sudan, Ethiopia, Uganda, Kenya, Tanzania, Burundi, Rwanda, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), as well as Eritrea as an observer. The NRVCF has enough flexibility in the sense that two of the nations who are part of the Framework can have certain specific bilateral understanding or arrangements. What is significant is that every member nation must maintain total transparency on its plans about utilising the resources of the shared river and inform the states concerned of any project at hand.

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who has already demonstrated India’s big power ambitions by his proactive foreign policy push, will be well advised to come up with a comprehensive shared river water policy, keeping China’s plans and/or intents in mind. Delay may cost India dearly and we may have a case of non-utilisation of waters of shared rivers such as the Brahmaputra – one that has neither being tapped for hydro-power or navigation, 26 years after it was declared National Waterways Number Two.

Wasbir Hussain
Executive Director, Centre for Development & Peace Studies, Guwahati, and Visiting Fellow, IPCS, New Delhi

Chinese Premier Li Keqiang said Friday that China has designated ecological and environmental protection as a key area in opening up to the outside world.

Li made the remark in a message sent to the Eco Forum Global Annual Conference 2014 that opened Friday in Guiyang, capital of the southwest province of Guizhou.

Li said that China will continue to strengthen environmental cooperation with all other countries and international organizations by pressing for implementation of the international environmental pact and jointly addressing climate change.

The Premier said China has given even greater priority to developing an eco-wise civilization in its modernization drive. It sticks to a protective approach in development and has improved the regulatory system for environmental protection. He said China has made great efforts to control haze, water pollution and soil contamination and advanced change in energy and resources production and consumption. He said China will continue to carry out major ecological projects in order to offer a healthy environment to the people.

Li said the forum will bring together common sense on eco-wise development and explore new frontiers for sustainable growth in the world.

Nearly 1,000 people attended the forum. Chinese Vice President Li Yuanchao made a speech at the opening ceremony.

He said people should balance economic development and preservation of the eco-system. He called for people to adopt the thinking that protecting and improving the environment is equal to maintaining and developing productivity. He said people should pursue the road of civilized development with greater productivity, better lives and a sound environment.

The Vice President also urged people to balance environmental protection and ecological restoration. He said the government should carry out rehabilitation of the eco-system as work of fundamental significance and create the social attitude to be nature friendly and protect the environment.

Li Yuanchao said the balance between developing and saving resources requires a set of rigid rules, an effective system of governance and harsh regulation by the law. He also called for greater efforts in expanding green, recycling and low-carbon-emission industries.

The Vice President said different countries should balance their own specific responsibilities and international cooperation to achieve common environment-friendly development.

He said China is advocating and implementing the development of environment-friendly civilization and is ready to strengthen cooperation with all other countries on an equal, friendly, and mutually beneficial basis.

Ethiopian President Mulatu Teshome, Maltese Prime Minister Joseph Muscat, President of the Council of States of Switzerland's Federal Assembly Hannes Germann, Russian Presidential Administration chief Sergei Ivanov, Vanuatu Deputy Prime Minister Ham Lini also made speeches at the opening ceremony.

MBAs recognise value of tapping into water management (excerpts only included here; see FT website link for complete story)

By Sarah Murray
Ferguson illustration

Business school graduates heading to jobs in sectors such as energy, telecoms, drinks or apparel may find the subject of water appears on their agenda. Some may even find themselves wishing that their MBA had given them a better understanding of water management.


Research published last month indicates increasing concern among companies about how to deal with water risks and opportunities. More than three in four companies said they were already facing water-related challenges, according to the study by Vox Global, a communications firm, and Pacific Institute, an environmental research group.

On average, respondents said that they saw water management as the most significant sustainability issue they faced, with almost 60 per cent predicting that water challenges would have an impact on business growth and profitability in the next five years. Nearly 85 per cent said that, in five years’ time, water issues would influence decisions on where they located their facilities.

“Water is going to be seen as a strategic resource,” says Tony Calandro, head of Vox Global’s sustainability and CSR practice group. “Within a business school environment, it’s about understanding how the competition for water is going to impact the business and integrating that into the curriculum.”

“If you have world-class water and engineering people doing advanced research, you can get a good blend of the technology and the management if you put it together properly,” says Peter Lacy, managing director for Asia-Pacific of strategy and sustainability services at Accenture, the professional services group.

“Business schools have a responsibility to ensure that future leaders are exposed to the basics of environmental management through collaboration with departments of engineering, hydrology, science and technology,” says Jean-Paul Jeanrenaud, director at WWF International (World Wildlife Fund) and co-founder of the University of Exeter Business School’s One Planet MBA.


“Unless there’s someone in the faculty with a passion or they are able to leverage experts to shape the curriculum, schools are poorly positioned to bring that depth of knowledge to issues such as water,” says Mr Lacy, who sits on the boards of several global business schools.

However, the question is whether – given the amount of material to be absorbed during the short time span of an MBA programme – the best use of a student’s time would be to delve deeply into the technical complexities of water management.

Mr Lacy believes that water should be included in the MBA as part of more general discussions about the efficient management of resources.

This becomes more pressing as commodity costs rise, making a more compelling case for treating wastewater (which contains everything from metals to nitrogen and phosphorus) as a source of raw materials.

“People on MBA courses might not have time to look into water specifically,” says Jamie Butterworth, chief executive of the Ellen MacArthur Foundation. “But if the price of energy, water and virgin materials is going to trend upwards, decoupling growth from resource constraints will allow companies to outperform their competitors – that’s something we’ll start to see covered in the MBA.”

But while companies’ awareness of this might be increasing, it does not always filter down to their recruitment staff. And MBA curriculum changes often reflect the demands of recruiters, explains Andrew Crane, director of the Centre of Excellence in Responsible Business at Schulich School of Business, Canada.

Unless recruiters signal that they are looking for MBA graduates equipped with the skills needed to manage resources such as water, he says, there is not always pressure to alter the curriculum.

“We could easily go far deeper with sustainability teaching but we have to be mindful of our recruiters,” says Prof Crane. “And they’re still not coming on to campus and demanding that graduates know about resource conservation.”

"World Bank head says climate change could lead to conflict

Jim Yong Kim, the president of the World Bank, has warned that the impacts of climate change could lead to an escalation in conflict and social unrest.

His comments come in the wake of the recently published report from the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report, which warned that no nation would be unaffected by climate change.

The report cautioned that the effects of global warming would impact on many areas including food prices and availability with production of vital crops predicted to drop by 2050, leading to a rise in poverty and conflict.

Mr Kim, speaking in a recent interview, said he believes disputes over food and water will begin within the next decade as climate change begins to affect production. He urged campaigners and scientists to collaborate to create solutions.

In order to keep global warming below the internationally agreed limit of 2°C, Kim called for governments and the UN to finalise a plan of action.

The four areas Kim outlined in which the World Bank could help fight climate change are investing in cleaner cities, finding a stable price for carbon, removing fuel subsidises and developing climate smart agriculture.
"

Suzhou, Jiangsu Province, China, has been conferred the Lee Kuan Yew World City Prize 2014 for its demonstration of sound planning principles and good urban management. Despite facing numerous challenges through China's rapid industrialisation and urbanisation processes, Suzhou has overcome difficulties through several stages of transformation to achieve remarkable economic prosperity, and preservation of its celebrated cultural and historic heritage concurrently. Investments in physical infrastructure are complemented by effective social integration policies, enabling the city to manage rural-urban migration challenges well.

Chinese companies that illegally discharge wastewater will receive a “heavy blow" from the government, according to Premier Li Keqiang.

Speaking at a recent State Council meeting on energy savings and emissions reduction, Li said the government will “crack down hard” on both businesses and local officials who have “ignored basic social responsibility and legal liability” for not providing proper oversight of discharges by companies that fall under their jurisdiction.

Last week, Vice Minister of the Ministry of Water Resources Jiao Yong said only 47.4 percent of the country’s surface water sources met water quality standards for their usage categories -- drinking water, industrial water, agricultural water or landscaping water.

Jiao said his ministry will improve water quality by setting new discharge limits and making sure local governments are handling problems before they lead to public protests.

It is also planning to expand a pilot program that creates a system of “three red lines” -- one each for total water consumption, total wastewater discharges and water efficiency targets. About 95 percent of the nation’s cities and some 700 counties have completed draft plans on these three lines, according to Jiao.

This year, the ministry, together with the National Development and Reform Commission and the State Council, will create a system to determine if local governments are enforcing better water management policies, he added.

Water pollution is a growing public concern in China, and this in turn has spurred more government action.

Last month, the water resources ministry announced a $330 billion USD plan, which is currently under review, to address water pollution and improve water quality. It involves investing in wastewater treatment and recycling and membrane technology.

In December, the State Council approved a plan that focused on water quality in lakes. This plan adjusts the industrial structure and distribution surrounding lakes as a way to limit discharges. It also strengthens pollution control measures for rivers that flow into lakes.

The council also issued a statement calling for stronger scientific management, use of proper technology, adherence to strict water source protection rules, increased government investment, and balancing environmental protection with economic development and livelihoods.

Just last week, over a hundred dead pigs were dumped into a major river in China’s eastern Jiangxi Province. The Ganjiang River provides drinking water to Nanchang, the provincial capital.

The pigs are believed to have been dumped in the river’s upper reaches. All tests showed that tap water in the area was safe for consumption

"Official prophecy of doom: Global warming will cause conflict, displace millions and devastate economy

Tom Bawden
The Independent - ‎18‎ ‎March‎ ‎2014


Climate change will displace hundreds of millions of people by the end of this century, increasing the risk of violent conflict and wiping trillions of dollars off the global economy, a forthcoming UN report will warn.

The second of three publications by the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, due to be made public at the end of this month, is the most comprehensive investigation into the impact of climate change ever undertaken. A draft of the final version seen by The Independent says the warming climate will place the world under enormous strain, forcing mass migration, especially in Asia, and increasing the risk of violent conflict.

Based on thousands of peer-reviewed studies and put together by hundreds of respected scientists, the report predicts that climate change will reduce median crop yields by 2 per cent per decade for the rest of the century – at a time of rapidly growing demand for food. This will in turn push up malnutrition in children by about a fifth, it predicts.

The report also forecasts that the warming climate will take its toll on human health, pushing up the number of intense heatwaves and fires and increasing the risk from food and water-borne diseases.

While the impact on the UK will be relatively small, global issues such as rising food prices will pose serious problems. Britain’s health and environmental “cultural heritage” is also likely to be hurt, the report warns.

According to the draft report, a rare grassy coastal habitat unique to Scotland and Ireland is set to suffer, as are grouse moors in the UK and peatlands in Ireland. The UK’s already elevated air pollution is likely to worsen as burning fossil fuels increase ozone levels, while warmer weather will increase the incidence of asthma and hay fever.
Coastal systems and  low-lying areas

The report predicts that by the end of the century “hundreds of millions of people will be affected by coastal flooding and displaced due to land loss”. The majority affected will be in East Asia, South-east Asia and South Asia. Rising sea levels mean coastal systems and low-lying areas will increasingly experience  submergence, coastal flooding and coastal erosion.
Food security

Relatively low local temperature increases of 1C or more above pre-industralised levels are projected to “negatively impact” yields of major crops such as wheat, rice and maize in tropical and temperate regions. The report forecasts that climate change will reduce median yields by up to 2 per cent per decade for the rest of the century – against a backdrop of rising demand that is set to increase by 14 per cent per decade until 2050.
The global economy

A global mean temperature increase of 2.5C above pre-industrial levels may lead to global aggregate economic losses of between 0.2 and 2.0 per cent, the report warns. Global GDP was $71.8trn (£43.1trn) in 2012, meaning a 2 per cent reduction would wipe $1.4trn off the world’s economic output that year.
Human health

Until mid-century, climate change will impact human health mainly by exacerbating problems that already exist, the report says. Climate change will lead to increases in ill-health in many regions, with examples including a greater likelihood of injury, disease and death due to more intense heatwaves and fires; increased likelihood of under-nutrition; and increased risks from food and water-borne diseases. Without accelerated investment in planned adaptations, climate change by 2050 would increase the number of undernourished children under the age of five by 20-25 million globally, or by 17-22 per cent, it says.
Human security

Climate change over the 21st century will have a significant impact on forms of migration that compromise human security, the report states. For example, it indirectly increases the risks from violent conflict in the form of civil war, inter-group violence and violent protests by exacerbating well-established drivers of these conflicts such as poverty and economic shocks.

Small-island states and other places highly vulnerable to sea-level rise face major challenges to their territorial integrity. Some “transboundary” impacts of climate change, such as changes in sea ice, shared water resources and migration of fish stocks have the potential to increase rivalry among states.
Freshwater resources

The draft of the report says “freshwater-related risks of climate change increase significantly with increasing greenhouse gas emissions”. It finds that climate change will “reduce renewable surface water and groundwater resources significantly in most dry subtropical regions”, exacerbating the competition for water. Terrestrial and freshwater species will also face an increased extinction risk under projected climate change during and beyond the 21st century.
Unique landscapes

Machair, a grassy coastal habitat found only in north-west Scotland and the west coast of Ireland, is one of the several elements of the UK’s “cultural heritage” that is at risk from climate change, the report says. Machair is found only on west-facing shores and is rich in calcium carbonate derived from crushed seashells. It is so rare and special, that a recent assessment by the European Forum on Nature Conservation and Pastoralism described it as an “unknown jewel”.

The IPCC also warns of climate threats to Irish peatlands and UK grousemoors and notes an increasing risk to health across Europe from rising air pollution – in which the polluted UK is already in serial breach of EU regulations


​"

HSBC: No Water, No Food? Ensuring Food Safety & Security

18 March, 2014 – No Water, No Food: HSBC explores the implications of China’s quest for food safety and food security given current water scarcity and pollution issues in a newly released research report. China Water Risk was commissioned by HSBC Climate Change Centre to research and analyse the findings which form the basis of this report.

The report warns:

    China’s agricultural output is as large as Australia’s entire economy and output of its one billion livestock animals (pigs, sheep, cattle, etc.) is more than 1.5x the Singaporean economy;
    Almost 30% of China’s agricultural output comes from the water-scarce and polluted North China Plain;
    Agriculture is the top user and polluter of water and the government is tightening regulations on water usage, as well as water and soil pollution due to rising fears over food safety;
    Only 14% of China’s total land area is currently used as arable land; the country as a whole is close to water-stress levels, and soil has become polluted through the overuse of fertilisers and heavy metals from industry;
    At the same time, food demand is increasing in China, driven by rising affluence and urbanisation

"Border disputes continue to overshadow China-India cooperation over the Yarlung Zangbo, but a more positive approach from China will help.
China and India are both planning a slew of large scale dams along the Yarlung Zangbo in disputed territory.
On a visit to India in May, Chinese premier Li Keqiang said that the two countries would no longer avoid talking about their differences – everything, including border disputes and water sharing issues, was up for discussion. In October those talks bore fruit, with long-awaited progress on river issues. Li and his Indian counterpart Manmohan Singh, meeting in Beijing in their second summit of the year, signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) on strengthening cooperation on trans-border rivers, one of nine different agreements reached.

Under the agreement, both parties recognised that “trans-border rivers and related natural resources and the environment are assets of immense value to the socio-economic development of all riparian countries” and agreed to cooperate through the existing expert level mechanism on flood-season hydrological data and emergency management. China also agreed to provide India with monsoon-season hydrological data for the Yarlung Zangbo (known in India as the Brahmaputra) for an extra two weeks every year, from May 15, rather than from June 1, to October 15.

The agreement made front page news in the Indian papers. A headline in The Hindu announced that “China will be more transparent on trans-border river projects” while the Indian Express wrote that “China’s acceptance of downstream rights is without precedent, and this is to date China’s only written agreement with a neighbour on these issues.” But Indian academics expressed disappointment, complaining the deal did not cover the real problems: China’s hydropower development and dam building on the Yarlung Zangbo.

Stony silence from Chinese officials

The MoU did not make so much of a splash in the Chinese papers. When asked about the significance of the deal, the International Rivers Office at the Ministry of Water Resources’ Department of International Cooperation, Science and Technology waited a week before declining to comment.

Development of the Yarlung Zangbo has always been a sore point in relations between China and India. India worries Chinese hydropower dams will affect downstream flows. Brahma Chellaney of the Centre for Policy Research, an Indian think-tank, has even said, “China seems intent on aggressively pursuing projects on the Yarlung Zangbo and employing water as a weapon." A spokesperson at the Ministry of Water said China had no plans for any hydrological projects at the Great Bend of the Yarlung Zangbo, before the river flows into India. Meanwhile China would see any Indian development further downstream as threatening its claims over Arunachal Pradesh, which it refers to as South Tibet.

Li Zhifei, an assistant research fellow at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences’ (CASS) Institute for Asia-Pacific Studies, said that China was firmly opposed to any attempt by India to strengthen its de-facto control of the region by developing the Brahmaputra, while India holds that development would not weaken that control. “So real progress in talks on trans-border river and water allocation issues is unlikely, as the negotiations cannot avoid the status of South Tibet.”

Li argued the strategic significance of the new agreement was clear, but that China-India cooperation in this field is still just getting started, and has not yet dealt with the real issues – and so the problems cannot yet be solved. Although the two parties have opted to work together, any discussion of river development will inevitably run into questions of territory. Talks on sovereignty have decided to maintain the status quo, meaning that neither party will make any concessions. “So it can be expected that cooperation on trans-border rivers will go no further than these early exchanges of hydrological and flood-control information.”

But some Chinese academics have expressed confidence in future trans-border river cooperation. Yang Xiaoping, an assistant researcher with the National Institute of International Strategy at CASS, specialises in Chinese-Indian relations. She pointed out that the timetable for provision of flood-monitoring data on the Yarlung Zangbo hadn’t changed for over a decade, since the agreement was first signed in 2002. “It might have changed by just two weeks, but even that is a big step forward.” Yang added that “gathering data during the monsoon season is difficult, there is a lack of trust between the two nations, and scientific data is subject to national security considerations.”

Commenting on the outlook for the future, Yang said there can be further progress on institutionalising cooperation. So far there have only been MoUs,but in the future a working group could be set up to improve cooperation on flood warnings, environmental protection and biodiversity.

“For Chinese academics, trans-border rivers aren’t the decisive factor in relations with India. But if China takes a more positive approach, it will improve its image among neighbouring countries.”

In April 2011, China and Kazakhstan launched the long-awaited China-Kazakhstan Friendship Joint Water Diversion Project on the Khorgos River, a 150-kilmetre long tributary of the Ili and a border river between both countries. Under the agreement, each side will be allotted 50% of the water diverted, and the goal of the project is to improve irrigation, secure water supply for the ecosystem, and moderate flood damage, especially in Khorgos Port and the China-Kazakhstan Trade Cooperation Zone. While sharing water along a border river is not the same as along a transboundary river, this is arguably a sign that progress on bilateral water issues is possible with Beijing.

Chinese Minister Speaks Out Against South-North Water Diversion Project

China’s poker-faced party cadres are not known for speaking publicly against the country’s great engineering feats. Yet a Chinese minister has publicly called for an end to the South-North Water Diversion project, a $62billion investment designed to channel water from southern China to the arid north through three canal systems. “China tries to solve its water shortage problem by diverting water. But such a way is, to some extent, now mired in difficulties,” writes Qiu Baoxing, vice minister of the Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development.

The ambitious diversion project will be rendered irrelevant if one in three buildings in Beijing could recycle more wastewater and collect more rainwater, Qiu writes in an article published in the February issue of Water&Wastewater Engineering. The project, which officially started in 2002, is considered controversial because of its high cost, environmental impact and massive displacement of local population.

“ Recycled water could replace diverted water. Most Chinese cities are capable of finding more water if we develop water desalination technology and collect more rain water,” he writes.

Qiu says that new pollution problems have also emerged along some parts of the project’s routes. He says diverted water has led to the leaking of residues in local pipelines, a problem that is “very difficult” to solve.

Already China is grappling to deal with pollution in the central route, which is expected to start delivering water to Beijing and nearby Tianjin some time this year. The Danjiangkou Reservoir, located in central China’s Hubei Province, is badly polluted as the five rivers flowing into it are used as dumping grounds for untreated sewage, China’s Ministry of Environmental Protection acknowledged in November.

Qiu warns that new problems will emerge if China sticks to the diversion project. China has faced a number of water crises during the past few years. In March 2013, more than 16,000 diseased pig carcasses were found in Shanghai’s Huangpu River, which supplies drinking water to parts of the city.

“If we miss the opportunity to repair water ecology, we will pay dearly,” he writes. “If we try to solve our water crisis by diverting water, then new ecological problems will emerge. This is not sustainable at all.”

China’s Ideological ‘Soft War’: Offense is the Best Defense

By Nicholas Dynon

Beijing regularly reminds us that its foreign policy eschews the export of ideology and meddling in the political affairs of other countries. According to its concept of “peaceful development,” China has no intention of exporting ideology or seeking world hegemony, nor does it seek to change or subvert the current international order. In the same breath, Beijing frequently chides the United States as a serial offender in exporting ideology to shore up its international hegemony as the world’s dominant superpower.

China sees itself as the target of powerful Western political, military and media efforts to pursue neoliberal strategies of ideological world dominance. Beijing thus purports to maintain a defensive posture in relation to the export of ideology by other actors and the United States in particular. It articulates this in terms of safeguarding its “ideological security” against “ideological and cultural infiltration.”

Beijing characterizes its strategic intentions as mainly “inward-looking” while the United States’ are “outward-looking.” Thus, their strategic intentions do not clash (China Daily, September 9, 2013). While this inward versus outward characterisation appears prima facie to suggest a non-competitive arrangement, reality suggests otherwise. In addition to its defensive ideological posture—and as much as Beijing might state otherwise—there is an “outward-looking” element to this posture. While there exists no evidence that Beijing is exporting ideology for the purpose of universalizing its political values, there is evidence that it is doing so to safeguard its own ideological security in the face of a US-led “soft war.”

India-China Border Talks Shift From Resolving Disputes to Managing Them

By Rup Narayan Das

The 17th round of India-China Special Representative Talks (SR Talks) on boundary disputes between the two countries concluded in New Delhi on February 11. China was represented by State Councilor Yang Jiechi, and India by National Security Advisor Shivshankar Menon. An anodyne press release issued by the Indian Ministry of External Affairs said that the talks were candid and constructive ( https://www.mea.gov.in/press-releases.htm?dtl/22861/ ). It further said the Special Representatives continued their discussions on a framework intended to achieve resolution of the boundary question, the second stage of a three-step process agreed to previously by both sides.

The latest round of the SR Talks between the two countries took place against the backdrop of a major border incursion by China on the Indian side of the Line of Actual Control (LAC) on April 15 last year (See China Brief, July 14, 2013). Although the three-week standoff was peacefully resolved on May 5, it exacerbated mistrust between the two countries and exposed the weaknesses of the existing institutional mechanisms and Confidence-Building Measures (CBMs) intended to prevent and defuse border incursions.  It is no wonder, therefore, that the focus and thrust of the border talks in recent times have shifted to effective border management rather than seeking resolution of the issue.

China Invites India To The 'Maritime Silk Road'

By Ankit Panda

February 15, 2014

Although there are few specifics at the moment, the invitation could be an effort to reframe China’s rise.

Until now, the “Maritime Silk Road” (MSR) was China’s pitch to ASEAN, promising to deepen trade and cooperation between the PRC and various Southeast Asian countries. Xi Jinping coined the concept late last year and has been marketing it ever since. It appears now that Xi has expanded the reach of the MSR to India; China extended an invitation for India to join the MSR during the recent 17th round of border talks between the Special Representatives of the two countries in New Delhi.

Chinese Special Representative Yang Jiechi presented the invitation to Indian National Security Adviser Shivshankar Menon. India has accepted the invitation although it is not entirely clear what it entails at this point.

Sri Lanka, whose foreign minister G.L. Peiris was just in Beijing, is also an MSR participant. Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Hua Chunying indicated that the MSR is a flexible tool in China’s foreign policy at the moment. “This initiative is just an idea for cooperation. It is an open ended platform. The purpose is to integrate all kinds of ongoing cooperation especially cooperation on connectivity in the spirit of (ancient) silk road so that they can connect with each other and promote each other and accelerate regional countries’ common development,” she said.

“In this end China adopts an open attitude. We also hope to see good suggestions from other countries so as to substantiate this idea,” she added.

Including India in the MSR appears logical for China given the recent bids to push forward with the Bangladesh-China-India-Myanmar (BCIM) economic corridor. The four states held multilateral talks at the end of 2013 to draw up a timetable for the plan which would provide broad economic connectivity. The BCIM Joint Study Group concluded that the plan would ““advance multi-modal connectivity, harness the economic complementarities, promote investment and trade and facilitate people-to-people contacts.”

Generally, diplomats and officials in the region see the MSR as a bid to reframe China’s rise in a non-threatening way. The invitation for India to join the MSR, for example, comes just a week after China held rare naval exercises out of the Sunda Strait  in the waters of the eastern Indian Ocean.

For Indian strategists with an eye on China, the traditional concern has been the idea that China, via a series of port facilities in the South China Sea, is establishing a “String of Pearls” to contain India. As Shannon Tiezzi writes over at our China Power blog, the MSR has several parallels to the “string of pearls” idea (a phrase coined by U.S. defense contractor Booz Allen Hamilton).

The MSR remains an ambiguous tool of Chinese foreign policy at the point, but it will be one to watch in the coming years. What it does accomplish is offer Beijing a sort of centrality that the historic Silk Road couldn’t. The appeal of the MSR concept for Xi, a native of Shaanxi province – a terminus of the historic Silk Road – isn’t difficult to grasp. Reframing China’s interests in the Asia-Pacific’s maritime commons could serve to assuage concerns among  neighbors often sceptical of China’s nefarious intentions.

09:10 AM ET











Close






China's bold environmental move

There has been some surprising good news out of China. As you probably know, China's super-speed growth has produced super-high levels of pollution. Indeed, Beijing's poor air quality has popularized the word "air-pocalypse". There are days when you can barely see more than a few feet in front of you. It got so bad that the U.S. embassy in Beijing posted a real-time measure of air quality on its website; Chinese officials, of course, have disputed the American data as propaganda.

So people, mostly Chinese people, have asked for an accurate reading of pollution levels in China. In recent years, environmental groups have pressured Beijing to release official data on air pollution. But the government, notorious for being tight-lipped, secretive and unresponsive, had declined. In fact, few people actually believed that Beijing would ever accede to their demands.

Well, guess what? Beijing has ordered 15,000 factories to report details about their emissions: in public, and in real-time. The decree also calls for details on the release of pollutants like wastewater and heavy metals. This is a real first in China – an unprecedented mandate for transparency.

Keep in mind that many of these factories are actually run by powerful state-owned companies, with links to politicians in the upper echelons of government. But for the first time, there is a requirement to publicly acknowledge the environmental impact of mass-scale production…and to take steps to go green.

If you look at the numbers, perhaps we should have seen this coming.

According to the World Bank, the impacts of China's environmental degradation costs the country 9 percent of its Gross National Income. Studies by a number of journals show that more than a million Chinese die prematurely every year because of the country's poor air quality.

More from CNN: Can social media clear air?

And then there's the public response. In the West, we tend to hear only about the big incidents. For example, this time last year, when thousands of dead pigs were found floating in a river near Shanghai. Or when 39 tons of a deadly chemical leaked into one of China's main rivers. Or yet another "air-pocalypse."

All of these incidents and others have led to mass outrage and protest. But often unreported, at a smaller level, every day across this vast country there are hundreds of local protests about the environment. China's Society of Environmental Sciences reports that protests about the environment have grown by an average of 29 percent every year between 1996 and 2011. There are some reports that a majority of the organized protests in China are about the poor quality of air and water.

The good news – for China, and the world – is that Beijing seems to be listening. China has promised to spend $280 billion dollars cleaning up its air. According to information from the International Energy Agency: China's carbon emissions per unit of GDP have dropped by half since the 1990s. Massive investments in wind and solar energy mean that China hopes to get 20 percent of its energy from renewable sources by 2020.

The next step is to be open and transparent about how it is progressing on these fronts. But this is a big first move. And it should send a signal to other developing countries to stop denying their pollution problems and start dealing with them. Most of them are actually much worse than China in this regard. So we have the strange irony that dictatorial China, responding to public protests, is cleaning up its air faster than democratic India.​​


Post by:

CNN's Jason Miks

Sulton Rahimov – First Deputy Minister of Energy and Water Resources of Tajikistan, for EP Today on February 9, 2014.


Tajikistan is located in the center of the Eurasian continent in the south-eastern part of Central Asia. Occupying an area of 142.55 thousand km2, the country is bordered on the north by the Kyrgyz Republic (about 987 km), on the east by China (494,95 km), on the south by Afghanistan (1344,15 km), and on the west by Uzbekistan (1332,9 km).


Turn water into cooperation


With huge reserves of water resources and hydropower potential, Tajikistan has repeatedly stated its willingness to cooperate for mutual benefit with all stakeholders and especially with the neighboring countries for their effective and efficient use for the benefit of all countries in the region. Joint development of this huge potential could contribute to an integrated solution to many current and future issues in Central Asia.

First of all to ensure water security and guaranteed water for the irrigation of all the Central Asian countries in dry years by the construction of reservoirs to regulate the flow of rivers in the long-term and seasonal section. Acting on the regulatory capacity of the reservoirs today Amu Darya river basin is not sufficient for long-term regulation of the flow that the conditions prevailing poor hydrological situation can lead to large losses in irrigated agriculture. For example in 2000 and 2001 due to two consecutive dry years in the lower reaches of the Amu Darya River about 500 thousand hectares of irrigated land out of circulation, causes huge economic damage. Subsequently, it took several years for them to re-enter into the agricultural revolution. These losses could be avoided if at that time in the Amu Darya basin would be sufficient capacity for long-term reservoirs of flow regulation. For example the construction of Rogun HPP started in 1976 with a net capacity of 8.6 km3 reservoir, together with Nurek and Tuyamuyun reservoirs could provide reliable control of the Amu Darya with coefficient α=0,92, which would meet the requirements of water users at the exhaustion of own resources of the basin. "For the Amu Darya basin commissioning period Rogun reservoir has a great importance because, since 1986 water users requirements to the Amu Darya will exceed the capacity of its seasonal regulation in dry years.

Therefore period of development of water management before pool before construction of Rogun reservoir can be stressful at unfavorable combination of dry years that describes the importance of a speedy completion of the Rogun reservoir on the Amu Darya Master Plan scheme.

Secondly the development of the rich hydropower potential of Tajikistan would allow cheap and clean electricity in the region. Over the past 10-15 years the people of Tajikistan live in a tough deficit in winter. Fifth year in a row due to the termination of transit in the coldest period the population of the country gets only 2-3 hours per day electricity and in some areas the population does not receive electricity for 2-3 months in a row. This causes great damage to the socio-economic and environmental situation in the country. In recent years the shortage of electricity in the winter can also be observed in other countries in the region. So the joint development of hydropower resources of Tajikistan would cover the growing needs of not only Tajikistan but other Central Asian countries.

Thirdly the development of the energy also contributes to a significant reduction in emissions of carbon gases. At present the share of fossil fuels in the structure of a region-wide energy balance is more than 90%. Obviously, in this case emits significant amounts of acid gases. It should be noted that from more than 200 countries Tajikistan on the specific emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) is on 154th place. Greenhouse gas emissions per person in Tajikistan are less than 1 ton per person per year and its share of emissions on a regional scale is only 5%. So the development of hydropower and fits into the mainstream efforts at the global level steps for the transition to renewable energy sources is now considered as a top priority for the transition to a "green" economy.

Fourth the development of cheap hydroelectricity would save significant reserves of oil, gas and coal which are intensively used by some countries in the region to produce electricity. So the hydropower is also important in terms of sustainable use of natural resources in the long term. According to the Strategy for regional cooperation in the rational and efficient use of water and energy resources in Central Asia developed by specialists of the region within the UN-SPECA, oil and gas reserves in the region remained for 60 years. With the exhaustion of these reserves will be necessary to switch to coal or nuclear power, which are known as "clean environment". Thereby Central Asia can expect not quite bright prospects.

Fifth hydroelectric reservoirs contribute to the prevention of extreme meteorological events such as drought, floods and mudslides which are annually causing enormous economic damage to almost all countries in the region.

from China Daily
A valuable book on maritime disputes

By By Li Jianwei 
‎11‎/‎02‎/‎2014 ‎10‎:‎04‎:‎59



At a time when territorial disputes in the South China Sea have become increasingly complicated, Solving Disputes for Regional Cooperation and Development in the South China Sea: A Chinese Perspective has drawn the attention of scholars and the media, both at home and abroad. The book in English, published at the end of 2013, is the work of Wu Shichun, president of National Institute of South China Sea Studies.

The South China Sea disputes are not only matters of great concern for China and some of its Southeast Asian neighbors, but also interrelated with policies of regional and global powers and their interactions. In the near future, therefore, the South China Sea disputes will remain among the hottest security, regional conflict management and major-power relations issues in East Asia.

Wu has spent more than 20 years in regional diplomacy and research. He has also participated in the making of many policies. His rich first-hand experience of regional affairs, combined with his thorough research, makes Solving Disputes for Regional Cooperation and Development in the South China Sea an invaluable work.

The book is the first English publication with a systematic study of China's sovereignty claim over the South China Sea islands and the waters around them. With a detailed introduction to the history and current situation in the South China Sea, the book helps readers understand how the South China Sea disputes emerged and what is China's stance on the issues.

Wu's work is full of solid evidence and tells the grand story about how China first discovered, named and extended effective governance over Nansha Islands and its surrounding waters in the South China Sea. It creatively explains the actions of the Chinese government and people over the years in the South China Sea in terms of modern international law. The book will help Western readers better understand China's sovereignty claim because it uses a paradigm acceptable to both Chinese and Westerners.

A key dispute between China and some of its Southeast Asian neighbors is whether and how to apply the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. The South China Sea disputes are more than simple maritime territorial disputes; they are essentially about sovereignty over the islands in the South China Sea. Thus, it is improper to refer only to the UN Convention, which applies to maritime boundaries without any established principle on sovereignty, in order to resolve the disputes.

Chinese scholars lacking in-depth knowledge of history have studied the disputes within the limit of modern international law on the sea. Wu fills that void by conducting a systematic study of historical elements in the South China Sea disputes.

Another achievement of Solving Disputes for Regional Cooperation and Development in the South China Sea is that it lists the views of all claimants in the South China Sea disputes. Before the 1960s, the South China Sea disputes were interwoven with the invasion and intervention of colonial powers like Britain, France and Japan, with the discovery of oil and natural gas in the 1960s marking the beginning of a new round of struggle among regional countries for maritime territories and oilfields. Most claimant countries follow a general procedure, occupying maritime territories citing the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea and then unilaterally exploiting the natural resources in those territories.

Among the disputing countries, Vietnam is said to have historical evidence of its claim. But its evidence is weaker than China's, while the historical relations between China and Vietnam combined with France's occupation of Vietnam have made the problem more complicated. The book reviews the claims of all disputing countries and offers a more neutral and persuasive angle to resolve the disputes.

The book says the disputes, which by their nature are complex enough, have been further complicated by the interference of regional and global powers. There is an overall consensus that the disputes cannot be resolved immediately, especially because the disputing countries tend to study their own claims while ignoring that of the other sides. Wu is neutral and suggests cooperation among all parties to end the disputes.

It is cooperation that has kept the disputes in the South China Sea under control and prevented them from snowballing into full-blown conflicts. China is right in insisting on peaceful resolutions to the South China Sea disputes through dialogue and cooperation.

The resolutions to the disputes will depend on how China implements this principle on the road to national rejuvenation. And Wu's book is expected to help in that endeavor.

The author is director of Oceanic Economy Institute, National Institute for South China Sea Studies.

2014 No.1 Doc: Arable Land, Food & Water


19 January 2013, China’s top priorities for 2014 are improving the rural environment, maintaining food security and resolving environmental constraints such as water shortages, according to the No. 1 Document.

The No.1 Document has traditionally focused on agriculture and this year it states that China would continue to pursue “basic grain self-sufficiency” whilst increasing the use of overseas markets. Although imports are expected increase to meet rising food demand as a result of urbanisation and “Made in China” food safety fears, Xinhua states that China is not expected to “relax domestic food production at any time”.

Indeed, China recently announced the need to maintain 95% grain self-sufficiency and has drawn a “red-line” minimum at 120 million hectares of arable land in order to achieve this. Deeper reforms to allow transfer of land are thus expected to ensure to the minimum and ensure sustainable rural development.

Specific mention of food security is not surprising as food safety fears have been growing due to worries over water & soil pollution. However the 2014 document also states a move towards resolving water shortages. By linking arable land, food security & water, the No. 1 Document signals central government thinking beyond “silos”  (see more on this view in CLSA’s interview Moving Out of Silos).

Whilst aspirational, the document does not reflect China’s current environmental woes. Indeed the Ministry of Agriculture announced in December 2013 that around 3.33 million hectares of farmland is too polluted to grow crops and more recently, the State Forest Administration stated that around 9% or an area of 34,000 sq. km. of wetlands has disappeared over the last decade.

Given this, we expect to see more policies “straddling” the water-food-energy nexus this year

How Tumblr and GitHub could be the future of education

Felix Salmon

Jan 21, 2014 09:24 UTC

technology


I’m at DLD, in Munich, where on Monday I moderated an enjoyable discussion with Georg Petschnigg, the co-founder of FiftyThree, and David Karp, the founder of Tumblr. FiftyThree is the company which makes Paper, Apple’s iPad App of the Year in 2012, and also Pencil, the beautifully-weighted stylus which makes Paper even more of a pleasure to use. Tumblr is deeply embedded into Paper; it’s more or less the default way in which people using Paper share their creations.

Petschnigg and Karp get on just as well together as Paper and Tumblr, so this was never going to be one of those panels where the idea is to spark lively debate. Instead, we talked about a topic right in the DLD sweet spot: the intersection of technology and creativity.

It’s a topic I’d been thinking about anyway, in large part because I spent a few hours on the plane to Munich reading The Second Machine Age, the new book from MIT’s Erik Brynjolfsson. Brynjolfsson is a fan of the work of education researcher Sugata Mitra, whose research was featured heavily in Joshua Davis’s wonderful recent Wired cover story — the one which used the story of a single great teacher in the unprepossessing city of Matamoros, Mexico, to illustrate an important point about self-directed learning.

The lesson being taught by Mitra is not a new one: it dates back at least as far as Maria Montessori, whose Pedagogical Anthropology first came out more than a century ago. But Brynjolfsson, along with his co-author Andrew McAfee (himself the graduate of a Montessori school), makes the case that Montessori-style education, with an emphasis on creativity rather than rote learning, will be especially powerful and necessary in the coming decades.

Brynjolfsson cites work by the complexity scholar Brian Arthur and the economist Paul Romer, both of whom argue that the primary driver of economic growth is what Brynjolfsson likes to call “ideation”: the creative combination and recombination of ideas into something powerful and new. As Arthur puts it: “to invent something is to find it in what previously exists”.

Meanwhile, Petschnigg makes a compelling case that if you look at just about any creative industry — anywhere that ideation happens, from advertising to architecture — ideas generally germinate in exactly the same way: with creative individuals scribbling on a piece of paper. Petschnigg’s apps are, at their best, a way of turbocharging those scribbles — a way of allowing inspiration to flow, with the fewest possible bottlenecks, directly into the powerful networked computer known as an iPad. Then, when those ideas are shared on Tumblr, they can start mating with other ideas. This process, too, is almost effortless, thanks to Tumblr’s “reblog” button.

Don’t even bother trying to calculate the resulting increase in the number of potential combinations of ideas: it’s almost infinite. One of the reasons that Tumblr was valued at $1.1 billion when it was bought by Yahoo is that it naturally spawns millions of creative communities, most of which simply never existed before. The majority of the value created by those communities will not flow back to Yahoo, of course, but that’s fine: so long as Tumblr continues to be the foremost place where creative individuals congregate to share their ideas and creations, it will remain an extremely valuable property.

Tumblr does not appear in Brynjolfsson’s book; neither, more surprisingly, does its equivalent in the world of coders, GitHub. Yet there is undoubtedly trillions of dollars of potential economic value on GitHub right now, and every day coders unlock some of that value by combining its existing resources in innovative ways.

The power and value of combinatorial platforms can be seen elsewhere, too: just look at LinkedIn (market capitalization: $25 billion), which attempts to do for people what Tumblr does for creative output and what GitHub does for code. After all, companies like FiftyThree and Tumblr aren’t built by individuals working alone: they’re built by teams, working in a collaborative manner. Petschnigg teaches at NYU, and told me the story of one student he ended up hiring: not necessarily the most brilliant, but rather the one who could be counted on to be able to persuade just about anybody else in the class to join his team.

Brynjolfsson’s thesis, and I think he’s right about this, is that we’re only just beginning to glimpse the possibilities of a world powered by an unprecedented level degree of connectivity between people, ideas, and code. In such a world, educators will have to radically change the way they work. While schools once produced computers (the word originally referred to people, rather than machines), they will now have to produce creative individuals skilled in ideation, pattern recognition, and opportunistic team-building. Those things aren’t easily measured by standardized tests. But the children who are taught them are surely the ones who will build the future. One possible way to start: ask every child in the class to sign up for Tumblr and GitHub.

SOCHI, Russia, Feb. 8 (Xinhua) -- Chinese President Xi Jinping said in an interview aired Saturday that he is "very satisfied" with the fruitful development of China-Russia relations.

The bilateral relationship has entered a phase that boasts the most solid foundation, the highest level of mutual trust and the greatest regional and global influence ever, he said in the exclusive interview with Rossiya TV.

Xi recalled that he paid a visit to Russia in March last year only a few days after taking over the Chinese presidency, during which he and President Vladimir Putin reached important consensus on and charted the course for further strengthening bilateral comprehensive strategic cooperation.

China-Russia cooperation, Xi added, has so far borne rich fruit in such fields as trade and economy, energy, advanced technology, people-to-people exchanges and international affairs, not only promoting the development and prosperity of both countries, but also helping safeguard international justice, stability and peace.

"I am very satisfied with the achievements in the development of China-Russia relations," he said.

Xi traveled to this Russian resort city on Thursday to attend Friday's opening ceremony of the 22nd Winter Olympic Games at the invitation of Putin. The three-day visit was his first foreign trip this year.

Describing China and Russia as good neighbors, good partners and good friends and calling Putin his old friend, Xi said he came to Russia to offer his congratulations in person over the Sochi Olympics as is customary for the Chinese people to do upon their neighbors' joyous occasions.

Referring to his latest meeting with Putin on Thursday, Xi said the two sides agreed to unswervingly support each other on issues concerning their core interests and turn political advantages in their relations into cooperation advantages.

The Sochi trip has marked a "good start" for the advancement of bilateral ties in 2014, added the president.

BEIJING, Jan. 24 (Xinhua) -- China and India on Friday launched their "Year of Friendship in 2014," which they hope will increase understanding and cooperation between the two big countries.

Chinese Vice President Li Yuanchao attended the opening ceremony in Beijing, along with dozens of diplomats, cultural figures, businesspeople and officials.

Li said China-India ties are facing new opportunities and mutual friendship and cooperation will benefit the two peoples as well as contributing to world peace, stability and prosperity.

He pledged to further bilateral relations as this year also marks the 60th anniversary of the Five Principles of Peaceful Co-existence, which were agreed upon by China and India as a guideline for bilateral and international relations

by Evan A. Feigenbaum (Dec 2013)
Nonresident Senior Associate
Asia Program

A fraught 2014 lies ahead for Asia.
Political risks will rise, security tensions will increase, and skepticism will continue to grow about whether major Asian governments—especially in Beijing, Tokyo, New Delhi, and Jakarta—are sufficiently committed to growth-conducive reforms.

Ten trends will shape this more volatile Asia, yielding risks, opportunities, and patterns that will influence the next twelve months and beyond.

1. Asia Drives Demand

First, the good news: Asia’s relationship to the world economy is changing in dramatic, and positive, ways. For decades, G7 countries beat a path to Asia’s door—buying Asian exports and investing heavily in Asian economies. But Asia has become a major factor in the advanced economies’ own growth stories. And where others have long consumed goods from Asia, it is Asians who are now investing and consuming more from overseas.



2. Security Fragmentation Threatens Economic Integration

But here’s the bad news: Asia is becoming more prosperous and economically integrated, yet the central strategic challenge in Asia today is the collision between economics and security.

Asia’s major powers are mistrustful and prone to nationalism. Their strains are increasing over the sovereignty of tiny rocks and shoals in the East and South China Seas.



3. The Contested Commons

These tensions are likely to play out not just in disputes over territory but in the global commons as well. Beijing’s November declaration of an air defense identification zone (ADIZ) in the East China Sea raised hackles and will likely be followed in 2014 by similar declarations around China’s maritime periphery. Yet the debates over China’s actions raise broader questions about how competing sovereignty claims in Asia may touch public goods and the global commons—airspace, cyberspace, and the high seas.



4. Japan’s Pivot to Asia

With a competitive eye on China, expect Tokyo to further reinvigorate its Asian diplomacy in 2014. Just one year into his tenure, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has traveled Asia relentlessly, courted India, and pledged $20 billion in new aid and loans to Southeast Asia.



5. North Korea’s Great Unraveling?

The December execution of Jang Song-thaek, the uncle of North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, and the ongoing purge of his patronage network have highlighted internal divisions and raised underlying questions about the stability of the regime. The risk of instability will grow in 2014.

Washington will be working hard, mostly behind the scenes, to help its allies overcome their differences. Beijing will likely be looking to forestall this, betting that Seoul’s tensions with Tokyo over history and territory will ultimately limit their cooperation.

6. The Future of the U.S. Rebalance

It has been no easy ride for the Obama administration in Asia. First, its critics charged it with paying too little attention to the region while China “ate America’s lunch.” Then, the administration initiated a supposedly game-changing “pivot,” or “rebalance,” to Asia that put America back in the game. Finally, in November President Barack Obama missed a regional summit and the criticism picked up again.


7. A Convergence of Models?

Indeed, a raft of regional preferential trade agreements now compete for attention in Asia. These include, but are not limited to, the U.S.-backed Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and the pan-Asian Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), which does not include the United States.

Many see the TPP and the RCEP as competitive. And in recent years some in Beijing, in particular, have looked warily at the TPP, viewing it as part of a U.S. containment strategy. But things may change in 2014, as China has begun to take an interest in the TPP. Chinese reformers view external pressure, such as the pressure that the membership requirements of the TPP would provide, as a way to promote change at home, much as membership in the WTO forced economic and institutional changes in the late 1990s.



8. China’s Economy: To Market?

China’s reform efforts have become more vigorous because its growth model, which has depended on the twin pillars of investment in fixed assets and exports, has begun to run out of steam.


But reforms that aim to give the market a more decisive role cannot succeed unless the state begins to shed some of the functions that have made it a pervasive force in the economy. This will be a pivotal reform challenge in 2014. Chinese leaders have declared war on “vested interests” that, they say, are obstructing market reforms. Yet the biggest vested interest in the Chinese economy is the state itself, which plays an outsized role in areas, like price controls, that would be better left to the market. In the coming year, Beijing will debate and struggle with the state’s relationship to the economy, especially the way that prices and interest rates are determined.


9. The Push and Pull Over Reforms

Washington and Beijing won’t be the only capitals to face intensified scrutiny of their economic policies in 2014. Antsy global investors and angry domestic voters will push and pull a number of Asian governments in competing directions.

To date, enthusiasm for economic cooperation has been far greater outside the region than among Central Asian states themselves. Yet cooperation is important because these landlocked economies rely on surrounding powers like Russia and China for the transit of goods and resources, raising transaction and transportation costs.

In 2014, questions about leadership succession and other political risks in Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, and elsewhere will intensify the pressure on these governments to deliver more enduring economic gains. But with U.S. and European attention on the region likely to recede after the withdrawal from Afghanistan, these governments will have fewer outside partners. So they will increasingly need to look to their own neighborhood if they are to overcome their weak history of cooperation. Macroeconomic fundamentals and enhanced cross-border trade and investment could become more important as governments seek to deliver balanced growth and foster economic opportunity.

A Testing Time

For two decades, Asia has defied the gloomy predictions of those who believed that its future would resemble Europe’s conflict-ridden past. Like Europe before 1945, Asia is beset by territorial disputes, powerful nationalisms, and a long history of war and conflict. But Asian countries have managed throughout the post–Cold War period to grow and prosper together while keeping their disputes in check.

The question is how long that positive trajectory will last. Posing tough new tests to this effort to construct a shared future, the year to come will prove a trying one for Asia.

Water and Innovation: An Interdisciplinary Exploration
A Peter Wall Institute for Advanced Studies Exploratory Workshop

An estimated 80% of the world’s population faces a high-level water security or water-related biodiversity risk. Water security is also a serious issue in Canada, including drinking water risks (notably First Nations), water and climate change, and water and extractive sectors. However, water research and teaching is dispersed across disciplines, and interdisciplinary scholarship required to tackle these complex problems is relatively rare.
This exploratory workshop will include scholars working on water issues across the full range of the humanities and social sciences, natural sciences, and medicine, including (but not limited to): hydrology, geomorphology, geography, visual and performing arts, law, history, engineering, forestry, agricultural/food studies, hydrogeology, population and public health, biochemistry & molecular biology, and microbiology. Participants will explore some of our most pressing water problems from an interdisciplinary perspective, identifying potential innovative strategies and solutions.

Concerns raised over water security fall into broad four categories: threats to human health via drinking water (from both natural and terrorist sources); threats to economic growth and human livelihoods; threats to biodiversity and water-related ecosystem services; and threats to human security arising from increased hydrological variability in the context of climate change (Vörösmarty et al 2010).
Many predict increased political tensions and competition for water amongst different sectors, notably at the water-energy-food nexus, which entails tradeoffs between:
(1) Drinking water for humans: Addressing the global water crisis (the World Health Organization estimates that 1 billion people worldwide do not have access to sufficient supplies of adequate water);
(2) Water for agricultural production: Accessing water of sufficient quality and quantity to grow the amounts of food required to feed the world’s growing population;
(3) Reliable water supply for energy extraction, which is increasingly water-intensive as ‘peak oil’ approaches [Canadian non-conventional bituminous (oil) sands extraction requires approximately four barrels of oil for every barrel of water produced].

The objectives of this workshop are:
(i)    to foster interdisciplinary dialogue on innovative solutions to some of our most pressing water problems, across and beyond UBC;
(ii)  to identify key areas for cutting-edge interdisciplinary research on water issues, in support of (and as the first ‘launch’ event sponsored by) the Peter Wall Institute Water Innovation Lab;
(iii)  to support the development of major research grant applications

"Water and Innovation: An Interdisciplinary Exploration" is an Exploratory Workshop supported by the Peter Wall Institute for Advanced Studies awarded to Dr. Karen Bakker, with co-investigator, Dr. Leila Harris, at the University of British Columbia. The workshop will be held at the Peter Wall Institute in Vancouver from January 29-30, 2014.

International Court Issues Final Decision in Dispute Over India’s Kishenganga Hydropower Project


6 Jan 2014 - 10:04 by OOSKAnews Correspondent


THE HAGUE, Netherlands


The long-running dispute over diversion of water from the Kishenganga River in India’s Jammu and Kashmir state appears to have come to a conclusion. In December, the International Court of Arbitration at The Hague rejected objections raised by Pakistan in recent months and upheld India’s right to divert water from the river for the 330-megawatt, $687 million USD Kishenganga Hydroelectric Project.

The Kishenganga River flows from Jammu and Kashmir into Pakistan, where it becomes the Neelum River.  Use of the river water is governed by the Indus Waters Treaty of 1960, which regulates water shared between India and Pakistan.

On February 18, 2013, the court had ruled that the Kishenganga hydropower project was to be a “run-of-river” project under the Indus Waters Treaty, and allowed India to divert water in order to operate the plant.  After this decision, Pakistan raised concerns that there would be insufficient water downstream of the project for its needs, particularly for powering the 969-megawatt, nearly $3 billion USD Neelum-Jhelum Hydroelectric Project.  The court addressed Pakistan’s concerns in its partial award by adding that India was under an obligation to construct and operate the Kishenganga project in such a way as to maintain a minimum flow of water in the Kishanganga/Neelum River, at a rate to be determined by the court in a final award “at a later date.”

In resolution of the issue of minimum water flow, the court determined in its final award in late December that India must maintain 9 cubic meters per second of water in the Kishenganga River.  Beyond this, the court placed no further restrictions on the project.  The court said it believed this final award will allow India to divert the water it needs for power generation while also addressing Pakistan’s claims for an uninterrupted flow of water in the river.

The court said its decision had been influenced by the fact that India had “coupled intent with action” in planning and construction for the project. It said Pakistan had not yet achieved this in the Neelum-Jhelum Hydroelectric Project, and this allowed India to gain a “priority in right” for the project’s construction.

The court said that if either party was unhappy with the final award, then a “reconsideration” of the decision could be made through the Permanent Indus Commission and other avenues outlined in the Indus Waters Treaty, but only after a “period of seven years from the first diversion of water from the Kishenganga River.”

Senior counsel R.K.P. Shankardass, one of the lawyers representing India’s interests at the court, called the verdict "an absolute victory for India.”

'British Prime Minister David Cameron met with Chinese entrepreneurs and signed a large contract with Chinese hospitals and healthcare companies on the second day of his China trip on Tuesday.

Cameron signed contracts with Jack Ma Yun, CEO of Alibaba Group, the British Embassy in China said on its official Sina Weibo account on Tuesday.

Many British companies are planning to sell commodities ranging from British tea to non-mainstream fashion products on tmall.com, a Chinese online retail website owned by Ma, said the embassy.

Cameron also signed contracts with Chinese hospitals and healthcare companies, worth more than 120 million pounds ($197 million), according to the embassy's website.

At a luncheon party with businessmen from both countries, Cameron said that the UK supports free trade talks between China and European Union and revealed that in a few months, business travelers from Shanghai to the UK will get their visa within one day.

Also on Tuesday, Cameron met with Li Shufu, CEO of the Hangzhou-based Geely Holding Group, which has become a long-term investor of the British taxi industry since it acquired Manganese Bronze Holdings, a British taxi maker, in February 2013. The two held discussions over the future development of taxis in London, chinanews.com reported.

Cameron's China visit is a win-win trip for both countries not only economically but also in politics, Jin Canrong, vice director of the School of International Studies at the Renmin University of China, told the Global Times.

"The trip will not only bring great economic benefit to the UK, but also improve the country's influence in competition with other European countries like France and Germany," he said.

China, besides benefitting economically, can strike a balance in its relations with the three EU powers - Britain, France and Germany - by improving relations with the UK, which is also good for its relations with other Western countries, he noted.

"Signing the medical contracts is in accordance with mutual benefit of the two nations. Britain has the medical skills that are needed by China. At the same time, it is also beneficial for the British government to build its image domestically," Zhang Shengjun, international politics professor at Beijing Normal University, said.

Earlier, during Cameron's Monday talks with Chinese Premier Li Keqiang, the British prime minister voiced opposition against "Tibetan Independence."

Cameron said Britain respects China's sovereignty and territorial integrity, recognizes Tibet as part of China and does not support "Tibetan Independence."

"High-level exchanges between China and the UK had been at a standstill since Cameron met with the Dalai Lama despite China's objections in May 2012, which resulted in great economic loss for the UK," Jin said. "National interest has forced Cameron to soften his stance on Tibet."

Regarding the stance toward Tibet, according to Zhang, the attitude of Britain is not likely to change after Cameron  returns to Britain.

Xinhua contributed to this story

October 23, 2013
The Ministry of Water Resources, the Republic of India and the Ministry of Water Resources, the People's Republic of China (hereafter referred to as the "parties"),

Recalling the Working Regulations of the Expert Level Mechanism on Trans-border Rivers between the People's Republic of China and the Republic of India of April 2008, the MOU between the Ministry of Water Resources, the People’s Republic of China and the Ministry of Water Resources, the Republic of India upon Provision of Hydrological Information of the Langqen Zangbo/Sutlej River in Flood Season by China to India of December 2010, the MOU between the Ministry of Water Resources, the People’s Republic of China and the Ministry of Water Resources, the Republic of India upon Provision of Hydrological Information of the Yaluzangbu/Brahmaputra River in Flood Season by China to India of May 2013, and the Joint Statement between the People's Republic of China and the Republic of India of May 2013,

Have reached the following understanding:
• The two sides recognized that trans-border rivers and related natural resources and the environment are assets of immense value to the socio-economic development of all riparian countries.
• Both sides agreed that cooperation on trans-border rivers will further enhance mutual strategic trust and communication as well as strengthen the strategic and cooperative partnership. The two sides appreciated the role and importance of the Expert Level Mechanism on Trans-border Rivers between China and India.
• The Indian side expressed appreciation to China for providing flood-season hydrological data and the assistance in emergency management.
• The Chinese side agreed to extend the data provision period of the Yaluzangbu/Brahmaputra River, which was agreed upon in the MOU between the Ministry of Water Resources, the People’s Republic of China and the Ministry of Water Resources, the Republic of India upon Provision of Hydrological Information of the Yaluzangbu/Brahmaputra River in Flood Season by China to India of May 2013 from 2014, that is to start from May 15th instead of June 1st to October 15th of the relevant year. The two sides shall implement this in accordance with related Implementation Plan. The Indian side expressed appreciation to the Chinese side in this regard.
• The two sides agreed to further strengthen cooperation on trans-border rivers, cooperate through the existing Expert Level Mechanism on provision of flood-season hydrological data and emergency management, and exchange views on other issues of mutual interest.
This Memorandum of Understanding will enter into force upon signature and can be amended and modified with mutual agreement.

Done in Beijing on this 23rd day of October 2013, in two originals each in Hindi, English and Chinese, languages, all texts being equally authentic. In case of any divergence in interpretation, the English text shall prevail.

For the Ministry of Water Resources, Government of the Republic of India

For the Ministry of Water Resources, the People’s Republic of China

Keeping China moving will keep its leaders busy
It may be no exaggeration to say that Xi Jinping is now the world's most powerful leader. To be fair, there's not an awful lot of competition. Barack Obama, the US president, has been humbled abroad in Syria and weakened at home by the embarrassing failure of his healthcare plan. Perhaps prematurely, he is already being cast as a lame duck. Angela Merkel, the German chancellor, may not see out her third term as head of what, by Chinese standards, is a medium-sized national enterprise. Shinzo Abe, Japan's prime minister, is in charge of the world's most impressive printing press, though hardly its most robust economy. By default, that leaves Mr Xi, who has nine years left at the helm of an economy that could be the world's biggest by the time he leaves office in 2020.

"
Big is beautiful: Megadams, African water security, and China’s role in the new global political economy (pdf)

Dr. Harry Verhoeven, University of Oxford, United Kingdom

Big dams have long fascinated scientists and politicians alike, sitting at the intersection of water security, modernisation strategies and nationalism. They began their ascent in the West – remember Roosevelt’s Tennessee Valley Authority – but became popular in developing countries seeking to meet the triple challenge of state-building, nation-building and economic development. General Franco used dams and a powerful water-bureaucracy to re-centralise control over a fragmented, ‘backward’ nation after the Spanish civil war. Nehru saw dams as the “modern temples of India” lifting hundreds of millions out of poverty through spectacular multiplier effects in industry and irrigated agriculture. And Gamal Abdel Nasser advanced his revolutionary “second Egyptian independence” through the Aswan Dam: Africa’s biggest infrastructure project controlled the Nile flood for the first time in history and symbolically catapulted Egypt into the club of advanced nations.1

Big dams were believed to magically transform barren wastelands into fertile acreage, elevating the nation and integrating, through irrigation and electrification, the domestic political economy.2 The World Bank provided the ideological and financial backing for the construction of hundreds of megadams across Latin America, Africa and Asia. Yet from the 1970s onwards, dams as development instruments were increasingly contested.3 Opponents exposed huge corruption scandals that contributed to the systematic overestimation of their benefits and the neglect of their dark side. Paradigmatic cases like the Sardar Sarovar in Western India4 forced the Bank to largely withdraw its support for large-scale hydro-infrastructure: the displacement of tens of thousands of people; devastating environmental damage to unique ecosystems; and the undemocratic decision-making surrounding dams triggered a re-think. Many assumed that big dams might be shipped to a museum for 20th century illusions of development – with Western funding drying up, their role in economic growth strategies seemed over.

Yet anno 2012, dams are staging an impressive comeback: hundreds of new projects have commenced in the last few years. China, India and Brazil – not coincidentally also the three most important rising powers – are the world’s top three dam-builders, each with domestic megaprojects of its own, but also increasingly a proactive role in an emerging global political economy of food and water. Beijing especially is using its formidable technical expertise in hydro-infrastructure and immense foreign reserves to resurrect dam-building overseas: in half of all African countries, from the Sudanese desert and the Ethiopian lowlands to the rivers of Algeria and Gabon, Chinese engineers are involved in the planning, heightening and building of more than 100 dams.5 The tens of billions of US dollars and thousands of megawatts involved in these projects have so far remained off the radar in the China-Africa debate6 but are possibly more consequential for the future of the African continent than the exports of oil, copper and other valuable resources.

As the global balance of power shifts eastwards, supply and demand networks are restructured, resulting in tremendous pressures on commodity prices and scarce resources. Dams are therefore no longer merely central to the debate about economic development but also an integral part of water and food security strategies. Food prices especially have spiked, bringing riots in their wake; this has led many to predict that land and water are becoming the world economy’s Achilles heel.7 Emerging powers are seemingly racing to secure the key resources of the future.8 Big investments by Gulf Arab sovereign wealth funds, purchasing strategies of land by South Korean and Malaysian enterprises and China’s involvement in African dam-building cannot be seen in isolation from growing fears about how to ensure water security in the 21st century.

The speed and scale with which this new global political economy of water and food is taking shape is breathtaking. One emerging leader is Beijing’s Sinohydro, a state-owned giant claiming leadership in dam-building with more than 50% market share of new dams erected around the globe. Just in 2009, Sinohydro, which is lead by powerful Chinese Communist Party loyalists, installed 20000MW of new hydropower capacity outside China’s borders. Its technical expertise is undisputed, as is the extraordinary politico-financial backing given by Beijing’s key ministries and lending agencies so that Sinohydro can lead China’s “Go Out” strategy. Diplomats, bankers and technical specialists are disseminating the message that China’s economic miracle relied on dazzling investment in infrastructure and that the hundreds of dams that tame China’s rivers have powered agricultural and industrial growth rates of 10% per annum. Implicitly, the economy and the ecosystems that feed into it are imagined as a machine that needs to keep spinning at high speeds. Dams are argued to be a vital switch in maintaining the machine’s stability, controlling erratic water flows and channelling it to productive ends in regions of scarcity. It might not come as surprise that 7 out of 9 members of the Standing Committee of the Chinese Communist Party’s Politburo are engineers.9

Dams symbolise the merger of growing hard and soft power of China but their return to prominence begs important questions about the sustainability of the new model of growth and water security. Both on the Chinese and on the African side there seems preciously little interest in engaging with the criticisms of the 1980s and 1990s – these emphasised how the benefits of big dams typically accrue to politically influential groups with important transnational allies, while the costs of displacement, shrinking biodiversity and disappearance of traditional cultures fall on those outside the political elite.10

Moreover, while Chinese-built megadams are trumpeted as the answer to persisting water security crises in Africa, the truth is that hardly any planning surrounding them actually takes environmental concerns seriously. As my research in the Nile Basin shows,11 the impacts of climate change are seldom factored into the building of hydro-infrastructure and the new irrigation projects are consuming huge quantities of water – with water intensive cash crops being exported to wealthy economies. Instead of opting for environmentally sustainable models of regional integration that prioritise water and food security, some national governments maintain a simplistic view of development and still see dams as major achievements, regardless of their ecological impact.12 Thus, while the return of big dams may be beautiful in the eyes of Sinohydro and the African regimes that it partners with, their long-term contribution to water security in the climate change era remains deeply questionable.

The author of this article was ranked among the finalists of the 2012 Global Water Forum Emerging Scholars Award. The other finalists’ entries and details regarding the Award can be found here.

References:

1. Timothy Mitchell, Rule of Experts. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2002.
2. David Lilienthal, TVA: Democracy on the March. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1944.
3. World Commission on Dams, Dams and Development: a New Framework for Decision Making London: Earthscan, 2000.
4. John Wood, The Politics of Water Resource Development in India: The Narmada Dams Controversy. New Delhi: Sage Publications, 2007.
5. Michael Kugelman (ed.), Land Grab? The Race for the World’s Farmland. Washington DC: Woodrow Wilson Center for Scholars, 2009
6. Richard McGregor, The Party: The Secret World of China’s Communist Rulers. London: Allen Lane, 2010.
7. Satyajit Singh, The Taming of the Waters. The Political Economy of Large Dams. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997.
8. Harry Verhoeven, ‘Climate Change, Conflict and Development in Sudan: Neo- Malthusian global narratives and local power struggles’, Development and Change Vol.42, No.3 (2011), pp.679-707.
9. Richard McGregor, The Party: The Secret World of China’s Communist Rulers. London: Allen Lane, 2010.
10. Satyajit Singh, The Taming of the Waters. The Political Economy of Large Dams. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997.
11. Harry Verhoeven, ‘Climate Change, Conflict and Development in Sudan: Neo- Malthusian global narratives and local power struggles’, Development and Change Vol.42, No.3 (2011), pp.679-707. http://www.chathamhouse.org/sites/default/files/19482_0611bp_verhoeven.pdf



Dr. Harry Verhoeven completed a doctorate at the University of Oxford, where he teaches African Politics. His research focuses on conflict, development and environment in the Horn of Africa and the Great Lakes Region and he is the Convenor of the Oxford University China-Africa Network (OUCAN).

19 Nov 2013


Keynote Speech by UNDP Administrator Helen Clark,
High-Level Seminar on Addressing Climate Change
in South-South Co-operation
COP19, Warsaw, Poland

I am pleased to address this second High-Level Seminar on Addressing Climate Change in South-South Co-operation.

I thank the National Development and Reform Commission of China and Minister Xie Zhenhua for the initiative they have taken in organizing these events, and in guiding China’s work in this area. Their efforts are important in helping to raise awareness of South-South co-operation as a powerful tool in the fight against climate change.

There is no ‘one size fits all’ blueprint for making the transition to low-carbon and climate resilient development. But, without doubt, South-South co-operation is helping countries to shape their own, nationally appropriate paths to sustainable and inclusive development. This includes experience-sharing on how to build resilience to ever more deadly and costly natural disasters and less predictable weather patterns, and on taking integrated approaches to advance economic, social, and environmental objectives simultaneously – what we in UNDP call “triple win” approaches. Through the exchange of low-emission technologies and technical know-how, countries are able to lower the costs of sustainable solutions and strengthen their ability to access and deploy climate finance.

Tackling the shared threat of climate change demands “business unusual”. Business as usual - built on growth models which emerged from the Industrial Revolution of another age - has led to a level of environmental degradation which now threatens the carrying capacity of our planet. If we cannot cap global warming before it exceeds the two degrees Celsius level at which scientists predict there will be catastrophic and irreversible consequences, Hurricane Sandy and Typhoon Haiyan-level storms are likely no longer to be rare events. Such extreme disasters destroy lives and livelihoods and seriously set back the progress communities have made.

United Nations Member Statesagreed at Rio+20 last year that sustained development is not possible without protecting the ecosystems on which life depends. While developed countries have a particular responsibility to cut emissions, advance and disseminate low-carbon technologies, and support mitigation and adaptation, achieving sustainable development demands that all countries act.

South-South co-operation is an increasingly important modality for action. The South has emerged as a significant producer of low-carbon technologies and innovation. As South-South co-operation scales up, more countries will benefit from the impressive examples of low-carbon, climate resilient development found within the Global South, which can deliver new jobs and reduce both poverty and environmental degradation.

In 2012, China’s renewable energy sector employed more than 1.7 million people. These were new jobs which had emerged over the past decade or so. China is establishing national policies to incentivize green growth, setting rigorous targets for energy efficiency and energy conservation, and making significant and growing investments in renewable energy.

In China’s agricultural sectors, we are seeing how erosion control, agro-forestry, and other innovations are enabling productivity increases, ecosystem restoration, and the building of greater resilience to the threat of flooding and drought.

Now China is sharing its experiences through its Climate Change South-South Co-operation training programmes. To date, more than 700 government officials from 42 developing countries have received training on issues related to renewable energy, climate change, and forestry, and there are plans to train another 2,000 over the next two years.[1]

UNDP is pleased to be working with China to distil and disseminate lessons learned from China’s and other countries’ experiences in this area. We are presently working with the Shakti Sustainable Energy Foundation, China’s NDRC, and the  Energy and Resources Institute of India (TERI) on a set of studies which analyze various scenarios for low carbon development in India and China, and offer concrete recommendations.

UNDP’s role is that of a knowledge broker, builder of capacities, and facilitator of exchanges. To these tasks, UNDP brings an understanding of what is and is not working around the world in adaptation to and mitigation of climate change. Through our universal presence in developing countries, we see and are involved in a great deal of activity to address climate change.

When Minister Xie and I met in Beijing in September, we acknowledged that, working together, China and UNDP could do a great deal to advance South-South co-operation to address climate change. We agreed to strive to strengthen and formalize our collaboration in an agreement which would bring together China’s expertise, innovations, and experience with UNDP’s expertise, global networks, and on the ground experience.

In this context, UNDP looks forward to working with China as it implements its important pledge made at Rio+20 to support least developed countries, small island developing states, and African countries to address climate change.

There is much good work on which to build. SIDS countries are strengthening their climate resilience, including through a UNDP- facilitated initiative to learn from each other’s disaster reduction and response-related experiences, technologies, and methodologies. China, Ghana, Zambia, and UNDP are in the planning stages of an initiative to facilitate the exchange of clean energy technologies and to build local capacities to deploy and maintain them. 

The UNFCCC process opens up a number of opportunities to strengthen South-South co-operation. The Green Climate Fund could, for example, foster South-South co-operation, to speed up “finance readiness”. This is a pressing priority which has been recognized by the GCF Board.  A number of countries are now developing their readiness plans, which set out the actions and capacities they need in order to access climate finance and realize their national climate priorities. Through South-South co-operation, countries can learn from the early experiences of others – helping them to lower the costs and improve the process.

South-South and triangular co-operation can then help countries to meet funding criteria, build capacity, and use public funds in catalytic ways which will leverage additional investment. Such efforts, in turn, could help shape the efforts of the Green Climate Fund to lower the transaction costs of accessing monies and make climate finance more accessible to LDCs and SIDS.

Much remains to be done to reach a new climate change agreement in 2015. Concrete decisions and firm commitments are needed here in Warsaw to ensure that the solutions put forward in 2015 are both workable and adequate. 2015 is also the year when UN Member States will make decisions about the global development agenda which follows the MDGs. As climate change has emerged as one of the greatest threats to development, we need both these negotiation processes to succeed. In implementing both a new global development agenda and a new global climate agreement, South-South co-operation will have a vital role to play. 

[1] http://news.xinhuanet.com/environment/2013-09/16/c_125396164.htm

India-China ties a "strategic vision": Indian PM

BEIJING, Oct. 23 (Xinhua) -- Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said in Beijing on Wednesday that India and China have resolved to realize the full prominence of their partnership and maintain friendly relations.

"This will be our strategic vision," Singh said at a press briefing together with Chinese Premier Li Keqiang after their talks in the morning.

Singh said he and Premier Li have concluded a very productive round of talks and reached a important understanding on a number of matters.

"First and foremost, we agreed that the prosperity and progress of 2.5 billion Indian and Chinese people will be a major factor of Asian resurgence and global prosperity and stability," Singh said.

Second, he said, he and Li agreed that peace and tranquility in the two countries' border areas must remain the foundation for the growth of the India-China relationship even as they move negotiations toward a fair, reasonable and mutually acceptable settlement to the India-China boundary question. Singh described this as "our strategic benchmark."

Third, Singh said, they agreed that the relationships pursued by India and China with other countries must not become a source of concern for each other. This will be a strategic reassurance, according to the prime minister.

He suggested to premier Li the need to enhance mutual trust, expand common interest and deepen mutual understanding.

To build mutual trust, both sides have agreed to enhance transparency and strengthen strategic communications at all levels, including on the shared neighborhood. Singh proposed expanding cooperation on transborder rivers, and encouraging and institutionalizing greater exchanges between the two countries' armed forces.

He said the agreement on border defence cooperation added to the existing instruments to ensure peace, stability and predictability on the borders.

According to Singh, Li was "receptive" to his concern about the unsustainable trade imbalance between the two countries and both agreed to explore ways to bridge this gap.

India is taking forward the suggestion raised by Li in New Delhi for a Chinese industrial park to act as a magnet for Chinese investment in india, Singh said, adding that they are also exploring the possibility of the Bangladesh-China-India-Myanmar (BCIM) Economic Corridor connecting the two countries via the southern Silk Road.

"We are determined to inject new dynamism to our economic relations by working with wider stakeholders," Singh said.

To boost mutual understanding, both sides have decided to encourage provincial and sub-regional exchanges, institutionalize a high-level media forum, continue rooting exchanges for the next five years and celebrate 2014, the 60th anniversary of the announcement the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence as the Year of India-China Friendly Exchanges.

He conveyed to Li India's commitment to visa simplification to facilitate Chinese nationals traveling to India and expressed hope that China will also facilitate such exchanges, while expressing appreciation for China's cooperation in the establishment of Nalanda University.

They also had candid and constructive discussion on regional and global issues of importance to India and China, Singh said, describing this as one of the promising developments in the bilateral relationship.

The agreement and MOUs signed on Wednesday covering joint work in the areas of defence, road transport, transborder rivers, cultural exchanges, Nalanda University and sister-city linkages show impressive scope, he added.

India and China are two ancient civilizations and account for 2.5 billion people on this earth. "When India and China shake hands, the world notices," the prime minister said, adding, "I believe that my visit to China has put our relations on a path of stable and fast growth."

Singh arrived in Beijing on Tuesday night for a three-day official visit to China.

Keeping Neighbours Closer: Beijing’s Geopolitical Pitch

Posted on November 19, 2013 by Daniel Kane

Memo #249

By Jargalsaikhan Mendee - mendee [at] alumni.ubc.ca

Lately, Chinese leaders have been busy bolstering relations with their immediate neighbours.  As evidence, the Prime Ministers of India, Mongolia, and Russia arrived in Beijing for bilateral meetings with China’s President Xin Jinping and Premier Li Keqiang on the same day—October 24, 2013.  While Russian Prime Minister Dmitri Medvedev secured $1.9 billion in loans for infrastructure projects as well as pledged to develop natural gas and oil projects with Chinese companies, Indian Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh signed the much-anticipated Border Defense Cooperation Agreement with China and agreed to hold the Strategic Economic Dialogue to promote bilateral trade and investment.  Finally, Mongolian Prime Minister Norovyn Altankhuyag secured markets for coal exports and agreed to collaborate with Chinese energy companies.


Chinese President Xi Jinping (right) meets with visiting Mongolian Prime Minister Norovyn Altankhuyag in Beijing, October 2013 (Source: Xinhua).

Given the importance of Chinese investment and the Chinese market to China’s neighbouring states, economic concerns are certainly a key driving force behind these states’ engagement with China.  But from the Chinese side, these meetings showcase Beijing’s ability to pitch its appeal for strategic trust to its neighbours, and in so doing respond to American and Japanese containment policies in the context of “China Rising.”

The visits by the Russian and Mongolian prime ministers indicate, at least at the state-to-state level, that the Russian and Mongolian governments are committed to developing a “strategic partnership” with China. Similarly, Sino-Indian relations are progressing toward closer economic cooperation.  The conclusion of their mutual border agreement indicates the desire of both governments to bracket the most difficult issue in order to increase ‘strategic trust’ between these two major regional powers. Clearly, China’s ‘good neighbor policy’ is attracting its important neighbours.


Chinese President Xi Jinping (2nd right) and his wife Peng Liyuan (far right) pose for a photo with Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh (2nd left) and his wife Gursharan Kaur after their meeting in Beijing, October 2013 (Source: Xinhua/Pang Xinglei).

Beijing’s skillful arrangement for these three visits carries geopolitical significance.  Russia and India stood against China during the Sino-Soviet and Sino-Indian conflicts, while Mongolia has long been regarded as a geo-political card against China.  Even as the US and Japan increase their own political and security engagements with Mongolia and India, China’s same-day reception of the three prime ministers may signal a growing trust and confidence between China and its neighbours, or China’s growing power and influence over them.



Jargalsaikhan Mendee is a PhD student in the Department of Political Science at the University of British Columbia, and an Institute of Asian Research Fellow, 2013.  He has also authored Memo #11, Memo #87, Memo #161, Memo #169, & Memo #200.

If you enjoyed this memo, subscribe to our e-newsletter for free and receive new memos 2x week (Tues/Fri) via email.

Links:◾“India-China ties a ‘strategic vision’: Indian PM,” Xinhua News, October 23, 2013
◾“Russian Prime Minister begins official visit to China,” ITAR-TASS, October 22, 2013
◾“Prime Minister of Mongolia and China Hold Official Talks“ MONTSAME News, October 27, 2013
◾“China Media: Indian PM’s visit,” BBC News, October 22, 2013

"Scotland's educational links with China have been taken to the next level, after an agreement was struck to establish a Confucius Institute at Heriot-Watt University, the first to specialise in business and communication.


The Institute, the fifth Confucius Institute in Scotland, will aim to help Scottish companies to engage with China and increase the provision of Chinese language learning for business purposes.

The announcement was made during the First Minister's meeting in Beijing with Hanban - the organisation that is charged with promoting Chinese learning and language across the globe."

November 15,
Xi's four-point plan gives reason for optimism
China's new president hinted at bold new reforms on Tuesday, when the Chinese Communist party's Central Committee issued a document that was as sweeping in scope as it was short on detail. That apparent contradiction enabled optimists and cynics to focus on either aspect of the communiqué from the so-called Third Plenary Session of the 18th Central Committee.

The contributions of the Court are to be measured in terms of “the great progress made by it in the advancement of international justice and the peaceful settlement of disputes between States”, the President of the Court tells the United Nations General Assembly

THE HAGUE, 31 October 2013. Today, the President of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), H.E. Judge Peter Tomka, informed the United Nations General Assembly that over the last 12 months the Court had “continued to fulfil its role as the forum of choice of the international community of States for the peaceful settlement of every kind of international dispute over which it has jurisdiction”.
President Tomka was addressing representatives of the United Nations Member States meeting in New York on the occasion of the presentation of the Court’s Report for the period from 1 August 2012 to 31 July 2013.
He added that “as illustrated in the Report . . . the Court has made every effort to meet the expectations of the parties appearing before it in a timely manner” and emphasized once again in this regard that, “since the Court has been able to clear its backlog of cases, States thinking of submitting cases to the principal judicial organ of the United Nations can be confident that, as soon as they have finished their written exchanges, the Court will move to the hearings stage without delay”.
In his speech, President Tomka presented a brief overview of the judicial activities of the Court. During the period under review, as many as 11 contentious cases had been pending before it, and the Court had held public hearings in turn in the following three cases: the Maritime Dispute (Peru v. Chile), the Request for Interpretation of the Judgment of 15 June 1962 in the Case concerning the Temple of Preah Vihear (Cambodia v. Thailand) (Cambodia v. Thailand) and the case concerning Whaling in the Antarctic (Australia v. Japan: New Zealand intervening). He stated that the Court was deliberating in two of these cases and that, on 11 November 2013, it would deliver its Judgment in the case concerning the Request for Interpretation of the Judgment of 15 June 1962 in the Case concerning the Temple of Preah Vihear (Cambodia v. Thailand) (Cambodia v. Thailand).
Judge Tomka also informed the General Assembly that, during the period under review, the Court had delivered two Judgments — the first in the Territorial and Maritime Dispute (Nicaragua v. Colombia) and the second in the Frontier Dispute (Burkina Faso/Niger) — and six Orders. He reported briefly on the main findings reached by the Court in these Judgments and Orders.
- 2 -
The President then noted that, since August 2012, two new cases had been submitted to the Court.
The first of these had been brought before it on 24 April 2013 by the Plurinational State of Bolivia, which had instituted proceedings against the Republic of Chile concerning a dispute in relation to “[the latter]’s obligation to negotiate in good faith and effectively with Bolivia in order to reach an agreement granting Bolivia a fully sovereign access to the Pacific Ocean”.
The second case had been brought on 16 September 2013 by the Republic of Nicaragua, which had seised the Court of a dispute with the Republic of Colombia concerning “the delimitation of the boundaries between, on the one hand, the continental shelf of Nicaragua beyond the 200-nautical-mile limit from the baselines from which the breadth of the territorial sea of Nicaragua is measured, and on the other hand, the continental shelf of Colombia”.
The President stated that there were currently ten cases on the Court’s General List.
In addition, he recalled that the Court had held public hearings in mid-October on a new request for the indication of provisional measures submitted by the Republic of Costa Rica in the case concerning Certain Activities carried out by Nicaragua in the Border Area (Costa Rica v. Nicaragua). He noted that, as this was an urgent procedure, the Court would make its Order on this request as soon as possible. The Court had also decided to hold hearings the following week on a request for the indication of provisional measures submitted by Nicaragua in the case concerning the Construction of a Road in Costa Rica along the San Juan River (Nicaragua v. Costa Rica).
The President then observed that, since 15 April 2013, the Court had been sitting in the renovated and modernized Great Hall of Justice, where it enjoyed improved technical facilities offering a wider range of possibilities. “Therefore,” he stated, “the Court will be able to hear the cases submitted to it faithfully and impartially as it always does by virtue of its noble judicial mission but it will do so in a modern setting”.
President Tomka noted that this Great Hall of Justice had provided a venue for many distinguished guests on the occasion of a conference organized by the Court to celebrate the centenary of the Peace Palace on 23 September. He expressed his satisfaction at the very high quality of the speakers; the conference programme had engaged with the past and present of international justice, while also addressing the future prospects and challenges for the work of the Court.
Lastly, the President recalled that the Court performed its tasks using modest resources, since the Member States awarded it less than 1 per cent of the Organization’s regular budget. “Nevertheless, I hope that I have shown that the recent contributions of the Court are not to be measured in terms of the financial resources that sustain it, but against the great progress made by it in the advancement of international justice and the peaceful settlement of disputes between States”, he concluded.
*
The full text of the address by the President of the Court to the United Nations General Assembly, as well as the Court’s Report for the judicial year 2012-2013, are available on the Court’s website (www.icj-cij.org), under the heading “The Court” (click on “Presidency” or “Annual Reports”, respectively).
___________
- 3 -
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) is the principal judicial organ of the United Nations. It was established by the United Nations Charter in June 1945 and began its activities in April 1946. The seat of the Court is at the Peace Palace in The Hague (Netherlands). Of the six principal organs of the United Nations, it is the only one not located in New York. The Court has a twofold role: first, to settle, in accordance with international law, legal disputes submitted to it by States (its judgments have binding force and are without appeal for the parties concerned); and, second, to give advisory opinions on legal questions referred to it by duly authorized United Nations organs and agencies of the system. The Court is composed of 15 judges elected for a nine-year term by the General Assembly and the Security Council of the United Nations. Independent of the United Nations Secretariat, it is assisted by a Registry, its own international secretariat, whose activities are both judicial and diplomatic, as well as administrative. The official languages of the Court are French and English. Also known as the “World Court”, it is the only court of a universal character with general jurisdiction.
The ICJ, a court open only to States for contentious proceedings, and to certain organs and institutions of the United Nations system for advisory proceedings, should not be confused with the other mostly criminal judicial institutions based in The Hague and adjacent areas, such as the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY, an ad hoc court created by the Security Council), the International Criminal Court (ICC, the first permanent international criminal court, established by treaty, which does not belong to the United Nations system), the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL, an independent judicial body composed of Lebanese and international judges, which is not a United Nations tribunal and does not form part of the Lebanese judicial system), or the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA, an independent institution which assists in the establishment of arbitral tribunals and facilitates their work, in accordance with the Hague Convention of 1899).

"China-India deal on water: why we should be sceptical
China-India deal on water: why we should be sceptical
Beth Walker 28.10.2013 · Leave a Comment

A new agreement between China and India on transboundary rivers will not improve transparency and could open the floodgates for more dam building in the Himalayas

430_brahmaputra

India and China’s much-publicised agreement last week claims to strengthen cooperation on shared rivers, supposedly allaying Indian fears over new dams.

Under the deal, China has also agreed to extend the flood data they provide to India on the Brahmaputra – the most controversial of the Himalayan rivers flowing between India and China – from May to October instead of June to October in the previous agreements.

From its source in Tibet, where it is known as the Yarlung Zangbo, the Brahmaputra meanders 2,900 kilometres and passes through India and Bangladesh. With devastating annual floods and potentially hazardous hydroelectricity projects in the pipeline, improved cross-border cooperation is urgently needed.

China’s plans to construct more dams on the Brahmaputra in Tibet have caused increasing alarm in India about the downstream impacts. The most contentious project is a massive 48,000-megawatt dam slated for the “great bend” in China, before the river swings round into India (over twice the size of the Three Gorges dam).

China’s repeated assurances that the projects will not reduce water flow in the Brahmaputra, as they are run-of-the-river hydropower projects not designed to hold water, have failed to quell fears.

Hopes that the new agreement will mark a turning point in relations on water may be premature. Looking at the actual language of the most recent agreement, signed last week, there is no mention of dams, river projects or India’s water rights. What’s more, it transpires that India is paying China for the hydrological data and not making it publically available afterwards, according to the South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers and People (SANDRP).

In resolving their differences, the deal could also be seen as a tacit agreement between India and China to plough ahead with their respective dam building plans in the Himalayas, regardless of the disastrous environmental consequences.

South Asia water experts voiced this very fear at a recent Third Pole workshop in Kathmandu, citing the powerful economic and political interests behind dam building in the region.

More than 400 hydroelectric schemes are planned in the region, which, if built, could together provide more than 160,000 megawatts of electricity and mean that the Himalayas become the most dammed region in the world."

China still awaits genuine reform
It has been nearly a year since Xi Jinping led the seven-strong standing committee on to the stage of the Great Hall of the People as the new head of China's Communist party. At the time, there was much speculation, partly encouraged by Mr Xi's more down-to-earth manner, about whether his appointment might herald a fresh attempt to implement economic and political reform. Those hopes have not yet been answered. Mr Xi has shown himself rather more adept at consolidating his grip over the Communist party than at opening up either China's economic or political system. He has brought cadres to heel with an anti-corruption campaign, established what looks like a firm grip on the People's Liberation Army and launched a campaign against bloggers in order to stifle criticism of the party. He has even revived sloganeering reminiscent of the Mao era. Some speculate that Mr Xi has tacked to China's political left in order to provide cover for market-oriented reforms. But if he is a closet reformer he has a funny way of showing it. There have been intimations of changes to policy - a liberalisation of banking licences here, the announcement of a free-trade zone there. But nothing that amounts to much.

China assumes rotating presidency of UN Security Council

　UNITED NATIONS, Nov. 1 (Xinhua) -- China on Friday assumed the rotating presidency of the UN Security Council for November.
　　Liu Jieyi, China's permanent representative to the United Nations, took over the rotating presidency from Agshin Mehdiyev, permanent representative of Azerbaijan.
　　According to the council's provisional work program for November, the 15-nation UN body has a very heavy work load, including more than 20 meetings or consultations on nearly 20 issues, Liu told Xinhua.
　　The hot issues in Africa and the Middle East are top on the council's agenda, he said.
　　Under the UN Charter, the Security Council has the primary responsibility for the maintenance of peace and security in the world at large.
　　"As the rotating president of the Security Council, China will adhere to the principle of being objective, fair, efficient, pragmatic, open and transparent, and further strengthen communication and cooperation with other council members and all the parties concerned to ensure success of the work of the Security Council," Liu said.
　　"We are also committed to addressing issues of relevant regional hot-spots in a constructive way, so as to enable the Security Council to carry out its responsibility of maintaining international peace and security in an active manner," Liu said.
　　Liu is also expected to brief the press next week on the work program for November.
　　The UN Security Council presidency rotates every month among the council members in alphabetical order of their names, while each president holds office for one calendar month.
　　The last time China took over the rotating presidency was in June 2012

Premier Li Keqiang has encouraged farmers in Heilongjiang province to plant more crops next year to ensure their own prosperity as well as the nation's food safety.

"As the largest grain producer, Heilongjiang is embracing a good harvest this year in the wake of a devastating flood. The province showed a strong capability to fight against natural disasters as well as its great potential for grain output," Li said during a visit to the province on Monday.

Li said grain is like a golden mountain, which lays the foundation of the nation, as he visited a local grain depot in Nongqiao township, in Fuyuan county.

"Standing on top of the grain, I feel a sense of reassurance," he said.

Li arrived in Fuyuan on Monday to inspect grain production and the state of flood-stricken residents as they resettle in the area.

Fuyuan and neighboring Tongjiang were both hit by devastating floods over the summer, damaging crops and creating billions of yuan in economic losses.

Liu Jinfu, 47, and his family were hit hard by the disaster. He said his cornfield yielded next to nothing this year because of the flood, which cost his family nearly 200,000 yuan ($32,790) in economic losses.

Li, sitting in Liu's traditional adobe home in rural China, encouraged the farmer to replant crops after floodwaters receded. He also urged local governments to ensure that flood-stricken residents have a safe and warm winter.

Heilongjiang, home to large areas of fertile land, is one of the country's major grain producers.

Wang Xiankui, Party chief of the province, said the grain output is expected to reach 65 billion kg this year, despite the flooding.

Li Guoxiang, deputy director of the rural development institute at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences in Beijing, said the expected output is possible because farmland in northern China has better natural conditions than those in the south.

He said China's major grain-producing areas used to be in irrigated farmlands in the South.

"Farmers ensured their grain output by improving unit area yield. This fundamental method contributed to almost 80 percent of China's total grain output in 2012," he said.

However, this method isn't sustainable and a great deal of farmland has already reached its maximum production level of various crops, according to a study released by the Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences in September.

"In contrast, almost half of China's farmland is located in the North, especially in the Northeast, where the land doesn't necessarily depend on heavy irrigation. The area has strong potential in raising the gain output in rice, corn and soybeans," said Ding Shengjun, a senior researcher at the Academy of the State Administration of Grain.

Ding said the dry farmland, mainly located in northeast, northwest and southwest regions, are rich in sunshine and have distinct temperature differences between day and night.

"This provides favorable conditions to improve grain output," he said.

Contact the writers at zhaoyinan@chinadaily.com.cn and zhongnan@chinadaily.com.cn

China Donates $1 Million to Cambodia Flood Relief

China on Thursday donated one million US dollars to Cambodia for the relief of the flood- affected people. Chinese Ambassador to Cambodia Bu Jianguo handed over the cash donation to Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen at the Peace Palace in the Cambodian capital. Bu, on behalf of the government and people of China, extended deep sympathy to Cambodia over the loss of lives due to flooding and expressed her confidence that under the leadership of Prime Minister Hun Sen, Cambodian flood-affected people would get out of difficulties and rebuild their homes soon. In the name of the Cambodian government and people, Hun Sen expressed sincere and heartfelt gratitude to the government and people of China for supporting Cambodia in difficult times. The premier said the donation will be used to buy rice for the flood-affected families. Mekong River and flash floods had hit the country since mid- September, killing at least 168 people and affecting more than 1.8 million people, Nhim Vanda, first vice-president of the National Committee for Disaster Management, said last week. Some 113,260 hectares of rice paddies, or 4.4 percent of the total rice field, were completely destroyed. Moreover, about 440 km of national roads and 3,693 km of gravel roads were damaged. He said the damage to property was estimated to top one billion US dollars.

Pakistan May Request Review of Indus Waters Treaty
1 Nov 2013 - 10:00 by OOSKAnews Correspondent

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan
Pakistan may ask for a review of the Indus Waters Treaty, originally negotiated by the World Bank and signed by Pakistan and India in 1960.
Facing a looming water crisis, Pakistani officials have started to express the view that the terms outlined in the treaty are not favorable to them.
Khawaja Asif, Pakistan’s Federal Minister for Water and Power, told a press conference on October 25 that “the water issue has become a matter of life and death for us, and we will have to face severe shortage in the coming 10 to 15 years.”
One of Pakistan’s arguments against continued use of the treaty is that when it was signed in 1960, the country had a population of 30-40 million, which has now grown to at least 180-200 million. 
Asif said Pakistan has recognized that the country will need to adopt methods of water conservation as well as control its growing population to avoid a dire situation of extreme water scarcity in the future.
The Indus Waters treaty has been in the public eye recently due to a very public dispute between the two countries over India’s proposed Kishanganga Hydroelectric Plant in Kashmir.
In February of this year, the International Court of Arbitration at The Hague ruled in favor of India’s plans to divert a specified minimum amount of water for the project on the Kishanganga River, which flows on into Pakistan to become the Neelum River.
In addition to the dispute over the Kishanganga facility, Pakistan is objecting to at least seven other water projects in India, including the Ratle, Miyar, Lower Kalnai and Pakal Dul hydropower plants. Pakistani officials have specifically stated that they are ready to approach the International Court of Arbitration if the Ratle Water Project is not stopped.
Earlier this month, Pakistani officials warned that the country is likely to face a 13 percent water shortage if India succeeds in building the 330-megawatt Kishenganga project.
The two countries are racing to complete competing hydropower projects on the Kishenganga/Neelum River. Under terms of the Indus Waters Treaty, whichever nation finishes its project first will have priority water rights on the river.
Pakistan's $2.6 billion USD, 969-megawatt Neelum-Jhelum hydropower project is mired in financial problems that threaten to delay its completion.

Top-Down, Bottom-Up or the Yin and Yang Metaphor? How to Envision the Global Legal System (Eyal Benvenisti)


Every state looks internally to its constitution for the source of its authority. If in the past sovereigns drew their legitimacy from God, they now invoke their peoples’ right to self-determination. This vision also implies that they are exempt from international obligations unless they have freely consented to them. Such a vision comports with the positivistic theory of international law, which therefore is espoused by governments and some state-dominated courts.

However, this is a myopic vision that fails to notice the other dimension of the bigger picture. Like those who see only one part of the Rorschach test, governments as well as many political thinkers and legal scholars fail to acknowledge the more complex interrelation between the state and the global, between domestic law and international law.

As much as states consent to and thereby create international law, they are also shaped by it. Any sovereign title is contingent on international law and international institutions to recognize and protect it. The law on the creation of states defines statehood and protects states against internal challengers. The prohibitions on the use of force and annexation of foreign territory protect states against external challenges in much the same way as the domestic laws against trespass indirectly demarcate private property. There is a profound symbiosis between the law of sovereignty and the law of occupation which aims to protect it, and the two evolve in lockstep.

Moreover, central fields of international law serve primarily to reinforce domestic laws and institutions against internal challenges: by committing to international human rights institutions, governments preempt political opponents and provide a more secure environment to minorities; by joining the WTO, states are able to avoid or limit the opportunities for capture by domestic interest groups; by codifying international humanitarian law and joining international criminal tribunals, governments increase discipline within their own armed forces. At times, international law may intervene too much, as some say is the case with investment treaty arbitration. In other contexts, as in the case of environmental law, one would have hoped for a more interventionist international jurisprudence. But whether or not the relationship between the domestic and the international is balanced appropriately, the state is as much the creation of international law as it is its source of authority. Indeed, if the national constitution of a state is its legal backbone, international law operates as a shell that provides the state with complementary backing.

The complex legal interdependence between the state and the global, between domestic law and international law, defies any attempt to describe them along a vertical axis, either top-down or bottom-up. One is tempted instead to invoke the metaphor of yin and yang, the two opposite but complementary principles that according to Chinese philosophy shape and regulate all aspects of life. Just as the yang is generated from the yin and vice versa, international law is shaped by states whose powers are in turn shaped by international law. Both sides derive their meaning, purpose and limits from the principle of human dignity.

As lawyers we are trained to look for rigid hierarchical relations. But this training is inadequate for the complex contemporary web of international obligations. Instead, we need to adopt a multi-dimensional framework that also takes into account the horizontal axis, as well as the sense of motion and evolution. These dimensions are integrated into the yin/yang interpretation of the world.

images

There are two benefits to rejecting the hierarchical perspectives and adopting a yin/yang-like vision of the national/international legal system. First, the hierarchical vision – either top-down or bottom-up – fails to reflect the complex interrelations within the fragmented legal space that characterizes the complex global legal system. It also fails to convince those who prefer the top-down view that the bottom-up claim makes more sense, and vice versa. As Kelsen suggested, one can argue both ways with equal conviction. The Yin/yang visions reflects the normative claim that both international law and national law are equally grounded in human dignity and equally bound by it.

The second benefit of the yin/yang interpretation of the world is that besides being arguably a more comprehensive way of giving meaning to global events, it also provides at least a rudimentary moral compass for those who make and review policy choices. The inherent inter-dependence it depicts projects the need to take into account the effects of one’s action (or inaction) on the others and to strive to strike a proper balance – whatever that means – between the national and the international.

By emphasizing the profound interrelationship between the national and the international, I wish to offer another ground for viewing states as trustees of humanity in addition to the previous ones on which I elaborated earlier. If sovereigns negotiate their external recognition and respect with the world around them, and seek external protection from internal and external challengers, they must be prepared to provide reasons for their demands. They must also acknowledge their responsibility toward the others.

When asked “Why should states be accountable for their policy choices to the rest of humanity?” the proper retort could well be: “Why not?” The former question is based on an implicit assumption that the state is prior to the global system, and therefore the burden lies on whoever imposes obligations on states to justify this demand. But if the state is both the creator of international law and its creature, both the author of the law and its subject, the state needs to explain its motives (both as author and as subject!). At the same time, and for the same reason, the state is entitled to expect the rest of humanity to provide an account for its reaction.
This entry was posted in Blog on August 25, 2013 by Eyal Benvenisti.

TEASING ASEAN
by C. Raja Mohan
Nonresident Senior Associate
South Asia Program
@MohanCRaja

Those who think "spheres of influence" is an outdated idea in international relations should take a close look at China's charm offensive in Southeast Asia. At the recent annual regional summits in Brunei, Beijing actively pressed for an agreement on regular defence ministerial consultations with Southeast Asia. The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) did not bite, for now. But Beijing is unlikely to give up on the tease.
Mohan is a nonresident senior associate in Carnegie’s South Asia Program, where his research focuses on international security, defense, and Asian strategic issues.

Despite numerous requests from Premier Li Keqiang, the statement emanating from the "ASEAN Plus China" meeting merely "noted" Beijing's proposal. Put in plain English, ASEAN was neither accepting nor rejecting the call from Beijing. The fact is that there are significant differences among the member states on accepting a separate defence track with China. ASEAN, it might be recalled, has already agreed to hold such a "plus one" defence dialogue with the United States. Earlier this year, ASEAN defence ministers accepted US Defence Secretary Chuck Hagel's invitation for a joint session in Hawaii during 2014.

ASEAN's fear of a defence embrace with China is not surprising, given Beijing's intensifying maritime territorial disputes with Vietnam and the Philippines. Southeast Asia is also intrigued by another proposal from Li for a China-ASEAN treaty on "good neighbourliness, friendship and cooperation to consolidate the political foundation of mutual trust". China, it would seem, is eager to demonstrate that it does not pose a threat to ASEAN and signal its desire for a comprehensive partnership with the region.

Some see the proposal as a response to a recent initiative from Jakarta calling for an Indo-Pacific treaty of friendship and cooperation. If Jakarta wants to embed ASEAN's relationship with China in a broader structure of regional balance, Beijing is looking for an exclusive sphere of influence.

SELLING FAST TRAINS
ASEAN's current reluctance to embrace China in the security sector did not stop Li from outlining the case for a deeper economic integration with Southeast Asia. If the last 10 years of engagement between the two has been a golden one, Li wants the next 10 to be the "diamond decade".

After the ASEAN summit, Li travelled to Thailand, where he pitched for high-speed transborder rail links between the two countries. Opening an exhibition showcasing China's high-speed rail technology in Bangkok, Li pressed for an expansion and modernisation of rail connectivity in the region.

Earlier agreements between Bangkok and Beijing to build high-speed rail links between the two countries have stalled amidst controversies within Thailand over high project costs, the methods of financing and the proposed route. Public backing for the project from the Chinese premier is expected to accelerate Bangkok's decision on executing the project.

SMILING at HANOI
While consolidating the strong ties with Thailand, Li has made a bold effort to improve strained relations with Vietnam. Maritime territorial disputes between China and Vietnam in the South China Sea have boiled over in recent years.

Vietnam has actively sought security cooperation with the US, Japan and other Asian countries, including India, to balance the giant neighbour to the north. If the previous leadership in Beijing frowned at Hanoi's insolence, China has now turned on "smile diplomacy". "The symphony of China-Vietnam diplomacy rises to a new crescendo," China's official Xinhua news agency gushed as Li arrived in Hanoi over the weekend.

Li signed a number of agreements to boost bilateral cooperation. The two agreed to boost bilateral trade to $60 billion by 2015 and promote cooperation in the areas of finance and infrastructure. Even more important was the decision to set up a joint working group that will explore joint exploration and development of the Gulf of Tonkin resources while they continue to negotiate a peaceful resolution of their territorial disputes.

At a joint press conference in Hanoi, Li declared that despite their current differences, China and Vietnam have the will to promote stability in the "South China Sea". His counterpart, Nguyen Tan Dung was less lyrical when he noted that the two sides agreed to maintain peace in the "East Sea".

Forget, for a moment, the different names that Li and Dung employed to describe the same disputed waters, but do keep an eye on the masters of realpolitik in Beijing and Hanoi circling each other in the coming months.

This article was originally published in the Indian Express.

"An Agreement Among Unequals (by Frederic Grare)

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's trip to China last week was, by all appearances, a success. Coming just a few months after Chinese Premier Li Keqiang's visit to New Delhi, it left the impression of healthy and sustained working relations. The trip was fruitful, producing nine signed agreements, including the much-discussed-in-India Border Defence Cooperation Agreement (BDCA), as well as an agreement on strengthening cooperation on trans-border rivers. A closer look indicates, however, that the visit only institutionalised the status quo at best, or, if one takes a more pessimistic view of India's situation, reflected the deterioration of its regional position. To guard against the latter, India ought to strengthen partnerships with neighbours — China will certainly not be shy about doing the same.
The new BDCA, the fifth since 1993, commits the two sides to "maximum self-restraint". It states that neither side shall use its military capability against the other. The two sides will also have to give notice of patrols along the border and will ensure that "they shall not follow or tail patrols on the other side in areas where there is no common understanding of the Line of Actual Control in the India-China border areas."

The agreement does not address the border issue per se and thus, to some extent, institutionalises the status quo. It has been criticised for de facto allowing what India used to consider border violations. While it is presented by both sides as a means of ensuring the safety of a border area (where, indeed, not a single bullet has been fired since 1975), the agreement is primarily a tool for the political management of bilateral relations. It does not constitute a guarantee against potential future incidents. The safety of the border area is likely to remain dependent on future political tensions between the two countries. The BDCA is, however, a pragmatic and realistic answer to a rapidly changing situation along the border, where the construction of new military infrastructure and the deployment of additional troops on both sides increase the risk of incidents.

What is perhaps more worrisome is the regional context in which the border agreement is taking place. China continues its longstanding strategy of counterbalancing India by supporting Pakistan; just days before Singh's visit, Beijing announced it would sell two additional nuclear reactors to Pakistan at a time when Islamabad is increasing its arsenal of tactical nuclear weapons. Moreover, India cannot ignore China's sudden diplomatic burst in Southeast Asia. President Xi Jinping recently visited Malaysia, while Li attended the ASEAN and East Asia summits before visiting Thailand and Vietnam. Beijing is trying to improve relations with its southern neighbours after years of tension, bringing tangible economic benefits to its new partners in the process. In so doing, it widens existing fissures among ASEAN states. Moreover, Delhi looks with increasing suspicion at Chinese arms exports to the region.

The effort may not be aimed primarily at India — observers underline the growing China-Japan competition in the area — but it will affect all of India's ASEAN partners. It is hardly a coincidence that Chinese analysts commenting on Singh's visit underline the contrast between the confrontational Japanese and accommodating Indian attitudes vis-à-vis border issues with China, and the independence of India's foreign policy, in a clear attempt to pull the two apart. Russia, India's traditional strategic and defence partner, is unlikely to be of much help as it needs to export arms to sustain its domestic defence industry and has become China's main arms supplier.

On the economic side, relations with China have fallen victim to the global economic crisis. The exports of both countries to each other suffered in 2012, but China's exports to India diminished by only 5 per cent, while India's exports to China have diminished by some 20 per cent, increasing the already unsustainable trade deficit. In order to bridge or at least reduce the gap, the two countries have decided to explore the possibility of creating a Chinese industrial park in India and the feasibility of the Bangladesh-China-India-Myanmar economic corridor. But these projects are unlikely to materialise any time soon, and the already huge trade imbalance is likely to persist.

It is not clear at this stage that India has any response other than biding time. There is no easy answer to the current asymmetry of power between India and China, and therefore to India's incapacity to match Chinese influence in its larger neighbourhood. Regardless of the government that comes to power after the 2014 Lok Sabha elections, it will be unable to simply decree stronger defence capacities and rejuvenated economic growth into existence.

India does, however, have some diplomatic space it could leverage to its advantage. For years, its ASEAN and East Asian partners have been asking Delhi to become more involved in regional affairs, in particular the existing security institutions. India has always been careful not to antagonise China though, and most Indian analysts readily admit that Delhi is in no position to take a confrontational public posture vis-à-vis Beijing. China understands this. The new Chinese leadership keeps sending seemingly contradictory signals, indicating that it is not ready for any meaningful compromise on the border, but that it wants a non-confrontational relationship with India. The message here seems to be that Beijing wants Delhi to know it wants a peaceful relationship, but it wants that relationship to be defined on its terms.

Perhaps India would also be well advised to remember its recent history. It was Delhi's rapprochement with Washington that prompted China to seek better relations with India. Today, Washington's choices are again affecting the region's dynamics. Uncertainty about the US role in the Asia-Pacific is helping China's designs as regional actors try to hedge their bets. There seems, therefore, to be no alternative for India but to promote its network of regional partnerships and give them the substance that would help insulate it from the perils of relative American isolationism. In the process, Delhi will not have to renounce its cherished strategic autonomy — but realise that the capacity to act independently matters less than the capacity to decide autonomously, while leveraging the forces of others.

This article was originally published in the Indian Express.
Frederic Grare
"

Twenty-six eminent scientists, representing natural, social and human sciences and engineering, have been appointed to a Scientific Advisory Board, announced by the UN Secretary-General, Ban Ki-moon. The new Board will provide advice on science, technology and innovation (STI) for sustainable development to the UN Secretary-General and to Executive Heads of UN organizations. UNESCO will host the Secretariat for the Board.


The members of the Scientific Advisory Board are:

·        Tanya Abrahamse (South Africa), CEO, South African National Biodiversity Institute;

·        Susan Avery (United States of America), President and Director, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution;

·        Hilary McDonald Beckles (Barbados), Pro-Vice Chancellor and Principal, University of the West Indies;

·        Joji Cariño (Philippines), Director, Forest Peoples Programme;

·        Rosie Cooney (Australia), Visiting Fellow, Institute of Environmental Studies, UNSW, Sydney;

·        Abdallah Daar (Oman), Professor of Public Health, University of Toronto, Canada;

·        Gebisa Ejeta (Ethiopia), Professor of Agronomy, Purdue University, United States;

·        Vladimir Fortov (Russian Federation), President of the Russian Academy of Sciences;

·        Fabiola Gianotti (Italy), Research physicist and former Coordinator of ATLAS Experiment, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland;

·        Ke Gong (China), President of Nankai University;

·        Jörg Hinrich Hacker (Germany), President, German National Academy of Sciences – Leopoldina;

·        Maria Ivanova (Bulgaria), Professor of Global Governance, University of Massachusetts, United States;

·        Eugenia Kalnay (Argentina), Professor of Atmospheric and Ocean Sciences, University of Maryland, Unites States;

·        Eva Kondorosi (Hungary), Research Professor, Biological Research Centre, Academy of Sciences of Hungary;

·        Reiko Kuroda (Japan), Professor, Research Institute for Science and Technology, Tokyo University of Science;

·        Dong-Pil Min (Republic of Korea), Emeritus Professor, Seoul National University;

·        Carlos Nobre (Brazil), Senior Climate Scientist, National Secretary for R&D Policies;

·        Rajendra Kumar Pachauri (India), Director-General, The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI); Chair, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change - Nobel Laureate for Peace;

·        Shankar Sastry (United States of America), Dean, College of Engineering, University of California, Berkeley;

·        Hayat Sindi (Saudi Arabia), Founder and CEO, Institute of Imagination and Ingenuity;

·        Wole Soboyejo (Nigeria), President, African University of Science and Technology (AUST), Garki;

·        Laurence Tubiana (France), Director, Institute of Sustainable Development and International Relations (IDDRI), Paris;

·        Judi Wakhungu (Kenya), Professor of Energy Resources Management, First Cabinet Secretary, Ministry for Environment, Water and Natural Resources;

·        Ada Yonath (Israel), Director, Helen and  Milton A. Kimmelman Centre for Biomolecular Structure and Assembly, Weizmann Institute of Sciences; Nobel Laureate in Chemistry;

·        Abdul Hamid Zakri (Malaysia), Science Advisor to the Prime Minister of Malaysia; Chair, Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES);

·        Ahmed Zewail (Egypt), Director, Department of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, California Institute of Technology, United States; Nobel Laureate in Chemistry.

“The creation of the Scientific Advisory Board follows on a wide-ranging consultation work entrusted to UNESCO by the UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon,” said UNESCO Director-General Irina Bokova.  “It brings together scientists of international stature, and will serve as a global reference point to improve links between science and public policies.”

The Board is the first such body set up by the UN Secretary-General to influence and shape action by the international community to advance sustainable development and eradicate poverty. The initiative derives from the report of the UN Secretary-General’s High-level Panel on Global Sustainability Resilient People, Resilient Planet: A Future worth choosing (January, 2012). This report recommended the launch of a “major global scientific initiative to strengthen the interface between policy and science. This should include the preparation of regular assessments and digests of the science around such concepts as “planetary boundaries”, “tipping points” and “environmental thresholds” in the context of sustainable development”.

The fields covered by the Board range from the basic sciences, through engineering and technology, social sciences and humanities, ethics, health, economic, behavioral, and agricultural sciences, in addition to the environmental sciences.

It aims to ensure that up-to-date and rigorous science is appropriately reflected in high-level policy discussions within the UN system, offering recommendations on priorities related to science for sustainable development that should be supported or encouraged; providing advice on up-to-date scientific issues relevant to sustainable development; identifying knowledge gaps that could be addressed outside the UN system by either national or international research programs; identifying specific needs that could be addressed by on-going assessments (e.g., IPCC or the IPBES); and advising on issues related to the public visibility and understanding of science.

Board members will act in their personal capacity and will provide advice on a strictly independent basis. They will serve pro bono for two years, with the possibility of renewal for one further two-year term, upon the decision of the Secretary-General. The first session of the Board will be held at the beginning of 2014.

China's Energy Research Institute (ERI) and officials from the UK will adapt the British government's 2050 Pathways Analysis Calculator to assist in their new alliance.

The online tool allows organisations to explore energy-related risks and the balance between energy efficiency and building power generation capacity.

The Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO), with the support of the British Embassy Beijing, and the ERI will host a conference in Beijing in 2013.

South Korea and Belgium are also developing a similar alliance with the assistance of DECC and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. Developing countries will also receive help as they develop their own calculators over the next two years.

Chinese and UK officials will engage with these countries at next years conference to promote the use of this methodology.

DECC's Carbon Plan, published in December 2011, used the 2050 Calculator to generate and predict three 2050 futures that illustrate the possibilities of reaching the UK’s carbon reduction target.

Staff call for action on gender progression


Senior members of the University of Cambridge are calling for a debate on gender progression within the higher education sector


Added 20 February 2014 | University of Cambridge, academics, Times Higher Education


Posted by Rebecca Paddick


Save for later

Tweet 

In a letter published today in the Times Higher Education, more than 50 Cambridge staff – among them heads of colleges and departments – appeal for a broader and more inclusive approach to academic appointments and promotions so that talented women stand a better chance of progressing to senior positions.

They argue that conventional success in academia, for example a promotion from Reader to Professor, can often seem as if it is framed by quite rigid outcomes – a paper published in a leading journal, or the size and frequency of research grants – at the expense of other skill-sets and attributes. Despite the importance of such metrics, on their own they are likely to benefit men more than women, they argue.

A broader, more inclusive approach to success and promotion, where other academic contributions, including teaching, administration and outreach work are valued, would make it easier for women to advance, and universities fulfil their potential as institutions that contribute positively to society.

Data provided by the Higher Education Statistics Agency reveal that there are four male professors for every female professor in UK universities, despite women accounting for 45% of the UK academic workforce.

Professor Dame Athene Donald, gender equality champion at the University of Cambridge, said that she and her colleagues were keen to highlight how a conventional understanding of success in academia seems to disadvantage women.

“Our experience at Cambridge, where we have recently surveyed 126 female academics and administrators on this subject, suggests that this is indeed the case.

“Women seem to value a broader spectrum of work-based competencies that do not flourish easily under the current system.

“There will always be hardcore metrics for academics, such as grants, or prizes won, and books and papers published, and they are important. But there are opportunities to reward and embed different types of success, such as teaching, outreach and departmental support; activities that lots of very talented women, and indeed men, are involved with, but are not currently a meaningful part of recognition and advancement in universities.

“If universities inhibit the progression of talented female staff, they in turn are unable to reach their full potential. And we know that universities make a huge contribution to society through research, teaching and partnerships with businesses, among many other activities.”

The survey by the University of Cambridge is part of ongoing work to improve its own gender imbalances. Each of the participants were nominated by peers as successful women, with further interviews and questions being used to understand what shaped their views around success, the barriers they faced on their way to becoming successful, and what techniques they had used to thrive.


Added 20 February 2014 | University of Cambridge, academics, Times Higher Education


Posted by Rebecca Paddick

GWP Technical Focus Paper, titled 'Water and Food Security – Experiences in India and China,' which identifies as critical the challenges of water and energy for food and agriculture. It stresses the “wicked challenge” posed by the complexity of hydrology, engineering, legal and political systems, sectors, institutions and agronomic elements that drive country outcomes.

Focusing on the case studies of China and India, the report compares the balance between centralized and decentralized management. The report includes chapters on: water and food as global priorities; India and China – similarities and contrasts; water governance in India; water governance in China; selected experiences from other countries; lessons from India, China and others; and a role for integrated water resources management (IWRM).

In the section on selected experiences from other countries, the report examines challenges faced in sub-Saharan Africa. Among conclusions, the report stresses that small-scale water management solutions are more likely to succeed when governance and institutional capacity is weak, but such solutions are unlikely to sufficiently address increased competition for scarce water resources or the threat of climate change.

Pressure China to enter into appropriate water-sharing agreements

19th Oct 2013

Women’s Environment and Development Desk
Tibetan Women’s Association
Central Executive Committee
Dharamshala, 176219, India

To: Environment Ministers of the Governments of Bhutan, Bangladesh, Burma, Cambodia, India, Laos, Nepal, Pakistan, Thailand, and Vietnam
cc Mrs Irina Bokuva, Director General, UNESCO

Your Excellencies,

With an increasing number of Chinese hydropower projects and water-diversion projects in Tibet, as well as water pollution from mining in Tibet, it is certain that Tibet and its ten downstream nations will face great challenges in the coming years. Therefore, we are writing to share our grave concerns about the impact of China’s policies on Asia’s regional water security, and to urge your government to join forces with other downstream nations to pressure China to enter into appropriate water-sharing agreements.

Over the last sixty years, China’s policies in Tibet have led to major environmental degradation. This includes poisoned river and groundwater through unregulated mining, drying up of wetlands and shrinking of lakes, and disrupting the fragile ecosystem at the headwaters of these rivers. This has exacerbated a serious situation, whereby meltdown from Himalayan glaciers has caused chronic flooding downstream from Tibet, including your countries.

Along with water security, we must consider the importance of food security also. For thousands of years, those in downstream nations have had access to the free flow of rivers from Tibet, bringing not only water for irrigation but rich nutrients for growing crops. To maintain food security in agriculture in the major deltas of South Asia and Southeast Asia, there must be water-sharing treaties in place to allow for free flow of water on these rivers.

Global climate change is warming the Tibetan Plateau at twice the rate of the rest of the world, and the impact of this on Asia’s water supplies is exacerbated by China’s extensive mega-dam-building programme intended to harness hydropower and divert water to mainland China. This programme threatens the safety, security, and sustainable livelihoods of more than one billion people living downstream. There must be a moratorium on China’s mega-dam building on Tibet’s rivers, which are shared by multiple nations, to prevent disastrous impact downstream.

By claiming authority over the Water Tower of Asia, China is wielding considerable power over its neighboring countries, yet it has not signed a single water sharing agreement. Following on from the initiatives of the UN International Decade for Action ‘Water For Life’ (2005-2015) and the UN International Year of Water Cooperation (2013), we urge all ten downstream nations to act now to secure your future water supplies and bring China to the negotiating table to sign appropriate international transboundary water-sharing agreements.



Yours faithfully,

Ms Dorji Kyi

Women’s Environment and Development Officer

Tibetan Women’s Association

http://tibetanwomen.org/

Abstract—With the highest concentration of transboundary
water, the northeast, northwest and southwest regions of China
enjoy abundant transboundary resources and pose complicated
issues. This paper deeply discusses major characteristics of
transboundary water basins in China, including that the
distribution of those basins in China is complicated; most of
those basins are poor and backward; the basic studies and works
on those are much weaker and exploitation is difficult. Then,
focused problems on transboundary waters in China are
analyzed that in international river basins, data and information
are confused; problems on border and territory are unresolved;
related studies in China is lagged behind. Finally, according to
the present situation of transboundary water in China, a few of
proper measures are proposed to address above issues in hope of
promoting regional cooperation and sustainable development for
transboundary water based on the principle of equitable and
reasonable utilization and the obligation against causing harm.

Asia needs to transform and upgrade its development model in keeping with the trend of the times. Sustaining development is still of paramount importance to Asia, because only development holds the key to solving major problems and difficulties it faces. It is important that we should shift the growth model, adjust the economic structure, make development more cost effective and make life better for our people.
We need to make concerted efforts to resolve major difficulties to ensure stability in Asia. Stability in Asia now faces new challenges, as hotspot issues keep emerging, and both traditional and non-traditional security threats exist. The Asian countries need to increase mutual trust and work together to ensure durable peace and stability in our region.
We need to build on past success and make new progress in promoting cooperation in Asia. There are many mechanisms and initiatives for enhancing cooperation in Asia, and a lot of ideas on boosting such cooperation are being explored by various parties. What we need to do is to enhance mutual understanding, build consensus, and enrich and deepen cooperation so as to strike a balance among the interests of various parties and build mechanisms that bring benefits to all.

Published in the International Year of Water Cooperation (2013), this paper explores how international law facilitates transboundary cooperation in a manner that is accessible to the wider transboundary water community. It discusses the norms and principles contained in treaties and rules of customary law, and examines how these work in selected case studies from across the GWP network.

The IHP-HELP Centre for Water Law, Policy and Science (under the auspices of UNESCO) (CWLPS) at the University of Dundee is very pleased to announce the publication of the Proceedings from the UN Watercourses Convention (UNWC) Global Initiative Symposium held in Dundee, Scotland, in June 2012.


At over 400 pages, these Proceedings are a comprehensive collection of materials (programme, accepted abstracts, slideshow presentations, and some full papers) featured as part of the Symposium. The biographies of participants and others who contributed to the Symposium are also included

Resilient Dynamism is the theme for this year’s World Economic Forum Annual Meeting in Davos-Klosters, and I am pleased to introduce the Global Risks 2013 report in the same spirit. Based on an extensive survey of over 1,000 experts worldwide, the report – now in its eighth edition – serves to orient and inform
decision-makers as they seek to make sense of an increasingly complex and fast-changing world. I hope this report challenges, provokes and inspires you, and I invite you to engage – if you have not already done so – with the World Economic Forum’s Risk Response Network, which provides private and public sector leaders with a collaborative platform to build national resilience to
global risks.
Klaus Schwab,Founder and Executive Chair, WEF

Water Security -- a new publication by UNU arising out of a high level experts meeting convened by the The InterAction Council comprised of former heads of state, which now call on the UN Security Council to make water a top priority. What is the role of international law in promoting the peaceful management of the shared transboundary water resources around the globe? My current research explores the duty to cooperate as a platform for promoting regional peace and security through transboundary water resources management in line with the rules of international law. The water community and the legal community need more connectivity.

Dear Patricia, Mike, Ana, Jackie and Teferra,

It was such a pleasure and an honor to have you all on the AWF panel discussion. The exchange was rich, dynamic and quite thought-provoking. 

I wanted to let you know that we received excellent feedback from our audience in Stockholm and at home, in Tunisia, which means that we might need to have a sequel at next year’s water week!

In the meantime, you may watch and share the video recording of the session, now available for viewing on  the AfDB web tv site.

Part 1: AWF panel discussion: Cooperation and Hydro-Diplomacy:  Successful Approaches to Optimise Transboundary Water Management

http://www.afdb.tv/?changeLangue&lang=en&k=d2cb44e811151c116d025253c852cfe9&pays=79&v=list


Part 2: AMCOW High Level Ministerial Panel  + Speech from AfDB

http://www.afdb.tv/?k=8d1ae6073f306e41cbdc7486c47661d4&pays=79&v=list&lang=en



If you cannot view through Explorer – please change browser and use Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox.  Note that high speed internet is required to view without interruptions.

Dear Patricia, Mike, Ana, Jackie and Teferra,

It was such a pleasure and an honor to have you all on the AWF panel discussion. The exchange was rich, dynamic and quite thought-provoking. 

I wanted to let you know that we received excellent feedback from our audience in Stockholm and at home, in Tunisia, which means that we might need to have a sequel at next year’s water week!

In the meantime, you may watch and share the video recording of the session, now available for viewing on  the AfDB web tv site.

Part 1: AWF panel discussion: Cooperation and Hydro-Diplomacy:  Successful Approaches to Optimise Transboundary Water Management

http://www.afdb.tv/?changeLangue&lang=en&k=d2cb44e811151c116d025253c852cfe9&pays=79&v=list


Part 2: AMCOW High Level Ministerial Panel  + Speech from AfDB

http://www.afdb.tv/?k=8d1ae6073f306e41cbdc7486c47661d4&pays=79&v=list&lang=en



If you cannot view through Explorer – please change browser and use Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox.  Note that high speed internet is required to view without interruptions.

Professor Patricia Wouters was invited to participate as a legal expert on a panel convened by the Africa Water Facility at the African Development Bank, "Africa Focus: Cooperation and Hydro-Diplomacy - Successful Approaches to Optimize Transboundary Water Management" convened at the recent Stockholm World Water Week (1-6 September 2013).



The session explored opportunities and barriers to transboundary water cooperation across Africa, which is home to numerous international watercourses. The session was streamed live and closed with reactions from 9 Ministers of Water Resources from across Africa. The High Level Ministerial panel involving HE John Agyekum Kufuor, former President of Ghana & Chair, Sanitation & Water for All (SWA), AMCOW President, EXCO members, AUC Commissioner for Rural Economy and Agriculture and other AMCOW Ministers to receive report on the Africa Focus seminars and adopt resolutions on transboundary water cooperation. Africa has seen an increase in transboundary cooperation over recent years, but still faces serious challenges across the continent.


http://www.flickr.com/photos/worldwaterweek/sets/72157635371680635/

What role does Scotland have in addressing the global water crisis? Professor Wouters will outline some of the key challenges in making Scotland a Hydro-Nation with particular reference to its possible role in hydro-diplomacy - to assist with advancing regional peace and security through the peaceful management of the world's shared transboundary water resources.

How does the concept of "Dynamic Cooperation", considered through the perspective of international law, contribute to enhancing cooperation across the Nile? This presentation introduced the notion of dynamic cooperation as a platform for the peaceful management of the transboundary water resources of the Nile during times of great uncertainty, including the pressing challenges imposed by climate change. By focussing on the institutional mechanisms and rules of procedure within a governance framework that is adaptive, and moving away from pre-occupations with the normative content of the notion of water security, Dynamic Cooperation offers a pragmatic way forward on the Nile.

International Water Conflicts -- Past, Present and Future. This talk frames the discussion around transboundary water wars - suggesting that the key issues are: Communities; Competition; Conflicts-of-use and identifies the important role of international water law.

This work introduces the Legal Assessment Model (LAM) a framework for national governments to use at the domestic (local) and regional level to identify all relevant factors to be considered in the consideration of the lawfulness of new and increased uses on transboundary waters. The case studies examine the rules of international water law in 3 scenarios upstream - China; downstream - Mozambique; and shared groundwater - Palestine. It uses small teams of multidisciplinary experts to apply the LAM for national governments (law, policy, economics and science).

This work introduces the Legal Assessment Model (LAM) a framework for national governments to use at the domestic (local) and regional level to identify all relevant factors to be considered in the consideration of the lawfulness of new and increased uses on transboundary waters. The case studies examine the rules of international water law in 3 scenarios upstream - China; downstream - Mozambique; and shared groundwater - Palestine. It uses small teams of multidisciplinary experts to apply the LAM for national governments (law, policy, economics and science).

Approximately 40 per cent of the world’s population
lives in river and lake basins that comprise two or more
countries, and perhaps even more significantly, over 90
per cent lives in countries that share basins. The existing
263 transboundary2 lake and river basins cover nearly
one half of the Earth’s land surface and account for an
estimated 60 per cent of global freshwater flow. A total
of 145 States include territory within such basins, and
30 countries lie entirely within them. In addition, about
2 billion people worldwide depend on groundwater,
which includes approximately 300 transboundary
aquifer systems.