Substitutability,securitisation and hydro-hegemony: ontological and strategic sequencing in shared river relations

When a river passes through multiple states, to what extent are those states able to co-operate over or come into conflict over that shared water source? To address this question, I build on previous literature that emphasised benefit sharing, securitisation narratives and basin-level hydro-hegemony to advance an ontologically and strategically sequential framework for understanding shared river relations. I apply that framework to explain the changes in the hydro-political relationship between Turkey and Syria with regard to the Euphrates River. From 1980 to 1998, the policy-makers in both states saw use of the Euphrates as helping the government achieve high priority political goals and perceived full usage of that water to be the only means of doing so. Therefore, they both securitised the issue of Euphrates water usage to a significant degree. This mutual securitisation drove the two states toward greater conflict. After 2000, each state found substitute means for those same goals and so reduced its securitisation of Euphrates water usage. This reduced securitisation facilitated greater co-operation between them.