Iran’s clashes with Afghanistan over water could reveal deeper ambitions

The long shadow of water disputes

Water as a strategic issue has long affected the diplomatic and strategic relations between Afghanistan and its neighbours, with the country sharing major rivers that flow toward central Asia, Pakistan, and Iran.

Tehran tried to increase its share of the Helmand River's waters in 1882, setting up the conflict between the countries that the 1973 agreement was designed to consign to history.

Back then, the Afghan Prime Minister, Musa Shafiq, and his Iranian counterpart, Amir Abbas Hoveyda, reached the deal that bears their names and divides the Helmand River's water supply between the countries. Under its terms, Iran receives 26 cubic meters of water per second, significantly less than it was accustomed to.

And so over time, Iran took advantage of instability in Afghanistan and constructed over 30 dams within its borders on rivers that flow into the country.

Additionally, with the assistance of Japanese experts, Iran drilled wells in Sistan and Baluchestan and acquired one billion cubic meters of Afghan water without consulting the Afghan side.

Iran also extended water pipelines for 192 kilometres to the city of Zahedan. These actions contradict previous agreements signed between the two countries, as noted by the Afghan government.

Tensions escalated between Kabul and Tehran when former Afghan President Mohammad Ashraf Ghani assumed power in 2014. The dispute then centred on dam construction projects in western and southern Afghanistan, particularly in Herat, Farah, and Nimruz, which border Iran.

Ghani aimed to organise and manage river waters and implement a water strategy to improve his country's political and economic conditions.

The opening of the Kamal Khan dam in Nimruz near the Iranian border in March 2021 further exacerbated the longstanding dispute over its impact on Iran's share of the Helmand River's flow.

Similar tensions arose when the Taliban resumed power in August 2021. Iran, as usual, requested negotiations with the new government on the division of the Helmand River's water and urged a reconsideration of the Shafiq-Hoveyda Agreement, arguing that it was signed during the reign of the Shah, who, in Iran's estimation, forfeited the country's right to water.

The Afghan government rejected Iran's request and emphasised that the agreement is comprehensive, outlining water allocation throughout the seasons, and called on Tehran to adhere to its provisions.

The recent border clash between Iran and Afghanistan cannot be solely attributed to the chronic ambiguity in their relations or the loss of water experienced by Iran over the past year. It is a significant factor in the tensions, but no assumptions should be made about its potential to lead to a full-scale conflict.

That would be a strategic loss for both countries, as acknowledged by Iran's Minister Mousavi.

Does Tehran have ambitions that run beyond water disputes? Comments from Mousavi raise questions. His call on social media to curb Western influence among Afghans implies there may be broader motivations at play.

His reference to a supposed plot by the invaders may be an attempt to link historical events to the current situation. The mention of British army officer Frederic John Goldsmid – who demarcated the borders between Iran and Pakistan – adds a historical context.

The British division of the Baluchistan region, with the western part handed over to Iran and the eastern part to Afghanistan, including Herat, may be invoked to fuel nationalist sentiments or create a sense of historical grievance.

Historical insight

Iran's relations with Afghanistan from the Soviet invasion in 1979 through to the present day shed important insight into its intentions.

Particular insight comes from its behaviour on either side of the 11 September 2001 terrorist attacks on the US, as can its reaction to the subsequent fall of the Taliban.

Despite the ideological differences between the Shiite Islamic Republic of Iran and the Sunni Salafi Taliban movement, Iranian dynamics have influenced Afghanistan's transformation since the Soviet days, and they have been pragmatic.

Iran's involvement through the Afghan Mujahideen, particularly in the Hazaristan region, where the Shiite sect is prominent, played a significant role in maintaining friendly relations with the Soviet Union, despite Iran's official condemnation of the invasion.

Iran's influence also helped alleviate its isolation during the hostage crisis at the American embassy in Tehran. Furthermore, Iran provided shelter, weapons, and support to key figures within the Taliban movement.

Pragmatic dealings

Tehran is often pragmatic in its dealings with the Taliban, even as it perceived it as a persistent security threat. This can be seen in Iran's response to the occupation of Mazar-i-Sharif and the storming of the Iranian consulate in August 1998.

Eight Iranian diplomats and a journalist were killed in this bloody incident, and 50 other Iranians were detained. Despite the deployment of 200,000 soldiers to the border, war was averted when the Taliban, under pressure from the United Nations, returned the bodies of the deceased diplomats and released the remaining Iranian prisoners.

Despite the geopolitical factors and cultural ties that enabled Iran to exercise great influence in Afghanistan, ideological differences and political ambitions naturally played a role in the tense relationship with the Taliban movement, which seized power in the late 1990s.

The Sunni Taliban movement adopted a hardline approach at the time, suppressing the Hazara Shiites in Afghanistan, and the Taliban also hosted al-Qaeda elements, which made it logical for Tehran to seek to overthrow the Taliban then.

Iran supported the US invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, driven by the shared goal of eliminating the al-Qaeda threat.

However, the hostility between Iran and the Taliban quickly diminished after US military bases popped up across the region, extending from Central Asia to the Gulf and from Iraq to Afghanistan.

This shift in the balance of power led to tactical cooperation between Tehran and the Taliban in the face of the US presence. The Iranian Revolutionary Guard played a significant role in supplying weapons to the Taliban, with international coalition forces conducting numerous interceptions of Iranian-made weapons, including Russian surface-to-air missiles.

The Taliban attributed successful attacks against Nato forces in southern Afghanistan to Iranian weaponry. The discovery of Iranian weapons in provinces like Helmand, a major battleground between the Taliban and Nato forces, further highlights the intertwining of interests and the ambiguity of roles, including Iran's part.

An August 2009 report by General Stanley McChrystal, the commander of US forces in Afghanistan, described Iran's role in the country as "ambiguous." The report stated that Iran assisted the Afghan government while allowing weapons to pass to the Taliban. The then US defence secretary, Robert Gates, accused Tehran of playing a "double game" in Afghanistan.

The return of the Taliban

The Taliban's resurgence in Afghanistan began with the signing of the Doha Agreement between the US and the Taliban in late February 2020, which paved the way for the withdrawal of US forces from the country.

Despite the subsequent delay in the withdrawal, President Joe Biden's policy did not significantly differ from that of his predecessors. In a shocking turn of events, the Taliban re-took control of various areas, ultimately leading to the fall of the Afghan government after the withdrawal of American forces from Afghanistan.

Regarding the Taliban's policies towards the Hazara Shiite minority, the group initially pledged to grant them full freedom to practice their rituals without persecution upon their return.

However, over two years, the Taliban gradually reverted to their previous practices, raising concerns about persecution, ethnic discrimination, mistreatment of women, and other repressive measures observed before 2001.

Herat could show the future

Herat, currently considered one of Afghanistan's most stable and prosperous regions, experienced progress during the rule of Afghan President Hamid Karzai.

The city became an industrial hub connected to remote northern provinces through infrastructure development. Schools, health clinics, and commercial centres were also established, and a railway project connected Herat to the Iranian interior.

Today, Herat's markets are filled with Iranian products, and the Iranian consulate's presence is noticeable, along with the influence of the Revolutionary Guards. However, with the American withdrawal, Tehran might sense that the shared commonalities with the Taliban movement are insufficient to ensure its desired influence within Afghanistan and future strategic cooperation in the Southeast Asian region. 

Clashes cause uncertainty

Nonetheless, the border conflict could potentially mark the beginning of a storm, introducing unforeseen developments.

The American withdrawal revealed the inherent challenge of coexistence between two extremist ideologies, and the water dispute, coupled with other factors, may lead to unanticipated developments.

Rasul Mousavi's statement that any conflict between the two parties would result in a strategic loss underscores the significance of the situation and the potential ramifications for all involved.