Water is by International Law, Not by Whims
US-Mexico Water Treaty: A History of Scarcity and Agreement
Table of Contents
TIJUANA, Mexico – Recent discussions surrounding water deliveries from the Bravo River to the United States, particularly Texas, have sparked debate and finger-pointing. Some attribute the situation to former Mexican presidents Vicente Fox or Felipe Calderón, alleging compromised water agreements.These discussions occur as Mexico approaches an October deadline to meet its water quota obligations under international law.
Origins of the Water Dispute
The issue dates back to the late 19th century and the need to establish water rights on the Alto Bravo River, specifically in the El Paso, Texas, and Ciudad Juarez, Chihuahua, region. As users in Colorado began utilizing the water, residents of Ciudad Juarez protested. In 1896, a convention coordinated by Matias romero on the Mexican side resulted in an agreement granting Mexico 74 million cubic meters of water.
This decision was based on the principle of “first appropriation,” meaning the first to use the water had the right to it. This principle favored Ciudad Juarez, which had existed for 300 years. The ”first appropriation” principle was applied in many places in the western United States and was convenient for mexico in this case. The agreements of the 1896 convention were formalized in a treaty signed in 1906.
The 1944 Treaty: A Landmark Agreement
Hydraulic technology advancements, particularly hydroelectric dams, led to disagreements among Colorado River basin states. This spurred the 1944 international law agreement. This agreement, predating the administrations of Fox, Calderón, and Lopez Obrador, dictates that Mexico delivers 432 million cubic meters of water annually to Texas while receiving 1.85 billion cubic meters in Baja California. According to historical accounts, Interior Secretary Harold Ickes sought confirmation from President Franklin D.Roosevelt regarding the accuracy of these figures before proceeding wiht the treaty’s signing and Senate approval during wartime.
While Texas supported the agreement, California sought to reduce Mexico’s allocation. Arizona, despite its historical opposition to providing water to Mexico, ultimately supported the treaty, preventing California’s proposals from gaining traction. arizona’s stance proved crucial in ensuring the treaty’s overall acceptance, rejecting California’s proposal to limit Mexico’s share to 980 million cubic meters.
The construction of hydroelectric dams globally underscored the need for international river agreements. The 1944 treaty served as a model when the Helsinki rules were established in 1966. While each international basin has unique characteristics, the principle of respecting prior water usage remains paramount. The agreements are not merely water exchanges but estimations based on respecting established water usage rights.
The 1848 treaty designated the bravo and Colorado rivers as international rivers. While the Colorado River’s limit is smaller than the Bravo’s, the area bordering Arizona, California, and Baja California was prone to flooding for many years. Large-scale hydraulic projects transformed the area into a “desert,” making it tough to imagine the previous flow of 20 billion cubic meters. The treaty allocates only 8% of the current flow, with the remainder distributed across 2 million acres and numerous cities, including denver, Phoenix, Los Angeles, and San Diego.
Cycles of Scarcity and Potential Solutions
The treaty allows for five-year cycles to address potential annual shortfalls in the Bajo Bravo region. Problems similar to the current situation have been recorded since the 1980s, with short cycles occurring, such as in 2008-2009 when dams were stopped. Both countries have adhered to the essential principle of international law, granting each nation rights to water originating in the other. Proposals to reform the treaty due to its age or perceived new needs periodically arise.
Though, the treaty’s architects recognized that water would never be sufficient for all progress possibilities, emphasizing limitations rather than abundance. Climate change exacerbates this inherent scarcity, highlighting the urgency of the original treaty.
The current situation is not attributable to specific administrations but rather to a permanent condition of scarcity. The treaty establishes rules for resource allocation, considering the long-term water shortages in northern Mexico and the western United States.
clarifying the Treaties and Historical Context
Confusion frequently enough arises regarding the existence of multiple treaties. Ther are two: the 1906 treaty concerning the Alto Bravo, extending to Fort Quitman, and the 1944 treaty, covering the area from Fort Quitman to the Gulf of Mexico. The 1906 convention was actually held in 1896. Conflicts within the International Boundary Commission and the Bureau of Claim led to Mexico accepting the treaty without full institutional involvement.Consequently, the treaty was signed by Joaquin D. Casasús, a graduate sent from Mexico City, rather than a Mexican commissioner, resulting in translation errors with lasting consequences. The lack of a commissioner in 1906 stemmed from the death of engineer Jacobo Blanco in late 1905. Due to technical errors, commission members initially disavowed the treaty until the Ministry of Foreign Affairs mandated its recognition in 1938.
The post-revolution government initially disregarded the agreement made by Porfirio Díaz, even though deliveries to the United States continued. Even in the 1940s, farmers in Juarez used twice the agreed-upon amount. The 1944 treaty emphasized international law to avoid translation and technical errors. It underscores the principle of water rights across borders, granting the United States rights to water originating in Mexico, and vice versa. This principle underpins the economic, cultural, political, and social activities dependent on the Colorado river for the past half-century.
The Reality of Scarcity
While political figures may amplify concerns, the underlying issue remains the scarcity of a vital resource in geographically and climatically disparate regions. This challenge will persist for generations unless effective solutions emerge. Desalination efforts, while potentially helpful, require significant investment and only partially address the problem.
US-Mexico Water Treaty: A history of Scarcity and Agreement
What is the US-Mexico Water Treaty?
the US-Mexico Water treaty, specifically the 1944 agreement, is an international law that dictates how water from the Colorado and Bravo (Rio Grande) rivers is shared between the United