Beyond the Draft: The Trilateral Hydro-Sovereignty Battle Over the Tigris and Euphrates (Turkey-Iraq-Iran)

1. Introduction: Turkey-Iraq: Strategic Borders of the Tigris and Euphrates, and Regional Hydro-Security

Looking at the Middle East, water has always been a strategic resource; it is an indispensable element for agriculture, energy, and the livelihoods of populations. However, accelerated drought due to climate change, increased population pressure, and hydrological projects are making water competition fiercer among the countries of the region. The water diplomacy between Turkey and Iraq is one of the most critical stages of this rivalry.

As of 2025, the water of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers is both a fundamental resource for Turkey’s energy and agricultural projects and a vital component for Iraq’s drinking water, agriculture, and ecological systems. Control over this resource reflects a critical asymmetry in the regional balance of power between Turkey, which holds the geographical advantage upstream, and Iraq, which remains downstream.

2. Historical Tension: Upstream Power vs. Downstream Asymmetry

Turkey has long built dams and irrigation systems on the tributaries of the Euphrates and Tigris through the GAP (Southeastern Anatolia Project). Massive projects like the Ilısu Dam have increased Turkey’s capacity to control the flow on the Tigris to historically unprecedented levels. Iraq, on the other hand, is structurally vulnerable in water management, having long been dependent on upstream usage.

Historically, Iraq signed various protocols on water with Turkey and Iran, but most failed to be implemented or lacked binding force. In this historical context, the water issue has always played out on a fault line between “political will versus technical difficulties,” solidifying Turkey’s hydro-strategic advantage.

3. What Has Changed in the Current Picture?

a) Climate and Drought Pressure

In 2025, climatic factors such as decreased rainfall, low snow cover, and rising temperatures are critically stressing water resources in the region. Iraq officially declared it is facing “the most severe drought period,” while Turkey similarly reports that water levels in many provinces have dropped to critical levels. This situation has exponentially increased the pressure on water sharing, making a diplomatic resolution more urgent.

b) Dams, Reservoirs, and Controlled Flow Mechanisms

Turkey’s dam structure enhances its water storage capacity upstream, providing it with a critical strategic tool. The Ilısu Dam is a powerful instrument that can control the flow on the Tigris in terms of timing and quantity. New planned projects also carry the potential to further control the flow. These projects can reduce the amount of water reaching Iraq or affect its timing, giving Turkey a significant hydro-strategic leverage.

c) Iraq’s Internal Vulnerability: Infrastructure Collapse and Turkey’s Demand for Reform

Inside Iraq, inefficient canals, illegal water usage, and outdated irrigation systems are causing a large portion of the water to be lost. From the Turkish side, there is a demand that Iraq prioritize making improvements regarding these losses and implement infrastructure reform. Iraq’s internal governance difficulties lead to the inefficient use of water, regardless of the volume received from outside, thereby deepening the crisis.

4. The 2025 Diplomatic Breakthrough: Strategic Content and Legal Fragility of the Framework Agreement

The announcement in October 2025 that Turkey and Iraq prepared a draft framework agreement on the sharing and management of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers marks a significant turning point in the decades-long tension. This diplomatic breakthrough indicates that both countries have accepted the necessity of finding common ground in the face of increasing climate pressure and the risks of internal instability.

Strategic Content of the Draft

The core articles of the draft cover water release planning, joint commitments for the rehabilitation of Iraq’s irrigation infrastructure, and the establishment of continuous consultation mechanisms. This implies that Turkey will provide not only water flow but also technical expertise and capacity-building support to Iraq. The Iraqi side’s anticipation of officially signing this framework soon reflects the Baghdad government's political will to alleviate pressure on its population and farmers.

Legal Fragility and the Issue of Binding Force

However, the fact that the agreement is merely a “framework draft” remains the biggest point of fragility for international policy analysts. This creates the risk that the agreement’s legal binding force may remain weak, offering no guarantee against future political or seasonal cuts. The fundamental principles of international water law—“reasonable and equitable utilization” and “not causing significant harm”—can only be secured through definite and binding provisions. Despite the speed at which the Iraqi government is moving to formalize the agreement under domestic political pressure, whether the final text includes minimum flow guarantees and sanction mechanisms will determine the agreement's long-term success.

5. Mutual Interests, Risks, and Challenges

The resolution of the water issue lies at the intersection of the short- and long-term interests of Turkey and Iraq, yet this area also harbors great risks. For Turkey, water is a strategic advantage for hydropower generation, agricultural irrigation, and regional development. However, the unilateral use of this power carries the risk of a diplomatic cost to Turkey's international image. For Iraq, water is the foundation of national security. Water scarcity, especially in the southern regions like Basra, triggers water-stressed migration and anti-government protests, rendering the Baghdad administration politically vulnerable; this means the water problem is an internal security crisis that goes beyond being an external threat.

The risks in this dual equation include the danger of the draft agreement lacking legal binding force and the presence of Iran, the third actor in the region, which, by controlling the Tigris tributaries with its own dam projects, indirectly threatens Iraq's water security. Any potential solution between Turkey and Iraq must create a stabilizing element in this triple hydro-strategic rivalry.

6. Strategic Perspectives and Geopolitical Confrontation by Actor

The water diplomacy reveals the extent of the precarious confrontation each main actor in the region faces in terms of security, economy, and political stability objectives. States are compelled to use the advantages conferred or vulnerabilities created by their geographical positions as tools in foreign policy.

a) Turkey’s Perspective: Strategic Use of Upstream Power

For Turkey, the Tigris and Euphrates rivers are not just economic resources fulfilling energy independence and regional development goals through GAP, but also a powerful strategic lever used in international relations. Turkey’s use of its upstream power, though debated in international law, is a natural policy tool stemming from the principle of a sovereign state's right to control natural resources within its territory.

b) Iraq’s Perspective: Downstream Vulnerability and National Security Crisis

As a downstream country at the rivers' final destination, Iraq faces a structural vulnerability in the water issue. Water for Iraq is a matter of national security for basic food production, social peace, and ecosystem survival. Water-stressed migration and protests triggered by scarcity, especially in the south, politically expose the Baghdad administration, meaning the problem is an internal security crisis undermining the country's stability. Iraq's biggest risk is its inability to efficiently use even the water it receives due to infrastructure collapse.

c) Iran’s Perspective: Hydro-Strategic Obstruction as a Malicious Actor

Iran is the third and crucial actor in the Turkey-Iraq water equation. Iran controls the water flow with its own dam projects on the tributaries of the Tigris (especially Karun and Karkheh rivers), directly affecting Iraq’s water supply. In this context, even if Turkey is committed to fair water release, Iran's hydro-strategic obstruction as a ‘malicious’ actor by cutting off the water flow has the potential to completely derail the Turkey-Iraq process. This deepens Baghdad’s water security crisis, allowing Iran to increase its influence within Iraq.

d) The Region and Syria’s Perspective: Spread of Climate and Security Threats

The geopolitical impact of the water issue is not limited to Turkey, Iraq, and Iran; it extends to other riparian states like Syria in the Euphrates basin. Water scarcity carries the danger of creating “climate refugees” and a suitable environment for terrorist organizations like ISIS, spreading instability and security risks across borders. The common goal of the region is to prevent water scarcity from turning into a source of regional conflict.

7. Future Projections, Imperative for Strategic Resolution, and Recommendations

Future relations between Turkey and Iraq will be shaped by success in water diplomacy, and a multi-dimensional strategic approach must be adopted for a lasting solution.

a) Future Projections and the Imperative for Strategic Resolution

In the most optimistic scenario, Turkey and Iraq will establish a foundation for a long-term solution through strong cooperation. However, the riskiest scenario involves the failure to meet commitments and the breakdown of monitoring mechanisms, potentially escalating into a diplomatic strain and even a regional crisis.

In this context, Turkey’s key role upstream is the guarantor of the process's success. Turkey's water diplomacy moves should be seen as a strategic investment that reinforces its own national security by supporting internal stability in Iraq. However, the full success of this strategic investment may be derailed by Iran's 'malicious' obstructions, underscoring that the efforts of Turkey and Iraq necessitate establishing a regional trilateral mechanism.

b) Critical Recommendations for a Lasting Solution

For a lasting solution to be established, comprehensive strategic steps are mandatory:

1. Legal Binding Force and Guarantee: The draft agreement must move beyond a mere statement of goodwill and include legal binding force with minimum flow guarantees. This requires Turkey to provide a legal assurance beyond its intentions.

2. Enforcing Trilateral Basin Management: Turkey and Iraq must take steps to include Iran in the water diplomacy process. A regional mechanism must be pursued to ensure Turkey acts as the source country while Iran also aligns its actions with upstream-downstream dynamics.

3. Monitoring, Surveillance, and Transparency: A Monitoring and Surveillance Mechanism comprising joint stations, flow measurement systems, and independent observers must be established. Transparency will prevent diplomatic crises from spilling into domestic politics.

4. Iraq’s Infrastructure Reform: It is a national imperative for Iraq to urgently implement internal water management and irrigation infrastructure reforms by maximizing technical support from Turkey. Turkey should prioritize concrete financial and technical support for these reforms.

8. Conclusion and Strategic Call: Water is the Gold of the Near Future and the Key to Sovereignty

The Turkey-Iraq water file in 2025 has become central to the international agenda due to diplomatic resolve. However, success from this point depends not only on the existence of written texts but also on ensuring implementation on the realpolitik ground, transparency, and legal binding force.

Water for the Middle East is not just an environmental resource, but the foundation of national sovereignty, social stability, and regional security. In this regard, the assessment that "water is the gold of the near future" is no longer a prediction but a vital geopolitical reality. Turkey must view its upstream power not merely as an advantage but as a strategic responsibility and investment toward regional stability.

Ultimately, this process represents much more than a simple water distribution protocol for the leaders of Turkey and Iraq: it is a test of their regional sovereignty. The failure of the two countries to reach a permanent collaboration, neglecting their shared future dictated by climate change, will set the stage for water tension to escalate into regional instability and conflict. This instability will create an opportunity for major powers, particularly actors like the US and the EU, to intervene under the guise of "mediation" and increase their influence over the region for their own geopolitical interests. Therefore, the success of Turkey and Iraq will determine not only the prosperity of the peoples of the Tigris and Euphrates but also the capacity of all regional countries to protect their sovereignty against international intervention. A permanent hydro-diplomacy is the strategic key for the Middle East to hold its own destiny in its hands.