English 
Spanish 
6 min read
0 comments
The water conflict between Mexico and the USA worsens. Learn how the treaty faces modern challenges. Discover the causes and possible solutions to this border crisis
The United States and Mexico appear headed for a new border dispute, this time over water. Or better said, due to the lack of it. Since 1944, both countries have had a treaty to divide the use of transboundary river basins Colorado e Bravo. The problem is that, when this pact was signed 80 years ago, its authors did not consider the increase in demand or the persistent droughts that affect the region in the XNUMXst century.
The result is that the 1944 commitments have become an unmanageable time bomb with which both countries now deal.
A little of history
to understand the current situation on the border between the USA and Mexico, it is necessary to go back to the first half of the 1906th century, when both countries signed agreements to share the water of three transboundary rivers: the Bravo —known as Grande in the USA—, the Colorado and the Tijuana. The first agreement was in 1944. The second, the International Water Treaty of XNUMX, in which the commitments of both parties were agreed: Mexico would give up a certain amount of water from Bravo and the USA would do the same with that from Colorado.
- Why Brazil is not a superpower — but should be
- The MOST INDEBTED countries in the world: Brazil's surprising position in 2024
- Chilean multinational invests R$730 million in new sector and transforms Goiás into the largest manufacturer in the country!
- US unleashes devastating ATACMS missile on Ukraine with over 120 missiles, 90 drones and 10.000 North Korean troops allied with the Kremlin
See more
Detailing the Agreement
The fine print is a little more complicated and can be consulted on the Government of Mexico website. The US undertakes to send 1,5 million acre-feet of water from Colorado per year, while Mexico sends 1,75 million acre-feet of water to the US every five years of the Great. For reference, an acre-foot is the volume needed to cover an acre one foot deep. In a more graphic way, The Washington Post clarifies that it is the amount of water consumed by two or three average homes during a year.
The 1944 pact, which establishes the division of the waters of the Colorado and Bravo rivers from Fort Quitman, Texas, to the Gulf of Mexico, includes five-year cycles for a very simple reason: the unpredictability of the river. The idea was that if there were periods of deficit, they could be offset by periods of surplus.
"Something changed"
This peculiar cross-border arrangement worked for a while, in the first decades, but at the end of the 20th century it showed its weaknesses. As María Elena Giner, from the International Commission on Limits and Waters (CILA), explains to CNN, “something has changed”. Mexico closed several five-year cycles with deficits in a relatively short period. Furthermore, the The Washington Post highlights that the country has regularly fallen short since 1997.
One of the reasons would be that the 1944 international treaty was based on water availability and drought predictions at the time, without considering the current scenario. This same week, Álvaro Iván Bustillos, from the Regional Livestock Union of Chihuahua, in Mexico, acknowledged to El Heraldo that the sector is facing the worst drought crisis in the last 35 years.
The Memory of 2020
You don't have to go back too far to find tensions between Mexico and the US over water. In the summer of 2020, about to close the five-year cycle, Mexico was already at risk of not meeting its quota. The situation was so complicated that the authorities even considered using the La Boquilla dam reserve, which provoked outrage from farmers. At the height of the protests, there was even one death.
Four Years Later…
The scenario is not very different, as CNN recently explained in an extensive report that explains that, due to the drought and high temperatures that are plaguing the country, Mexico is lagging behind in supplies. The current cycle will not end until October 2025, but the scenario is not optimistic, especially given the prospect of a hot summer. “We only received one year of water and we are in the fourth year”, warns Giner.
The current situation is explained by high temperatures and drought associated with global warming, but also by the construction of reservoirs since the signing of the 1944 treaty and the increase in water demand as the Rio Grande region developed and the population increased. .
To further complicate the situation, Vianey Rueda, a researcher at the University of Michigan, recalls that the last 80 years have taken their toll on the system agreed upon at the time: “We have treaties that were designed for a stable climate, but that now try to apply to a climate that is not stable.”
Malaise in the USA
The situation is complicated in the north of Mexico, but also in the south of the USA, more specifically in Texas, where water scarcity affects farms. “American agriculture, and particularly Texas agriculture, is being deprived of the water they need to grow crops and make a living,” John Cornyn, a Republican senator from Texas, lamented recently: “We are trying to get the attention of the Mexican government.”
According to data from CW39, which cites the International Commission on Limits and Waters, since 2020, Mexico would have delivered a third of what was stipulated in the treaty. “It’s a matter of life and death for many farmers.”
The most affected area is the Rio Grande Valley and some say that water problems could end up resulting in an increase in food prices. CNN goes further and states that there are reservoirs on the border that supply homes and farms at historic lows: Amistad would be below 26% and Falcon, at 9,9%. The drought also forced the closure of a sugar factory in Texas, affecting around 500 employees.
What's the solution?
A month ago, The Washington Post already warned that the diplomatic conflict between Mexico and the US was deepening and in Texas there are already voices demanding that Mexico provide water or face cuts in US aid. At the epicenter of the crisis is the 1944 treaty, the drought and its effect on the upper reaches of the Rio Grande. After all, there are two factors that are difficult to control: the increase in demand since the 1940s and rain.
Precisely the latter, a strong storm that feeds Mexican rivers, is one of the possible solutions to alleviate the current problem, although experts warn that it would be a short-term solution to a complex challenge. Another possibility is to reconsider the treaty or apply amendments. In 2020, López Obrador stated that the 1944 pact is “one of the best agreements reached in history in relation to the USA”. In any case, Giner admits that, at least in the short term, without water available “there is nothing we can do”.
Rueda goes further and defends on CNN that we stop seeing the division as a zero-sum game in which the loss of one party implies a gain for the other. “So you start to eliminate this zero-sum game, you start to say that we are both essentially losing. In reality, no one is winning.”
Image | Daxis (Flickr)
