Another tension front with the United States: Water (III) 2025/18/18

It is known that through the International Water Treaty between Mexico and the United States, the last annually is 1850 million cubic meters (MM³) from the Colorado River, while Mexico must provide two thousand 158 mm from the Bravo River in five sessions, equivalent to an average of 431.6 mm. It is important to emphasize that it is not a slight exchange of water, as the European Union, apparently provides a generous way, 4.3 times of the size of Mexico.

In fact, this agreement is the result of more than 70 years of negotiations, which are directed at recognition of water rights, not for the trade exchange of resources.

As a date, it is worth noting the Guadalupe Hidalgo Treaty -which was filmed on February 2, 1848, which ended the war between Mexico and the United States (1846-1848) -. The conflict arose after the inclusion of Texas by the United States, after its independence from Mexico in 1836, and reached its climax with a loss of nearly two million square kilometers of Mexican lands, including what today is the states of Texas, California, Nevada, Utah, New Mexico.

Although this treaty has set the new regional borders, it has deleted the organization of international rivers, a large deficiency in the arid region where the water is necessary for production and production. This omission left the door open to the conflicts that started practically at the end of the war, which intensified at the end of the nineteenth century, as agricultural societies grew on both margins of the river.

At that time, the position of the public prosecutor, Godson HarmonKnown as the doctrine of absolute sovereignty (Harmon doctrine). This has proven that every country has full control of water resources inside its territory, without commitment to looking at the effects in the direction of the river course. Based on this principle, the European Union has transferred water from the Colorado River to California to develop the imperial valley, leaving Mexicali with a significant flow of decrease and seriously affects the MEXIALI Valley farmers, located at the end of the river.

For these farmers, the refusal to recognize historical rights implicitly, in practice, leaves them without reaching the supplier. At the same time, producers from South Texas began to condemn that Mexican tributaries Rio Bravo were converted, reducing the flow that has reached their lands.

After decades of conflicts and negotiations, both countries were able to formally give a treaty that is recognized today at the international level as a model for joint water management. With more than 80 years of authority, political changes, economic pressures and climate crises have resisted, becoming a basic pillar of the bilateral relationship.

The agreement determines clear and balanced criteria for distributing the water of the Colorado River, Bravo and Tiguana, where it attends agricultural, urban and industrial needs of both countries. In addition, it includes mechanisms such as “minutes” of the International Water and Water Committee (CILA), which allows re -negotiating technical and operational adjustments to the full treaty. It also facilitated the construction and operation of hydraulic works such as Falcón and friendships, and promoting regional development and water security.

The 1944 international treaty has become a proposal for re -negotiation, which will be a little comfortable for Mexico. What the country needs urgently is not a new negotiator, but it is a firm and effective strategy to control the increasing demand for water, which after more than eight decades exceeds the original expectations of the agreement.