Iranian president's water remarks spark anger in Afghanistan

By Hamza

This photograph, taken March 21, 2021, shows a general view of the hydro-electric Kajaki Dam in Helmand province, Afghanistan. [Wakil Kohsar/AFP]

This photograph, taken March 21, 2021, shows a general view of the hydro-electric Kajaki Dam in Helmand province, Afghanistan. [Wakil Kohsar/AFP]

KABUL -- Afghans who spoke to Salaam Times said they regard the Iranian president's recent comments regarding water rights as threatening, and they contend Iran is playing a political game that goes against accepted international principles.

During a Thursday (May 18) visit to Sistan and Baluchestan province, Iran, Ebrahim Raisi accused Afghan authorities of not meeting their obligations to provide Iran with its "water rights" from the Helmand river.

Using threatening language, he accused Afghanistan of failing to honour its commitments under a 1973 treaty and of failing to offer the necessary co-operation in supplying Iran's legal water rights.

"I warn the officials and rulers of Afghanistan to immediately honour the rights of the people and the region of Sistan and Baluchestan," he said, calling for Iranian specialists to be allowed to assess Afghan claims of insufficient water.

"If water is short, we have no claim," he said. "But if there is water, then the rights of the people of Sistan and Baluchestan should be honoured, and we will not allow the rights of the people to be violated."

"According to the international treaty, 820 million cubic metres of water from the Helmand river should flow into Iran in years when there is enough water," Iranian ambassador to Kabul Hassan Kazemi Qomi told Iranian media.

"But last year only 27 million cubic metres of water flowed into Iran."

Afghan authorities regarded Raisi's statement as inappropriate and harmful, while some in the country accused Iran of trying to revisit the water treaty.

"Iranian authorities should first obtain complete information regarding Helmand water and then present their demands in appropriate language," Afghan authorities said in a statement released a day after Raisi's remarks.

"Making such statements without carefully studying the reality can damage the political environment between the two Muslim peoples and countries, which is in the interest of neither side and should not continue," it said.

'Political manoeuvering'

"Repeated demands for water rights from the Helmand river are political manoeuvering, a political game," on the part of the Iranian government, Kabul-based political analyst Zalmai Afghanyar told Salaam Times.

"On one hand, by making such statements, it wants to mask the political and economic problems and its own failures to gain support from its people," he said.

"On the other hand, it pressures Afghanistan to deliver more water."

"Iran can never take away the right of Afghans by force and intimidation," Afghanyar added. "The Iranian president's threats will provoke Afghans to react and damage relations between the two countries."

"The Iranian president's threatening statement is against the political ethics and logic of a president and in violation of neighbourly and internationally accepted principles," said Kabul-based political analyst Salim Paigir.

"Such threats are not acceptable to Afghans and will push the people of the two countries into conflict," he told Salaam Times.

"In the past 44 years, Iran fuelled war and conflict in Afghanistan for its own benefit," Paiger said. "Contrary to the treaty, it has received billions of cubic metres of water every year."

"If there were accountability one day, Iranians would owe $70 to $80 billion for the excess water they have received."

"With such statements, the Iranian president wants to show to the people of Sistan and Baluchestan that he is serving them and is ensuring their rights," he noted.

"But in reality, throughout history, the Iranian government has discriminated against, oppressed and violated the rights of its minorities."

"The words and the threatening rhetoric that the president of Iran used regarding his country's water rights were gutter language," Kabul University graduate Abdul Musawer, 26, told Salaam Times.

"Our people did not expect this from the highest authority in Iran," he said.

"To secure its economic interests in Afghanistan, the Iranian government has always tried to bring insecurity and instability to our country," Musawer said.

"It has tried to destroy Afghanistan's dams, and now it is trying to fan ethnic divisions and civil war" in order to access Afghanistan's water, he said.

Excessive demands

"According to the treaty, Iran's share is 26 cubic metres of water per second, but if it receives more than that, then it has to pay Afghanistan $1 per cubic metre of water," said Kabul-based political analyst Noorulhaq.

"Water levels have dropped 12-fold since the treaty was signed," he told Salaam Times. "According to the treaty, Iran is not entitled to 26 cubic metres of water [per second], and it should not get free water anymore."

"For more than four decades, the Iranians did not allow the construction of Kamal Khan dam, while during construction work on dams in the country, dozens of guards protecting these dams were killed," he added.

"[Afghans] do not want their water to be looted by the Iranians anymore."

Iran and Afghanistan have similar arid and semi-arid climates, water resource specialist Najib Aqa Fahim told Salaam Times.

"Each drop of water is critical to both countries; therefore, water from the Helmand river has been a problem for a long time between the two countries," he added.

"In 1973, a treaty to determine Iran's water rights was signed between the two countries, but war and insecurity started soon after that in our country," Fahim said. "Therefore, we .... couldn't use our water properly."

"Using this opportunity, Iran unilaterally used all water from the Helmand river and others including the Farah river. In violation of the treaty, it has also built numerous projects in its Sistan and Zahedan regions."

"In recent years, Afghanistan had the opportunity and was able to build dams and manage and use its water to an extent," he said.

"The Iranians proposed talks, during which they implied that Afghanistan has violated the treaty," he added.

"During the talks, we reached the conclusion that Iran is not interested in the implementation of the treaty but wants to revisit it and sign another legal document so that it can use [more of] Afghanistan's water," he said.

"The Iranian president's positioning is political, threatening and contrary to the principles foreseen in the water treaty," Fahim added. "Iran wants the treaty to be revisited in the [post-August 2021] absence of experts in Afghanistan so that it can use more water."

Do you like this article?

19 Comment

Comment Policy * Denotes required field 1500 / 1500

The general tunnel of the Bakhshabad Dam in Farah was successfully drilled. Work was going on both sides of the tunnel. It was connected today to find a way for the water, and the concrete works of the tunnel will also start in the near future. Connecting the second tunnel will also be completed in a few days. Bakhshabad Dam is a water supply and electricity project located on the river in the eastern part of Farah Province. This project is generally an irrigation project and can generate 27 megawatts of electricity. It is part of the development of the Farah Road project, which provides an irrigation ground for more than 60,000 hectares of land in Farah. This dam is 80 meters high and 265 meters wide and can store more than 570 million cubic meters of water. At first, the nature of the dam was suggested to be of rock and soil. Then, after looking at the topography and technical studies, the concrete plan was made as it was considered the best. About 60 km from the dam, there is a water circulation structure in the Kansk area, the maximum length of which is 256 meters, from where two general canals start on the right and left sides. The canal on the right side is 41.38 km long and has a capacity of 92.25 cubic meters per second. The second canal on the left side has a length of 45.5 km and 20.25 cubic meters per second. With the construction of this dam, the flood water flowing into the neighborhood will be controlled, and Farah will turn into a green province. Many people


Iran always wants to have a government in Afghanistan that has troubles in itself. In the last 46 years, Iran has always intervened in the war in Afghanistan and provided financial aids to the fighters against the Afghan government and provided them with advanced weapons. If Iran and Pakistan did not intervene in the wars in Afghanistan, Afghanistan would not be in this situation today. Afghanistan has been brought to this state by Pakistan and Iran. Due to the sinister plans of these two countries, we Afghans have not had a good day in the past 46 years. Iran and Pakistan have destroyed Afghanistan in cooperation with each other. The two countries are involved in Afghanistan's insecurity. They have destroyed Afghanistan, deprived the Afghan people of any kind of good life. We Afghans must take our revenge from this country that ruined us through this water. Whatever bad situation happens to these two countries from the government of Afghanistan it is their own fault, because they wanted this type of government in Afghanistan. Whenever a country's neighbor is destroyed, it should expect to be destroyed the following day. If there is a fire in the neighbor's house, the house next to them will surely burn.


Benefits of the Agreement 1. The rights and obligations of both countries in the Helmand waters are clear, so there is no need for conflict, double interpretation, or ambiguity. Whenever any problem arises, the treaty and its two annexed protocols are referred to. 2. We have been at war for the past 40 years and did not get any opportunity to invest in our water; on the contrary, Iran has invested enough. If we had entered into another agreement on distribution, we would have been forced to consider Iran's current needs and accept more water because now their water consumption is more than ours. 3. Without an agreement, Afghanistan's foreign relations with Iran would have been greatly affected by water. 4. If there were no agreement, Iran would have submitted the matter to international courts and organizations, in which case it would have been difficult for us to defend our rights in the presence of international courts and organizations. 5. Without an agreement, infrastructure construction like Kamal Khan in Helmand would not be without conflict and dangers. Iran protested a lot when the dam was being built, but our answer was, "What else do you want from us?" It was because Iran did not have logical and sufficient reasons for opposition. 6. The last thing is the 100-year-old conflict between the two countries, the Helmand Treaty, which was requested twice by the British, once by the Americans, and once by the Ottoman Turks, which they did not accept, intervened, and ended.


America appointed a neutral technical commission called Helmand Delta to solve the issue, which included an American, a Chilean, and a Canadian engineer. This commission studied the Helmand river's characteristics and finally prepared a report in 1951. In this report, the water rights of both countries were specified, but because Iran called the report in favor of Afghanistan, it objected and said that it did not accept it. Finally, in 1973, the political conditions became favorable, and the royal governments of Afghanistan and Iran wanted to resolve their historical disputes and conflicts for good relations. Finally, based on this technical report of the Helmand Delta Commission, the agreement was compiled and signed in 1973.


And shaped their social and economic life, but if we dry up all this water on Iran, Iran has the right to sue us based on the principle of preventing significant damage to international rights. The two rules of fair and reasonable use and prevention of significant harm were created to balance the use of upstream and downstream countries. Helmand Treaty and international water rights: Now, let's come to the Helmand Treaty, which follows the theory of water distribution. First, when we accepted that Iran has the right to Helmand water, we got the idea of limited rights of international law. Article 5 of the Helmand Agreement states that Afghanistan will not take any action to deprive Iran of its rights in the Helmand River in whole or in part. If we put it in the theoretical framework of international water rights, it is based on the rule of (preventing significant harm). On the other hand, in the agreement, most of the water from the total annual production of the Helmand River was given to Afghanistan, which Iran recognizes as a fair and reasonable principle because Afghanistan produces most of Helmand's water, and Iran On the contrary, many people in Afghanistan use it, and their lives depend on it. Considering these facts, Iran and Afghanistan had had disputes and conflicts five times since the arbitration of Goldsmith in 1872 until 1973, when the agreement was signed. The last battle occurred in 1947 after a severe drought when both countries finally offered the United Stat


But to find out that usage by one country is fair and reasonable and another is not, 7 factors were identified. Considering these factors, the countries should be entitled to their rights. For example, the river's geography, people's reliance on water, economic and social conditions, other water alternatives, and other significant factors determining fair and reasonable use. This principle gradually became a common rule of international law. It gained more credibility when the International Court of Justice ruled based on this principle in the water dispute between Hungary and former Czechoslovakia in the 1980s. After this, the next historical step was that, for the first time, the United Nations approved a convention or agreement in 1997 regarding the regulation of the rights of flowing rivers. The 'No Significant Harm' principle was recognized and thus gained international legitimacy. As a result of this evolution and development of international water rights, states' sovereign rights over water resources have been limited. Therefore the doctrine of limited sovereignty against absolute sovereignty has developed. No country can claim that all the water is mine, and I have the right to use it. Now the upstream countries do not follow the principle of fair and reasonable water, and the downstream countries do not follow the direction of preventing significant damage. For example, the fair and good code of water gives us the right to use Helmand's water more than Iran does becau


Created, and the upper countries would rely on it in many water disputes. On the other hand, downstream countries presented the theory of absolute territorial integrity against these doctrines. They claimed that if upper countries claim that water is part of their national sovereignty, then we can also argue that the natural flow of water should be respected, and drying up the water that comes from the upper countries to the lower countries means that one country destroys the water geography manually. The government is violating territorial integrity because the theory of absolute sovereignty did not help resolve water disputes; it gave its place to the idea of limited territorial sovereignty. In the middle of the 20th century, European countries began to invest in the water of their rivers to develop shipping, electricity, agriculture, and fishing industries. Since famous rivers in Europe, such as the Danube and the Rhine, pass through several countries, it was difficult for these countries to manage and invest in their water without a clear legal framework. Finally, the International Law Union in Europe established the Helsinki Rules in the 1960s for river water usage. These rules were a significant event in the history of international water rights that established the principle of equitable and reasonable water utilization. Based on this principle, all countries can use water in a typical river basin.


The Helmand River water between Iran and Afghanistan is a legal debate. First, I would like to clarify the theoretical dimension of the issue. If we look at the topographical structure of the rivers, they usually flow from high altitudes to low areas. Like other natural resources, rivers existed on Earth for millions before political geography and international borders. When national states were formed and boundaries were drawn, the conflict over water and rights also appeared. Until the beginning of the 20th century, the upstream countries (the countries where the rivers originate) believed that water, like minerals, oil, and gas, was their exclusive right, and they could consume it as they pleased. He gave himself the right to stop the water in the downstream countries (those countries that lie at the end of the rivers). In 1895, a legal dispute arose between the United States of America and Mexico over the waters of the Rio Grande River. Mexico claimed the United States violated international law by diverting the Rio Grande River. Judson Harmon, the Attorney General of the United States, presented the defense that, given that the Rio Grande cannot provide enough water for the region's residents, Mexico has no set boundaries for the United States in this area. It is a general principle of international law that all states have [absolute right to sovereignty] over their territory. The theory of absolute territorial power in law, which later became known as the Harmon Doctrine


(10) With the inauguration of the 11th government, President Hassan Rouhani, during his trip to Afghanistan to attend the 5th International Nowruz celebration, in a meeting with his Afghan counterpart, demanded full and strict compliance with the provisions of the existing agreement between the two countries regarding Helmand and the existence of international regulations surrounding the rights of water of the countries. In this meeting, the Afghan authorities promised to be committed to the agreement between Iran and Afghanistan regarding the usage of the Helmand River and Iran's right to use the Hamoun Lake according to international regulations. It was also decided that delegations from Afghanistan and Iran would travel between the two countries to negotiate and discuss the exact implementation of the existing agreement about Helmand. Despite the then President's emphasis on the need to pursue Iran's water rights in Helmand, the level of negotiations in this regard with the Afghan authorities ultimately reached an agreement with the Afghan government, not at the highest levels and with the presence of the President or members of the government cabinet, but with the presence of the heads of ministries and governors of the cities of Sistan and Balochistan was signed with their Afghan counterparts, and in February 2019, after a series of negotiations between the managers of the ministries of energy and foreign affairs, as well as the commanders of the cities of Sistan and Balu


The information is really interesting, but it looks like the author supported the Iranian side and blamed the Afghans in every paragraph of his writing.
I would like to make two points:
- I think that this article, which is presented in several parts, does not end here and it is possible that it has the remaining parts as well.
- The water issue between Iran and Afghanistan is easily solved. Iran has oil, we don't have oil. On the other hand, Iran is without water and we have water. So they can give us oil in exchange for water and take water, and if they don't, then why should we give them water? We have to terminate the contract of 22 or 26 cubic meters per second because Afghanistan is an agricultural country and needs a lot of water. I ask every country, even Israel, to help Afghanistan to build electricity and water dams on their rivers. Long live Afghanistan


(9) Finally, Iran's share of the total water of this river was determined to be 14%. The water rights of Helmand from the treaty of 1351 until today In July 1973, as a result of a coup d'état, the Afghan monarchy was changed to a republic, and finally, in June 1977, the government of the Republic of Afghanistan also declared this treaty in force. After this date, due to successive coups in Afghanistan and numerous internal issues of that country, there were no actions that would reflect the opinion of the subsequent governments of Afghanistan on this issue, but during the first period of Taliban rule over Afghanistan (1996-2001), the route of the Helmand River to Iran was closed. By closing the Helmand River, the Taliban caused, in addition to the aggravation of the drought in the areas along the Helmand River, the volume of the Hamon Lake to decrease drastically. It remained blocked until the fall of the Taliban government and the inauguration of the Hamid Karzai government. After the fall of the Taliban in 2001, Seyed Mohammad Khatami, the president of Iran at the time, during his trip to Afghanistan and met with the president of this country, Hamid Karzai, negotiated the release of Helmand water. In this meeting, a Memorandum of Understanding was signed between the two countries on the implementation of the 1973 agreement. In this period, despite the holding of several meetings of the Helmand water issue committee, the water conflict between the two countries still existe


(8) However, the Afghan government, which was very pleased with the neutral commission's decision, always cited the opinions of the neutral commission and considered it as the basis for negotiations with Iran on the distribution of the water of Helmand and tried to increase the amount of water flowing to Iran to a certain amount limited by the commission. Helmand Water Sharing Treaty in 1351 In 1345, negotiations to solve the Helmand problem between the two countries started once again. During this period of negotiations, Iran wanted to carry out joint projects and investments in the Helmand Basin to supply the water needed by Sistan. During the negotiations between the two countries in 1349, a terrible drought occurred in the Helmand river delta region, which led to the migration of many people from Sistan to Gorgan, Turkmen Sahara and Mashhad. In this same year, for 23 days, the water flow of the Sistan River, as the largest branch of Helmand, which flows towards Iran, was completely cut off, and water did not flow from the Helmand River towards Iran. Also, the amount of incoming water from the Sistan River and the canals branching from the common Perian River decreased to the lowest amount, i.e. 189 million cubic meters. Despite the severe water shortage throughout the river’s basin, the two countries, with continued negotiations, finally succeeded in signing the Helmand water sharing agreement on March 13, 1973. According to this treaty, the amount of water that was deli


(7) The contract of 1330 and determination of the Helmand water rights for Iran: 22 cubic meters per second Following the tensions between Iran and Afghanistan in 1326, the Iranian government decided to send a delegation to Afghanistan to investigate the cause of water shortage in Sistan to visit the border of Helmand. This issue was not agreed upon by the Afghans. Following that, the Iranian government decided to refer the issue of Helmand water distribution to the Security Council. Finally, the United States of America dissuaded Iran from raising the issue in the Security Council and proposed the formation of an impartial commission to solve the problem of water sharing in Helmand, which was agreed upon by both countries. In this regard, Iran sent one of its technical experts to Afghanistan to visit the outskirts of Helmand and the facilities built on it; In the final opinion of this expert about the causes of water shortage in the Sistan region of Iran, "digging a canal in the path and development of agriculture in Afghanistan" were cited as one of the reasons for this water shortage. The American government also selected three experts in this field from Chile, Canada and the United States to be members of the commission. The impartial commission determined the amount of water required for Iran's Sistan region to be 0.62 billion cubic meters per year, which means an average of 22 cubic meters per second. According to the decision of the commission, this amount, which was c


(6) 1317’s contract and non-adherence of the Afghan government to the water agreements with Iran In this agreement, Iran and Afghanistan agreed that from Kamal Khan Dam onwards, water will be divided equally, and in order not to consume more water from the village of Chahar Borjak to Kamal Khan Dam. In addition to the river that has been running and is still in the said distance, the Afghan government pledged not to construct or even repair the dam. In the appendix of this agreement, the declaration was approved by the parties, during which Afghanistan was prohibited from taking measures that would reduce Iran's share of water in the Kamal Khan Dam and harm the agriculture and irrigation of the Sistan region of Iran. This contract and its annexed declaration were approved by the National Assembly of Iran. The board of the Afghan National Council Association and the General Assembly of the Afghan Council approved the contract, but prevented the approval of the declaration; the non-approval of the declaration by the Afghan parliament prevented the implementation of the provisions of the contract. The failure of the Afghan government to adhere to the water agreements with Iran caused the problem of water shortage in Sistan to continue. Over the years, Iran tried to start negotiations with the Afghan government, but these negotiations never reached a positive point, even in 1326, Afghanistan used the lack of water in Helmand as an excuse and returned all the remaining water to it


(5) Despite Iran's written protest, the British government did not pursue the issue and the issue remained practically silent. Temporary contract of 1315 and dividing Helmand water by half-half In 1309 and 9 years after the independence of Afghanistan, during the negotiations of the then Iranian ambassador in Kabul with the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Afghanistan regarding Helmand water rights, it was decided that the parties should form a joint commission to resolve their differences regarding Helmand's claim. After a year, this commission did not reach an agreement on the location of this division, despite the agreement on the Helmand water basin, and the negotiations of the Helmand Joint Commission failed. With the decrease of river water and lack of water in July 2015, Afghans poured all the water to their agricultural lands in such a way that the people of some villages in Sistan were forced to dig wells to supply their water needs. The action of the Afghans caused the destruction of agricultural products in some villages and border areas and provoked the anger of the Sistani farmers. After Afghanistan's action, the delegations of the two countries met again in September 2015, and it was decided to divide the water of the Helmand River from the Kamal Khan Dam to the Lakhshak Dam in half for one year. In 1316, following the signing of the Saad Abad Treaty between the countries of Iran, Afghanistan, Turkey and Iraq, the two countries extended the temporary water shari


(4) And built dams on Helmand. They made all the water of the river flow towards them. The decrease in rainfall in the upper part of the river caused a severe water shortage in the delta region in the summer of 1281, so that Sistan and Chakhansur faced the problem of water shortage. It led to conflict in the Delta sector. In 1281, a group of Afghan soldiers destroyed the Sistan dam after invading Iran's territory. This aggravated the problem of water shortage in Sistan, so that some people of Sistan migrated to Afghanistan. The disputes that arose over the location of the border and the aggression of Afghans to Iran along with the severe water shortage in Sistan caused severe tension between Iran and Afghanistan, and finally the issue was entrusted to the British government. McMahon, the English judge, along with his arbitration commission, was fully settled in Sistan in 1282 and began studies and surveys related to water and land in Sistan. After completing his border arbitration, McMahon made minor changes in the border line determined by Goldsmith, and determined it as the border between the two countries and voted in favor of Iran, which was accepted by the Iranian government; however, the Amir of Afghanistan obstructed but accepted it a year later. 2 years after his initial vote, McMahon also began dividing the water of the Helmand River and reduced Iran's share of Helmand water to one third. Meanwhile, in the Goldsmith agreement, Iran's share of water was specified as


(3) According to Goldsmith's final opinion, the main branch of Helmand was determined as the border of the two countries, and the Sistan region was divided into two main and external parts, during which an area west of the Helmand river was handed over to Iran, and external Sistan, which includes an area east of Helmand, was given to Afghanistan. Also, Goldsmith prohibited the two parties from carrying out an operation on the river that would cause the opposite party to cut water. Goldsmith did not issue any decision regarding the water division of the Helmand River, based on which the existing problems regarding the use of the river water would be solved or prevent the spread of disputes in the future. Later, at the request of the Afghan government, the British Foreign Minister, with the agreement of Goldsmith, interpreted the above sentence in a way that the Afghans could use Helmand water to a greater extent by building new canals and repairing old and abandoned canals. Based on this, the Afghans allowed themselves to reduce the amount of water flowing to the Sistan region by building and digging new canals, which created many problems for Sistan in the years of water scarcity and due to its geographical and upstream location. McMahon's contract and the reduction of Iran's share of Helmand to one third In the year 1275, the flooding of the Helmand River changed its channel in the delta region, and with the deviation of the river's course to the west, most of the water flow


(2) The lower part of Helmand, which forms the river delta in Sistan region, has an area of 18,200 square kilometers, 40% of which is in Iran. The direction of Helmand flow after Kamal Khan Dam in the Delta region is towards the north, which is divided into two branches "Peryan Hamsand" and "Sistan" at Kohak Dam; The first one enters Hamoun-e-Puzak lake and the second one enters Hamon Helmand; The Helmand River forms the border between Iran and Afghanistan in a part of its path after Kohak dam. Rainfall in the delta area is very low and evaporation is high, and the water needed is all supplied from the Helmand River; The high rate of evaporation and high loss of water as a result of it in the Helmand Delta region of Sistan, Iran and Chakhansur, Afghanistan greatly increases the amount of water required for each hectare of agricultural land in this area. On the other hand, the Helmand River has a variable watering regime throughout the year in such a way that 84% of the river's water flow is from February to June. Also, the water level of the river changes drastically in different years. The differences between Iran and Afghanistan over Water rights are not specific to today and yesterday, but its history goes back to the time when the eastern borders of Iran were formed with the intervention of Britain. Goldsmith's contract and the British green light to interfere with the Helmand water flow More than 150 years ago (1250 AH) with the height of the disputes that arose in the


(1) Water rights of Helmand and Afghanistan's 150-year stubbornness For 150 years, Iran has been in dispute with Afghanistan over its claim to the Helmand River. Whether it was when this country was not independent, or when the "Islamic Republic" became the type of political government of this country, or during the first and also the current period of the Taliban's presence in Afghanistan; Helmand and Iran's claim to this river has always been one of the disputes and issues that from time to time become the main issue of dispute between the two countries. Isna Plus: "Helmand" is a river that originates in Afghanistan and the life of the people of Sistan and Baluchistan region of Iran depends on it. The fluctuations in the flow of Helmand water and the decrease of water flowing towards Iran in the past 150 years have always caused problems in the political relations between Iran and Afghanistan at the local and national levels. During these years, Afghans have consumed more water by separating several canals from Helmand and building reservoir and diversion dams on it, and have reduced the amount of water flowing to Iran. This issue has intensified the difficulties in Sistan during the droughts in the upper sides of the river. Where is Helmand River? The Helmand River with a catchment area of 150,000 square kilometers originates from Mount Baba in Afghanistan and after traveling 1050 kilometers flows into Hamon Lake in the Sistan region of Iran. The southern slope of the