【Report】Summary of the lecture by Charlotte Grech-Madin

When Water Bleeds: Protecting Water in a Changing Conflict Landscape

Charlotte Grech-Madin (Australian National University)

On November 13, 2025, Dr. Charlotte Grech-Madin of the Australian National University (ANU) gave a presentation based on her ongoing book project on the norm against the weaponization of water, or the “water taboo,” at Ritsumeikan University.

Dr. Grech-Madin began her presentation by explaining how water is central to human survival and that it can often be a source of conflict. In the classroom, she provided trivia quizzes related to water to the audience.

The ANU researcher emphasized that water can be weaponized to harm or gain leverage over an adversary. Throughout history, humans have often weaponized water in various ways, including poisoning wells, destroying dams and dikes, and restricting the flows of rivers. She explained that despite this history and the strategic utility of weaponizing water, states have developed a norm against using water as a weapon in the past half-century. Her study, therefore, looks at why and how the water taboo emerged and evolved over the decades. Dr. Grech-Madin explained that she draws analytical insights from the norm life cycle model and has conducted interviews with practitioners to analyze the question.

Dr. Grech-Madin argued that the water taboo emerged through state leaders’ instrumental calculations of averting criticisms by the international community in the early post-World War II period. Bombings of dams during the Korean War drew international criticism for targeting civilians indiscriminately. This created incentives for policymakers to avoid weaponizing water to prevent weakening their states’ international status. This was clearly observable during the Vietnam War, where key U.S. decision makers debated over whether or not to strike dams. The norm against the weaponization of water was then institutionalized into international treaties from the 1970s and grafted by existing norms of human rights and environmental protection, reinforcing its legitimacy. The internalization of the water taboo is observable when looking at domestic political debates of conflicting parties. Dr. Grech-Madin gave an example of the 1999 Kargil War between India and Pakistan, and how Indian officials explained why weaponizing water is morally unacceptable. She also noted, however, that there is a limitation to the water taboo in preventing the weaponization of water, since states sometimes violate the norm, as happened during the First Gulf War and the wars in Ukraine and Gaza.

The presentation was followed by a lively Q&A session. The audience members asked many interesting questions, including those related to international institutions regarding the water taboo, the enforceability of international law, the conflict between India and Pakistan, and the redirection of river flow.