The Geopolitics of Water and Food in a Scarce World

By the year 2050, two-thirds of our world could face water shortages (United Nations, 2024). Simultaneously, according to the Food and Agriculture Organisation (2009), food demand is expected to increase by about 50 per cent. These are not just statistics; they signify new struggles for power, reshaping alliances, and redefining the meaning of state and human security. UN (2024) states that access to safe water, sanitation, and hygiene fall under the most basic human rights. It also notes that populations that cannot access safe, nutritious, and sufficient food remain a barrier to sustainable development, and perpetuate less productive individuals - prone to disease, and unable to prosper through economic and social development. It is evident that these global issues require united and sustainable solutions, but this article aims to identify how the state of global politics and power may shift in the age of resource anxiety.

Control over water and food sources has long been a root cause of power and conflict, and in today’s world, it is a form of geopolitical currency. Across the world, control over rivers, dams, and aquifers reflects the anxiety of a world running dry (Rosinger, 2023). For example, in the Nile Basin, Ethiopia’s Grand Renaissance Dam has heightened tensions with Egypt, threatening the fragile balance that sustains millions (Pemunta et al. 2021). In South Asia, the Indus River, lifeline to both India and Pakistan, remains a symbol of uneasy coexistence, as climate change intensifies water stress and mutual suspicion (Aijaz & Akhter, 2020).

As climate extremes continue to disrupt traditional rainfall patterns and water resources, states are increasingly viewing water security as synonymous with sovereignty. Through this, the weaponization of water is occurring, such as through “hydro-hegemony”, where upstream nations are manipulating rivers and reservoirs over those downstream, to assert dominance (Hayat et al. 2022, p. 1724). 

For many states, development and sovereignty now mean securing the flow of water, whatever the regional cost (Hayat et al. 2022). As glaciers melt and rainfall becomes erratic, scarcity will only deepen these divides (Rosinger, 2023). The result is not merely environmental degradation, but political instability on a planetary scale.

While water is the source of life, food is its sustenance. Food is being increasingly governed by power, where countries can limit exports, monopolise trade routes, and corporations can influence crop growth (Lang, 2003). This is evident in the Russia-Ukraine war for example, where Russia has implemented grain export bans and utilised Ukraine’s agricultural losses to their advantage, where food was even named Russia’s “silent weapon” by former Russian President, Dmitry Medvedev (Welsh & Glauber, 2024, p. 6). The war itself has certainly created internal food insecurities, but the impacts are global (Welsh & Glauber, 2024). Since Russia and Ukraine produce approximately 30 percent of the global wheat trade, the war has led to inflated prices and subsequently higher rates of hunger (Liefert, 2024). Similarly, India’s restrictions on rice shipments, implemented to stabilise domestic prices ahead of elections, triggered global market volatility, especially in Africa and Southeast Asia (Ali et al. 2024).

Globe, sitting in the sand. Photo by Madison Oren on Unsplash

Meanwhile, wealthier nations have quietly engaged in land grabbing, meaning the leasing, or purchasing of farmland to secure their own food futures, commonly from poor, developing countries by wealthier, food-insecure nations (Daniel, 2011).

The economic dominance of wealthier nations is also reflected in humanitarian crises like Yemen and Gaza, where control over food or the deliberate obstruction of food and aid takes on an explicitly violent form (Samad et al. 2025).

The unfortunate reality is that behind every geopolitical manoeuvre, communities are left to endure the fallout. Smallholder farmers are facing extreme climate challenges, families are unable to afford food at the market due to war zones, or are walking further and further to access safe drinking water. Resource scarcity creates new challenges and magnifies existing inequalities, between rich and poor nations, between urban and rural populations, and between men and women. As scarcity fuels displacement, migration, and instability, it also exposes that vulnerable populations are the first to suffer the consequences.

Food and water scarcity cannot be addressed by traditional security frameworks. Instead, they require a comprehensive framework surrounding human security, to ensure that communities can access the essentials of life without fear or dependency (United Nations, 2024). This demands cooperation, empathy, and foresight, over competition and ignorance. Regional initiatives such as the Mekong River Commission, highlight how diplomacy can protect rivers, soil, and livelihoods. Like all diplomacy should include, this commission addresses the related issues of population growth, environmental preservation, and regional security (Jacobs, 2002). The effects of climate change are present, and its impact will be felt globe-wide, therefore the politics of survival must become the politics of empathy and must teach us how to share and sustain.

Bibliography

1. Aijaz, A and Akhter, M 2020, ‘From building dams to fetching water: Scales of politicization in the Indus Basin’, Water, vol. 12, no. 5, pp. 1351.

2. Ali, M.A, Kamraju, M and Sonaji, D.B 2024, ‘Navigating rice export restrictions: The impact of India's policy on domestic and international markets’, ASEAN Journal of Agriculture and Food Engineering, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 9-22.

3. Daniel, S 2011, ‘Land grabbing and potential implications for world food security’, Sustainable agricultural development, pp. 25-42.

4. Food and Agriculture Organization 2009, How to Feed the World in 2050, Food and Agriculture Organization, viewed 30 October 2025, https://www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/wsfs/docs/expert_paper/How_to_Feed_the_World_in_2050.pdf.

5. Hayat, S, Gupta, J, Vegelin, C and Jamali, H 2022, ‘A review of hydro-hegemony and transboundary water governance’, Water Policy, vol. 24, no. 11, pp. 1723-1740.

6. Jacobs, J.W 2002, ‘The Mekong River Commission: transboundary water resources planning and regional security’, Geographical Journal, vol. 168, no. 4, pp. 354-364.

7. Lang, T 2003, ‘Food industrialisation and food power: implications for food governance’, Development policy review, vol. 21, no. 5‐6, pp. 555-568.

8. Liefert, W 2024, ‘Why is Russia restricting its fertilizer and crop exports?’ EuroChoices, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 4-10

9. Pemunta, N.V, Ngo, N.V, Fani Djomo, C.R, Mutola, S, Seember, J.A, Mbong, G.A and Forkim, E.A 2021, ‘The Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam, Egyptian national security, and human and food security in the Nile River Basin’, Cogent Social Sciences, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 1-18.

10. Rosinger, A.Y 2023, ‘Water needs, water insecurity, and human biology’, Annual Review of Anthropology, vol. 52, no. 1, pp. 93-113.

11. Samad, A, Naz, E, Batool, S and Amjad, A 2025, ‘The new geopolitics of hunger: When food becomes the ultimate weapon’, Review Journal of Social Psychology & Social Works, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 311-327.

12. United Nations 2024, Water and Sanitation, United Nations, viewed 30 October 2025, https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/water-and-sanitation/.

13. Welsh, C and Glauber, J.W 2024, ‘Food as the “silent weapon”: Russia’s gains and Ukraine’s losses’, Intl Food Policy Res Inst.

Disclaimer

The opinions expressed herein belong solely to the columnist and do not represent the official position of our think-tank. Humanotions cannot be held liable for any consequences arising from this content. Content published on Humanotions may contain links to third-party sources. Humanotions is not responsible for the content of these external links. Please refer to our Legal Notices & Policies page for legal details and our Guidelines For Republishing page for republication terms.