The State Political Doctrine: A Structural Theory of Transboundary Water and Foreign Policy

Revealing the complex system of transboundary conflicts would help to understand the behavior of states and anticipate potential actions that would collectively reflect the state doctrine. However, a specific approach to the state political doctrine (SPD) for governing transboundary water has not been formalized. The core academic contribution of this research is to formalize the structure of the SPD for transboundary water, which might assist in fostering water cooperation and peacebuilding in one of the most conflict-prone regions—the Middle East and South Africa—by examining the upstream countries’ behavior. Case studies include Turkey in the Euphrates–Tigris Basins, Israel in the Jordan River Basin, and Ethiopia in the Nile River Basin. The theoretical framework presents a new paradigm that systematically links a state’s essential drivers, political philosophy, and potential actions, employing the Hegelian dialectic of thesis–antithesis–synthesis and the three Doctrines of Being, Essence, and Concept to articulate the state’s behavior and its indispensable core principles for survival. It is integrated with Arnold Toynbee’s challenge-and-response theory to analyze upstream motives. This study reviewed 328 documents and pieces of literature alongside 105 expert discussions. The key findings include the three upstream countries embracing different SPDs to address specific challenges at the state level, where Turkey employs the Water-Bank Doctrine, Israel utilizes the Identity-Seeking Doctrine, and Ethiopia adopts the Nation Rise Power Doctrine. Besides the critical external challenges that limit water availability, such as the impact of climate change, the time factor is a crucial key to shifting the bargaining power and impacting the adopted SPD, thereby affecting water diplomacy and regional water cooperation.