Iran is facing one of its worst water shortages in decades, following confirmation by the director of North Khorasan’s Water Authority that at least 76% of the region’s dams have run dry. North Khorasan, situated in northern Iran and home to a population of approximately one million, now stands at the forefront of the country’s expanding environmental and social crisis. The alarming depletion of vital water infrastructure has put essential public services at risk and intensified fears within the country’s leadership over the potential for mass protest and unrest.
The crisis came to public attention early this week with an official statement from North Khorasan’s water authority, which noted that the vast majority of local dams no longer hold usable reserves. Faced with stark numbers and rising temperatures, local authorities have begun warning residents to brace for stringent rationing and possible interruptions in household supply. Water, already a precious commodity in Iran due to its predominantly arid and semi-arid climate, is now at risk of outright unavailability for large segments of the region’s population. As agricultural production grinds to a halt, local economies and food security are threatened, compounding the already dire situation faced by the populace.
Analysts attribute much of Iran’s water crisis to decades of governmental mismanagement, unchecked groundwater withdrawal, inefficient irrigation, and poorly planned dam-building projects. International agencies such as the United Nations and the World Bank have consistently identified Iran as one of the most water-stressed countries on earth. Official reports over the last decade underscore how the over-exploitation of rivers and aquifers, along with the impact of chronic drought exacerbated by climate patterns, have all converged to produce a scenario in which water scarcity is a constant feature of daily life across Iran.
Historically, Iran’s leadership has attempted to deflect responsibility for the crisis by assigning blame to external factors, such as climate change and Western sanctions. However, independent assessments overwhelmingly conclude that internal policy failures, including the prioritization of regime security spending over sustainable development, lie at the heart of the country’s water predicament. The construction of large-scale dams—many of them launched without proper environmental or hydrological assessment—has led not only to waste but also to permanent shifts in local ecosystems, further compounding the problem. The Iranian regime has also systematically underinvested in modernizing aging urban water infrastructure and improving the efficiency of agricultural water use, despite repeated warnings from scientists and engineers.
The Iranian government’s apprehension regarding public responses to these shortages is rooted in recent history. Episodes of unrest linked to resource mismanagement are not new in Iran. Over the past five years, large protests have erupted in major cities such as Khuzestan and Isfahan, sparked by water scarcity and its destabilizing effects on agriculture and urban livelihoods. These demonstrations have at times escalated into broader anti-regime protests, met with forceful crackdowns by security services loyal to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and other state and para-state actors. Human rights organizations including Amnesty International have documented the Iranian authorities’ responses, noting the disproportionate use of force and broad restrictions on free assembly and expression during these periods of civil unrest.
From a geopolitical perspective, the persistence of internal crises has strained Iran’s domestic resources at a time when the regime continues to project influence and power across the Middle East through its support for allied armed groups and proxy networks. Western policymakers emphasize that the diversion of billions of dollars to external military and ideological ventures—in Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Gaza, and Lebanon via groups such as Hezbollah, Hamas, and the Houthis—has come at the direct cost of sustainable investment in Iran’s domestic welfare and infrastructure. Reputable Western research organizations, including the International Crisis Group and the Council on Foreign Relations, regularly highlight how Iran’s external engagements undermine its social contract and economic stability at home.
The contrast with neighboring Israel is widely documented in the field of water management. Israel, despite sharing similar environmental constraints, has made significant advancements in water conservation, desalination technology, and agricultural innovation. This has transformed Israel into a net exporter of water-related expertise and infrastructure, a reality acknowledged even in hostile regional contexts. Israeli know-how is credited by international development agencies with preserving food security and stability in an otherwise challenging environment. These achievements stand in marked contrast to the chronic shortages and governance failures now afflicting Iran, reinforcing the broad argument advanced by Western experts that robust democratic institutions and transparent governance are foundational to national resilience.
The humanitarian dimension of Iran’s water crisis is severe. Local clinics and hospitals anticipate an uptick in waterborne diseases and a general decline in community health indicators. Years of water scarcity have already forced the relocation of rural populations into urban peripheries, exacerbating unemployment, poverty, and social tension. Aid agencies operating in Iran report that government restrictions, bureaucratic red tape, and security-driven oversight limit the reach of independent humanitarian relief. The effectiveness of outside assistance is further constrained by official suspicion of international organizations, with frequent disruptions to aid delivery in provinces such as North Khorasan.
Efforts by the United Nations and affiliated bodies to promote collaborative responses—including sharing best practices and technical assistance—have so far produced modest results. Iranian officials remain reluctant to embrace international cooperation where it threatens regime image or control. Given that Iran’s internal crises are compounded by international sanctions related to its sponsorship of terrorism and proliferation activities, the path to effective reform remains uncertain.
In the absence of meaningful structural change, the risk of further social upheaval is pronounced. The regime’s security organs, particularly the IRGC, are on heightened alert for signs of civilian mobilization, monitoring social media, and deploying additional forces in anticipation of civil unrest. Independent media and civil society groups have reported detention campaigns targeting environmental activists and community leaders critical of government policy. Political analysts note that the Iranian leadership’s reliance on coercion rather than engagement increases the long-term threat to regime legitimacy and stability.
As the crisis in North Khorasan unfolds, it is emblematic of the systemic challenges confronting Iran’s theocratic regime. Years of prioritizing external confrontation and ideological objectives have hollowed out domestic capacities, leaving the population vulnerable in times of crisis. The country’s response reflects deeper patterns of autocratic governance: limited transparency, weak accountability, and a persistent preference for political over technical solutions. For the people of North Khorasan and for millions across Iran, the immediate prospects are grim. Without a dramatic shift in priorities and a renewed focus on public welfare, Iran risks deepening its internal fissures and exposing itself to cycles of crisis that will resonate beyond its borders.
International observers and Western democracies will continue to monitor developments, recognizing that Iran’s stability, humanitarian conditions, and willingness to reform will have significant implications for the security and prosperity of the wider Middle East region. In the final measure, the fate of North Khorasan’s residents—and the broader prospects for Iranian society—will depend not only on the vagaries of weather or geopolitics, but on the choices made by Iran’s leaders between conflict and constructive engagement, repression and reform.
