Analysis of Mechanisms Governing Water Withdrawal from Helmand Transboundary River Originated from Afghanistan, Emphasizing on the Role of State Building Project in the Country

Introduction 
Originating from the north east of Afghanistan, the Hirmand river, being withdrawn by the country then flows to Iran. Other than Hydrological causes, there have been seen many evidences showing that a vast spectrums of mechanisms include regional, developmental and international one's influence water capturing of Hirmand river in Afghanistan. As a result, one of the most important mechanisms makes for tendering Afghanistan tendency of water withdrawal from the river is the role of foreign countries other than Hirmand transboundary river riparian states such as Britannia, United States and former Soviet Union. In that piece, nominating this kind of mechanisms as third parties role by a modern transboundary river management literatures, the paper aims at analysing Afghanistan water withdrawal from the river in the light of third parties concept.  
 
Methodology
With a descriptive-analytical approach the paper aims at highlighting the role of third parties in increasing Afghanistan tendency to water capturing rather than water withdrawal. Then through a given simulation model and future studies based on a scenario planning approach the paper deals with quantifying the role of international events, in particular, state building project conducted with united states, on the phenomena, mapping water flows to Iran until 2050 under each kind of state building attitude. 
 
Findings
The paper indicated that one of the most stated reasons for the third party interference in Afghanistan development (or other countries of geopolitical interest) is the need for state building as the concept of “state-building” has a root in the interveners attempts to tackle perceptions of “state failure/fragility”. In consequence, the results, based on both of the descriptive-analytical and modelling approaches could be set out asbelow:
• Successful state building in Afghanistan: If Afghanistan’s security situation can be stabilized then we will probably witness an increase in water capturing upstream and a reduction in the downstream availability.
• Failure of state building in Afghanistan: Arising from a stabilization of the security situation in Afghanistan, Reduction in agricultural activities in the above-mentioned conditions and declining agricultural development would naturally result in this situation. If accelerating rate of water withdrawals from upstream sources is to be decreased, rate of water capturing in Afghanistan will be eroded 
• Suspended state building in Afghanistan: This scenario is built according to the known objective realities and history of the area. Under this scenario, the state-building process stagnates, or is suspended (neither strengthened nor weakened), there will be a slowing down of the total water capturing in upstream and also a reduction in downstream resources, but less so than the second scenario.
 
Analysis
The findings suggest a new concept in transboundary water management literatures entitled negotiable water. In accordance, negotiable water is the part of total generated water in an upstream riparian state taken away by it for making balance in asymmetrical hydropolitics among other riparian states rather than for coming over its needs. By this way, although, in first glance the failure of state building in Afghanistan, the first scenario, makes for generating morenegotiable water than other scenarios, but successful state building in Afghanistan increases possibility of successful negotiation between countries, setting up a trustable central government in the country. 
 
Conclusion
To be less vulnerable to water deficit coming from water capturing in Afghanistan, Iran must plan for making polices based on the resilience approaches, decreasing its dependency to Hirmand river flows, otherwise it will settle for bargaining on future negotiable waterwhich state building attitudes in Afghanistan are in charge of that.