This article examines the international legitimacy of unilateral dam development in an international watercourse from the perspective of international water law. Drawing upon technical analysis over the Harirud River Basin, the article discusses probable negative impacts of unilateral dam development in Afghanistan on downstream Iran and Turkmenistan. Competing claims are analyzed to assess emerging transboundary damage under customary international water law. Applying these insights to the case study, this article explores how legal norms and principles can contribute to transboundary water cooperation. It investigates how equitable and reasonable utilization, as required by the United Nations Watercourse Convention, could be reached and whether current activities are in conformity with international norms. Based on this analysis and in the light of international customary law, the article questions the compatibility of unilateral control and capture of water resources in Afghanistan, particularly through the Salma Dam, with ‘equitable and reasonable utilization’ and ‘no significant harm’ rules. The article also argues that building the Salma Dam results in significant transboundary harm to downstream states. Hence, such harm could be considered as significant transboundary damage. Conclusions point to an understanding of water law as a form of institutional guidance in order to provide a transparent setting for transboundary water cooperation among riparian states.

中文翻译：

---

国际水道大坝开发的合法性：以哈里鲁德河流域为例

本文从国际水法的角度审视了在国际水道中单方面开发大坝的国际合法性。根据对哈里鲁德河流域的技术分析，本文讨论了阿富汗单方面开发大坝对下游伊朗和土库曼斯坦可能产生的负面影响。对竞争性索赔进行分析，以根据习惯国际水法评估新出现的跨界损害。本文将这些见解应用于案例研究，探讨法律规范和原则如何促进跨界水合作。它调查如何按照《联合国水道公约》的要求实现公平合理的利用，以及当前的活动是否符合国际规范。基于这一分析并根据国际习惯法，本文质疑单方面控制和捕获阿富汗水资源的兼容性，特别是通过萨尔马大坝，与“公平合理利用”和“无重大损害”规则的兼容性。文章还认为，建造萨尔玛大坝会对下游国家造成重大跨界损害。因此，此类损害可被视为重大跨界损害。结论表明将水法理解为一种制度指导形式，以便为沿岸国家之间的跨界水合作提供透明的环境。具有“公平合理利用”和“无重大损害”的规则。文章还认为，建造萨尔玛大坝会对下游国家造成重大跨界损害。因此，此类损害可被视为重大跨界损害。结论表明将水法理解为一种制度指导形式，以便为沿岸国家之间的跨界水合作提供透明的环境。具有“公平合理利用”和“无重大损害”的规则。文章还认为，建造萨尔玛大坝会对下游国家造成重大跨界损害。因此，此类损害可被视为重大跨界损害。结论表明将水法理解为一种制度指导形式，以便为沿岸国家之间的跨界水合作提供透明的环境。