Abstract This study examines the discursive dynamics of bilateral water diplomacy between Türkiye and Iraq through a detailed analysis of the legal agreements governing the Euphrates-Tigris (ET) River system. Rather than focusing on the implementation or efficacy of these agreements, the paper investigates how discourse shapes the roles, identities, and power hierarchies of the involved actors over time. Employing a discourse-analytical framework, the research explores how water agreements position actors, embed values, and narrate cooperation in evolving geopolitical contexts. The paper begins with a historical overview of transboundary water relations in the ET basin, emphasizing the prevalence of bilateralism. It then lays out the conceptual and methodological foundations of discourse analysis, drawing on key literature and analytical categories such as presupposition, predication, and subject positioning. The core section applies this framework to four key water agreements between Türkiye and Iraq, highlighting thematic shifts and evolving actor roles. A discussion section synthesizes findings through Doty’s (1993) discourse model, emphasizing how identities and relations are constructed over time. Finally, the conclusion reflects on the implications of these discursive trends for the future of water diplomacy in the region. The Türkiye-Iraq case reveals how bilateral agreements can evolve into discursive tools that align with evolving global water management paradigms, offering politically sensitive basins a transferable approach to linking contested transboundary water issues with more comprehensive and partnership-based water diplomacy.
Güleç et al. (Sat,) studied this question.