Desalination
Until recently, debates regarding water rights involve zero-sum game dynamics, based on assumptions that supply is static or shrinking. New technological advances allow for future discussions about water needs to take place in a totally different context. The present and potential contribution of desalination for resolving water scarcity dynamics in general, and in conflict regions in particular, offers a source of optimism,
Already the Israeli water system has seen critical benefits from the additional 15% of water supply that is presently received from its new coastal, water factories. Within a decade this amount should triple, making water resources from the sea far greater than even those provided by the contested Jordan River Basin. Given the mixing of water sources by Israeli utilities, Palestinians, in fact for several years have also enjoyed this ultra-clean, new source of water. It is time that the regions pervasive political hydro-conflict begin to benefit from what desalination can offer.
Beyond the actual quantities, desalination for the first time has also introduced a significant private sector presence into local water management substantially in Israel and much more modestly in Gaza. Thus far, Israeli experience suggests that due to the highly regulated nature of local water supply, the pitfalls associated with privatized water supply have not been a problem. Palestinian leadership remains skeptical about desalinations role in long-term Palestinian water supply due to its high costs for farmers, the finite life-span of plants and implicit concessions on Palestinian claims to the mountain aquifer. Yet, Palestinian experts also recognize that their citizens continue to pay exorbitant prices for bottled and privately supplied water while a centralized desalination strategy, which takes advantage of economies of scale and proven new technological advances could provide more water, at higher quality, more cheaply.
With confidence constituting the scarcest resource of all in the region, it is probably too early to advocate a bi-lateral or multi-lateral water market for the region. But given the charged climate of the Middle East, the fast that desalinated water suppliers are consortiums and corporations with headquarters dispersed around the world whose economic interests are fundamentally apolitical should be seen as an advantage. Their pursuits need not clash with those of local governments, and the steady advance of privatized desalination facilities constitutes a quiet step in the right direction.
Desalination surely makes discussion about the creation of a regional water market more possible.
Water Rights
The specific allocation of water remains a threshold issue which will need to be addressed in a final accord. It is axiomatic among Palestinians of all political denominations that the hydrological narrative of the region is dominated by the ongoing violation of their basic national rights of access to water. Any final accord in their view, must first and foremost rectify the situation. There appears to be no real argument over the inadequacy of present water allocations by the two sides. Yet, most Israelis contest the Palestinian position regarding water rights and the resulting deadlock has done little to serve Palestinian or Israeli interests. While many Israelis have argued that progress can be made through a changed focus in the discourse from rights to needs, Palestinians are uncomfortable with this approach and believe that recognition of their legitimate rights under international law should be the basis for a formal understanding and agreement. In this context, for over 50 years the position of international law under Helsinki Rules has recognized the validity of claims to a reasonable and equitable share in the beneficial uses of the waters in an international drainage basin. Quantifying the specific volume of an equitable share ultimately requires a climate-specific characterization of human and economic needs as well as those of ecosystems.
This technical exercise can be done transparently either jointly or by an authorized third party. The results should lead to a clearer definition and recognition of Palestinians rights to an equitable share, in the spirit of international law, of the waters of the mountain aquifer, coastal aquifer in Gaza, the Jordan River and the Dead Sea. A parallel and concomitant effort should also recognize the legitimacy of Israeli claims to these water resources can clearly set forward the water deficit, allowing for intensive efforts through international assistance and private sector investment, to eliminate it.
Specific allocation quantities will need to be defined in a final accord on this basis with the assumption that basic human needs should be guaranteed before alternative uses are approved. The increasingly dominant role of waste water reuse and the adoption of drought resistant crop types among local farmers suggests that agriculture on both sides need not be a victim of water provisions in a final accord. The ultimate agreement should define projected development goals for each side, enabling them to articulate a clear list of hydrological development projects to potential donors as part of the investment needed to facilitate a final resolution of the conflict.
Previous
Next