Institutional Cooperation
...
Experience from around the world suggests that the most stable and effective management frameworks of common water resources are based on the empowering of independent professionals and isolating political consideration and personalities. A shift in the makeup of the JWC and adoption of an approach, such as that existing between the United and Mexico, regarding the utilization of waters of the Colorado and Tijuana rivers and of the Rio Grande could both return the faith among Palestinians about the fairness of the Committees decisions as well as expedite progress in meeting the sides shared interest in expanding water supply to Palestinians and protecting water quality.
Ironically, discontinuation of the most important component of the interim agreement, from the perspective of Israels hydrological interest, the Joint Supervision and Enforcement Teams rarely is the subject of discussion. The interim agreement empowered these teams of Israelis and Palestinians to enjoin activities that can produce transboundary contamination or extraction of water in violation of quantitative agreements. Unfortunately, political turbulence prevented the launching of these enforcement units. Israel may want to consider making concessions in the makeup of the JWC, to ensure a more balanced and less-politicized discussion among equals there. But at the same time, there is also room to link such reform to a firmer political commitment by both parties to return to the coordinated enforcement program, even as it may not enjoy immediate public popularity.
Protecting Water Quality
For instance, Israeli efforts to capture and treat sewage and wastes at the border that flow from the Palestinian Authority into the Alexander and Beer Sheva streams in Israel may be justified as a short-term exigency given the present collapse of cooperative efforts. But it constitutes a dubious long-term strategy. Recent research suggests that roughly half of the waste water percolates from the waste stream into the ground during its route into Israel, leaving real concerns about groundwater contamination. International assistance along with clear Palestinian performance standards must treat pollution sources at the source and in the case of industry, promote pollution prevention measures.
After fifteen years, the institutional framework that was adopted under Article 40 of the interim agreements i.e.: the Joint Water Committee (JWC) is no longer sufficient. As successive Israeli governments preferred to maintain water as a core issue that should be resolved in the overall negotiations over a final peace accord, the temporary arrangement became entrenched. Unfortunately, the JWC and the veto power held by its Israeli representatives perpetuates the inherent asymmetry between Israeli and Palestinian influence and engenders resent about what has been called hydrological hegemony.
While there is agreement that the very survival and stamina of the JWC are worthy of praise, there also seems to be an agreement that the Committee could benefit from expansion. For instance it should include independent professional experts as well as qualified NGO representatives (at least as observers) from both sides. There is a strong case to be made for permanent international presence on the committee by representatives of the EU, the U.S. or the United Nations. Such participation is especially compelling when the key role envisioned for international assistance in providing the infrastructure necessary to reach water quality objectives is considered.
Previous
Next