Leah Kaiser
April 21, 2014
Water Politics in Israel: Conflict or Collaboration?
Introduction
Traditional views of international security have emphasized military security
as the primary goal of nation-states. These views posit that the international
political system is anarchical and therefore survival and military concerns should
supersede goals of environmental protection and sustainability (Dinar, 2002).
However nontraditional views of security are increasingly calling for the expansion
of the definition of security to encompass a wider variety of threats faced by nations
including environmental concerns. Environmental problems can lead to social
unrest, economic decline and disputes or forced migration all of which contribute to
increasing instability and represent important security concerns (Dinar, 2002).
Water is widely considered to be the natural resource that poses the greatest
threat to security and is most likely to lead to interstate conflict and possibly war.
This is because water is absolutely essential for survival and yet is extremely scarce
and increasing in scarcity in many areas. Israel is an ideal location to examine the
effects of water scarcity on regional politics because Israel is not only considered a
water-scarce country but it relies on many shared water resources. Overall the
Middle East and North Africa combined contain only about 0.9% of global water
resources although these areas contain 5% of the global population (Berman &
Whibey, 1999). As a result of increasing population growth and domestic pollution
the Middle East now has the worst per capita water availability in the world
(Berman & Whibey, 1999). This is further complicated by the fact that most of the
water in the Middle East comes from only three key waterways: the TigrisEuphrates, the Nile, and the Jordan River systems. There is growing controversy
about whether this tense situation will lead to water wars or to better water
cooperation.
Research
There is evidence that thus far water has incited both conflict and
cooperation. As far as conflict goes there are several events, which are commonly
used to support the link between water and war. Between 1951 and 1953 Israel
and Syria exchanged sporadic fire over Israeli water development in the Huleh
basin, which lies between Syria and Israel (Dinar, 2002). The two countries
exchanged fire again from 1965 to 1966 because Syria attempted to divert the
Jordan River headwaters in order to prevent Israel from implementing the national
water carrier project (Dinar, 2002). Finally the 1982 Israeli invasion of Lebanon can
be viewed as a quest for water resources. Current water conflicts in the area
concern the distribution of water between Jordan, Israel, and Palestine and have so
far ended in tense stalemates despite several existing agreements.
These tense situations involving water distribution could also offer
important opportunities for increased collaboration and cooperation among the
different countries. Globally there are more examples of treaties signed among
nations concerning water than there are of armed conflicts over water (Dinar,
2002). Factors such as resource scarcity based on environmental degradation are
considered important for initiating cooperation to end the degradation. Israel and
Jordan currently have a Peace Accord, which includes an agreement on common
water resources. Israel also passed an Interim Agreement in 1995 with Palestine
concerning the West Bank and Gaza Strip that included a Water Annex (Berman &
Whibey, 1999). The Water Annex was meant to deal specifically with resource
distribution. However the Israeli-Palestine relationship continues to be plagued by
disputes over water.
Conclusions
There is evidence supporting the conjecture that dwindling water resources
will lead both to cooperation and war. As a result it is difficult to predict what water
relations will look like in the Middle East in the coming years. However it is
important to recognize that water availability is decreasing. The water that does
exist is limited, unevenly distributed, and subject to climatically determined
fluctuations (Lowi, 1993). Furthermore it is increasingly stressed by rapid
population growth and increased degradation as a result of local pollution and
salinization. As a result of these factors it is essential that Israel, Jordan, and
Palestine focus on working towards mutually beneficial solutions to water scarcity
in the Middle East beginning with widespread data sharing among the affected
countries. Further conflict in the region will only lead to further water degradation
and will delay any possible conservation practices.
References
Alatout, S. (2008). ‘States’ of scarcity: water, space, and identity politics in Israel,
1948 – 59. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 26(6), 959-982. doi:
10.1068/d1106
Berman, I., & Wihbey, P. M. (1999). The new water politics of the Middle East.
Strategic Review.
Dinar, S. (2002). Water, security, conflict, and cooperation SAIS Review, 22(2), 229253.
Lowi, M. R. (1993 ). Bridging the divide: Transboundary resource disputes and the
case of West Bank water. International Security, 18(1), 113-138.