Siamese Twins Share Dilemma Over Aquifer

Water is, indeed, a major issue in the Israeli-Arab peace process. It is a vital resource--an indispensable and relatively scarce commodity. And yet, precisely because of these qualities, water is also a compelling catalyst for cooperation.

How to make sense of this seeming contradiction? First, Israelis and Palestinians, as most Californians, live in a semi-arid climate. There is a short, wet winter and a long, dry cycle each year. Moreover, the amount of rain varies widely from year to year. In such a setting, water supply in the dry season and drought years depends primarily on the available storage capacity. In such a climate, water evaporates quickly. The best place to store water is underground. Israelis and Palestinians share the Mountain Aquifer, which is actually made up of three main sub-basins. This is the best water storage available to both parties.

These ground-water basins, however, are susceptible to pollution and to salinization if they are over-pumped. Once polluted or salinized, it is unlikely that the basins can ever be cleaned up again. To prevent this from happening, the aquifer must be judiciously managed. Yet, even in the current situation, where Palestinians have control over very limited parts of the West Bank, neither side can manage the aquifer satisfactorily alone. The two sides can be likened to Siamese twins, two separate entities sharing a joint vital organ, the aquifer. If they do not cooperate and the quality of the water in the aquifer deteriorates and its storage capacity is reduced, future generations of both sides will suffer.

The management of an aquifer is a very complex task requiring multiple time-related decisions. In a drought situation, for example, source replenishment is reduced. Last year, the aquifer was not strengthened at all. Therefore, pumped outflow had to be curtailed too.

Before anything at all can be done, all parties have to agree that there is a drought. This is not always obvious because droughts come slowly and quietly. The decision to declare a drought or emergency situation is an administrative one. Once the situation has been acknowledged, the next challenge is to agree on measures that need to be taken and then enforce them.

For the last seven years we have been working together under the auspices of the Harry S. Truman Institute for the Advancement of Peace at the Hebrew University and the Palestine Consultancy Group on the question of how best to address our joint ground-water concerns.

One of the more innovative suggestions made is that the shared resources be privatized--having an international firm be responsible for pumping, selling, treating and reusing water. In this case, Israel and the Palestinians would have to bond together to prepare and choose the best company by bid. Such a structure creates, therefore, an incentive for cooperation in itself.

The other institutional structures we propose also offer win-win options. Peace negotiators should not have to limit their discussions to the question of how much water each side gets now, but rather they could focus some of their attentions on improving the lot of future generations. Steps in this direction were taken already in the interim agreements signed in September 1995. Successful cooperation evolves only after the sides have developed some confidence in each other. Some West Bank Palestinians now suffer acute summer water shortages. Moreover, there are still many villages not connected to running water. Addressing these concerns is an absolute necessity for building the confidence needed to manage ground water successfully.

Addressing Palestinian domestic needs would require Israel to give up some water currently used for irrigation. However, once this water is recycled, some of it can be reused--which would reduce the initial loss. If water is seen as a human right, however, and if all people are equal, it is obvious that the Palestinian water supply should be augmented.

Eventually, it will be necessary to desalinate the seawater. Such desalination costs money. It would approximately double household water expenditures. But since water is among the lowest of all household budget items, at least in Israel, this is not an insurmountable problem. In any case, it is much cheaper than conflict.

Water is indeed a source of concern for Israelis and Palestinians. Solutions do exist. But unless water is managed jointly, future generations of both sides stand to lose.