Israeli Water Racism Against Palestinians

Given the asymmetry in power between the U.S.-backed Israel and the stateless Palestinians, it is not surprising that when one analyzes the water situation in the Holy Land it is evident that Israel dominates the regulation of water.

palestine water UWoSq 19672

Israel has long maintained an ideology of hegemonic control over water in its buffer zone, so to speak. At the 1919 Paris Peace Conference, for example, the nascent World Zionist Organization insisted that the planned future Jewish state "control not only the water resources within the British Mandate of Palestine, but also the sources of their flow."

An emissary of the Zionist Organization to Palestine in 1898-99 outlined a scheme for the use of the Jordan River and the Litani River that did not takethe wellbeing of Arabs. Not surprisingly, Israeli water plans would often conflict with neighboring Arabs states, particularly Syria which fought skirmishes over water; and it is believed that disputes over water heightened tensions in the lead up to the 1967 War.

The 1995 Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip outlined a policy of ostensible joint water and wastewater cooperation agreement, but delayed a detailed plan until final negotiations which, of course, have not been held. Article 40 addresses "Water and Sewage," and stipulated that Israel recognize Palestinian water rights in the West Bank, but these rights would be enumerated in final status talks. As of writing, Palestinians have no recognized water rights by Israel. The said Article also included a statement to the effect that both sides would coordinate water and sewage management in the West Bank. Finally, the Interim Agreement codified an asymmetrical relationship in the use of water. Under paragraph 7 of Article 40, for example, Israel agreed to allocate West Bank Palestinians 28.6 mcm (million cubic meter) of water per year out of a recognized need of between 70-80 mcm. The disparity in water access is detailed in Schedule 10 of Annex III. Ratio [Israel/Palestinians] as follows: 40:132 in Jordan River Eastern aquifer, 103:42 in Jordan River North-eastern aquifer, and 340:22 in the Jordan River Western aquifer. Bar the Eastern aquifer, Israeli self-allocation is significantly more than Palestinians for an aggregate ratio of 483:196. The Interim allocation established ratios only for the Jordan River. As unfavorable for the Palestinians as this agreement is, Israel is not even bound by such an agreement when it comes to the Yarqon-Taninim, Jizreel and Gaza aquifers. Israel does not control all Palestinian wells, however. Under Oslo, Palestinians local actors maintain control of 18% of the water in the West Bank.

The Oslo years brought about the Palestinian Water Authority (PWA) "as a water regulatory body of the future Palestinian state . . . to assume control over water access at the expense of local actors." Until Palestinian sovereignty, the PWA remains constrained by the occupation. In addition, the Oslo Agreement established the Joint Water Committee (JWC), which, concludes a review in the Middle East Report has legalized Israeli veto of Palestinians water projects and delayed others claiming infringement on Israel's alleged water rights. Both of these policies of institution building have failed to meet Palestinian water needs as Palestinian rights are subdued to the matrix of Israeli occupation.

A 2002 report published by Israeli human rights group B'Tselem stated that average Palestinian consumption has fallen in recent years to 60 litres per person per day (lpd) to Israel's 350 lpd. Palestinian water allocation has fallen greatly with the advent of the second intifada as "Israel has engaged in various forms of collective punishment." As a result, Palestinians often lack water for basic hygiene, personal vegetation and house cleaning. The report concluded that "at a time when Israeli public debates whether to water their lawns or wash the car, Palestinians suffer from a shortage of water to meet their most basic needs."

This disparity is made more egregious when factoring in water allocation to nearby international illegal Israeli settlements. Several Palestinian NGOs report settler allocation to be 15 times more and the Israeli settlement of Kiryat Arba, for example, with a population of 5,000 is the beneficiary of the same amount of water reserved for the 170,000 Palestinian Arabs in Hebron. Israel denies any discriminatory practices and lays the blame on the Palestinian Authority, as an Israeli Water Commission official stated: "We allocate water according to the 1995 interim agreement . . . and even 20 percent more. It is not an allocation problem, it is a Palestinian distribution problem." While Palestinians may make more efficient use of water, that is a marginal solution and an unfounded accusation. It is indisputable that Israel allocates a significant share more for Israeli Jews as the aforementioned Interim Agreement itself makes clear in mandating a 483:196 ration favoring Israelis. Furthermore, that Agreement only pertains to the Jordan River and not to the other major sources in which Israel always allocates a disproportionate share for itself.

In addition to limiting access, Israel charges Palestinians significantly more for water than Israeli citizens even though the latter are wealthier. A new report by Amnesty International states that Israel charges Palestinians four times as much. "Increases in the cost of water are coming at the same time that Palestinian income is plummeting. . . . Households have gone into debt just so they can have water." And Israeli attacks against Palestinian civilian infrastructure predate Gaza 2008: During the second intifada, Palestinian water infrastructure was the victim of Israeli attacks: Israeli helicopter attack destroyed wells connecting 200,000 people in Gaza in 2001, to cite one such incident.

gaza water refugee ramadan wzZSq 19672

Israel treats Palestinians in such a discriminator manner because Zionism is racism and refuses to acknowledge Palestinians as fellow humans. As recently as October 2002, then Israeli Infrastructure Minister Effi Eitam, president of the far-right National Religious Party, declared that the Palestinians were “stealing water from the state of Israel” through unauthorized drilling and “pirate” water pipes connected to those serving illegal Israeli settlements. Eitam declared that this constituted a Palestinian “water intifada,” and “ordered Water Commission Shimon Tal to stop all new drilling of Palestinian wells in the West Bank and to freeze the issuing of new permits by the Joint Water Committee.” The Palestinians dismissed “water intifada” accusations (Eitam had even accused Palestinians of polluting Israeli water), but did state that Palestinians farmers have dug well without official permits. This was due to the fact that at the time over 200 applications submitted by Palestinians to the Joint Water Committee were all vetoed by Israeli members. Needless to say, not many Palestinians believe that an occupying force staffed often by recent Israeli immigrants should dictate their digging of wells on a land their families have farmed for centuries. As the Middle East Report put it then:

“Given the growing Palestinian water and health emergency, and the fact that many Palestinians exist on only 15 liters per day of water or less and pay exorbitant prices for that water, the charge by Eitam is another example of the inability of many Israelis to recognize the humanity of the Palestinians. . . . Israel is using water as a weapon in its efforts to suppress the Palestinian uprising and the goal of an independent Palestinian state.”

Racism on land, racism on water: This Is Israel.

Sources:

Rouyer, Alwyn. (2003). Basic Needs vs. Swimming Pools Water Inequality and the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict. Middle East Report, (227)

Haddadin, Munther J. (2002). Water in the Middle East Peace Process. The Geographical Journal, 168(4)

Giordano, Meredith, & Giordano, Mark, & Wolf, Aaron. (2002). The Geography of Water Conflict and Cooperation: Internal Pressures and International Manifestations. The Geographical Journal, 168(4)