The Israeli-Palestinians Water Conflict: The Israeli Altitude
THE BEGIN-SADAT CENTER FOR STRATEGIC STUDIESBAR-ILAN UNIVERSITYMideast Security and Policy Studies No. 94The Israeli-Palestinian Water Conflict:An Israeli PerspectiveHaim Gvirtzman The Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic StudiesBar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan 52900 Israelhttp://www.besacenter.orgISSN 0793-1042January 2012
The Begin-Sadat (BESA) Center for Strategic StudiesThe BESA Center for Strategic Studies at Bar-Ilan University was founded by Dr. Thomas O.Hecht, a Canadian Jewish community leader. The Center is dedicated to the memory ofIsraeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin and Egyptian president Anwar Sadat, whoconcluded the first Arab-Israel peace agreement. The Center, a non-partisan and independentinstitute, seeks to contribute to the advancement of Middle East peace and security byconducting policy-relevant research on strategic subjects, particularly as they relate to thenational security and foreign policy of Israel.Mideast Security and Policy Studies serve as a forum for publication or re-publication ofresearch conducted by BESA associates. Publication of a work by BESA signifies that it isdeemed worthy of public consideration but does not imply endorsement of the author's viewsor conclusions. BESA Colloquia on Strategy and Diplomacy summarizes the papers deliveredat conferences and seminars held by the Center, for the academic, military, official andgeneral publics. In sponsoring these discussions, the BESA Center aims to stimulate publicdebate on, and consideration of, contending approaches to problems of peace and war in theMiddle East. The BESA Memorandum series consist of policy-oriented papers. The contentof the publications reflects the views of the authors only. A list of recent BESA Centerpublications can be found at the end of this booklet.International Advisory BoardFounder of the Center and Chairman of the Advisory Board: Dr. Thomas O. HechtVice Chairman: Mr. Saul KoschitzkyMembers: Prof. Moshe Arens, Ms. Judy Ann Hecht, Ms. Marion Hecht, Mr. Robert Hecht,Prof. Riva Heft-Hecht, Hon. Shlomo Hillel, Mr. Isi Leibler, Amb. Yitzhak Levanon, Sen.Joseph I. Lieberman, Mr. Robert K. Lifton, Maj. Gen. (res.) Daniel Matt, Rt. Hon. BrianMulroney, Maj. Gen. (res.) Ori Orr, Mr. Seymour D. Reich, Amb. Meir Rosenne, Mr. GregRosshandler, Amb. Zalman Shoval, Amb. Norman Spector, Mr. Muzi WertheimInternational Academic Advisory BoardDesmond Ball Australian National University, Ian Beckett University of Kent, Eliot A.Cohen Johns Hopkins University, Irwin Cotler McGill University, Steven R. David JohnsHopkins University, Yehezkel Dror Hebrew University, Lawrence Freedman King's College,Patrick James University of Southern California, Efraim Karsh King's College, Robert J.Lieber Georgetown University, Barry Posen Massachusetts Institute of Technology, JasjitSingh Centre for Strategic and International StudiesResearch StaffBESA Center Director: Prof. Efraim InbarResearch Associates: Dr. Efrat Aviv, Dr. Yaeli Bloch-Elkon, Prof. Stuart A. Cohen, Dr. GilFeiler, Prof. Jonathan Fox, Prof. Hillel Frisch, Prof. Eytan Gilboa, Col. (res.) Aby Har-Even,Dr. Tsilla Hershco, Dr. Mordechai Kedar, Prof. Avi Kober, Dr. Yaakov Lifshitz, Prof. Ze'evMaghen, Mr. Amir Rapaport, Dr. Jonathan Rynhold, Maj. Gen. (res.) Emanuel Sakal, Prof.Shmuel Sandler, Dr. Eitan Shamir, Dr. Dany Shoham, Dr. Shlomo Shpiro, Dr. Max Singer,Dr. Joshua TeitelbaumDirector of Public Affairs: David M. WeinbergProgram Coordinator: Hava Waxman KoenPublication Editor (English): Ilana HartPublication Editor (Hebrew): Alona Briner Rozenman
The Israeli-Palestinian Water Conflict:An Israeli PerspectiveTable of ContentsINTRODUCTION . 1DEVELOPMENT STAGES OF THE WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM . 2The British Mandate Period (1917-1948) . 2Jordanian Rule (1948-1967) . 3The Israeli Administration (1967-1995) . 3ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN WATER AGREEMENTS. 4The Gaza Agreement . 4The Judea and Samaria Interim Agreement . 5Implementing the Agreements . 5Agreement Violation by the Palestinians . 9PALESTINIAN PER CAPITA CONSUMPTION . 12Total Per Capita Consumption . 12Domestic Per Capita Consumption . 14WATER SUPPLY SYSTEMS IN JUDEA AND SAMARIA . 15Types and Locations of Water Supply Plants . 15Domestic Water Plants . 17Sewage Plants . 21LEGAL ASPECTS OF THE WATER AGREEMENTS . 23The Superiority of a Signed Agreement . 23Natural Characteristics of the Mountain Aquifer . 24Historical Usage . 26Available Alternative Water Sources . 27Water Conservation and Efficient Usage . 27THE FORTHCOMING PERMANENT STATUS . 29Ideology versus Practice. 29Quantifying Palestinian Water Rights . 30Practical Solutions . 30CONCLUSION . 31
This research paper was supported by theB. L. Manger FoundationThe B. L. Manger Foundation Inc. is a charitable foundationestablished by Bernard L. Manger, z"l, for Jewish charitable,philanthropic, religious and educational purposes. Longtime residentsof Stamford, Connecticut, USA, Ben Manger, together with his wifeFaye, support numerous worthwhile Jewish causes and the growthand development of the State of Israel.
The Israeli-Palestinian Water Conflict:An Israeli PerspectiveHaim Gvirtzman INTRODUCTIONHarsh allegations are being raised against the State of Israel due to thedispute over water with the Palestinians.1 The Palestinians claimpolitical and legal ownership over the groundwater reservoir of theMountain Aquifer, including its three internal basins – western,eastern and northern. They also claim rightful access to the waters ofthe Gaza Strip Coastal Aquifer and the Jordan River. Quantitatively,these demands amount to about 400 million cubic meters per year(MCM/Y) from the Mountain Aquifer, about 100 MCM/Y from theCoastal Aquifer and about 200 MCM/Y from the Jordan River. Thistotals roughly 700 MCM/Y, which is more than 50 percent of the totalnatural water available between the Mediterranean Sea and the JordanRiver. In addition, the Palestinians insist that they suffer from watershortages in their towns and villages due to the Israeli occupation andcite international legal norms in support of their claims.This paper's objective is to examine the Palestinian arguments againstIsrael by presenting detailed information about water supply systemspresently serving Israelis and Palestinians. This data, previouslyclassified due to political sensitivities, was recently released forpublication by the Israeli Water Authority for the first time after thesigning of the Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement (Oslo II) over 15years ago. It is presented in this study, which makes use of new maps,tables and graphs. The data shows that most of the Palestinians'arguments have no foundation. Moreover, contrary to most of thesearguments, Israel has fulfilled all of its obligations according to thesigned water agreements with the Palestinian Authority (PA).2 The author is a professor of hydrology at the Institute of Earth Sciences, HebrewUniversity of Jerusalem, and a member of the Water Authority Council.
MIDEAST SECURITY AND POLICY STUDIESIn fact, the issue of water scarcity could be changed from a source ofcontroversy and tension to one of understanding and cooperation ifboth sides are prepared to start planning future water supply plantstogether. Israeli-Palestinian cooperation based on academic research3is a good starting point. Cooperation based on sustainabledevelopment and advanced technologies can solve the real waterdeficiency.4 This paper presents practical plans to efficientlyovercome the water shortages of both sides.DEVELOPMENT STAGES OF THE WATER SUPPLY SYSTEMThis section will discuss the development stages of the water supplysystems in Judea and Samaria,5 during which the ancient, traditionalwater supply systems were replaced by modern ones. The stagesincluded are the British Mandate period (1917-1848), the JordanianKingdom period (1948-1967), and the Israeli administration period(1967-1995). The post-1995 period, during which the InterimAgreement between Israel and the Palestinians was implemented, isdescribed separately in the next section.The British Mandate Period (1917-1948)The traditional, ancient water supply systems that were built inhouseholds and communities hundreds and maybe thousands of yearsago were still widely in use during the British Mandate period.6 Theseincluded aqueducts that conveyed spring water by gravitation andcisterns that collected rainwater. Three irrigation systems were activeon the eastern slopes of the Judea and Samaria mountains. The WadiQelt aqueduct provided a total of 3 MCM/Y from Ein Fara, Ein Fawarand Ein Qelt to Jericho; the Wadi Uja aqueduct brought 7 MCM/Yfrom Ein Uja to the Uja Valley; and the Wadi Faria aqueduct supplied5 MCM/Y from Ein Baidan, Ein Isca and Ein Shibli to the Giftlik.Two additional Roman systems for domestic consumption were activein the high mountains: the Nablus aqueduct (2 MCM/Y from Ras-ElEin, Ein Kariun and Ein Asal to Sabastia) and the Jerusalem aqueduct(1 MCM/Y from the Biar and Arub springs). In addition, about 200small springs were utilized all over the mountain range, each for localconsumption, both domestic (by carrying water cans) and agricultural(by flooding mountainous terraces). Also, many cisterns collecting2
THE ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN WATER CONFLICTrainwater at the household level were used. These springs and cisternssupplied 5 MCM/Y during rainy years and were almost dry duringdroughts.7During the British Mandate, two modern, electric powered plantssupplying water to Jerusalem (from Ein Fara) and Ramallah (from EinSamiya, Ein Kinya and Ein Ariq) were built, with a total capacity of 2MCM/Y.8 Thus, at the end of the British period, the maximum watersupply in the Judea and Samaria mountains was 25 MCM/Y (in rainyyears).Jordanian Rule (1948-1967)During most of the period of Jordanian rule in Judea and Samaria thewater supply system remained unchanged. However, in 1965 newdrilling technology was introduced and 350 wells were drilled,supplying a total of 41 MCM/Y. Most of these wells were shallow(10-70 meters deep), equipped with thin casing (5-12.7 centimeterdiameter), and operated with weak engines (5-50 horse power); thus,they were pumped at low rates (10-70 m3/hour). Yet, some of thewells were relatively large, specifically those drilled at El-Fawar nearHebron, Bet-Fajar near Bethlehem, Deir-Sharaf near Nablus, andBardala in the Jordan Valley. Out of the 41 MCM/Y, 19 MCM/Ywere pumped in west Samaria (Qalqiliyah, Tulkarm and Anabta), 5MCM/Y in north Samaria (Jenin and Qabatiyya), 1 MCM/Y in Judea,and 16 MCM/Y in the Jordan Valley (Jericho, Uja, Giftlik andBardala).Due to the addition of these wells during the Jordanian period, themaximum water supply was 66 MCM/Y (in rainy years), most ofwhich was used for agriculture. Throughout this time, however, onlyfour of the 708 Palestinian towns and villages were connected tomodern water supply systems and had running water.9The Israeli Administration (1967-1995)Given the lack of running water in most towns and villages in 1967,the Israeli administration drilled deep, wide wells adjacent to most ofthe large urban centers and connected them through a network of3
MIDEAST SECURITY AND POLICY STUDIESpipelines. The bigger wells were the three Dotan wells near Jenin, theBeit-Iba, Horon and Tapuach wells near Nablus, and the sevenHerodion and Shdema wells near Bethlehem. The Israeliadministration helped the Municipality of Nablus in drilling the twoBaidan wells and assisted the Municipality of Ramallah in drilling thetwo Samia wells. Thus, in the first five years of the Israeliadministration, the water supply to the Palestinians increased by 50percent, most of which was designated for domestic consumption.In the late 1970s and 1980s, as many new Jewish settlements werebuilt in Judea and Samaria, they were connected to the IsraeliNational Water Carrier (that passes along the coastal plain) by longpipelines. Consequently, the Palestinian villages and towns locatedalong the pipelines were connected to running water as well and thestandard of living in these communities increased considerably.From 1967-1995 (prior to the signing of the Israeli-PalestinianInterim Agreement), the total amount of water supplied to thePalestinians in Judea and Samaria increased from 66 to 120 MCM/Y.This additional water was mainly used for domestic consumption.During this period, the number of towns and villages connected torunning water through modern supply systems increased from four to309 communities.10ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN WATER AGREEMENTSThe Gaza AgreementAs part of the Oslo Agreement in 1994, it was decided that Israelwould transfer control over the Palestinians' water supply in Gaza tothe PA, including the responsibility for the local aquifer and itspumping wells and the management, development and maintenanceof the water and sewage systems. Only the water systems of theJewish settlements were excluded (though in 2005, during the Israeliwithdrawal from Gaza, these were also transferred to PA control). Itwas also agreed that Israel would transfer an additional 5 MCM/Y toGaza via pipeline.4
THE ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN WATER CONFLICTThe Judea and Samaria Interim AgreementIn the second Oslo Agreement, signed in 1995, Israel stated itsrecognition of the water rights of the Palestinians, which would bequantitatively defined in the future in the permanent agreement. Bothparties concurred that the future needs of the Palestinians would beabout 70-80 MCM/Y more than their existing water consumption(118 MCM/Y in 1995). During the interim period, the Palestinianconsumption would increase by 28.6 MCM/Y (including the 5MCM/Y to Gaza), most of which would be supplied from the EasternAquifer basin. It was also agreed that new water sources should bedeveloped (for example, sewage recycling and seawater desalination)and that management of water sources must be coordinated. As well,both sides agreed to prevent contamination and treat sewage effluents.Implementing the AgreementsTo implement the water agreement in Judea and Samaria, a JointWater Commission (JWC) was established, with joint IsraelPalestinian supervision and enforcement teams, which was givenpermission to move freely throughout Judea and Samaria.The JWC, which has worked continually over the last 15 years, evenin times of tension, meets on a regular basis, approving theconstruction of water supply systems and sewage installations. Thecommission is comprised of four sub-committees. The first one is theHydrological Committee, which has approved the drilling of about 70new production wells for the Palestinians and 22 observation wells(see Figure 1), of which just 50 percent have actually been drilled.This committee has also approved the upgrading of 55 existing wells(out of about 500 authorized wells in Judea and Samaria). Second isthe Engineering Committee, which has approved the laying of watersupply pipelines along hundreds of kilometers (see Figure 2) and theconstruction of tens of large storage reservoirs and pumping stations.The third one is the Sewage Committee, whose work has been heldback due to severe political obstacles. Thus, while international donorcountries were ready to fully fund wastewater treatment plants for allthe major Palestinian cities, only one such plant has been constructed(at El-Bireh). Finally, there is the Pricing Committee, which solves5
MIDEAST SECURITY AND POLICY STUDIESFigure 1: A map of all JWC-approved wells in Judea andSamaria since the signing of the 1995 Interim Agreement6
THE ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN WATER CONFLICTongoing issues regarding the amount of payment owed by thePalestinians to Israel.Figure 2: The laying of domestic water pipelines over time invarious Palestinian communities11Following the signing of the Interim Agreement, the management andmaintenance of all Israeli water installations remained in the hands ofMekorot (Israel's national water company) and the responsibility forall Palestinian installations was transferred to the PA. Installationsthat supplied water to both Israelis and Palestinians remained Israel'sresponsibility. However, the Israeli government at the time decided todisconnect Israeli settlements from predominantly Palestinian waternetworks (and reconnect them to adjacent Israeli networks). Thisprogram was accomplished over several years. These installationswere thereby reclassified as Palestinian and handed over to the PA.This separation eliminated the dependence of the Israeli settlementson Palestinian management but did not lead to a full separationbetween Israeli and Palestinian communities. Instead, water supplypipelines belonging to the Israeli systems still included manyconnections to Palestinian villages and towns.The exact quantities of water delivered to Palestinian villages andtowns as part of Oslo II were monitored using standard meters, basedon which monthly charges were paid according to the rate determinedby the agreement (price protocol). Payment was made to Mekorot bythe Government of Israel, using port taxes collected by Israel onbehalf of the PA.7
MIDEAST SECURITY AND POLICY STUDIESOver the last 15 years, the development of water supply systems forthe Palestinian communities has been carried out on an extensivescale, much larger than that called for in the Interim Agreement (seeFigure 3). The water agreement stated that water supply to thePalestinians would increase by 28.6 MCM/Y (of which 5 MCM/Ywould be supplied to the Gaza Strip), in addition to the quantityalready consumed annually, which was 118 MCM/Y (in 1995).Essentially then, it was agreed that the Palestinians' water supply inJudea and Samaria during the interim period would increase by 20percent. In practice, however, the Palestinians' water supply increasedby about 50 percent (60 MCM/Y in 2006, not including Gaza),reaching a total of 180 MCM/Y. Thus, considering the drilling of theapproved wells, Israel has fulfilled its signed obligations.Figure 3: Amount of water supplied to the PA since the 1995Interim AgreementNote: The red histograms include 13 MCM/Y of unapproved Palestinian wells.8
THE ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN WATER CONFLICTAs mentioned earlier, only four of 708 Palestinian towns and villageswere connected to a running water network in 1967, when Israel firsttook control of Judea and Samaria. By the time the InterimAgreement was signed in 1995, however, 309 communities wereconnected (see Figure 2). In 2000, the estimated percentage ofPalestinians not connected to a water network was only 19 percent.12Five years later, this figure had narrowed to about 10 percentaccording to data collected
Jan 25, 2010 · The Israeli-Palestinian Water Conflict: An Israeli Perspective Haim Gvirtzman INTRODUCTION Harsh allegations are being raised against the State of Israel due to the dispute over water w
May 02, 2018 · D. Program Evaluation ͟The organization has provided a description of the framework for how each program will be evaluated. The framework should include all the elements below: ͟The evaluation methods are cost-effective for the organization ͟Quantitative and qualitative data is being collected (at Basics tier, data collection must have begun)
Silat is a combative art of self-defense and survival rooted from Matay archipelago. It was traced at thé early of Langkasuka Kingdom (2nd century CE) till thé reign of Melaka (Malaysia) Sultanate era (13th century). Silat has now evolved to become part of social culture and tradition with thé appearance of a fine physical and spiritual .
On an exceptional basis, Member States may request UNESCO to provide thé candidates with access to thé platform so they can complète thé form by themselves. Thèse requests must be addressed to esd rize unesco. or by 15 A ril 2021 UNESCO will provide thé nomineewith accessto thé platform via their émail address.
̶The leading indicator of employee engagement is based on the quality of the relationship between employee and supervisor Empower your managers! ̶Help them understand the impact on the organization ̶Share important changes, plan options, tasks, and deadlines ̶Provide key messages and talking points ̶Prepare them to answer employee questions
Dr. Sunita Bharatwal** Dr. Pawan Garga*** Abstract Customer satisfaction is derived from thè functionalities and values, a product or Service can provide. The current study aims to segregate thè dimensions of ordine Service quality and gather insights on its impact on web shopping. The trends of purchases have
Palestinians in Israeli Textbooks 2016 Update Yael Teff-Seker, Ph.D. September 2016 IMPACT-se Suite 15, Belgium House, Givat Ram Campus, Hebrew University of Jerusalem Office/Fax: 972-2-5332497 Website: www.impact-se.org. 2 Introduction Israeli curriculum research in the past two decades has acknowledged that attitudes
Chính Văn.- Còn đức Thế tôn thì tuệ giác cực kỳ trong sạch 8: hiện hành bất nhị 9, đạt đến vô tướng 10, đứng vào chỗ đứng của các đức Thế tôn 11, thể hiện tính bình đẳng của các Ngài, đến chỗ không còn chướng ngại 12, giáo pháp không thể khuynh đảo, tâm thức không bị cản trở, cái được
as advanced engineering mathematics and applied numerical methods. The greatest beneÞt to the reader will probably be derived through study of the programs relat-' 2003 by CRC Press LLC. ing mainly to physics and engineering applications. Furthermore, we believe that several of the MATLAB functions are useful as general utilities. Typical examples include routines for spline interpolation .
