Flame
03-21-2002, 03:22 PM
ISRAEL'S WATER BASICS
By Yedidya Atlas
While the arguments go back and forth whether or not Israel's security is
threatened by unilateral territorial withdrawal from the administered
territories and the Golan Heights, one issue has been studiously glossed
over by advocates for territorial concessions: water.
Israel has a water problem. No country can physically exist without
sufficient supply of this most vital liquid, and Israel is no exception.
Located on the fringe of a desert, Israel is almost wholly dependent on
seasonal rainfall for her water supply. Rarely do Israelis experience
rainfall outside of a five-month winter season from November through March.
Moreover, Israel has a growing population that maintains a modest level of
western standard of living, where water (for bathing regularly, drinking
freely, etc. ) is not considered a luxury. Nonetheless, it shouldn't be
assumed that Israeli water consumption is extravagant; by Western standards,
it is low. Recent figures show that Israeli average annual per capita
municipal consumption is less than half of that of domestic consumption in
southern California, for example - a region with similar climatic
conditions.
THE THREE SOURCES
Israel's water supply is stored in three main sources, which together
comprise the National Water System: Lake Kinneret, the Coastal Aquifer, and
the Mountain (Yarkon-Taninim) Aquifer.
A series of extensive studies conducted by geologist Martin Sherman, author
of "The Politics of Water in the Middle East," indicate that the permissible
output of these sources varies from year to year, according to the annual
rainfall. This varies from 600 to 800 million cubic meters per year. Current
non-agricultural demand (e.g., showers, coffee, chicken soup, etc.) has
reached the level of 600 to 700 million cubic meters. In other words,
Israel's current population needs virtually the entire permissible annual
output of both the surface and underground water reservoirs that make up the
National Water System. We see, then, that the necessary quantities of water
required by the agricultural sector can only be supplied by over-exploiting
the system and reaching the danger levels.
As a result, Israeli agriculture has become increasingly dependent on
recycled sewage and other types of low-grade waters which are unsuitable for
drinking. Hence, the oft-repeated argument that Israel's water crisis can be
resolved by reallocating water used by the agricultural sector to the
non-agricultural sector sounds good, but is simply untrue - unless we are to
drink these low-grade waters.
COASTAL AQUIFER IN TROUBLE
Moreover, while the population increases, the water supply is actually
shrinking. This is due to a deterioration of both the quantity and quality
of the country's water resources. As Sherman's study logically stipulates,
"the diminishing quantities and deteriorating quality in one water source
inevitably increases the importance of other sources in the system."
Specifically, there is deterioration in the Coastal Aquifer, where "the
level of salting and other pollutants has reduced the quality in numerous
sites to below that permissible for drinking water. " A similar pattern has
begun in Lake Kinneret as well, albeit to a lesser extent. What this means,
however, is that the importance of the Mountain Aquifer has increased. As
Israel's State Comptroller's Annual Report already reported by the early
1990's:
"The Mountain Aquifer, extending eastward of the Coastal Aquifer, from the
slopes of Mt. Carmel to Beersheba, and from the crests of mountain ridges in
Judea and Samaria to the coastal plain, serves as the principle reservoir of
drinking water to the Dan region, Tel Aviv, Jerusalem and Beersheba. Today,
it is the most important long term source in the [National] Water System. "
ALL-IMPORTANT MOUNTAIN AQUIFER - TO THE PALESTINIANS?
Now comes the political problem. This "most important long-term
source"physically straddles the pre-1967 cease fire lines, alias "the Green
Line", into Judea and Samaria. The Principle of Connecting Vessels tells us
that any activity affecting the water on one side will affect that on the
other side as well. So if pumping operations, or uncontrolled flow of sewage
or industrial waste, etc., occur on the western slopes of Judea and Samaria,
it would cause serious, and most probably irreversible, damage to the key
source of drinking water for Israel's major urban centers and environs.
The political and strategic significance for Israel is clear. Withdrawing
from Judea and Samaria - i.e., the Mountain Aquifer - or from the Golan
Heights would create a situation in which the fate of Israel's water supply
would be determined by Mr. Arafat's Palestinian Authority and the Syrians,
respectively.
Can Israel really afford to trust her most valuable and irreplaceable
national resource in the hands of those who have had a long history of
trying to destroy the Jewish State? In the case of the Syrians, this
includes diverting and/or poisoning Israel's water supply.
MISMANAGEMENT ALONE CAN DO US IN
Even if we completely ignore Arafat & Co. 's consistent and deliberate
record of gross noncompliance with the Oslo accords - the Palestinian
Authority's municipal mismanagement, poor planning, insufficient knowledge
or policing, and just plain neglect would still cause the irreparable damage
to Israel's main supply of drinking water. The present predicament of the
Gaza Aquifer is proof enough.
When Gaza was turned over to the sole ruling authority of Arafat's PA, it
received total control of the Gaza aquifer - which at the time was still
functioning and producing potable water. Within less than two years under
Palestinian Arab management, the Gaza Aquifer was ruined, contaminated
beyond repair. If the PA is incapable of taking care of its own aquifer to
supply water to its residents, how can Israel place its trust in the same
Authority to care and conserve water sources that supply Israeli taps?
On the Syrian front, let's even assume that the Syrians are genuinely
interested in keeping the peace. Nevertheless, a few years down the road,
with the increase in Syria's own population, and continued Turkish diversion
of water from the Euphrates River on the other side of Syria, Damascus may
decide to divert water from the Golan for peaceful means, and not just to
dry out Israel. Yet for Israel, the effect would be the same.
AND THEN WHAT?
Although Israel's national survival would be at stake, at what point could
Jerusalem re-invade the Golan or Judea and Samaria? When the water supply
goes down to the danger levels, or when its irreversibly damaged? What
justification would be acceptable to the United States and/or the UN who may
feel there are more pressing problems to deal with besides Palestinian
municipal mismanagement or terrorist well-digging, or Damascus' diverting
the Jordan River's headwaters to irrigate Syrian fields?
True, peace talks sub-committees continue to discuss the water issue. But
what is there to talk about? Either Israel has sole control of her national
water sources or her very survival is threatened. If everything works out,
fine. But if it doesn't, well, then what? As an economics professor of mine
once said, "All things being equal, such and such is the case - but in real
life things are never equal." How much more so in the Middle East.
Yedidya Atlas is a senior correspondent and commentator for Arutz-7 Israel
National Radio. He also serves on the advisory committee of the Freeman
Center For Strategic Studies.
By Yedidya Atlas
While the arguments go back and forth whether or not Israel's security is
threatened by unilateral territorial withdrawal from the administered
territories and the Golan Heights, one issue has been studiously glossed
over by advocates for territorial concessions: water.
Israel has a water problem. No country can physically exist without
sufficient supply of this most vital liquid, and Israel is no exception.
Located on the fringe of a desert, Israel is almost wholly dependent on
seasonal rainfall for her water supply. Rarely do Israelis experience
rainfall outside of a five-month winter season from November through March.
Moreover, Israel has a growing population that maintains a modest level of
western standard of living, where water (for bathing regularly, drinking
freely, etc. ) is not considered a luxury. Nonetheless, it shouldn't be
assumed that Israeli water consumption is extravagant; by Western standards,
it is low. Recent figures show that Israeli average annual per capita
municipal consumption is less than half of that of domestic consumption in
southern California, for example - a region with similar climatic
conditions.
THE THREE SOURCES
Israel's water supply is stored in three main sources, which together
comprise the National Water System: Lake Kinneret, the Coastal Aquifer, and
the Mountain (Yarkon-Taninim) Aquifer.
A series of extensive studies conducted by geologist Martin Sherman, author
of "The Politics of Water in the Middle East," indicate that the permissible
output of these sources varies from year to year, according to the annual
rainfall. This varies from 600 to 800 million cubic meters per year. Current
non-agricultural demand (e.g., showers, coffee, chicken soup, etc.) has
reached the level of 600 to 700 million cubic meters. In other words,
Israel's current population needs virtually the entire permissible annual
output of both the surface and underground water reservoirs that make up the
National Water System. We see, then, that the necessary quantities of water
required by the agricultural sector can only be supplied by over-exploiting
the system and reaching the danger levels.
As a result, Israeli agriculture has become increasingly dependent on
recycled sewage and other types of low-grade waters which are unsuitable for
drinking. Hence, the oft-repeated argument that Israel's water crisis can be
resolved by reallocating water used by the agricultural sector to the
non-agricultural sector sounds good, but is simply untrue - unless we are to
drink these low-grade waters.
COASTAL AQUIFER IN TROUBLE
Moreover, while the population increases, the water supply is actually
shrinking. This is due to a deterioration of both the quantity and quality
of the country's water resources. As Sherman's study logically stipulates,
"the diminishing quantities and deteriorating quality in one water source
inevitably increases the importance of other sources in the system."
Specifically, there is deterioration in the Coastal Aquifer, where "the
level of salting and other pollutants has reduced the quality in numerous
sites to below that permissible for drinking water. " A similar pattern has
begun in Lake Kinneret as well, albeit to a lesser extent. What this means,
however, is that the importance of the Mountain Aquifer has increased. As
Israel's State Comptroller's Annual Report already reported by the early
1990's:
"The Mountain Aquifer, extending eastward of the Coastal Aquifer, from the
slopes of Mt. Carmel to Beersheba, and from the crests of mountain ridges in
Judea and Samaria to the coastal plain, serves as the principle reservoir of
drinking water to the Dan region, Tel Aviv, Jerusalem and Beersheba. Today,
it is the most important long term source in the [National] Water System. "
ALL-IMPORTANT MOUNTAIN AQUIFER - TO THE PALESTINIANS?
Now comes the political problem. This "most important long-term
source"physically straddles the pre-1967 cease fire lines, alias "the Green
Line", into Judea and Samaria. The Principle of Connecting Vessels tells us
that any activity affecting the water on one side will affect that on the
other side as well. So if pumping operations, or uncontrolled flow of sewage
or industrial waste, etc., occur on the western slopes of Judea and Samaria,
it would cause serious, and most probably irreversible, damage to the key
source of drinking water for Israel's major urban centers and environs.
The political and strategic significance for Israel is clear. Withdrawing
from Judea and Samaria - i.e., the Mountain Aquifer - or from the Golan
Heights would create a situation in which the fate of Israel's water supply
would be determined by Mr. Arafat's Palestinian Authority and the Syrians,
respectively.
Can Israel really afford to trust her most valuable and irreplaceable
national resource in the hands of those who have had a long history of
trying to destroy the Jewish State? In the case of the Syrians, this
includes diverting and/or poisoning Israel's water supply.
MISMANAGEMENT ALONE CAN DO US IN
Even if we completely ignore Arafat & Co. 's consistent and deliberate
record of gross noncompliance with the Oslo accords - the Palestinian
Authority's municipal mismanagement, poor planning, insufficient knowledge
or policing, and just plain neglect would still cause the irreparable damage
to Israel's main supply of drinking water. The present predicament of the
Gaza Aquifer is proof enough.
When Gaza was turned over to the sole ruling authority of Arafat's PA, it
received total control of the Gaza aquifer - which at the time was still
functioning and producing potable water. Within less than two years under
Palestinian Arab management, the Gaza Aquifer was ruined, contaminated
beyond repair. If the PA is incapable of taking care of its own aquifer to
supply water to its residents, how can Israel place its trust in the same
Authority to care and conserve water sources that supply Israeli taps?
On the Syrian front, let's even assume that the Syrians are genuinely
interested in keeping the peace. Nevertheless, a few years down the road,
with the increase in Syria's own population, and continued Turkish diversion
of water from the Euphrates River on the other side of Syria, Damascus may
decide to divert water from the Golan for peaceful means, and not just to
dry out Israel. Yet for Israel, the effect would be the same.
AND THEN WHAT?
Although Israel's national survival would be at stake, at what point could
Jerusalem re-invade the Golan or Judea and Samaria? When the water supply
goes down to the danger levels, or when its irreversibly damaged? What
justification would be acceptable to the United States and/or the UN who may
feel there are more pressing problems to deal with besides Palestinian
municipal mismanagement or terrorist well-digging, or Damascus' diverting
the Jordan River's headwaters to irrigate Syrian fields?
True, peace talks sub-committees continue to discuss the water issue. But
what is there to talk about? Either Israel has sole control of her national
water sources or her very survival is threatened. If everything works out,
fine. But if it doesn't, well, then what? As an economics professor of mine
once said, "All things being equal, such and such is the case - but in real
life things are never equal." How much more so in the Middle East.
Yedidya Atlas is a senior correspondent and commentator for Arutz-7 Israel
National Radio. He also serves on the advisory committee of the Freeman
Center For Strategic Studies.