http://www.stratfor.com/meaf/specialreports/special19.htm
Water: The Key to Middle East Peace?
Stratfor Special Report,
10 November 1999
Summary
While Syria continues to demand an Israeli withdrawal from the
"strategic Golan Heights," Israeli Gen. Uri Saguy made it clear
Nov. 8 that water, not land, is the critical issue between Israel
and Syria. Israel is willing to consider the development of water deals with Turkey and Syria,
but, so far, Syria has not participated in any negotiations on the matter. The peace process
may hinge on the creation of a three-way water deal among Israel, Syria and Turkey.
Analysis
Gen. Uri Saguy, reportedly the Israeli government's
favorite candidate to head peace negotiations with
Damascus, recently told a Nazareth daily, that "water is
the most critical issue in negotiations with Syria,"
implying that land was less of an issue. Saguy, a former
head of Israeli military intelligence, added that any
solution to the water problem will be resolved in the
context of an Israeli-Syrian-Turkish agreement. With
regard to Syria's demand for return of the Golan Heights,
Saguy noted, "if Israel is satisfied, it will return all
territory."
Al Hayat reported Nov. 2 that, in an attempt to encourage
Syrian flexibility in water deals with Israel, the United
States had asked Ankara to negotiate with Damascus for a
final statement on Turkey and Syria sharing the Euphrates'
waters. Syria has been at odds with Turkey over its
control of the Euphrates upstream. Al Hayat's sources said
that Turkish Foreign Minister Ismail Cem told Syrian
Foreign Minister Farouk Sharaa that Ankara is willing to
discuss the water issue when at the upcoming meeting in Damascus of officials from both
countries.
Golan water resources are key to a future resolution of the Arab-Israeli conflict. Any official
peace agreement will have to address water issues. The source of the water Israel seeks to
secure lies within the Golan region. Saguy's comments are directed at those involved in the
formal peace process who have equated land with security. Specifically, Saguy said, "the
security arrangements are a lot easier" than water issues.
Militarily, the Golan Heights offer little advantage. Israeli military doctrine is based on
mobile air-land warfare. At best, the Golan provides some security from modern Syrian
artillery. It is not ideal ground for conducting mobile defensive operations because it forces
defenders to operate with their backs to a steep escarpment. Syrian armor descending the face
of the Golan would be extremely vulnerable to Israeli gunners on the other side of the Jordan.
Obviously, there is some value to the Golan, but it is far from an indispensable strategic
asset.
Water, on the other hand, does matter. By abandoning the superficial, but highly emotionally
charged, issue of occupying the Golan and by raising this strategic water issue, Saguy and
Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak are making a serious step forward toward negotiating a formal
peace.
This step forward exemplifies the pitfalls of pushing ahead the formal peace process.
The sides have to cut through potentially politically destabilizing concerns - explicitly
addressing in a formal peace agreement issues about which they had implicit understandings -
just to reach a point where they must deal with the real divisive issues. This is a positive
sign for commitment to the peace process, but now the hard part begins. Barak must convince the
Israelis that water matters more than land, while also brokering a deal with Syrians and Turks.
A look at Israel's complicated water issues will illustrate why the Golan water situation is
much more complicated than security arrangements.
The Golan provides more than 12 percent of Israel's water requirements, estimated at 1.8
billion cubic meters per year. Israel consumes 122 million cubic meters from the Al-Hasbani
River, 121 million cubic meters from the Banias River and Mt. Hermon, in addition to the many
springs in the Golan. The rest of Israel's water comes from a few principal sources which,
without the Golan, would be insufficient to sustain it: the Coastal Aquifer, the Mountain
Aquifer, the Lake Kinneret (the biblical Sea of Galilee) basin and the Yarkon-Taninim aquifer.
The Coastal Aquifer supplies about 1700 wells, but contains poor quality water and is
continually deteriorating due to waste produced from crowded urban centers. Over-pumping during
the past 25 years has caused a drop in the ground water levels and penetration of seawater,
resulting in salinization of the aquifer's western edge.
The Mountain Aquifer contains very high quality water but its use has not been expanded for
households so as to prevent a dependency on it as the exclusive future water source for the
population of the coastal region.
The Lake Kinneret basin supplies most of Israel's water. The water levels have been lower than
usual since Israel's 1998-1999 drought. 500 million cubic meters of Israel's water comes from
the Jordan River and its sources. 300 million cubic meters flow from streams originating on the
Golan Heights, which drain into the Jordan and Kinneret. In accord with a 1994 peace agreement,
Israel shares the Jordan River's waters with Jordan.
A recent report from Israel's hydrology service indicates Israel's water supply is steadily
dwindling after the recent drought. The flow of the Banias spring, the source of the Jordan
River, has reached its lowest level ever measured - 4 cubic meters per second. The Shamir,
Mousreif, and Fit springs in the Golan Heights have dried up. Also, the water level of the
Kinneret is at its lowest since measurement began, and is dropping two centimeters a day. The
recent drought and the continued pumping of the Yarkon-Taninim aquifer, Israel's principal
reservoir of ground water, resulted in a sharp drop in the water level. In the Petah Tikvah
area, the water level dropped to 80 centimeters below the planned minimum, causing fear that
this level could expose the aquifer to salinization.
The water coming from Golan sources is critical. Israel will have to strike some sort of deal
that allows them to continue utilizing that water or else sack the peace process and maintain
its occupation on the Golan. Thus, Saguy's comment about an Israel-Turkey-Syria water deal
coupled with Ankara's willingness to discuss the issue may be the solution to the water issues
in the region and the stalled peace process.
Israel and Turkey have recently hinted at water cooperation. On Oct. 25, Barak traveled to
Ankara to discuss defense and water issues. The next day Haaretz reported that Israel's Finance
Ministry is examining the feasibility of transporting 2,000 tons of Turkish water to Israel.
Getting water from Turkey, while expensive, would not be difficult for Israel. Pipes can be
laid under the Mediterranean, or water can be imported in barges. And, if Syria would
cooperate, pipes could be laid across land. However, interests could better be served by an
Israel-Syria-Turkey agreement.
Syria has expressed fear in past months that Turkey is using its control over the Tigris and
Euphrates rivers (Syria's two main sources of water) as a political lever. With Turkish-Israeli
water cooperation in the works, Syria may have a chance to deal with Turkey about the
Euphrates. If Syria misses that chance, it would face a situation where two of its neighbors
with extremely powerful militaries may be working together to control water. A three-way
compromise could be the only way to achieve a peace deal. If the Turks are willing to cooperate
under U.S. pressure, we may actually see some real movement in the stagnate peace process
between Israel and Syria.
