The
full text of Burkart’s dissertation can be uploaded below this article.
The thesis includes many original documents. Among them the minutes of
JWC meetings and
signed JWC agreements.
Until now much of the literature about
the Palestinian Israeli water conflict followed either the Palestinian
discourse (vast majority) or the Israeli discourse (small minority).
A thesis titled ‘The politicization of
the Oslo water agreement’ written by Lauro Burkart a Swiss graduate of
the Institute of International and Development studies in Geneva gives a
more accurate and impartial
picture of the topic of the scarcity of water in the Palestinian
Authority.
Burkart interviewed many key players in
the water conflict, Palestinians and Israelis as well as representatives
of NGOs and the donor countries. He also examined many original
documents such as the minutes
of the meetings of the joint Israeli Palestinian Water Committee (JWC).
Conclusions
Here are some of the most important conclusions in Burkart’s thesis.
Here are some of the most important conclusions in Burkart’s thesis.
The goals of the Oslo 2 water agreement
have been reached regarding the quantities of water provided to the
Palestinian population (178 mcm/year in 2006). The Oslo water agreement
estimated that the needs
would eventually be 200 mcm a year. The Joint Water Committee
functioned well in the first years following signature of the agreement,
but since 2008 cooperation has come to a halt
The facts disseminated by the
Palestinians, international organizations and donors about the root
causes of the water scarcity in the West Bank are incorrect.
Burkart writes: ‘It is not the Israeli
occupation policy but the Palestinian political resistance against joint
management and cooperation that is responsible for the relatively slow
development of the Palestinian
water sector and the deteriorating human rights situation in the
Palestinian Territories’ and ‘There is convincing evidence of
mismanagement within the Palestinian Water Authority (PWA).’
He cites the pro-Palestinian NGO AMAN
who concluded that there is ‘no clear legal separation between the
political and executive levels within the Palestinian water
institutions. To date there is no real
functioning water law. Furthermore the National Water Council is not
meeting and not functioning well’.
Although the PWA embarked on an
institutional reform process in reaction to international critics such
as the World Bank this did not solve the issue of mismanagement within
the institution. The head of the
Palestinian Hydrology Group called the reform a ‘fundraising
mechanism’. The PWA also did not manage to gain control over many
municipalities (where Israel has no control) due to the autocratic and
undemocratic manner in which they are managed. These power
holders did not want to lose control of the water systems since it was
one of the main services provided by the municipalities. As a result the
water supply is not centralized and illegal drilling is rampant.
The fact that the PA pays for most of
the water bills of the Palestinian population gives no incentive for
saving and leads to an unreasonable use of water in the domestic sphere
as well as in the agricultural
sector.
Shadad Attili
Burkart also interviewed Dr. Shaddad Attili, head of the PWA who was appointed in 2008. Attili, a Fatah member, is responsible for the de facto ending of the cooperation with Israel in order to bolster the Palestinian water rights claims. He did this to strengthen the position of Fatah after the Hamas victory in the Palestinian elections.
Burkart also interviewed Dr. Shaddad Attili, head of the PWA who was appointed in 2008. Attili, a Fatah member, is responsible for the de facto ending of the cooperation with Israel in order to bolster the Palestinian water rights claims. He did this to strengthen the position of Fatah after the Hamas victory in the Palestinian elections.
This policy is conducted at the expense
of the marginalized and peripheral Palestinian population which is
suffering from water shortages. Burkart writes that the abundance of
donor money allowed Atilli to
continue the non-cooperation strategy which has lead to a complete
stagnation of the water negotiations during the last five years
Wastewater
One of the results of the refusal to
cooperate with Israel is that almost all of the 52 mcm waste water
generated by the Palestinian population flows untreated into Israel and
the West Bank where it contaminates
shared groundwater resources. Nevertheless, the Palestinians claim that
Israel is blocking their waste water infrastructure. The facts are that
most of the Palestinian waste water treatment and reuse projects have
already received foreign funding and were
supported by Israel.
The PA however has not taken sufficient
action in order to execute those projects. Instead the PA claims that
Israel is demanding an unreasonably high level of treatment (BOD 10/10) A
JWC memorandum of understanding
from 2003 however, which was signed by both parties agreed on a gradual
process to achieve this standard (starting with BOD 20/30).
Following a meeting in November 2011
between Colonel Avi Shalev of the Civil Administration and PWA officials
about the implementation of Palestinian water projects, Israel offered
to finance water and waste
water projects that would serve Palestinian communities in the West
Bank. The Palestinians didn’t respond.
Desalination
Another solution that could solve the water crisis in the PA is seawater desalination. In fact Israel made an offer to the Palestinians to build a desalination plant in Hadera south of Haifa and pump the desalinated water to the northern West Bank. The Palestinians rejected this solution since it would put Israel in an upstream position to the West Bank. Another reason for this rejection has to do with water rights since the Palestinians claim the Mountain Aquifers.
Another solution that could solve the water crisis in the PA is seawater desalination. In fact Israel made an offer to the Palestinians to build a desalination plant in Hadera south of Haifa and pump the desalinated water to the northern West Bank. The Palestinians rejected this solution since it would put Israel in an upstream position to the West Bank. Another reason for this rejection has to do with water rights since the Palestinians claim the Mountain Aquifers.
Attili even withdrew a PWA expert team
from an Israeli desalination program using the argument that Israel
unilaterally destroyed a number of illegal wells on the West Bank. This
proved to be another example
of Attili’s propaganda campaign.
Israel responded after Attili complained
about the wells in a letter to the international community. The
decision to shut down these wells was taken by the Joint Water
Committee. After that several reminders
were sent to the PWA who reiterated its intention to execute the JWC
decision. Nothing happened however. Four years after the decision was
taken Israel decided to execute the decision since illegal drilling
diminishes the amount of water produced by legal
wells and damages the main aquifers.
Water as weapon
It is obvious that Attili’s non cooperation strategy is connected to the overall change in strategy vis-à-vis Israel in 2008 by the PA. Water has become a weapon against the so-called Israeli occupation.
It is obvious that Attili’s non cooperation strategy is connected to the overall change in strategy vis-à-vis Israel in 2008 by the PA. Water has become a weapon against the so-called Israeli occupation.
Download Instruction:
To download the PDF right click the link below and choose something like ‘save target as’ to save the pdf document your local computer.
MT_Lauro Burkart
To download the PDF right click the link below and choose something like ‘save target as’ to save the pdf document your local computer.
MT_Lauro Burkart
No comments:
Post a Comment