Water Scarcity in the Middle East: Regional Cooperation as a Mechanism Toward Peace

SPEAKERS       CONTENTS       INSERTS

 Page 1       TOP OF DOC

93–528PDF
2004
WATER SCARCITY IN THE MIDDLE EAST:
REGIONAL COOPERATION AS A MECHANISM
TOWARD PEACE

HEARING

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON
INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED EIGHTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

MAY 5, 2004

Serial No. 108–118

Printed for the use of the Committee on International Relations

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.house.gov/international—relations

 Page 2       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

HENRY J. HYDE, Illinois, Chairman

JAMES A. LEACH, Iowa
DOUG BEREUTER, Nebraska
CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey,
Vice Chairman
DAN BURTON, Indiana
ELTON GALLEGLY, California
ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida
CASS BALLENGER, North Carolina
DANA ROHRABACHER, California
EDWARD R. ROYCE, California
PETER T. KING, New York
STEVE CHABOT, Ohio
AMO HOUGHTON, New York
JOHN M. McHUGH, New York
ROY BLUNT, Missouri
THOMAS G. TANCREDO, Colorado
RON PAUL, Texas
NICK SMITH, Michigan
JOSEPH R. PITTS, Pennsylvania
JEFF FLAKE, Arizona

 Page 3       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

JO ANN DAVIS, Virginia
MARK GREEN, Wisconsin
JERRY WELLER, Illinois
MIKE PENCE, Indiana
THADDEUS G. McCOTTER, Michigan
KATHERINE HARRIS, Florida

TOM LANTOS, California
HOWARD L. BERMAN, California
GARY L. ACKERMAN, New York
ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American Samoa
DONALD M. PAYNE, New Jersey
ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey
SHERROD BROWN, Ohio
BRAD SHERMAN, California
ROBERT WEXLER, Florida
ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York
WILLIAM D. DELAHUNT, Massachusetts
GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York
BARBARA LEE, California
JOSEPH CROWLEY, New York
JOSEPH M. HOEFFEL, Pennsylvania
EARL BLUMENAUER, Oregon
SHELLEY BERKLEY, Nevada
GRACE F. NAPOLITANO, California

 Page 4       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

ADAM B. SCHIFF, California
DIANE E. WATSON, California
ADAM SMITH, Washington
BETTY McCOLLUM, Minnesota
BEN CHANDLER, Kentucky

THOMAS E. MOONEY, SR., Staff Director/General Counsel
ROBERT R. KING, Democratic Staff Director
LARA ALAMEH, Professional Staff Member
LIBERTY DUNN, Staff Associate

C O N T E N T S

WITNESSES

    The Honorable John F. Turner, Assistant Secretary of State, Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs, U.S. Department of State

    The Honorable David M. Satterfield, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, U.S. Department of State

    James Kunder, Deputy Assistant Administrator, Bureau for Asia and the Near East, U.S. Agency for International Development

    Gidon Bromberg, Israeli Director, Friends of the Earth Middle East

 Page 5       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Ihab Barghothi, Ph.D., Advisor, Palestinian Water Authority

    Uri Shamir, Ph.D., Director of the GWIRI, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Lawrence and Marie Feldman Chair in Engineering, Stephen & Nancy Grand Water Research Institute

    Elias Salameh, Ph.D., Professor, University of Jordan

    Franklin M. Fisher, Ph.D., Jane Berkowitz Carlton and Dennis William Carlton Professor of Economics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology

    Haim Shaked, Ph.D., Director, The Miller Center, University of Miami

LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING

    The Honorable Henry J. Hyde, a Representative in Congress from the State of Illinois, and Chairman, Committee on International Relations: Prepared statement

    The Honorable Tom Lantos, a Representative in Congress from the State of California: Statement submitted for the record by the Jewish National Fund

    The Honorable Earl Blumenauer, a Representative in Congress from the State of Oregon: Material submitted for the record

    The Honorable Nick Smith, a Representative in Congress from the State of Michigan: Prepared statement

 Page 6       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    The Honorable John F. Turner: Prepared statement

    The Honorable David M. Satterfield: Prepared statement

    James Kunder: Prepared statement

    Gidon Bromberg: Prepared statement

    Ihab Barghothi, Ph.D.: Prepared statement

    Uri Shamir, Ph.D.: Prepared statement

    Elias Salameh, Ph.D.: Prepared statement

    Gidon Bromberg, Ihab Barghothi, Ph.D., Uri Shamir, Ph.D., and Elias Salameh, Ph.D.: Responses to questions submitted for the record by the Committee on International Relations

    Franklin M. Fisher, Ph.D.: Prepared statement

    Haim Shaked, Ph.D.: Prepared statement and material submitted for the record

WATER SCARCITY IN THE MIDDLE EAST:

 Page 7       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

REGIONAL COOPERATION AS A MECHANISM
TOWARD PEACE

WEDNESDAY, MAY 5, 2004

House of Representatives,
Committee on International Relations,
Washington, DC.

    The Committee met, pursuant to call, at 10:39, a.m. in Room 2172, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Henry J. Hyde (Chairman of the Committee) presiding.

    Chairman HYDE. The Committee will come to order.

    The purpose of today's hearing on water scarcity in the Middle East is to examine how regional cooperation designed to share scarce water resources might serve as a mechanism to build peace in the region. Today we will hear from Administration officials and independent water experts on how this goal might be achieved.

    We owe much of the credit for our attention to these issues to the selfless work of a great public servant, the late Senator Paul Simon of Illinois. I am certain, had we not mourned his untimely death last year, he would be with us today sharing his visionary ideas about the world's water challenges.

    Within 1 year of his retirement from the Senate, our former colleague Paul Simon wrote an important book entitled, Tapped Out: The Coming World Crisis in Water Scarcity and What We Can Do About It. In his book, Senator Simon recounted a conversation he had with the late Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin. According to Simon, Rabin said that:

 Page 8       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

''If we solve every other problem in the Middle East but do not satisfactorily resolve the water problem, our region will explode. Peace will not be possible.''

    We should heed Paul Simon's recommendations and support the countries of the Jordan River Basin in developing a multilateral approach which will guarantee water security for all people dependent upon the basin.

    America has been involved in promoting cooperation on water resource issues in the Middle East for more than half a century. In 1953, President Eisenhower recognized the importance of the water issue when he sent Eric Johnston as his personal representative to the Middle East to negotiate the Johnston Plan to apportion the waters of the Jordan Valley. In his 1968 article, ''A Proposal For Our Time,'' outlining a massive international aid program to develop atomic-powered desalinization plants in the Middle East, President Eisenhower suggested that ''the collaboration of Arab and Jew in a practical and profitable enterprise of this magnitude might well be the first long step toward a permanent peace.''

    A quarter of a century later, as a result of the Middle East peace process's multilateral track, the Multilateral Working Group on Water Resources was created as a way to help facilitate regional cooperation on water problems. The working group has been a constructive element for Israelis, Jordanians, and Palestinians. In a place where hardship and loss of hope are widespread, cooperation on water has contributed to increased trust and confidence even during the worst of times. As former Prime Minister Shimon Peres said:

''If roads lead to civilization, then water leads to peace.''

 Page 9       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    The U.S. and the international donor community have played an important role in the peace process. The United States Department of State and the U.S. Agency for International Development have been instrumental in helping communities in the Middle East find solutions to water challenges. Programs aimed at the development of water infrastructure are an important factor in improving the quality of life in the region.

    While nature may not recognize manmade borders, man has the ability to determine how natural resources can be shared for everyone's benefit. Is it not realistic for the region's water challenges to serve as motivation for peace rather than a point of contention, since any future territorial settlement between the people and the countries of the Jordan River Basin will be linked to their need for water?

    While there is no substitute for water, there are ways to ameliorate the problem of water scarcity. Today, we will learn about ways to increase the supply of water and to improve the distribution, utilization, and management of current and future water supplies.

    If Senator Simon were here today, I am sure he would agree that access to quality water resources is vital not just to sustainable development, but also to peace, and that the very act of joining together to solve water resource problems can itself make peace more likely. I hope Senator Simon's contributions will be remembered today as we focus on the water challenges in the region.

    We have three distinguished panels before us today representing the Bush Administration and water experts from the region and the United States. And I look forward to hearing from our distinguished witnesses about these important issues.

 Page 10       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    I now yield to my distinguished colleague, the Ranking Democratic Member, Tom Lantos, for any opening remarks he may wish to make.

    [The prepared statement of Chairman Hyde follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE HENRY J. HYDE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, AND CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

    The Committee will come to order.

    The purpose of today's hearing on water scarcity in the Middle East is to examine how regional cooperation designed to share scarce water resources might serve as a mechanism to build peace in the region. Today we will hear from Administration officials and independent water experts on how this goal might be achieved.

    We owe much of the credit for our attention to these issues to the selfless work of a great public servant, former Illinois Senator Paul Simon. I am certain, had we not mourned his untimely death last year, he would be with us today sharing his visionary ideas about the world's water challenges.

    Within one year of his retirement from the Senate, our former colleague Paul Simon wrote an important book entitled, Tapped Out: The Coming World Crisis in Water Scarcity and What We Can Do About It.

 Page 11       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    In his book, Senator Simon recounted a conversation he had with the late Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin. According to Simon, Rabin said that ''. . . if we solve every other problem in the Middle East but do not satisfactorily resolve the water problem, our region will explode. Peace will not be possible.''

    We should heed Paul Simon's recommendations and support the countries of the Jordan River Basin in developing a multilateral approach which will guarantee water security for all people dependent upon the basin.

    America has been involved in promoting cooperation on water resources issues in the Middle East for more than half a century. In 1953, President Dwight D. Eisenhower recognized the importance of the water issue when he sent Eric Johnston as his personal representative to the Middle East to negotiate the ''Johnston Plan'' to apportion the waters of the Jordan Valley. In his 1968 article, ''A Proposal for Our Time,'' outlining a massive international aid program to develop atomic-powered desalinization plants in the Middle East, President Eisenhower suggested that ''. . . the collaboration of Arab and Jew in a practical and profitable enterprise of this magnitude might well be the first, long step toward a permanent peace.''

    A quarter of a century later, as a result of the Middle East peace process's multilateral track, the Multilateral Working Group on Water Resources was created as a way to help facilitate regional cooperation on water problems. The Working Group has been a constructive element for Israelis, Jordanians, and Palestinians. In a place where hardship and loss of hope are widespread, cooperation on water has contributed to increased trust and confidence, even during the worst of times. As former Prime Minister Shimon Peres said, ''If roads lead to civilization, then water leads to peace.''

 Page 12       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    The United States and the international donor community have played an important role in the peace process. The United States Department of State and the United States Agency for International Development have been instrumental in helping communities in the Middle East find solutions to water challenges. Programs aimed at the development of water infrastructure are an important factor in improving the quality of life in the region.

    While nature may not recognize manmade borders, man has the ability to determine how natural resources can be shared for everyone's benefit. Is it not realistic for the region's water challenges to serve as a motivation for peace, rather than a point of contention, since any future territorial settlement between the people and countries of the Jordan River Basin will be linked to their need for water?

    While there is no substitute for water, there are ways to ameliorate the problem of water scarcity. Today, we will learn about ways to increase the supply of water and to improve the distribution, utilization, and management of current and future water supplies.

    If Senator Simon were here today, I'm sure he would agree that access to quality water resources is vital not just to sustainable development, but also to peace, and that the very act of joining together to solve water resource problems can itself make peace more likely. I hope that Senator Simon's contributions will be remembered today as we focus on the water challenges in the region.

    We have three distinguished panels before us today representing the Bush Administration and water experts from the region and the United States. I look forward to hearing from our distinguished witnesses about these important issues.

 Page 13       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    I will now yield to my colleague, Ranking Democratic Member Tom Lantos, for any opening remarks he may wish to make.

    Mr. Lantos.

    Mr. LANTOS. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I want to commend you for calling this important hearing.

    The issue of water in the Middle East is complex, emotional, and it requires dispassionate analysis. I am convinced that long after today's headlines have faded, the water issue will remain as one of the serious problems of this very critical area.

    The Middle East is historically a water-challenged region, and we need to explore the best means of averting a regional humanitarian disaster. The Middle East suffers a chronic water deficit that is worsening daily as a result of the unhappy combination of population increase, industrial development, and long periods of drought. The past 5 decades have seen a steady decrease in the amount of precipitation.

    The Middle East, of course, is a very large region. It is particularly fitting that we are focusing on the area inhabited by the Israelis, Palestinians, and Jordanians since this area suffers most severely in the region.

    For several years it has been virtually a cliche that the next war in the Middle East will be fought over water. For this view perhaps the proper metaphor is found in Lawrence of Arabia, where Omar Sharif shoots dead a stranger for drinking from his watering hole. In studying the testimony for today's hearing, I am pleased to see that, in fact, there are other opinions; that water is not necessary a zero-sum game, and that there is significant cause to believe that Omar Sharif's metaphor need never come to pass.

 Page 14       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Thanks to advances in technology, and particularly the emergence of desalination as an affordable technique, new water can actually be produced to counterbalance the deficits run by most of the states in the region and to take the edge off disputes between regional parties. Next year a desalination plant will come on line in Ashkelon, Israel, that will produce 100 million cubic meters of water per year.

    I am certain we will hear many viewpoints from our witnesses today, but I am struck in particular by Dr. Fisher's testimony contrasting the cost of water and the cost of war. The cost of settling the Israeli-Palestinian water dispute on an annual basis, he argues, may be cheaper than the cost of a single fighter jet.

    I am also pleased by two other trends in the Israeli-Palestinian-Jordanian triangle. First of all, there is growing consciousness of the need for conservation and efficient use of resources. Israel, Jordan, and the Palestinians have the region's lowest rates of per capita usage of water, and Israel's per capita usage has actually diminished by some 50 percent over the past 2 decades.

    Whatever their other disputes, the parties clearly recognize the importance of water to their neighbors. All parties have continued to place importance on honoring commitments undertaken in their bilateral agreements on water, in particular the Israeli-Jordanian peace agreement of 1994 and the Israeli-Palestinian interim agreement of 1995. In fact, Israeli-Palestinian water arrangements represent one of the few areas in which the Oslo II agreement continues to hold. These arrangements have been reinforced by more recent agreements between Israeli and Palestinian water commissioners, committing the parties to continued cooperation even under fire.

 Page 15       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Apparently, Mr. Chairman, Israeli workers under military protection even repaired damage to Palestinian wells in Jenin as fighting raged around them during Operation Defensive Shield some 2 years ago.

    In this regard, I want to commend diplomats, including Mr. Satterfield, for their effective role in chairing a trilateral water committee with Israel and the Palestinians that keeps the lid on difficulties related to implementation of Israeli-Palestinian water agreements. I also want to commend USAID for implementing major water and sewage treatment projects in both the West Bank and Gaza.

    Mr. Chairman, it seems to me that the most dire zero-sum predictions about the water situation in the region need not come true. With good will, intelligent analysis, efficient use of funding, and effective American leadership, water can be a source for cooperation and coexistence, not war, in the Middle East.

    I look forward to hearing the views of the Administration and other expert witnesses, and I ask unanimous consent to submit a statement on this subject prepared by the Jewish National Fund.

    Chairman HYDE. Without objection, so ordered.

    Mr. LANTOS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    [The information referred to follows:]

 Page 16       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE JEWISH NATIONAL FUND, SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD BY THE HONORABLE TOM LANTOS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

    Jewish National Fund appreciates the opportunity to present testimony to the Congressional Committee on International Relations at its Hearing on Water Scarcity in the Middle East.

    For committee members unfamiliar with JNF, allow me give you some background. Jewish National Fund is a non-profit apolitical organization founded in 1901 to serve as caretaker of the land of Israel. During the first half of the 20th century, JNF set out to achieve its goal by purchasing land in what was then Palestine. Following the successful establishment of the state in 1948, JNF evolved to meet Israel's most pressing needs, including the ongoing water shortage and other environmental challenges. Over the past century, we have planted over 240 million trees, developed over 250,000 acres of land, and created more than 450 parks.

    In western industrialized nations, such as the United States, the water allocation is 9,000 cubit meters per person. In Israel, the allocation is 300 cubic meters per person. That's a stark difference. And while it is true that Israel has a higher water consumption rate than its neighbors, a population boom is causing a severe water shortage.

    The reason that it is important that we be here today is that JNF's unique experience at making the desert bloom gives us the privilege of being the world authority on arid land issues, including forestry and water, something we are willing to share with all nations. JNF is solely responsible for increasing water supply in Israel through water reclamation and recycling as well as water harvesting. We have built 160 reservoirs, and are responsible for dams, river reclamation and water recycling projects in Israel. JNF has also worked on a number of regional issues including the rehabilitation of the Alexander River, which was just featured in the March 16 issue of the NY Times, and was awarded an international prize for JNF's ability to bring together Israelis and the Palestinian Authority to work on a joint issue.

 Page 17       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    And that is just the beginning of the work JNF has done to resolve and provide a model for water scarcity issues in the region.

    JNF is a member of the Middle East Regional Cooperative, under the auspices of the U.S. Forest Service's Middle East programs. As part of the cooperative, our scientists work in cooperation with Jordan, the Palestinian Authority, Turkey and the U.S.

    JNF organized and is the founding member of the International Arid Lands Consortium, an organization based at the University of Arizona whose members include six American universities, JNF, Egypt and Jordan. The IALC supports multilateral peer reviewed research and demonstration projects in IALC member countries. Currently, the IALC is working on projects in Jordan, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen and is moving toward a project in Haiti, all under the auspices of a U.S. A.I.D. grant.

    Our current activity with Jordan is as follows. Through our involvement with the International Arid Lands Consortium, JNF facilitated researchers from the University of Arizona working on a Water Friendly Garden in Aqaba, as well as a demonstration site in Mafraq, the latter is awaiting approval by the U.S. A.I. D. Mission. In addition, the team is working on a wastewater related project with the University of Jordan and Jordan University of Science and Technology, as well as technical assistance to Jordanian partnering institutions. A Water Demand Management Conference is scheduled in Jordan from May 30–June 3 and faculty support is being provided. Finally, once visas are approved, several tours of Jordanians will be coming to the U.S. for study and workshops in bio-solids, wastewater analysis and instrumentation, drought risk analysis and high solids irrigation.

 Page 18       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    In addition, JNF has been part of international study teams consulting on water and soil projects in Chile, Paraguay, Mexico, Turkey, Burkino Faso and Nigeria, and most recently East-Timor. Our forestry program, which has planted over 240 million trees during the 20th century, is now being used as a model in countries such as Afghanistan for its success at preventing soil erosion, decreasing air pollution, improving water quality, and providing a green lung to the region.

    JNF's work has been presented at the United Nations, both in Johannesburg at the World Summit on Sustainable Development and at last fall's United Nations DPI/NGO conference, where we featured former Senator Paul Simon and projects that helped bring life back to the land.

    I bring this to your attention because resolving the water scarcity in the Middle East is not something that can be resolved overnight. JNF has worked many years on this issue. Although in Israel JNF has been successful at recycling water, this water is not used for human consumption. Instead, it is used for agriculture and keeps Israel's farmers market competitive. We have combined our work in water recycling with the training of farmers in techniques that provide the best utilization of water possible. We have research and development centers and our research has shown a number of things that help. For example, we can show a farmer, particularly in the Negev, Israel's driest region, how much water to use and at what points in the plant's growth cycle to use it, so precious water is not wasted.

    Second and more importantly, we have planted hundreds of millions of trees. Trees are important not only because they retain the soil and provide needed shade, but also because the roots hold water in the soil. This is important particularly during the rainy season, when much of the water would otherwise be lost. Also, the water held by the trees that eventually seeps into riverbeds is cleaner and potable water.

 Page 19       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    By building reservoirs to hold the water from rain, and planting trees, which hold the water in the soil, we have provided a model to the region. And the reservoirs we built enabled Israel to provide Jordan with 50 million cubic meters of water annually as part of the 1994 peace treaty. However, what most people do not know is that the water supplied to Jordan annually is stored in JNF reservoirs. Since water is a key element in the peace treaty, it would not have happened to offer the 50 million cubic meters of water if JNF had not foreseen this problem years ago and had initiated the building reservoirs.

    As an example of regional cooperation, JNF built the Besor Reservoir Complex, which is used for irrigating citrus groves and fields in 12 communities in the Eshkol Regional Council, and plays a major role in the battle against desertification. This area once had only non-irrigated crops, such as winter wheat, and today it is producing an average of 25,000 tons of fruit providing a net income of $1.5 million dollars for the 12 communities.

    The Besor Reservoir Complex is a series of three interconnected reservoirs, with a total capacity of 7 million cubic meters. The water for the reservoir is a combination of floodwater, from the winter floodwaters of the Besor River and recycled water from the greater Tel Aviv area.

    JNF's development of water resources in Israel, including that which is shared with the Palestinians, has been far superior to most any other state in the region. Israel substantially upgraded the Palestinian water system, and the Palestinians now have access to water almost unequaled in the Middle East. All international statistics show this.

 Page 20       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

As the water shortage in the Middle East loomed overhead, Jewish National Fund adapted its role as caretaker of the land to meet the pending need for water. For the past 20 years, Jewish National Fund has worked side by side with the people to address the water shortages so critical to the long term survival of the region, not only Israel. An appeal to JNF by the government of Israel for more reservoirs has the organization committed to building another 75 reservoirs during next five years. These are some of the immediate solutions to alleviating Israel's water crisis and are an integral part of its plans for supplying water over the long term.

We feel we have the practical and scientific expertise that can be applied to the regional water shortage that should not be overlooked. We stand ready to apply our experience and expertise with all countries in the region. Water has no boundaries. It is the essence of life.

Respectfully Submitted,

Ronald S. Lauder,

President, Jewish National Fund

Russell F. Robinson,

CEO, Jewish National Fund

Joseph Hess,

Vice President, Jewish National Fund.

Chairman HYDE. The Chair would announce that we expect a vote about 11:30 on the rule and previous question, and then there will be 2 hours of debate and then final passage. So it is my hope and expectation that we can promptly and expeditiously get to our panel of witnesses. We have two gentlemen over in Tel Aviv; thanks to the magic of technology, they can hear us. And so we would like to get to them, and they are on the final panel.

 Page 21       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    So with that, the Chair recognizes Mr. Ackerman. If you will have an opening statement.

    Mr. ACKERMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    Today the Committee is focusing on one of the most important and contentious issues between Israelis and Palestinians, the allocation and management of scarce water sources—resources. But while this issue is difficult and central to any future Middle East peace agreement, it is not more important than what is currently going on in Iraq. It is not more important than the transfer of sovereignty to God knows who in 57 days. It is not more important today than our failure to adequately share the burden of reconstruction. It is not more important than contractor fraud and waste of U.S. taxpayer funds. It is not more important than knowing in advance what the status of our forces will be after the transfer of sovereignty. It is not more important than the vast and likely irreversible damage done to our national image in the Middle East due to the abuse of Iraqi prisoners. And it is not in short what this Committee should be talking about today.

    When are these subjects finally going to attract the Committee's attention? Water and water scarcity are important. Normally I would be extremely pleased that the Committee was devoting attention to the issue. But these are not normal times. Our Nation is at war, and our efforts in Iraq, though performed by brave, dedicated, and honorable men and women, are floundering. Our responsibilities should call our attention elsewhere right now.

    Had the Committee begun focusing on Iraq up to this point, we might be entitled to indulge our interests in the future of water as a vital element in any future Israeli-Palestinian peace, but we have not focused on Iraq. We have looked at Saddam Hussein's human rights record, we have looked at environmental damage he did to Iraqi swamplands, and we have looked at allegations of corruption in the old U.N. Oil-for-Food Program. To our shame, however, since October 2003, not a minute, not 1 minute of our time, has been spent thinking about the future of Iraq.

 Page 22       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Our Nation deserves better. Committee oversight should not be defined as overlooking as much as possible.

    On the subject of water, I would note only a few points. The Middle East and North Africa has 5 percent of the world's population, but only 1 percent of its fresh water, clearly making it the most water-stressed region in the world. The three major water sources in the region are obviously best managed by a series of multilateral agreements governing the distribution and development of such a scarce resource. But as important as such agreements are, they seem accessible only in the distant future.

    Cooperative water management by various regional governments may well contribute to a more stable Middle East in the future, but we clearly have a long way to go from making such arrangements a reality. At this time, however, our attention should not be focused on dreams of water in the desert in the future, but on the fighting in the desert today. I do look forward to hearing from our witnesses.

    Chairman HYDE. I thank the gentleman for his remarks. His flare for criticism is in full blossom, and I am sure he could do a better job than we do, but we do our best. I would advise the gentleman that our Committees and our Subcommittees are busy. We are doing a lot of things apropos of Iraq and Oil-for-Food and other things the gentleman is not privy to. We have a hearing next week on the transition in Iraq. We will have witnesses from the State Department, from the Department of Defense, and the gentleman will be a full participant, and he can continue his critique.

 Page 23       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Ms. Ros-Lehtinen.

    Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    Chairman HYDE. The gentlelady from Miami.

    Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for convening this very important hearing on an important subject, and that is water scarcity in the Middle East.

    In a region struck by war and strife, to have to deal with water scarcity is certainly one additional problem that is not needed. Add to this an extended drought, and the problems of the region only worsen. Today's hearing is important in that we must examine ways to alleviate the situation that impacts each and every person in the region.

    As our witnesses today will testify to, there are, in fact, bodies of water that can lessen this problem, but they are, due to geography and politics, not as easily reached as all would wish.

    Mr. Chairman, I am particularly grateful for the Committee's invitation to one witness in particular, Professor Haim Shaked, who is in our audience of the University of Miami. Professor Shaked is a personal friend and a renowned expert in the field of Middle Eastern issues. His proposals that he will discuss later today for a joint commission provide a measure of hope for an otherwise bleak situation. I hope that his proposals receive serious consideration.

 Page 24       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    A commission can override the political difficulties that often arise in this part of the world, and in this context I would like to understand from our witnesses what is the long-term environmental prognosis for the region if action is not taken to solve this water crisis? And, furthermore, would an international donors conference be the route to take in order to raise the funds for the various proposals to address this problem? And I am gratified that not only are there proposals to improve the situation, but that in some places, such as the Alexander River cleanup in Israel, both Palestinians and Israelis have come together to clean up a river for the use of both communities.

    I hope that our witnesses can tell us if they foresee future opportunities whereby the political circumstances in the region could be correctly aligned to allow for work on this project to continue and spread, and to what extent does the political situation regarding Israel's withdrawal plan impact the infrastructure working on the water situation,

    So I thank the Chairman for all of the work that he has done on the issues of the Middle East, and this is but one of the many examples where our Committee has done an incredible amount of oversight in the problems of the region. So I thank the Chairman for the time.

    Chairman HYDE. Mr. Blumenauer.

    Mr. BLUMENAUER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I am pleased that you indicated we will be doing more oversight as it relates to Iraq. I have no quarrel with our doing more; I think it is important. But I would take modest exception to my colleague from New York, because there is never, I think, a good time for us to spend as much time as we need to on these critical issues that deal with water.

 Page 25       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    I would note that we will have more people in the world die by noon today unnecessarily from waterborne diseases than were lost in the World Trade Center tragedy and the Pentagon. And it is not just in the Middle East that this is a sticking point. We can just reflect in this Committee about the control by China of the major watersheds in Asia.

    This is an area of potential conflict, where death is occurring on an ongoing basis. Some of us were in Johannesburg 2 years ago when the international community—and this is an area where I was pleased the United States moved to provide some leadership—made a commitment that we were going to give 233,000 people around the world every day access to safe drinking water and 400,000 people a day access to sanitation. And, sadly, I think the record will show that we are not in very good shape in terms of making that commitment a reality. It is not clear to me that we are where we need to be.

    I treasure, Mr. Chairman, my copy that I received from Senator Simon of his book dealing with the water challenge. I am concerned that this Committee, this hearing, the work that has been done might spur us to greater action. We are the world's largest donor; but in terms of the amount of gross national product, we are the least generous of countries. And so we have got, I think, something that we could do.

    Water is an easier guide to sort through these problems. We can quantify, we can look at water quality, we know basically where it is and where it is flowing. And I think this, I hope, Mr. Chairman, would be a first step that we could focus more on water and oceans as a way of understanding how our Committee can make a contribution in helping shape policy, working with the Administration and NGOs.

 Page 26       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    I would just request, Mr. Chairman, that in the future that we might look at adding to these panels the people who are in the private sector who are involved with the provision of water infrastructure around the world. They have a sort of insight on the ground that we don't often hear that I think might add a dimension to our distinguished experts. And I would ask, Mr. Chairman, with your permission, to add some information from an internationally recognized expert from the upper West Coast in Oregon, Professor Aaron Wolf from Oregon State University, that might supplement the record, if that would be all right.

    Chairman HYDE. Without objection, so ordered.

    [The information referred to follows:]

93528am.eps

93528an.eps

93528ao.eps

93528ap.eps

    Chairman HYDE. And I thank the gentleman. I hope he will have lunch with Mr. Ackerman and discuss with him the importance of this subject. And I am——

    Mr. ACKERMAN. Mr. Chairman.

 Page 27       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Chairman HYDE. Yes, Mr. Ackerman.

    Mr. ACKERMAN. I don't take the things you say very lightly, and I hope that you don't take the things that I say very lightly either. I know how important the issue of water is, and perhaps you have missed my point. I tried to make it as clearly and succinctly as I possibly could.

    I don't know about other Members of your Committee, Mr. Chairman, but I have personally traveled to the Middle East, to Israel and four of its neighboring countries, exclusively on the issue of water and discussed it with heads of state in each of those countries as well as the private sector for a very long period of time.

    The point I tried to make, which obviously apparently went unnoticed, was the fact that there are other important issues that I believe, as a Member of this Committee and as the Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on the Middle East, are critical this date. Water in the desert is important, but American blood in the sand is important as well. And not 1 minute's time of this Committee since October 2003 has been spent on this issue.

    I have said it for the third time. I think discussing water issues are very, very important. They are critical issues, they are long-term issues. But this Committee seems to be finding issues that have importance as a diversion to the job that we should be doing.

    I hope I made myself clear, Mr. Chairman.

 Page 28       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Chairman HYDE. I think it is pointless for us to continue this give and take. I disagree with the gentleman profoundly about our intention and the time we have spent on the subject of Iraq. It occupies almost every waking moment, and we talk about it, and we work on it, and we have worked on it. But that is again getting away from the subject at hand. And I will try to wrench us back in that direction.

    Mr. Rohrabacher.

    Mr. ROHRABACHER. Thank you very much. And I will try to control my political nature, as we all have a political nature here, and look at the issue today. And, in fact, one of the things that I am pleased with the current Administration about is that they have a strategic view and a long-term view rather than just always a short-term view of how to approach things in the Middle East. And I am so pleased with your leadership, Mr. Chairman, on calling this hearing today in order to draw attention to the issue of water. And there is no more strategic issue that needs to be dealt with if we are going to have peace in the long run in that region than the issue of water.

    It was 1 year ago when I introduced H.Con. Resolution 238, which is aimed at trying to encourage more of a focus on the water issue in an effort to bring peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians, and, yes, the Jordanians as well.

    I might add that shortly after submitting that legislation, which is still in the hopper, I received a letter from Senator Paul Simon right before his death, and it was a very inspiring letter, and he gave me a copy of his book. And I might add again that we overcame politics. Senator Paul Simon overcame politics, I overcame politics, and I had a great communication with him. And I believe that his spirit should be guiding us today.

 Page 29       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Let me note that if anything comes out of these hearings today, I hope it is a call, a call on all sides and all factions to agree to work with all other sides and all other factions in the Middle East in order to increase the amount of water available in the region. That is a noble cause. If we can just get all the sides and all the factions in the Middle East working to solve that problem independently of all the other issues at hand, number one, it will make conflict less likely in the Middle East, because you will have a higher level of water, and water—and the scarcity of water is in and of itself something that could cause conflict. So we have lessened that cause for conflict. Plus if we get people focused on something that they can work together on and they can solve problems, it will demonstrate and it will get them used to working together to solve other problems and other issues. And no other—I can't think of a better way to give people an incentive to work together and to learn from each other and to learn how to solve problems than to working together in tackling the water issue in that area.

    Also, let me note that I certainly agree with our witnesses today that an investment in water is far more important in the long term in peace, for the cause of peace, than simply investment in weapons systems. One is a short-term view of providing weapons to deter conflict between these two groups of people, but in the long term an investment in water will give people a reason not to fight one another.

    So I would suggest that we move forward with the spirit of Senator Paul Simon, and let us try to be brutally honest on this issue. Let me note it was a long time before I realized that the Golan Heights issue is not just a security issue. When I went to Israel and talked to both sides, I might add, I was surprised to learn that the Golan Heights is—a major portion of that problem is a water issue in the Golan Heights area.

 Page 30       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Let us get serious about this, and let us talk about solving that problem. Let us talk about making sure that when we come up with peace plans, for example, strategies of how to map out a peace plan, that we realize that water is part of that, and that these gerrymandering pictures of the fences and the borders are often designed by parties based on where the water is. While we haven't taken it as seriously as we can—and when I say we, I mean the United States. And I thank you for your leadership, Mr. Chairman, in trying to bring up this discussion, because it is a valuable, valuable asset. Thank you.

    Chairman HYDE. I thank the gentleman and would comment, as the brand-new father of triplets, you are remarkably alert. Mrs. Rohrabacher must be doing the heavy lifting. But we will talk about that later.

    Ambassador Watson.

    Mr. SMITH OF MICHIGAN. Mr. Chairman, can I make just a very brief statement?

    Chairman HYDE. Yes. I will get to you in just——

    Mr. SMITH OF MICHIGAN. Oh, excuse me.

    Ms. WATSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I want to congratulate the new father of triplets, and give my regards to your wife and your children.

 Page 31       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    I feel that we have issues that really take front and center stage. And this also takes front and center stage, too, because I think many of the problems that we are facing in this part of the world are contingent on how we treat and how the United States sees and reacts to what is going on.

    Water is certainly a major issue, so I do hope that the witnesses will address some of the concerns that I have. According to some sources, each Palestinian is allotted 83 cubic meters of water per year, while each Israeli is allotted 333 cubic meters of water per year. The World Health Organization recommends a minimum domestic water consumption of 100 liters per capita per day. Palestinians average 57 to 76 liters per day per capita. Something is unequal here, and how much of it is political, how much of it is happenstance, how much of it is or relates to accessibility of water.

    In the landlocked nations such as Jordan, there is a real problem. Are there political barriers, for instance, that would keep water from being sent from Turkey underground to these areas?

    So I do hope, as you make your presentation, you will clarify, because I join my colleagues, That if we are seeking to democratize this area of the world and bring peace, we need to know the correct way to go about doing it. Do we start with water, or do we start, as has been said, with blood in the sand? Where do we begin? And how do we relieve the political aspect of this, take it out of the picture? And how do we work in some kind of unity and solidarity to bring peace and do it with water?

    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

 Page 32       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Chairman HYDE. Thank you, Ms. Watson.

    Mr. Smith.

    Mr. SMITH OF MICHIGAN. Mr. Chairman, very briefly, because we certainly do want to get to our witnesses.

    I recently did a presentation on the House Floor on the worldwide problems of water. In fact, this morning we are having a hearing in the Science Committee on some of the problems of our oceans' depletion, contamination, and an inability of the ocean to provide food. And I think even though we are concentrating on the water problems of the Middle East today, water—fresh water is becoming an increasing challenge throughout the world, including in the United States.

    And make no mistake, water is food; and these kind of challenges involving water can be more challenging and result in more conflicts maybe than what we are even facing in Iraq today.

    And I yield back. Thank you.

    Chairman HYDE. Thank you.

    [The prepared statement of Mr. Nick Smith follows:]

 Page 33       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE NICK SMITH, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MICHIGAN

    I want to thank Chairman Hyde for holding this hearing today. And I would also like to thank our distinguished witnesses for joining us. I look forward to hearing their testimony. As worldwide population expands, the corresponding demand for drinking water, agricultural production, and industry use also expands. Today, we look at the Middle East but fresh water is a worldwide problem

    The Middle East has a history of tension over water. Recently Syria and Turkey increased tensions dangerously over rights to the Euphrates River. Saddam Hussein drained the marshes of the Marsh Arabs, ending a way of life that had existed for thousands of years. When you combine the exploding populations of the region with primarily agricultural economies and natural scarcities, water becomes an important geopolitical factor.

    Water is already a source of concern in the Jordan Valley. Today Israel is considering partially resolving its water shortage by importing water from Turkey by oil tankers. Gaza has almost no source of safe water, a rising population, and a poor sewage system that has resulted in contamination of ground water. Gaza and Israel have started building desalination plants.

    These approaches to today's problems illustrate the range of solutions that need to be considered in the future. Technology, like desalinization and decontamination of sewage water, will increase the amount of water available. Transportation systems will allow people in the region to move water to where it is needed. More water efficient agricultural techniques will lower the need for water. However, in the end, there will need to be cooperation between Palestinians, Jordanians, and Israelis to address their regional problem together. I look forward to hearing about current and future efforts in this area.

 Page 34       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Again, I would like to thank the Chairmen for holding this hearing. I applaud his forward thinking on this important issue. This is an issue that must be solved to maintain a sustainable peace, and, by starting now, hopefully we can make progress towards peace through better cooperation.

    Chairman HYDE. Mr. Chandler.

    Mr. CHANDLER. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. I am pleased to have the opportunity to hear a little bit today about the water problem in the Middle East. I am aware of the importance of water, and I am aware of many of the things that have gone on in the Middle East to try to deal with that problem. It is going to be interesting to hear what you all have to say. Thank you very much for being here.

    Chairman HYDE. Thank you, sir.

    Mr. Pitts.

    Mr. PITTS. Mr. Chairman, I will waive my right to speak.

    Chairman HYDE. You are a gentleman and a scholar. Thank you.

    We will have to recess while we vote. I think there are two votes, and then we will return promptly. So I am sorry to put you off for so long, but that is the way this operates. Thank you for your patience.

 Page 35       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    [Recess.]

    Chairman HYDE. The Committee will come to order.

    The Chair will introduce the witnesses in the first panel. Mr. John Turner was sworn in as Assistant Secretary of State for Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs on November 13th, 2001. And prior to his appointment, he was President and Chief Executive Officer of the Conservation Fund, a national nonprofit organization dedicated to public-private partnerships to protect land and water resources. Assistant Secretary Turner received a Master of Science Degree in Wildlife Ecology from the University of Michigan.

    Ambassador Satterfield is a career member of the Senior Foreign Service. He served overseas in Jeddah, Tunis, and Damascus, and as American Ambassador to Lebanon. He served on the National Security Council staff from 1993 to 1996, and was Director of the Department of State's Office of Israel and Arab-Israeli Affairs from 1996 to 1998. Ambassador Satterfield assumed the position of Deputy Assistant Secretary on June 25, 2001, and the President has recently announced his intention to nominate him to be our next Ambassador to Jordan.

    Mr. James Kunder is the Deputy Assistant Administrator of the Bureau for Asia and the Near East at the U.S. Agency for International Development. Mr. Kunder was previously Director for Relief and Reconstruction in Kabul, Afghanistan.

    We are honored to have you all appear with us today.

 Page 36       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    And, Mr. Turner, please proceed with a 5-minute summary of your statement, and the full statement will be made a part of record.

STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE JOHN F. TURNER, ASSISTANT SECRETARY, BUREAU OF OCEANS AND INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL AND SCIENTIFIC AFFAIRS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE

    Mr. TURNER. Mr. Chairman, Members of the Committee, I certainly appreciate this opportunity to appear before you today to discuss water scarcity and opportunities for cooperation. In my brief comments this morning, I would like to briefly address water availability in general around the globe, transboundary water disputes, and touch upon some of our diplomatic efforts.

    Regarding the global water situation, the statistics today are stark, even frightening, as referred to by both Congressman Blumenauer and Congressman Smith. Today more than 1 billion people lack access to safe drinking water, 2.4 billion lack access to basic sanitation. Diarrheal diseases alone cause 1.8 million deaths per year; most are children under 5. I think we would all agree it is totally unacceptable that the world loses 5,000 to 6,000 children each day due to diseases from unsafe drinking water; indeed, the equivalent of two World Trade Centers.

    The economic impacts are staggering. The CIA estimates that, by 2015, nearly half the world's population will live in countries that are water-stressed. At the World Summit on Sustainability, Secretary Powell launched the Water for the Poor Initiative, a $970 million, 3-year initiative focused on the following three areas: Access to drinking water and sanitation, watershed management, and productive water use in agriculture and industry. More than 100 initiatives are being implemented under this program.

 Page 37       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    In fiscal year 2003, USAID estimates that the U.S. effort on water resulted in more than 19 million people gaining improved access to water and sanitation.

    Turning briefly to transboundary water issues, while the mechanics of providing access to water is often a local issue, ensuring adequate supplies of water is often a regional issue. More than 260 of the world's river basins are shared by two or more countries. These shared basins are the home to more than 40 percent of the world's population. As competition over scarce resources continues to grow, tensions are likely to increase.

    We have taken proactive measures to address this problem. In 2001, Secretary Powell launched an action plan on transboundary water. It is designed essentially to do three things: Improve conservation and management of water, mitigate tensions associated with shared water, and use water where appropriate as a diplomatic tool to build trust and promote cooperation, as Congressman Rohrabacher referred to, in those places where other tools might not be available.

    Our approach is to support the development of new or to strengthen existing regional institutions to facilitate cooperative management of shared water resources. My colleague Ambassador Satterfield will discuss our work on the Jordan River Basin.

    I would like to highlight a couple of examples from the Africa region where several basins are coming under increased pressure and are going to be critically important to regional growth and stability in the future.

 Page 38       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Africa's Okavango River originates in Angola and flows through Namibia into Botswana, where it terminates in the Okavango Delta, certainly one of the richest areas of biodiversity in the world. In 2001, the U.S. hosted a study tour for representatives of the Okavango River Basin. We were able to demonstrate U.S. water management practices and create a shared experience that brought the countries closer together.

    Mr. Ackerman talked about water scarcity in North Africa. In the case of the Nile, 7 of the 10 countries within the Nile Basin have been at war with themselves or their neighbors within the past 10 years; 6 out of the 10 countries are among the 10 poorest in the world. For many, water is a scarce resource key to economic growth, development and peace in the future. Egypt is particularly dependent on the Nile, and views access to Nile waters as a national security priority.

    Consistent with the restrictions on aid to countries in the basin, the U.S. has supported the regional dialogue components of the Nile River Basin through the U.N. Development Program. We have also hosted a study tour for members at the Secretariat of the Nile Basin Initiative to build their capacity to better manage the regional institution.

    In closing, Mr. Chairman, fresh water and transboundary water issues are extremely complicated. In cooperation with other Federal agencies and nongovernment partners, the State Department is pleased to be working on a country-by-country basis to, one, improve water management; two, reduce water-related diseases; and, three, mobilize resources for long-term water, wastewater infrastructure; and regionally, to facilitate the management of shared water resources. We believe implementing successful, cooperative strategies and access to fresh water is one of the key paths to a future of a more peaceful world. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

 Page 39       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Chairman HYDE. Thank you, Mr. Turner.

    [The prepared statement of Mr. Turner follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE JOHN F. TURNER, ASSISTANT SECRETARY, BUREAU OF OCEANS AND INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL AND SCIENTIFIC AFFAIRS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE

    Chairman Hyde and other Members of the International Relations Committee, I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss water scarcity, particularly in the Middle East. I would like to briefly address water availability in general, transboundary water disputes, and our diplomatic engagement.

THE GLOBAL WATER SITUATION

    The statistics are stark. Today an estimated 1.1 billion people lack access to safe drinking water; 2.4 billion lack access to basic sanitation. Each year, over 3 billion people suffer from water related diseases resulting in 3–4 million deaths. Diarrhoeal diseases alone cause 1.8 million deaths per year—most are children under five. The economic impact of the health related aspects related to unsafe water is estimated at $380 billion per year. In agrarian-based developing countries (countries that often lack water storage capacity), GDP often correlates directly to rainfall—when there is rain, the economy prospers; during droughts, it falters. In some countries water mismanagement and water pollution can reduce GDP by more than 2%—enough to keep a country in poverty, or if remedied, set it on a path towards economic growth. Water related disasters between 1992 and 2001 in developing countries accounted for 20% of the total number of natural disasters and over 50% of the all disaster-related fatalities.

 Page 40       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

As populations continue to grow and current freshwater sources degrade, conditions are expected to worsen. The CIA reports that, by 2015, nearly half of the world's population will live in countries that are water-stressed (i.e., have less than 1,700 cubic meters per capita per year). These data have not been lost on the international community. In 2000, the United Nations General Assembly adopted the Millennium Declaration—agreeing to halve, by 2015, the proportion of the world's population who are unable to reach or afford safe drinking water. At the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) in Johannesburg in 2000, countries similarly agreed to halve, by 2015, the proportion of the world's population without access to basic sanitation.

To address these issues, Secretary of State Powell launched the ''Water for the Poor'' initiative at WSSD. The 970 million dollar, three year, initiative is focused on increasing access to drinking water and sanitation, improving watershed management, and promoting productive water use in agriculture and industry. Some of the approaches under this initiative show considerable promise: Point-of-use approaches such as the Safe Water System—a market-based process for developing and distributing technologies for disinfecting water at the household level. Coupled with social marketing and hygiene education, these systems can significantly reduce diarrheal disease and, in some cases, achieve full cost recovery. Development Credit—partial loan guarantees to support local capital investment in water and wastewater treatment infrastructure. These mechanisms can significantly leverage U.S. support and help develop and strengthen local capital markets. Water management plans—working on a country-by-country basis to facilitate the development of integrated water resources management plans to optimize the benefits of water among competing uses. In FY03 alone, USAID estimates that U.S. work on water resulted in more than 19 million people gaining improved access to water and sanitation. We are working to build support for these approaches through several international fora including the World Water Forum, the UN Commission on Sustainable Development, and the G8.

 Page 41       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

TRANSBOUNDARY WATERS

    Ensuring adequate supplies of water for human consumption, agriculture, energy and industry is, in many cases, a regional issue. More than 260 river basins are shared by two or more countries. These shared basins are the home to more than 40% of the world's population. Historically, water has rarely, if ever, been the sole cause for war. To the contrary, water has often been a source of cooperation. Even during times of war, countries have abided by existing water agreements and often continued payments. Discussions over water have often built goodwill and provided a basis for regional dialogue on other issues. That said, the CIA has identified several basins throughout the world where future water conditions and the emerging geopolitical environment may lead to increasing tensions including the Nile, Jordan, Tigris-Euphrates, and Indus.

    In 2001, the Secretary of State launched an action plan on transboundary water designed to improve conservation and management of water resources, mitigate tensions associated with shared waters, and use water, where appropriate, as a diplomatic tool to build trust and promote cooperation in those places where other tools might not be available. As a first step, the Department of State with the CIA hosted a workshop with government, military and non-government experts to identify key regions ''at risk''. We then worked, in close cooperation with our USAID colleagues, to build programmatic and diplomatic activities to support increased cooperation on shared waters in many of these regions.

    Transboundary water disputes are extremely complex, deeply rooted in history, and often take years to decades to resolve. These problems involve sovereignty, individual and collective rights, economic growth and power. These are also extremely technical issues that require an understanding of water flows (both above and below ground), water quality, needs, and uses. Establishing a framework for the management of shared water resources often means defining who gets what water under what conditions and what constitutes harm or damage should one country pollute waters that may impact another. Often, the first step is years of building trust and cooperation through joint capacity building and information sharing. Over time, the conversations can become more regularized and substantive—covering a range of water-related issues including health, energy, agriculture, and trade.

 Page 42       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    The Department is directly or indirectly supporting work in several basins throughout the world. My NEA colleague David Satterfield will discuss our work in the Jordan River Basin. I would like to give you a few examples of what we are doing in Africa—a region where several basins are coming under increasing pressure and are going to be critically important to regional growth and stability.

    The Okavango River originates in Angola and flows through Namibia into Botswana where it terminates in the Okavango delta—one of the richest areas of biodiversity in the world. Preserving the ecosystem is important, as is meeting the growing needs for water in all three countries. Considerable benefits could be derived from strengthened basin-wide planning and management. The United States has helped catalyze regional dialogue to build trust and establish a foundation for regional initiatives. In 2001, the United States hosted a study tour for government representatives of the Okavango River Basin Commission (OKACOM). The tour demonstrated U.S. water management practices, including our cooperative institutions with Mexico and Canada, and created a shared experience that brought the countries closer together. Due, in part, to these efforts, the countries have re-established regularized meetings of OKACOM and are now discussing several joint initiatives. Many challenges remain, but the countries are working together in a productive fashion and several donors are engaging to protect the human and environmental needs of the Okavango basin.

    Seven of the ten countries within the Nile Basin have been at war with themselves or their neighbors within the past ten years. Six out of the ten countries are among the ten poorest in the world. For many, water is a scarce resource key to economic growth and development. Egypt, the downstream riparian, is particularly dependent on the Nile and views access to Nile waters as a national security priority. (Egypt has a 1959 agreement with Sudan that established specific water rights. No such agreement exists among all 10 of the Nile riparian countries.) Cooperation is critical to optimizing the potential benefits of the river system among the competing needs. The riparians recognize this and have recently launched the Nile Basin Initiative to develop a framework for joint management of the basin's resources as well as bi-lateral, sub-regional and regional development projects.

 Page 43       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Consistent with restrictions on aid to countries in the basin, the United States has supported the regional dialogue components of the Nile Basin Initiative through the United Nations Development Program. The United States also hosted a study tour for the recently established secretariat of the Nile Basin Initiative to build its capacity. The work is conducted in partnership with the World Bank and several other donors active in the region. Several U.S. agencies including USAID and the Department of the Interior are involved. These efforts are beginning to show promise. Through the Nile Basin Initiative, the Nile countries have defined a shared vision for the development of the basin and have developed several joint projects. The countries have also been discussing a new legal framework. The United Nations Convention on the Law of Non-navigational Uses of International Watercourses has been helpful in this regard.

    Adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1997, the Convention provides a framework for managing shared waters, including general principles on equitable and reasonable utilization of international watercourses, an obligation not to cause significant harm and a general obligation to cooperate. While the Convention has not entered into force, it has served as a useful guide to countries negotiating international watercourse agreements. In the case of the Nile, the riparian countries used the Convention as a starting point to frame their discussions.

    These are just two examples of U.S. efforts to facilitate cooperation among riparian states on transboundary watercourses. The Department, in partnership with USAID, U.S. agencies, and other donors, is actively engaged in other basins throughout the world. We have also established the Global Water Alliance, a group of donors that meet informally to share experiences and further diplomatic and development cooperation on transboundary rivers. These efforts complement U.S. engagement with a broad array of international organizations, financial institutions and intergovernmental organizations that address water issues.

 Page 44       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Chairman HYDE. Ambassador Satterfield.

STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE DAVID M. SATTERFIELD, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY, BUREAU OF NEAR EASTERN AFFAIRS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE

    Mr. SATTERFIELD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Committee. It is a pleasure to talk to you this morning concerning water in the Middle East, and we certainly do agree with the views expressed by the Chair and Members of the Committee present regarding the importance of addressing this issue in as comprehensive and multilateral fashion as possible.

    I would like to take just a few minutes to briefly summarize the three topics addressed in my written statement: The water situation in the Jordan River Valley, water in the peace process, and the future of water in cooperation with the region.

    The climate in the Jordan River Basin, which is the area at focus in the peace process, is semiarid to arid. In addition to inadequate precipitation, seasonal and annual variations, along with the distribution of rainfall, it makes managing water resources extremely complicated and difficult. The cycle of multiple drought years followed by 1 or 2 years of good rainfall, so familiar in the American West, is unfortunately also the norm in the Jordan Basin. The net result of this is that the people in Israel, Jordan, the West Bank, and Gaza live in a constant state of water scarcity. With population growth and economic development in the future, water resources in the basin will come under even more and still greater increasing stress.

 Page 45       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    With respect to the peace process, water has been discussed in a variety of multilateral fora in the peace process as well as in bilateral discussions. The bilateral track is where negotiations on the broad spectrum of political issues, including those related to water, have taken place. Both the Israel-Jordan peace treaty and the Israel-Palestinian interim agreement of 1995 contain extensive water provisions in which, among many other things, joint water committees were established to implement the provisions of the agreements.

    The Israel-Jordanian Joint Water Commission and the Israel-Palestinian JWC have continued to operate without pause since agreements were signed, and the United States has worked closely with both institutions to assist the parties in agreement implementation.

    In addition to the bilateral track process, in early 1992 we established the multilateral track of the peace process consisting of five working groups to focus on technical issues. Despite the fact that those working groups have not formally met since late 1996, projects which were initiated by the Water Working Group have remained active and have continued to be productive. The projects focus mostly on the needs of Jordanians, Israelis, and Palestinians. The robustness, the success of this multilateral approach is clearly demonstrated by the fact that in the last 3 1/2 years of violence, during which time political negotiations have largely gone into abeyance, Israelis, Palestinians, and Jordanians continue to work together on the multilateral water projects. The regional parties themselves clearly believe these projects are too important to allow them to stop. The U.S. and other donors and supporters agree and have continued their engagement and support of the projects.

    There is one other class of regional water engagements I would like to mention. Over the years there have been numerous ideas for very large-scale regional water infrastructure projects whose objective would be to generate significant quantities of additional water to meet the needs of Palestinians, Jordanians, and Israelis. While such projects might in principle be able to alleviate water shortages in the region, there are several reasons why, as a practical matter, none of these projects has yet been realized.

 Page 46       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    First, they are extremely expensive. Second, these kinds of projects can take on a more political character as they raise by their very scope political concerns among parties that have not yet concluded final peace agreements. And, finally, there are many unresolved practical and technical questions surrounding these projects, including environmental concerns and questions of ultimate economic viability.

    I would like to say a few words about one project idea currently being discussed, the Red-Dead conveyance project. This project is designed in principle to move Red Sea water from the Gulf of Aqaba some 180 kilometers north to the Dead Sea. Cost estimates for the full project range from 4- to $5 billion. As currently envisioned, the project would generate 850 million cubic meters of desalinated water a year for use by Jordan, Israel, and Palestinians.

    Given the scale of the Dead-Red project and the many outstanding questions surrounding it, the Department of State has not yet taken a position on whether the project could or should be pursued. Rather, we have told the three parties involved, Israelis, Jordanians, Palestinians, that if they want to work together to explore this project in more detail, and if they can agree on how they will work together, we would be willing to work with them. The World Bank has taken a similar position with respect to the parties and the Bank's own participation in feasibility studies.

    In closing, Mr. Chairman, let me just reemphasize water cooperation among Jordanians, Palestinians, and Israelis is an active and ongoing pursuit that takes place today through a number of bilateral and multilateral mechanisms. The regional parties, through their work together, continue to demonstrate that the old adage about the next war in the Middle East being over water is not a given. Thank you.

 Page 47       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    [The prepared statement of Mr. Satterfield follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE DAVID M. SATTERFIELD, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY, BUREAU OF NEAR EASTERN AFFAIRS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE

    Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Water is a topic of great importance in the Middle East, and the United States has long recognized the key role water plays in relations between Middle East neighbors and in economic development of their societies. Since the October 1991 Madrid conference, water has been an integral part of the peace process, and the United States has worked continuously with parties in the region and members of the international donor community on a wide range of water issues. Over the years, the work the regional parties have done together on water, both among themselves and with the support and participation of the international community, continues to demonstrate that the old adage about the next war in the Middle East being over water is not a given. Rather, our experience in the Middle East clearly illustrates that water can be a positive force for cooperation and does not have to be a negative force resulting in conflict.

    Before expanding on these thoughts, I would like to briefly discuss the general water situation in the region. Then I will spend a few minutes describing in more detail how water fits into the peace process, including the ongoing cooperation in the multilateral track of the process. And finally, I would like to comment on the future of water and cooperation in the region.

WATER IN THE JORDAN RIVER BASIN

 Page 48       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

As established at the Madrid conference, the core parties to the peace process are Israel, Jordan, the Palestinian Authority, Syria, and Lebanon. From a water resources perspective, then, the focus is on the Jordan River Basin. In the Middle East generally, and the Jordan basin specifically, the climate is semi-arid to arid, with all the limitations on water availability such a climate implies. In many respects, the water resources situations in the Jordan basin and the western United States are similar. In addition to not receiving adequate quantities of precipitation generally, the temporal and spatial variability of rainfall in both the Jordan basin and western United States make managing water resources quite complicated and difficult. In the Jordan basin, it rains only in the winter, with the rainy season spanning from approximately November through March. No rain falls at all during the summer months when demand for water is the highest. In addition to dramatic seasonal variations, annual variations in total rainfall are equally dramatic. The cycle of several years of drought followed by one or two years of good rainfall that is so common in the western United States is also the norm in the Jordan basin. The Jordan basin is just coming off two relatively wet winters (2002–2003 and 2003–2004). However, the previous three winters—1999–2000, 2000–2001, and 2001–2002—were very dry, and all governments instituted cuts in water allocations, especially to agriculture, in response to the drought conditions. In addition to temporal variability, the spatial variability in rainfall further complicates water management. Rainfall is highest in the northern Jordan basin, and decreases steadily as you go south. However, most water consumers live in central and southern parts of the basin. Thus, water must be moved from where it falls to where it is consumed.

As suggested above, the people in Israel, Jordan, and the West Bank and Gaza live in a constant state of water scarcity. A widely used rule of thumb is that a population is considered to be in a state of ''water stress'' if the average annual per capita availability of water is below 1,000 cubic meters. Israeli, Jordanian, and Palestinian average annual per capita availabilities are all significantly below that level. Israel, which has the most advanced water infrastructure and water management capabilities in the region, has an average annual availability of only some 250–300 cubic meters per capita. Jordan, at some 170–200 cubic meters per capita, and the Palestinians in West Bank and Gaza, at some 70–90 cubic meters per capita, are under even greater water stress. By comparison, average annual water availability in the United States is on the order of 7,000 cubic meters per capita.

 Page 49       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

Most of the naturally occurring water resources available to Israelis, Palestinians, and Jordanians are already being utilized. With population growth and further economic development, in the future those water resources will come under increasing stress. Since the mid-1990's, the United States, through its bilateral foreign aid programs, has provided substantial assistance to the Jordanians and Palestinians in the water sector. Through our support for major water infrastructure projects and projects designed to enhance the water authorities' capabilities for improved water management, we have helped the parties make better use of their water resources. My USAID colleague Jim Kunder will provide more details on those programs.

WATER IN THE MIDDLE EAST PEACE PROCESS

Water has been discussed in a variety of fora in the peace process. In the bilateral track, where Israel has negotiated bilaterally with its Arab neighbors, negotiations on the broad spectrum of ''political'' issues, including those related to water, have taken place. The various agreements that have been concluded to date have arisen out of these negotiations. The October 1994 Israel-Jordan Treaty of Peace (Article 6 and Annex II) contains an extensive discussion of water issues of common interest to both countries. Through the work of the standing Israel-Jordan Joint Water Committee that was established under the treaty, the two countries have been implementing the treaty's various water provisions over the last ten years. Similarly, the Israelis and Palestinians have been working together through an Israeli-Palestinian Joint Water Committee on water issues that were addressed in Article 40 of their September 1995 Interim Agreement. The United States has assisted the parties in implementation of their agreements, when requested. In the case of the Israeli-Palestinian interim agreement, the agreement established a formal U.S.-Palestinian-Israeli Trilateral Water Working Group to assist with implementation of the agreement's water provisions. The trilateral group has met regularly over the last 9 years. In the case of the Israel-Jordan treaty, though no formal trilateral mechanism was established, we have regular discussions with Israeli and Jordanian water officials concerning implementation of the treaty's water provisions. Any future Israeli-Syrian and Israeli-Lebanese treaties, as well as any Israeli-Palestinian permanent status agreement, also will contain substantial water provisions.

 Page 50       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

In addition to the bilateral track of the process, in early 1992, the United States and Russia, as co-sponsors of the peace process, established what is known as the multilateral track of the peace process. As constituted at that time, the multilateral track consisted of five working groups focusing on: water resources; the environment; refugees; regional economic development; and arms control and regional security. The multilateral track was designed to: 1) support the bilateral track of the peace process; 2) bring regional parties together to explore practical, technical solutions to key regional problems; and 3) build confidence among the parties to create a dynamic that reinforces cooperation and peace. Unlike the bilateral negotiations that involve only Israel and its four immediate neighbors, in the multilateral negotiations, we broadened participation to include a total of fifteen regional delegations and 34 non-regional delegations. The Multilateral Working Group on Water Resources' agenda included the following four topics under which activities were conducted: 1) enhancing water data availability; 2) principles of water management, including conservation; 3) enhancing water supply; and 4) principles of regional cooperation. In the early days of the working group, our initial efforts were modest, as it took time for the regional participants to adjust to and become comfortable with the idea of cooperating together. Over time, the group developed larger projects, several of which have continued to this day.

Before briefly describing the current projects, let me say a few words about the multilateral process itself. Through 1996, each of the multilateral working groups met regularly in plenary session. Individual project activities took place on a regular and frequent basis between plenary meetings. While the project work was kept focused on technical issues, holding the plenary meetings was more closely tied to the political climate in the region. In late 1996, the political situation took a downturn, the bilateral negotiations slowed, and we had to stop holding plenary sessions of the working groups. Unfortunately, we have not been able hold any plenary sessions since that time. Despite the lack of any plenary meetings of the Working Group on Water Resources since 1996, projects initiated by the working group have remained active and productive. Projects have continued first and foremost because the regional participants—the projects focus mostly on the needs of the Jordanians, Israelis, and Palestinians—have decided the projects are too important to allow them to stop. And the United States and other donors have agreed it is important for the projects to continue and so have continued to support the projects.

 Page 51       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    The three main water projects currently active are: 1) the Regional Water Data Banks project; 2) a Public Awareness project; and 3) the Middle East Desalination Research Center.

  1) In the Regional Water Data Banks project, Israeli, Jordanian, and Palestinian water officials—supported by the United States, the European Commission, France, and the Netherlands—work together to increase their capabilities to gather, store, and analyze a wide range of water data. The issue of sharing water data is considered political, and thus, the project does not directly address sharing data. Rather, the project focuses on technical aspects of water data, with the objective of giving the regional parties the technical tools they need to share data that are meaningful, whenever the political decision to share data is made. In the early days of this project, as with most other working group projects, most ideas for project activities came from donors. Over time, the regional parties have taken on more responsibility for guiding the project. Now, the Israelis, Jordanians, and Palestinians meet among themselves regularly to discuss and agree on the direction for the project and new activities they want to propose to the donors.

  2) At the beginning of the Public Awareness project, the Palestinian, Jordanian, and Israeli participants agreed the project should focus on increasing the awareness of water issues among children in the region, since that segment of the populations will be the decision makers of tomorrow. With U.S. support, the parties have produced: a) a public awareness video targeting children emphasizing the scarce nature of water in the Middle East and the need to use water wisely; and b) more recently, a student resource book on water (in Arabic, Hebrew, and English versions), which the parties have introduced on a pilot basis into a small number of their schools. The latest project activity just now starting keeps the focus on schools and will design and install rain harvesting systems in select schools. Teachers and students will use these systems for instructional purposes, and, in addition, the systems will provide additional water for the schools' use.

 Page 52       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

  3) The Middle East Desalination Research Center, which has its headquarters in Muscat, Oman, has been operating since 1997. The United States, Oman, Israel, Japan, Korea, and the European Commission have provided support to the Center. The Working Group established the Center in recognition of the fact that although most of the world's desalinated water production is in the Middle East, most of the expertise and technological capacity resides elsewhere. The Working Group agreed that the Middle East will need to make greater use of desalination in the future but that the cost of desalination will have to come down for its use to become more widespread. All the Center's activities—the training programs, the outreach and information sharing programs, and the cooperative research program—are designed to increase desalination expertise in the Middle East and to help address the issue of cost reduction.

    In addition to projects mentioned above, I should mention two other programs where the United States also has supported regional water-related activities. Under the Multilateral Working Group on the Environment, we have supported a number of activities on the important issue of wastewater treatment and reuse. Also, USAID's Middle East Regional Cooperation (MERC) Program, which is not part of the peace process per se but which funds cooperative research projects between Israeli and Arab scientists, has supported a variety of water projects.

    To sum up the multilaterals, the model for cooperation incorporated in the multilateral peace process is based on the premise that it is possible to create synergies through awareness of common problems, such as water. By focusing on problems related to regional water scarcity, the participants in the process have been able to transcend the realm of competing interests and create a situation in which all parties share benefits. Because the multilateral water working group has kept its work focused on technical issues (while leaving the ''political'' water issues to the bilateral track), the regional projects developed by the Working Group on Water Resources have been able to withstand the vagaries of the political process. The robustness and success of this approach is most clearly demonstrated by the fact that during the last three and a half years of violence and instability in the region due to the Intifada, during which time political negotiations have largely been in abeyance, Israeli, Palestinian, and Jordanian water officials and experts continue to work together on a range of regional water projects.

 Page 53       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

THE FUTURE OF WATER AND COOPERATION

To date, the multilateral water projects have focused on capacity building and technical assistance efforts, as described above. One reason is that the financial resources donors have available for regional activities are generally limited. For the United States, we have been able to provide on the order of $1–2 million per year for the regional water projects we support. However, despite these relatively modest efforts, the importance of the cooperative efforts on water the Israelis, Palestinians, and Jordanians have undertaken with our support (and that of other donors) should not be under estimated. The parties have told us repeatedly that the projects provide them with important practical benefits, and they have urged us to continue our support. We have assured the parties that as long as they continue to want to work together, we will continue to work with them.

As good and productive as the multilateral water projects have been, since the projects are technical in nature, we cannot expect them to resolve the broader political aspects of water. Thus, only when the Palestinians and Israelis get back to the bilateral negotiating table will it be possible for them to come to agreement on their outstanding political water issues such as water allocations. However, even though they do not directly address the bilateral water issues, the multilateral water projects do provide important technical assistance that will be helpful to the parties whenever they do get back to the negotiating table. Additionally, in the interim, the regional water projects help to maintain open channels of communications between the parties, which should also help facilitate the restart of the bilateral water negotiations.

 Page 54       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

There is another class of regional water projects I would like to mention. Over the years there have been numerous ideas for large scale regional water infrastructure projects whose objectives would be to generate significant quantities of additional water—on the order of 800 million to 1 billion cubic meters per year—to meet the water needs of the Palestinians, Jordanians, and Israelis. These ideas have included: 1) large scale desalination facilities on the Mediterranean coast; 2) large scale importation of water from Turkey via pipeline or canal; and 3) the Red-Dead conveyance project. While such projects might in principle be able to help alleviate water shortages in the region, there are a number of reasons why none of these projects have progressed very far. First, these projects would be very expensive, costing anywhere between $2 to 5 billion or so. Second, by their very nature, these kinds of projects take on a more ''political'' character, as they can raise political concerns among parties that have not yet concluded peace agreements. And third, there are many outstanding issues related to some of these projects, including environmental concerns and questions of economic viability.

Let me say a few words about the Red-Dead conveyance project, since it is an idea currently being discussed. The project is designed to move Red Sea water from the Gulf of Aqaba through a pipeline/canal conveyance approximately 180 kilometers to the Dead Sea. Since the Dead Sea is some 410 meters below sea level and the Gulf of Aqaba is at sea level, water dropping through that 410 meters of elevation can be used to generate hydropower, and the power can be used to desalinate a portion of the Red Sea water. The project as currently envisioned would generate 850 million cubic meters of desalinated water a year for use by Jordan, Israel, and the Palestinian Authority. In addition, a portion of the Red Sea water would flow directly into the Dead Sea, so that the level of the Dead Sea, which has been dropping almost 1 meter per year for the last thirty years or so, could be controlled. Proponents of the project argue that this project would reverse the negative environmental impacts produced by the continual lowering of the level of the Dead Sea.

 Page 55       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    The scale of the Red-Dead project is large, to say the least. If the envisioned desalination capacity were realized, the resulting desalination facility would be 5–6 times larger than the world's largest desalination facility currently in operation. And there are many crucial questions about the project that remain unanswered, such as: 1) will the introduction of Red Sea water into the Dead Sea have a major negative impact on the chemistry of the Dead Sea water?; 2) while introducing Red Sea water into the Dead Sea to control the level of the Dead Sea may alleviate some environment problems, will such introduction cause other negative environmental impacts?; 3) what will the environmental effects at the head of the Gulf of Aqaba be, where the Red Sea water will be siphoned into the project?; and 4) will the cost of the desalinated water delivered to customers in Amman or other population centers be too expensive for consumers?

    Given the scale of the Red-Dead project and the outstanding issues surrounding it, the State Department has not taken a position on whether the project could or should be pursued. Rather, in our discussions with the Jordanians, Israelis, and Palestinians, we have told them that if they want to work together to explore this project idea in more detail, and if they can agree on how they will work together, we would be willing to work with them, if they so desire. Since last year, the parties have been discussing a terms of reference for a project feasibility study. However, up until now, they have not come to final agreement on a T.O.R., largely because of some Israeli and Palestinian political concerns.

    In closing, I hope my discussion has demonstrated that water cooperation among the Jordanians, Palestinians, and Israelis is an active and ongoing pursuit, which takes place through a number of mechanisms. The governments in the region have recognized that they must continue to cooperate in order to be able to provide water for their people, regardless of the political situation in the region. And the United States, as it has done for so many years, will continue to work with the parties to facilitate their cooperation, and we will continue to encourage the international donor community to do so as well.

 Page 56       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Mr. SMITH OF MICHIGAN [presiding]. Thank you. Mr. Kunder.

STATEMENT OF JAMES KUNDER, DEPUTY ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR, BUREAU FOR ASIA AND THE NEAR EAST, U.S. AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

    Mr. KUNDER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will summarize my written statement very briefly.

    The people of the Middle East, as the Committee has pointed out, live in one of the most watered deprived regions of the world. Increasing water shortages and the climbing cost of supply are very serious constraints to economic growth in the region. This situation calls for concerted action by government, water users and donors working in partnership, and in that context we much appreciate the opportunity to testify here today.

    Responding to these water challenges is a top priority for USAID assistance to the region. Our programs in Jordan, West Bank and Gaza, Egypt and Lebanon focus on increasing access to water and wastewater services, improving the quality and expanding the reuse of wastewater, developing alternative sources of water through desalination, reforming water policy and strengthening water institutions. In this regard, we are expending between fiscal year 2003 and 2005 in excess of the $970 million that was pledged in the President's Water for the Poor Initiative in Johannesburg in 2002.

    Despite all the conservation measures and without downplaying the importance of those measures, in the Middle East demand will eventually outstrip supply and new sources of water will be needed. Additional supplies can be obtained through the treatment and reuse of domestic and industrial wastewater and through desalination of brackish water and seawater. USAID is supporting both of those developments in the Middle East.

 Page 57       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    In closing, many countries in the Middle East face chronic water shortages that pose serious constraints to economic development. Responding to these challenges will require new approaches that emphasize integrated water conservation and management, more efficient use of water, collaborative problem solving of water disputes and the development of alternative sources of water that I mentioned earlier.

    Just as the U.S. Government and other nations once led a green revolution to increase water production around the world, these new approaches in their totality, implying conservation, production and management, are so significant that full implementation of these initiatives would amount to a veritable blue revolution. The Administration is beginning to put in place the elements of that blue revolution with our current programs in the Middle East.

    Specifically, in the Middle East regional cooperation will become increasingly important. USAID, working in partnership with the State Department, will continue to work with our partners to help improve management and increase access to water supply and wastewater services. The challenges are great and the cost of inaction is unacceptable.

    Thank you.

    [The prepared statement of Mr. Kunder follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF JAMES KUNDER, DEPUTY ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR, BUREAU FOR ASIA AND THE NEAR EAST, U.S. AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

 Page 58       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

SUMMARY

Chairman Hyde, Members of the Committee, I am pleased to be here today, with my State Department colleagues, to testify on the subject of water scarcity in the Middle East. The governments of the Jordan River Basin, Jordan, Israel, Lebanon, Syria, and the West Bank and Gaza, face a looming water crisis. In this arid region, supplies of renewable water are limited while demand is rapidly rising, largely due to population growth, agricultural use, and increasing industrialization and urbanization. As a result, per capita water availability continues to fall. Daily per capita water consumption is quite low throughout the region, and the cost of supplying water continues to increase. The extreme water scarcity and increasing costs of supply are very serious constraints to economic growth across the region. In addition, with increasing scarcity, pressures to overexploit groundwater resources will grow, and competition over water among different sectors and among countries may intensify.

The challenges facing the water sector in the Middle East are daunting. Continuing past practices may plunge the region deeper into crisis, so the cost of inaction is unacceptable. At the global level, the Bush Administration announced an initiative to improve sustainable management of water resources at the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg in 2002. This initiative will accelerate and expand international efforts to achieve the goals of the UN Millennium Declaration including halving, by 2015, the proportion of people unable to reach or afford safe drinking water. Through the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), the United States will invest $970 million over three years (2003–2005) for enhancing access to clean water and sanitation services, improving watershed management, and increasing the productivity of water. For FY 04, estimated obligations in the Middle East (over $180 million) account for more than half of USAID's total funding for drinking water supply projects and related activities.

 Page 59       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Although USAID's investments in the water sector are strategic and substantial, to raise region-wide coverage to 90 per cent for water supply and 80% for sewerage and sanitation, the World Bank estimates that water investment requirements are on the order of $5 billion annually. Funds from public sector donors alone are expected to meet less than 5% of the increased financing requirements. Access to clean drinking water and sanitation for much of the world, including the countries of the Middle East, will only become a reality through substantial municipal and private sector investment.

    The critical water situation throughout the Jordan River Basin calls for concerted action by governments, water users, donors and the private sector working in partnership. New approaches are needed that emphasize integrated water management, collaborative problem-solving at all levels, conservation of water quality and quantity, more efficient use of water, and development of alternative sources of water. In response, USAID is committed to increasing the quality and quantity of water in the West Bank and Gaza, Jordan, Egypt, and Lebanon. At present, our efforts focus on increasing the supply of water, improving treatment and reuse of wastewater, and encouraging effective management of water systems.

    USAID also believes that regional solutions play an important role in resolving the serious water shortages in the Middle East. Although regional cooperation has proven challenging, I agree with Deputy Assistant Secretary Satterfield that water can provide both an opportunity for cooperation as well as a source of tension. The Bush Administration endorses and supports regional approaches that bring together water resource managers and experts from neighboring countries, build partnerships and networks that promote trust, confidence, and understanding of one another's problems, and provide opportunities for countries to work together to solve water-related problems.

 Page 60       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

PRIORITY WATER RESOURCE ISSUES:

    Before providing a regional perspective on USAID's activities in the water sector, I would like to briefly review the general water situation in the region.

    Three priority issues dominate water resources management challenges in the Middle East: (1) water shortages; (2) degradation of water quality; and (3) public and private sector resource management performance.

WATER SHORTAGES

    Problems of water scarcity and pollution can be found throughout the world, but are particularly acute for the people of the Jordan River Basin (Jordan, Israel, Syria, Lebanon, and the West Bank and Gaza). According to statistics published by the World Bank, a country or region will experience water scarcity when renewable water supplies fall below a threshold of 1,000 cubic meters per person per year. Water consumption in the Jordan Valley currently falls below the absolute scarcity level of 500 cubic meters of water per person/year. At these levels, chronic water shortages are a fact of life. Within the Basin, in parts of Jordan, Israel, and Gaza, more water is being withdrawn from their rivers and aquifers than is being replenished.

    When water supplies become scarce, pressure to exploit groundwater and other resources unsustainably will grow, and competition can become intense. In recent years, much of the water in the Jordan River basin has been used for agriculture, with approximately 30% allocated to municipal and industrial uses. However, as populations and urban areas grow, the demand for water resources is likely to increase, requiring shifts away from agriculture—a socially and politically sensitive issue. Addressing water use in agriculture will be a crucial area for future water use management. Encouraging this shift towards higher value uses will require a number of actions including reduction of subsidies; increased technical efficiency of irrigation; development of strategies to regulate, monitor, and control groundwater extraction; and potential reallocation of water from low-value irrigation by trading water rights.

 Page 61       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    The governments of the Jordan River Basin are faced with the reality that much of the available water is of a transboundary nature. Thus regional cooperation, though difficult, is vital. Where water shortages coincide with other sources of tension, the threats to regional security are most worrisome.

DEGRADATION OF WATER QUALITY

    Water contamination by fertilizers and pesticides; dumping of municipal and industrial wastewater into canals, rivers, and lakes; and uncontrolled solid waste dumping along river banks—all of these actions further reduce the availability of freshwater water suitable for domestic and agriculture use and increase the cost of treatment and reuse of water. In addition, water contamination due to inadequately treated wastewater affects public health, particularly of children, who are the primary victims of waterborne disease. This situation has resulted from a number of factors, including lack of access to capital, inadequate regulatory and enforcement capability, and general lack of public awareness and concern.

PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SECTOR RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE

    Lack of effective mechanisms to plan and manage water resources in a collaborative and integrated fashion and to resolve disputes over water resources is a key challenge to improving water resources management. Such mechanisms are critical to promoting institutional coordination and overcoming the bureaucratic and political realities that impede integrated water resources management in developing countries. Overlapping mandates and jurisdictions frequently contribute to fragmentary, unfocused water management programs, counterproductive competition and duplication of efforts. In addition, competing and powerful vested interests frequently stand to lose, and therefore often oppose changes in water resource management arrangements. This leads to government gridlock and inaction or to disputes within and/or among Ministries, between governments and communities, between governments and particular sectors using water, or even between governments across national borders.

 Page 62       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

USAID RESPONSE

    As Israelis, Palestinians, and Jordanians face increasing water scarcity and shortages, pressure to overexploit groundwater and other water resources will grow, intensifying competition for scarce resources at local and national levels.

    Addressing the water crisis in the Middle East will require concerted, coordinated action along a number of fronts. New approaches are needed that emphasize integrated water resources management, collaborative problem solving at all levels, more efficient use of water, development of alternative sources of water, and regional cooperation. Changes in the way water is valued, managed, and conserved are key. Governments need to improve water planning and management, support policy reforms to encourage decentralization and public-private partnerships, and develop appropriate water pricing and cost recovery systems to ensure more sustainable delivery of water and sanitation services. The role of the private sector in this process is vital.

    What is the Bush Administration doing to respond to these challenges? The answer is a great deal. Given the central role of water in the Middle East, USAID has made water a top priority. In FY 2004, excluding Iraq, USAID expects to obligate over $180 million for water supply and sanitation programs in the Middle East. These programs in Jordan, West Bank and Gaza, Egypt, and Lebanon focus on increasing access to water and wastewater service, improving the quality and expanding the reuse of wastewater, developing alternative sources of water through desalination, reforming water policy and strengthening water institutions.

 Page 63       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

Jordan

    Jordan is one of the ten most water-deprived countries in the world. Available per capita freshwater lags far behind most other countries. Daily water consumption is also quite low, and the cost of supplying water continues to rise. This extreme scarcity and the increasing cost of supply of water are very serious constraints to Jordan's economic development. Historically, USAID has emphasized water as a central concern because failure to effectively manage scarce water resources would undermine all other aspects of development in Jordan. Already, existing aquifers are being depleted at a rapid rate and water rationing is a fact of life for most Jordanians.

    Annual water demand in Jordan is projected to increase to 1.3 billion cubic meters by 2005, far above the current 750 million cubic meters now available on a sustainable basis. Per capita freshwater potential in Jordan also lags far behind that available in most other countries: for Jordan, it is on the order of a meager 170 cubic meters annually, a third of that available in Israel and Syria, a sixth of that available in Egypt, and less than a fortieth of that available in the United States. Despite this grim situation, more than half the water entering the Amman water system is unaccounted for, with half of this loss attributed to administrative losses (e.g., inadequate billing and collections) and the other half due to leakages. Improving the use of existing water supplies will help stretch scarce water resources even further. This includes reducing losses due to physical leaks, contamination and poor irrigation practices.

    Jordan has developed a 14-year, $5 billion plan to guide water investments in the coming years. The plan hinges on two main approaches to narrowing the gap between water supply and water demand. First, it entails improved water supply management. Second, it involves increased water use efficiency. Both approaches aim at ensuring that scarce water supplies are stretched further. Both approaches also figure prominently in USAID's own water sector program. In addition, through its involvement in improving wastewater management, USAID is helping abate serious environmental degradation while augmenting water supplies from a source that would otherwise be wasted.

 Page 64       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Through 1998, USAID's activities to strengthen water institutions focused on improving data collection and analysis, and installing new information management systems for the Ministry of Water and Irrigation (MWI), the Water Authority of Jordan (WAJ) and the Jordan Valley Authority (JVA) and developing key water policies. During 1999, USAID designed and began a new water policy implementation program focused on reducing groundwater depletion and optimizing the reuse of treated wastewater. USAID also initiated a new program to encourage private sector participation in the water sector and an activity to strengthen the government's capability to develop, contract and manage major infrastructure projects. With USAID assistance, the MWI has a major Build-Own-Transfer (BOT) wastewater project and supports the operation of the first decentralized, public water company for Jordan—the Aqaba Water Company.

    To improve the efficiency of water use in the agriculture sector, USAID is providing a variety of technical assistance focused on restructuring irrigation tariffs, increasing cost recovery, and stimulating internal competitiveness for JVA. In coordination with other donors, USAID is also engaged in policy dialogue with the Government of Jordan (GOJ) on the need for significant structural reforms in the irrigated agriculture sector.

    Improving the quality of wastewater is also a USAID priority. Four major projects are currently in the design or construction phase. Construction of a new wastewater treatment plant near Petra is now complete. The plant provides modern wastewater facilities for four communities and helps to reduce environmental degradation around the Petra National Park, a World Heritage Site. Construction is underway on wastewater conveyance and treatment facilities for expansion of the wastewater facility in Aqaba. USAID is also supporting the construction of a new wastewater treatment plant to replace the currently overloaded plant at As-Samra. When complete in 2006, this private sector operated, BOT plant will serve over 2 million residents of Greater Amman and Zarka. Both these projects will help Jordan meet its commitments under the 1994 Peace Treaty with Israel to reduce pollution in the Gulf of Aqaba and the Jordan River. Lastly, contracting is underway on a construction contract for a wastewater treatment plant for Mafraq in northern Jordan.

 Page 65       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

West Bank/Gaza

    The West Bank and Gaza suffer from a chronic water shortage. Hundreds of rural villages across the West Bank have no piped water, and hundreds more have it only in the winter. Residents typically use less than 30 liters per capita per day because of the high costs of water delivered by truck. Fewer and fewer families can afford basic water supplies. The continuing shortages constrain economic growth and damage the environment and health of Palestinians.

    Water quality is also poor and much of the water being used is untreated. About two-thirds of drinking water in rural households is contaminated with bacteria. Palestinian ground water supplies have increasingly become polluted as a result of agricultural chemicals, inadequate sewage treatment and over-pumping of wells. Untreated sewage is dumped in valleys and the Mediterranean Sea, decreasing the quality of the already inadequate groundwater supply and polluting the soil, sea, and coastline.

    In response, USAID is implementing a multi-year program that combines the rapid development of new water sources, improved systems for water distribution and management, and wastewater treatment. Despite the challenges posed by the Intifada (including shortages of critical building materials, limited access to the work site, and physical danger to workers), well drilling, pipeline construction, and delivery of essential water infrastructure continues with impressive results.

    In Hebron, the interests of Palestinians and Israelis have merged and led to the design of the Hebron Wastewater Treatment Plant. This $50 million USAID project will address Israel's concerns to protect the shared aquifer and eliminate stream pollutants in the northern Negev. For the Palestinians, the plant will protect public health, clean-up the environment, and develop agricultural uses for water which is now wasted. This is a clear example of how water projects can serve as a mechanism for cooperation in the Middle East.

 Page 66       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    In the West Bank, the heightened security situation and economic crisis have decreased access to water for the people in rural villages. Through the $50 million West Bank Water Supply program, USAID has dramatically increased the amount of water available to Palestinians in the West Bank. In a region chronically short of this vital resource, USAID continues to address this problem by drilling new wells; constructing reservoirs and transmission systems to take water from wells to towns and cities; and building distribution systems to deliver water to homes. Through USAID's $9 million Village Water and Sanitation program, construction of new water systems for under-served villages west of Hebron will begin later this year, and construction near Nablus will begin in 2004. In the meantime, USAID is providing water via tanker trucks to severely affected areas.

    Through the Mission's $28 million Coastal Aquifer Management Program, USAID is undertaking a number of activities to improve the management of Gaza's water system. A computerized model of the coastal aquifer highlights the dangers of over-pumping and points the way to sustainable water management.

SUPPLY AUGMENTATION

    Despite all conservation measures, in the Middle East demand will eventually outstrip supply and new sources of water will be needed. Additional supplies can be obtained through the treatment of reuse of domestic and industrial wastewater, and through desalination of brackish water and seawater. USAID is supporting development of both options in the Middle East.

 Page 67       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    In the Middle East, Israel has been a pioneer in the recycling of wastewater, demonstrating that wastewater can be used effectively and safely, and reducing the need for addition of organic matter and fertilizers to irrigation waters. The Israeli experience has shown that recycled wastewater is one of the least expensive and most attractive alternative sources of water for agriculture. Elsewhere in the Middle East, due to concerns over the availability of high quality groundwater, public health, and agricultural export markets, the unregulated use of treated wastewater has been discouraged. However, the growing population, industrialization, and tourism are all increasing demand for freshwater resources. At the same time, major efforts to rehabilitate and construct wastewater treatment facilities, including those funded by USAID and other donors, are resulting in increased supplies of high quality effluent, which is a viable source for meeting agricultural and other non-potable water demands. In addition, USAID is working with the Government of Jordan, other local partners, and water users to introduce direct water reuse in industry, agriculture, and urban landscaping in Jordan.

    Desalination, though relatively costly, is another technical option currently under development in the region for the production of freshwater. Construction of a seawater desalination plant on the coast of Gaza is currently suspended due to security concerns. We hope this project can go forward once the security situation is stabilized. Brackish water desalination may offer a more economically attractive option than seawater desalination to increase water supply in Jordan and other countries in the region. To augment water supply for Amman, USAID is supporting construction of a large brackish water desalination plant at Zara Ma'in in the Jordan Valley.

    In areas of serious water shortage, where the demand for potable water significantly exceeds available supply, seawater desalination may offer a viable option for meeting the rapidly growing demands and mitigating the environmental problems associated with over-extraction of the groundwater aquifers. As international experience with desalination plants has expanded in recent years, the construction and operating costs have fallen, making the plants increasingly attractive.

 Page 68       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

CONCLUSION

    In closing, many countries of the Middle East face chronic shortages of water that pose serious constraints to their economic development. Responding to these challenges will require new approaches that emphasize integrated water conservation and management, more efficient use of water, collaborative problem solving of water disputes, and development of alternative sources of water, including desalination and wastewater reuse. Just as USAID and other development agencies once led a ''green revolution'' to increase food production around the world, the new approaches required in water production, conservation, and management are so significant that full implementation of these initiatives would amount to a veritable ''blue revolution.'' The Bush Administration is beginning to put in place the elements of that ''blue revolution'' with our current programs in the Middle East. Specifically in the Middle East, regional cooperation will become increasingly important. USAID, working in partnership with the State Department, will continue to work with our partners to help improve management and increase access to water supply and wastewater services. The challenges are great but the cost of inaction is unacceptable.

    Mr. SMITH OF MICHIGAN. Thank you. I recently returned from Libya, where Colonel Ghadafi took pride in his human made river and a 12-foot aqueduct going hundreds of miles. Looking into the pros and cons, there is a concern that he is robbing Peter to pay Paul, if you will. It is reducing some other supplies that eventually might cause problems, and I am wondering if these kind of predicaments as we look at developing new supplies might also be a problem.

    And Mr. Turner, in particular, regarding the Nile Basin Initiative that seems to be successful so far, and its cooperation, are there any lessons that might be applicable to what we are talking about for the Middle East?

 Page 69       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Mr. TURNER. Mr. Chairman, the challenges of water basins, each one is unique and different. But I think there are some wonderful lessons from the Nile Basin when we consider the poverty of that area, the violence and war that has swept over it. The lessons I think are several, that you can start to build trust and cooperation by starting, first of all, to let the shared riparians get good information, start training their professionals at the technical level, showing them best models like we have here in the United States.

    One of the things we have learned from the Nile Basin is that it is good to go ahead and proceed with one track on individual projects which can gain confidence in the members and a second track trying to put together a legal framework. Our involvement there has been helping with environmental assessment, helping train professionals with exchanges, and work with UNDP on those type of accesses.

    So I think that the Nile Basin is a real success story, that those people that have been at war together, water is bringing them together on a basis of—to cooperate, because it is really the economic lifeblood of that region, are the waters of the Nile.

    Mr. SMITH OF MICHIGAN. To what extent was access to water in the Sea of Galilee a contributing factor to maybe the breakdown in negotiations between Israel and Syria here 8 years ago? Ambassador Satterfield or Mr. Turner.

    Mr. SATTERFIELD. Mr. Chairman, there were many factors that produced the nonconclusive outcomes to those negotiations. Quite frankly I think the issue of water in the Sea of Galilee itself and its alternate usage and control by Israel was not at the end of the day one of the more significant factors. It was an issue of sovereignty and territorial boundaries upon which the negotiations ultimately foundered.

 Page 70       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Mr. SMITH OF MICHIGAN. Regarding USAID attempts to address the water problems, how far we should go? Maybe Ambassador Satterfield. Also comment on USAID's funding and efforts in terms of ultimate success, whoever wants to comment.

    Mr. SATTERFIELD. Mr. Chairman, I would defer to my colleague from AID, please.

    Mr. KUNDER. Of the 970 million that we are projecting to spend worldwide for water between 2003 and 2005, more than half of that will be spent in the Middle East. So a significant portion of the available resources globally are going into this water starved region.

    But to go back to some of the comments Mr. Blumenauer was making earlier, World Bank estimates that approximately $5 billion are required annually in the Middle East region alone to meet the global targets for access to save drinking water. So are there enough resources going in? Well, there are significant resources going in, but we are not on track to meet those goals, given that kind of World Bank estimate.

    So naturally what we are focusing on is not expecting any of the mega bucks that for something like the Red-Dead Sea project in the short term, we are focusing on the desalinization plans. We are focusing on the conservation efforts. We are focusing on getting the pricing and the policies right. We are looking at whether we can divert water away from some of the excessive uses in agriculture. So we are looking for ways to align the resources available with the scale of the problem. But that is what the numbers tell us today, Mr. Chairman.

 Page 71       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Mr. SMITH OF MICHIGAN. And maybe this question is for the next panel, but research in desalinization. Bring us up to date on it. We know it is possible. But it is all still very costly. What is the potential for research?

    Mr. SATTERFIELD. There is an enormous potential for desalination in the Middle East. Israel is opening a new major desalination facility very shortly. There have been numerous proposals for shared Israeli/Jordanian desalination centers. They were in fact contemplated in the treaty between Israel and Jordan. There are several issues that involve desalination. One is of course cost and that is a very significant factor for the parties in the region today.

    The second view is appropriate disposal, particularly for inland desalination facilities of the brine that is produced. There is a major groundwater pollution problem created by brine reserves. That is an issue that has to be dealt with, and when it is dealt with there will be a cost to that attached as well.

    Finally come the ever present political and security issues, which would involve both construction of and alternate usage of waters from desalination facilities, particularly those which would involve Palestinian/Israeli shared usage.

    Mr. SMITH OF MICHIGAN. Gentlemen, thank you. Mr. Ackerman.

    Mr. ACKERMAN. Thank you very much. In his prepared testimony, Mr. Kunder says that despite all conservation measures in the Middle East, demand will eventually outstrip supply and new sources of water will be needed. Is that universally agreed to? Care to comment, either of the other two? Mr. Turner?

 Page 72       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Mr. TURNER. I agree. I think that that challenge that demand will outstrip supply is certainly true for the Jordan River Basin and their underground aquifer tap, and it is certainly true in many other river basins out around the world that the U.S. and our partners face, yes, sir.

    Mr. ACKERMAN. Are you in agreement, Ambassador?

    Mr. SATTERFIELD. A figure, Mr. Congressman, that may be of interest to you, it has been estimated that by the year 2040, combined Jordanian, Israeli, Palestinian demands for water would outstrip supply by between 870 million to 3.5 billion cubic meters per year. It is a very dramatic gap between supply and available demand.

    Mr. ACKERMAN. Ambassador, you note that Middle East Desalinization Research Center was established in Oman 7 years ago under the auspices of the Water Working Group. The work of the center is supported by Israel and Oman. Also involved in support are the United States, the EU, Japan and Korea.

    Could you tell us a little bit more about the work and the activities of the center? Does it conduct research? Are there scientists who are resident there? Is it staffed entirely by Omanese or other nationalities as well? Are the Israelis involved in the science and research? And given the regionwide water scarcity problem, could you suggest possibly why no other Arab countries are involved?

    Mr. SATTERFIELD. Mr. Congressman, the Middle East Desalination Research Center does indeed conduct from its base in Muscat, Oman a variety of outreach efforts and educational efforts as well as research. They encompass all of the areas which you have addressed: Its training programs for individuals in the nations involved in the Middle East who are involved in water resource development and management; its research on desalination options, water usage options; reducing the cost and the environmental impact of desalination. All of these form part of the work of the center. We have tried to reach out, and the other participants in the desalination center have tried to reach out to as many participants as possible, from the regional community and from the international community. While the center has remained active, with Israelis, with Arabs, with international parties participating during these 3 1/2 years of violence, our ability to mobilize broader support within the region has been constrained as the broader support for the multilateral track has been constrained by the events starting in 1996, but it remains our goal obviously to bring in as many parties in the region as possible in this engagement.

 Page 73       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Mr. ACKERMAN. If the Palestinians are hurting for water as well as the Israelis, why wouldn't Arab states participate in trying to relieve that burden? Ms. Watson, who is no longer here, carried the water, so to speak, for the inequities she cited between the amount of water Israelis use and the amount of water Palestinians use. Is there no interest on the Palestinian side, or the Arab side I should say, in solving the problem?

    Mr. SATTERFIELD. I wouldn't characterize it as much a lack of interest as a lack of resources available to them. With the exception of Lebanon, there are equally inadequate groundwater resources available to other Arab states as there are for the three key states, Israel, the Palestinians, and the Jordanians that we are focusing on today.

    In terms of political support for the process, that is something we would very much like to see, and I think no Arab state is opposed to an equitable distribution of water or adequate supplies of water for Palestinians or others in the region. But in terms of their own resources, they themselves are facing major water crises from Saudi Arabia through North Africa.

    Mr. ACKERMAN. I have been interested in this area for quite some time. It was in 1991 that I visited then President Ozal in Turkey and he had developed a plan with some degree of detail that would bring a pipeline from Turkey through several front-line states into the area of the Israelis and the Palestinians. Whatever became of that plan? It seemed at the time his big concern was that in some of the Arab world there would be people interested and willing to blow up the pipeline.

    Mr. SATTERFIELD. Mr. Congressman, there have been several proposals which have been kept alive by the Turkish government to supply fresh water to states in the Middle East. Some involve barge transport using large bladders. Others involve the Peace Pipeline that you were describing. In each case the reasons for nonpursuit of these ideas, which continue to circulate and to surface—they have not been shelved—are cost, economic feasibility. The cost of the Peace Pipeline is enormous, on the order of $35 billion. And even the freshwater bladder shipment schemes are quite costly. This has been the issue. Rather than politics, it has been economics that have shaped this.

 Page 74       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Mr. ACKERMAN. Is there a cheaper way to do this?

    Mr. SATTERFIELD. To move freshwater from Turkey to the countries of the Middle East and then for that water to be appropriately utilized in those countries' water systems carries a very heavy price tag. There are very few cheaper ways. There are few cheap ways to do it. There are relatively more expensive and less expensive ways to go about it. The pipeline is the most expensive option.

    Mr. ACKERMAN. A few years back I was in the Middle East looking at the possibility of desalinization plants and visited a number of countries as well as our projects that were going on within the Palestinian areas. Could you tell us about desalinization efforts? Maybe any one of you. How many plants are there? How many are projected and what are the costs of desalinization plants?

    Mr. KUNDER. Mr. Ackerman, I don't have the exact figures here. I will be glad to provide them for you. But I want to say it is a significant part of what we are doing, both in Jordan and the West Bank and Gaza area. The economics are getting better, in the sense that technology is driving the price down.

    To go back to what Assistant Secretary Turner said earlier, unfortunately the other variable in that equation is that people are willing to accept increasingly deteriorated water quality, and that is why we have some of the kind of health care problems. So this thing can bulge—this problem can bulge out a couple of different ways. But desalinization, we believe, as opposed to some of the other mega projects that you alluded to earlier, is the technological way to go in the Middle East.

 Page 75       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Mr. SATTERFIELD. Congressman, if I could add, we had planned through the Agency for International Development a major desalination project in Gaza. Unfortunately, we have just announced our decision to suspend that project and another water carrier project because of the security situation in Gaza. It is a very sad reminder of the fact that the realities of the security situation on the ground, security for American contractors, for American direct hire employees does play a role in our ability to proceed with obviously projects of great benefit to the peoples of the region. And we see this as another incentive for the Palestinians to do what they need to do and have needed to do for so long, which is to restore law and order in Gaza and the West Bank, and to end the terror and violence. It has prices that go far beyond the peace process.

    Mr. ACKERMAN. One of the things that frustrates me and I think so many others is that if the Palestinians understand the critical need for water, why they do not speak out against those who would build them a plant and against those who would kill those people, Americans and others, and why they would blow up the plant just to make a political point against people who are working so hard and so desperately and sincerely to try to ameliorate what is a tremendous problem.

    Mr. SATTERFIELD. It is a terrible situation.

    Mr. ACKERMAN. I guess that is rhetorical.

    Mr. SATTERFIELD. Three Americans were killed in the Gaza Strip last October. The Palestinian Authority has not brought those responsible to justice. The situation overall in Gaza remains one of sharply deteriorated security. In light of both of these circumstances, we simply cannot proceed with these new projects. We are sustaining the current AID project under way in Gaza, but we are not going to be able to begin these new undertakings.

 Page 76       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Mr. ACKERMAN. Is there an expiration on the funding of those projects? Would that have to be reauthorized or——

    Mr. KUNDER. The decision is to suspend at this point, sir, and at this point we will not face any need to reprogram those funds just yet.

    Mr. ACKERMAN. Thank you.

    Mr. SMITH OF MICHIGAN. Just a quick follow up. Mr. Kunder, normally terrorist have not attacked humanitarian projects. Has any AID project been destroyed or attacked by terrorists?

    Mr. KUNDER. In the West Bank, in Gaza specifically, sir?

    Mr. SMITH OF MICHIGAN. Well, or any place.

    Mr. KUNDER. There has been damage to our projects because of the ongoing instability in the region, not direct attacks, but damage.

    Mr. SMITH OF MICHIGAN. By terrorists or by who?

    Mr. KUNDER. By both Palestinian organizations and by the IDF, by the Israeli Defense Forces, but as part of the ongoing conflict, not as part of an attack on one of the USAID projects.

 Page 77       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Mr. SMITH OF MICHIGAN. Mr. Rohrabacher.

    Mr. ROHRABACHER. Thank you very much. What is the final price tag on the Red Sea to the Dead Sea project if we were going to—if everybody decided to get on board and said okay, we have got the agreement, we have got the cooperation? What is the final price tag on that?

    Mr. KUNDER. The best estimates, Congressman, are in the range of 4- to $5 billion for the project.

    Mr. ROHRABACHER. Four to $5 billion. And you mentioned an amount of water that that would produce again. Could you——

    Mr. SATTERFIELD. It is about 850 million cubic meters a year.

    Mr. ROHRABACHER. 850 million. Now could you—what is—maybe you could let us know what 850 million cubic meters of water, what is that?

    Mr. SATTERFIELD. This would be a production five to six times greater than that of any existing desalination complex project or facility in the world. It is an amount of water which would make a very significant impact on the needs of Jordan, Israel and the Palestinians.

    Mr. ROHRABACHER. What type of population could be serviced by 850 million cubic feet of water?

 Page 78       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Mr. SATTERFIELD. Congressman, I can get you those figures on what the magnitude of populations.

    Mr. ROHRABACHER. You are talking about a city of a million people or 500,000 people.

    Mr. SATTERFIELD. It would not be a city. It would be an area of many villages, many cities.

    Mr. ROHRABACHER. I understand that.

    Mr. KUNDER. Roughly, sir, 850,000 people at current, at good usage rates.

    Mr. ROHRABACHER. Okay. Got it. So 850,000 people could be serviced.

    Mr. SATTERFIELD. Another figure I have just been given, Congressman, which may be interesting is the total Israeli consumption, that is including agriculture, is twice that figure.

    Mr. ROHRABACHER. Oh, so, it would be——

    Mr. SATTERFIELD. This would be half of the total amount of current Israeli water consumption.

 Page 79       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Mr. ROHRABACHER. Okay. And we are only talking about $5 billion for that project, do you other gentlemen concur with that price tag? Is that a guesstimate?

    Mr. SATTERFIELD. That is an estimate.

    Mr. ROHRABACHER. It seems to me that right next door there are a lot of other people who have got a lot of money in that area. I mean, how far is it to fly from, I guess from Jordan to Riyadh or someplace else with lots of oil and——

    Mr. SATTERFIELD. Congressman, while the cost would have to be addressed, that is not the primary reason why the project has not proceeded. The primary reason is not a question of funding, or even funding being available for the feasibility study, which the World Bank is willing to undertake. It is the absence of political agreements among the parties necessary for the World Bank or indeed any other credible institution to begin that. There is no agreement between Israel and the Palestinians on how the issue of Palestinian representation in this project will be managed.

    Mr. ROHRABACHER. Well, I am glad I asked that question then. I think that we have a $5 billion price tag, which is doable, I mean that is a doable figure. That is not some outrageous—$35 billion for a pipeline is a lot of money. $5 billion to try to produce this asset there, this pipeline from the Red Sea to the Dead Sea and get the electricity and the water from that—speaking about water, I am going to have some right now—I think it behooves us in Congress to focus on the very challenge that you are talking about then. If we have something that is a reasonable price tag, it behooves us as Americans and our government to try to say to all of the parties involved exactly what I stated in a very—my first opening statement, which is the time is long since past when all factions should put aside other considerations and agree to work together on this one issue. And maybe not just the issue of water in general, but perhaps on this project specifically. And I would think that those of us who have some influences on various parties in the Middle East should stress that on those who we have influence. I don't think—it should not be tolerated that someone is putting some other political consideration or even security consideration in the way of getting this project underway because this project being successfully completed will have security and political implications that are positive implications.

 Page 80       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    So if nothing comes out of this hearing today, perhaps it should be a consensus among those of us on this Committee that if on no other project, on the Dead Sea—Red Sea to Dead Sea project, we expect all of the parties to work together and I would hope that 2 or 3 months from now—I will be talking to the Chairman—we could have a report from our government as to who is holding up what.

    Mr. SATTERFIELD. Mr. Congressman, if I could just add, following your remarks, while there are political difficulties that have held up the initiation of the World Bank feasibility study, a study which we strongly support and believe ought to be undertaken, I would only note for the record that experts on the various issues involved with projects of this kind, including the long-term economic feasibility, the environmental impact, have grave doubts and concerns about the nature of such a project on the Gulf of Aqaba and its environmental status, on the Dead Sea and Jordan Valley and Jordan Basin in terms of the environmental impact there, as well as, even if funded and developed, this would over time yield the results estimated. But the feasibility study is the opportunity to study that in all of the appropriate detail, and that is what we would support proceeding with.

    Mr. ROHRABACHER. Well, of course we are not going to move forward without a feasibility study that takes into account all of those things, into consideration. But I will tell you right now that we would be living in a bird's nest, you know, throughout the United States of America if we waited for everybody who had a concern about something before we built a dam that would produce electricity or a water system. In California we would be in a desperate desertlike situation in southern California, which we almost are, if it wasn't for the fact that we decided at some point you take all things into consideration and there are pluses and minuses to any type of change in the environment and then move forward on what seems to be best for human beings, I might add in the long run, and not just today's human beings but future generations as well. Because good environmentalism does not take the human aspect out of the consideration. So $5 billion and a lot of study and how much would this study cost, this feasibility study?

 Page 81       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Mr. SATTERFIELD. About 15 million.

    Mr. ROHRABACHER. 15 million. All right. So we have a $15 million challenge. Now, that seems doable. So let's see if we can proceed, if nothing else, let's see if we can proceed on this specific $15 million expenditure, plus trying to make sure that there is an agreement between all the parties and let's say 3 or 4 months from now let's all get together and make sure—and my office is open. I will be perfectly—I will be very happy to meet with the parties. I am sure the Chairman would be happy to do it under his auspices. I am sure the other side of the aisle believes that—Mr. Ackerman, would you believe that this would be a bipartisan support?

    Mr. ACKERMAN. Any day you want to spend 15 million, deal me in.

    Mr. ROHRABACHER. So let's leave it at that. I think that if nothing else comes out of this hearing, let's make a commitment to move forward on this, and then we can go move on those other things so we have something to show around here. I understand there is a study showing that hot air can be turned into energy, but unfortunately——

    Mr. ACKERMAN. That is not a personal reference, is it?

    Mr. ROHRABACHER. I think it is in reference to the way we do business here in Washington. But let's try to overcome some of those obstacles.

    Mr. SMITH OF MICHIGAN. Mr. Rohrabacher, thank you very much, and we will now proceed with the second panel. Gentlemen, thank you again.

 Page 82       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Our second panel will be two of the witnesses that will be with us here, and then on our monitoring screen from far away that have been very patient, two of our witnesses will join us electronically. Mr. Gidon Bromberg is the Israeli Director of Friends of the Earth Middle East, the only regional environmental organization bringing together Israel and Jordanian and Palestinian organizations. Mr. Bromberg holds a Master's Degree in Environmental Law from American University and he is also a member of the Israeli Bar Association. So welcome, Mr. Bromberg.

    Our second panelist will be Dr. Ihab Barghothi, and he is the Economic Advisor to the Palestinian Water Authority. He is responsible for the coordination of policy, capacity, building and infrastructure programs supported by USAID, the World Bank and the European Investment Bank. Dr. Barghothi holds a Doctorate in Economics from Southern Illinois University in Carbondale.

    And Dr. Uri Shamir, who is on the left side of our screen, is Professor Emeritus on the faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering at the Technion in Haifa. He is also the Founding Director of the Stephen and Nancy Grand Water Research Institute. Dr. Shamir is a consultant to Mekorot, Israel's national water supply company, and to the Israeli Water Commission. He is also a member of the Israeli water negotiating team. And Dr. Shamir holds a Doctorate in Civil Engineering from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

    And Dr. Elias Salameh is a Professor of Hydrology and Hydrochemistry at the University of Jordan. In 1983, he founded the Water Research and Study Center at the University of Jordan. And Dr. Salameh, his work on water-related issues has been published in international journals. He holds a Doctorate in Hydrology and Hydrochemistry from the Technical University in Munich, Germany.

 Page 83       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    And we are honored to have this kind of expertise join us today and help guide this Committee. Your written testimony without objection will be totally entered into the record, and to the extent that you can come close to 5 minutes in your presentation we would appreciate it. And if, Mr. Bromberg, you would proceed.

STATEMENT OF GIDON BROMBERG, ISRAELI DIRECTOR, FRIENDS OF THE EARTH MIDDLE EAST

    Mr. BROMBERG. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to present before this House. I will present from my statement four key issues that I want to highlight that I think are pertinent to this hearing and particularly pertinent for this House and Congress to hear about.

    First of all, peace deals with people and I don't think we have heard enough about people this morning. We need to get to the hearts and minds of people. Working on water issues, as I think as everyone has agreed, will advance peace between peoples.

    I want to highlight the fact that there is untapped potential in cross-community cooperation on water issues. At Friends of the Earth Middle East we have, for the past 3 years, led cooperation between 11 cross-border communities, Israeli, Palestinian, Jordanian, that are seeing tremendous results, and awareness programs taking place, the creation of water trustees, thousands of water saving devices implanted, schools converted into model water saving buildings, and common petitions signed by Palestinians, Israelis, Jordanians, to save and better share water. I think that this shows untapped potential in terms of advancing peace. The reason I raise it here in this House is because there is no funding mechanism in place for Congress, to mandate the U.S. Government to further support such activity. The funding that we received from the U.S. was a one-time Wye River grant. The limited nature of the Wye River Program is really inadequate as far as supporting cooperation on water issues, and as far as supporting peace.

 Page 84       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Secondly, I want to refer to the issue of water infrastructure. As we heard from the earlier panel, these projects are currently suspended, and I think that this is very alarming. If we all agree that building of infrastructure in water issues advances peace, then I think that we defeat the purpose of working on this issue if we are going to suspend these projects, at least for the West Bank-Gaza at this time.

    I want to highlight a report that we recently produced which talks about the 60 million cubic meters of untreated sewage pouring into a shared aquifer, Israeli-Palestinian, contaminating the most important source of drinking water for both peoples. If this suspension means that the Hebron sewage treatment plant is not to be built, or there is no date for its being built, then we are further risking the scarce water resources that we share.

    My third point is on the reaping of the peace dividend. I believe that there is a congressional mandate on USAID to work bilaterally and not regionally. This is problematic when we are dealing with a transboundary issue such as water. When we build a sewage treatment plant in, for instance, Hebron, both Israeli and Palestinian communities benefit. However, USAID is restricted from working with the two communities that benefit and therefore misses out on the peace dividend. I think the way to reach the hearts and minds of the populace is denied because of this restrictive mandate.

    Finally, although many words have been said in relation to the Dead Sea, I want to highlight the needs to approach the issue in a comprehensive fashion. The Dead Sea is unique to the world, not only to the region. The Dead Sea is dying because of manmade intervention. The issues facing the Dead Sea are complex. There will not be one way to save the Dead Sea. We need a comprehensive approach, and I think we are going to hear in other presentations later, some ideas on this comprehensive approach.

 Page 85       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Finally, I want to share with the Chair and with Mr. Lantos, a petition, a call from Palestinian, Israeli, and Jordanian children, calling for better solutions for sewage and water problems that we face. I have two such posters that I would be very grateful if the Honorable Members would take. I also want to highlight several reports that I have brought here with me, dealing with our Good Water Neighbors Project dealing with the sewage issue and dealing with the Dead Sea.

    I thank you very much, sir.

    [The prepared statement of Mr. Bromberg follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF GIDON BROMBERG, ISRAELI DIRECTOR, FRIENDS OF THE EARTH MIDDLE EAST

    Friends of the Earth Middle East (FoEME) is a unique regional organization made up of Jordanians, Palestinians and Israelis committed to protecting our shared environment and advancing peace between our peoples. The organization was created in 1994 to raise public awareness on transboundary environmental issues, promote sustainable development and support efforts for a just and lasting peace. The organization, a non-profit group, today has hundreds of volunteers, 27 paid staff and works out of 3 main offices in Amman, Bethlehem and Tel-Aviv. The organization works closely with the relevant Israeli, Palestinian and Jordanian government offices, as well as the US Embassies and USAID missions in the region. This testimony from the outset recognizes the leadership of our local governments on water cooperation issues and the essential and positive contribution made by US government agencies.

 Page 86       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    FoEME has a proven track record of creating cross border community partnerships. Through a US and EU government supported grant FoEME created 11 partnering communities in Israel, Jordan and West Bank/Gaza. Water issues were identified by FoEME as the focus of the cross border partnership, under the project title 'Good Water Makes Good Neighbors'. The project has witnessed hundreds of young people from schools and community groups becoming water trustees in their respective communities. The water trustees carry out water awareness programs within their community and at the cross border level conduct dialogue and where possible exchange visits with their neighboring water trustees. Significant achievements include; the installation of thousands of water saving devices, the conversion of 11 schools into model water saving buildings, the collection of over 15 thousand signatures from the general public calling for local level water and sewage solutions, and meetings of cross border mayors and municipal engineers to discuss cooperation on water issues.

    The willingness to cooperate on water issues at the community level exists because water is understood by all our peoples as essential to life. Due to the transboundary nature of the water resource and regional water scarcity it is well understood by the general population that when it comes to water we are dependant in each other to protect the resource and have a responsibility to share it(see footnote 1). FoEME receives regular requests from non-participating communities desiring to participate and we could duplicate our Good Water Neighbors project ten fold within one year if the relatively small financial resources to do so were made available.(see footnote 2)

    At the water policy and infrastructure level there is some excellent inter governmental experience in cooperation, but further potential to advance cooperation exists. I would like to highlight two examples where immediate progress could take place on shared water resources—the Mountain Aquifer and the Dead Sea Basin.

 Page 87       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

The Mountain Aquifer is an underground set of water basins shared territorially by Israel and the West Bank. Its waters presently constitute the best quality drinking water for both peoples. It supplies over a third of all water used by Israel and the vast majority of water consumed by Palestinians in the West Bank. Despite its obvious importance, an estimated 60 million cubic meters of sewage the vast majority being untreated are released annually above the aquifer. Currently for the over two million Palestinians living in the West Bank only five sewage treatment plants exist and only one actually works catering for 50,000 people. Some 15 million cubic meters of sewage are produced annually from Israeli settlements in the West Bank, a large portion if not the vast majority insufficiently treated.

Whether disposed of in cesspits or discharged into streambeds, untreated sewage threatens the future availability of good-quality safe drinking water from the Mountain Aquifer for both Israelis and Palestinians and is therefore a prime issue to promote cooperation. The US and German Governments are the largest donors to the Palestinians in this sector having together committed to invest in the building of sewage treatment plants some $230 million together. Despite the large financial commitment made little progress has been achieved, with all sides blaming each other for the lack of progress. The Israelis and Palestinians however openly express their commitment presently to cooperate on this issue. At FoEME we spent many months trying to understand why little progress had been achieved and we recently published a report detailing our findings and recommendations. The report is titled, 'A Seeping Time Bomb: Pollution of the Mountain Aquifer by Sewage.' We concluded that while in the past there have been some poor policy decisions on the issue by both Israel and the Palestinian Authority that led to stalemate, the willingness to move forward exists today and it is the donor states, the US and Germany that are reluctant to make the investment needed. See Appendix 1, Section 7, Recommendations, 'A Seeping Time Bomb: Pollution of the Mountain Aquifer by Sewage,' FoEME Report, 2004.

 Page 88       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    An additional opportunity for cooperation exists at the cross border community level once these investments on infrastructure move forward. The building of sewage projects constitutes concrete evidence of positive results from cooperation with the communities benefiting on either side. Therefore financing should also be directed to cross border community awareness so that the peace dividend of all USAID infrastructure projects are identified and well understood by the communities benefiting. Congressional requirements placed on USAID West Bank Gaza mission however prevent USAID from directing any financial resources to cross border community programming.

    Finally the drying up of the Dead Sea also presents itself as another important opportunity for regional cooperation. Over the last 40 years the Dead Sea has lost a third of its surface area and it continues to drop in depth by over a meter on average every year. The demise of the Dead Sea is totally man made due mostly to upstream water diversion and in the opinion of FoEME is an example of how the water economy in the region is out of balance. Notably, however, Jordanian, Israeli and Palestinian government representatives have recently identified the issue of 'Saving the Dead Sea' as an issue of national priority.(see footnote 3) As another transboundary water body 'Saving the Dead Sea' requires regional cooperation.

    It is clear from the public statements made by our governments that a real opportunity for cooperation exists. In our opinion in order to benefit from this momentum, the focus of cooperation should be comprehensive, on how to promote sustainable development around the Dead Sea area. All the alternative means to raise the water level including the rehabilitation of the River Jordan must be carefully considered but also other development issues such as tourism development, cultural heritage protection, urban and rural settlement, industry and agriculture, all impacting the Dead Sea Basin. To this extent US assistance in advancing World Heritage listing for the Dead Sea Basin and investigating lessons to be drawn from the US Canadian International Joint Commission are potential framework approaches to move cooperation forward.(see footnote 4)

 Page 89       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    See Appendix 2, Comments to World Bank Terms of Reference to Red Dead Conduit.

    In conclusion I want to congratulate the Honorable Chair and the House Committee for holding this hearing today on the issue of water as a mechanism for cooperation and peace. Investing in water issues particularly when involving the communities impacted directly advances Middle East peace efforts and indirectly world security. As I have tried to highlight in this short presentation there is much that all parties including the US Congress could do to further assist in moving forward this peace and security effort.



APPENDIX 1:

A SEEPING TIME BOMB: POLLUTION OF THE MOUNTAIN AQUIFER BY SEWAGE

A REPORT OF FRIENDS OF THE EARTH MIDDLE EAST

Section 7.—Recommendations

Israel:

    In order to protect the Mountain Aquifer from sewage pollution, FoEME believes that urgent and key constructive and pro-active steps need to be taken by the Israeli government, as follows:

 Page 90       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

1. It is recommended that the Minister of National Infrastructure appoint a senior staff member to advance the issue at the diplomatic and political levels. This senior staff person should invest maximum effort to assist donor countries in implementing sewage treatment projects in the West Bank through, inter alia:

a.

Removing obstacles and administrative barriers to their operations;

b.

Coordinating between them and the Israeli security services in the issuance of permits to workers, engineers and vehicles involved in sewage treatment projects;

c.

Coordinating between donor countries and the Israeli security services on the release from Customs of goods and materials required for sewage treatment projects.

2. The use of the Mountain Aquifer's pollution for propaganda against the Palestinian Authority is damaging, and creates distrust regarding Israel's genuine good will to find solutions. Pollution of the aquifer's recharge area originates from both Palestinian and Israeli sources, and can only be solved through maximum cooperation between all sides even through these difficult times. The shared interest of all the region's inhabitants to preserve scarce water resources must be the priority.

 Page 91       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

3. Israeli settlements in the West Bank discharge significant amounts of untreated sewage in the recharge area of the Mountain Aquifer. The Ministry of the Environment should take immediate legal action against settlement municipalities that fail to implement Israeli sewage treatment standards.

4. The involvement of Israeli authorities in the planning stages of donor-funded sewage infrastructure can prevent delays at a later stage. For example, through examining projects' terms of reference (ToR) and then submitting comments, Israel can voice its concerns on important issues before the completion of detailed plans. This could prevent disputes at a later stage, reduce costs and accelerate implementation of projects.

The Palestinian Authority:

In order to protect the Mountain Aquifer from sewage pollution, FoEME believes that urgent and key constructive and pro-active steps need to be taken by the Palestinian Authority, as follows:

1. Sewage treatment projects should be promoted with a similar level of urgency as water provision projects, applying medium- and long-term foresight. The treatment of sewage in the recharge area of the Mountain Aquifer is necessary for the protection of shared Palestinian-Israeli water resources. The aquifer's pollution will cause massive humanitarian problems and will be a great burden on the Palestinian economy.

2. The use of the Mountain Aquifer's pollution for propaganda against Israel is damaging, and creates distrust regarding the genuine good will of the Palestinian Authority to find solutions. Pollution in the aquifer's recharge area originates from both Israeli and Palestinian sources, and can only be solved through maximum cooperation between all sides even through these difficult times. The shared interest of all the region's inhabitants to preserve scarce water resources must be the priority.

 Page 92       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

3. The involvement of the Palestinian Authority and local municipalities in the planning stages of donor-funded sewage infrastructure can prevent delays at a later stage. For example through examining and submitting comments on projects' terms of reference (ToR), the Palestinian Authority and local municipalities can voice their concerns on important issues before completion of detailed plans. This could prevent disputes at a later stage, reduce costs and accelerate project implementation.

Donor Countries

FoEME believes that there are several key steps that donor agencies urgently need to adopt in order to better facilitate the implementation of sewage projects in the West Bank.

1. In the planning, building and budgeting of projects in the West Bank, it is necessary to factor in additional, conflict-related costs rather than await the end of the conflict before project advancement.

2. Investment in intensive, daily coordination with Israeli authorities can significantly reduce conflict-related costs. Such cooperation requires:

a.

Designating staff whose primary task would include coordination of activities with Israeli authorities.

 Page 93       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

b.

Submitting lists of the registration numbers of vehicles and names of workers employed in the construction of sewage treatment projects, as well as detailed lists of imported equipment in advance to the relevant Israeli authorities in order to expedite the necessary permits.

c.

During the past year, the IDF has created a special division for external relations and international organizations. Its services should be used to the greatest extent possible for the coordination of ongoing activities.

3. Comprehensive consultation with the Palestinian Authority and Israel during the planning stages of projects could prevent later objections. Certain projects have had to be relocated, and the parties insisted on significant alterations to the plans, which could possibly have been prevented had the parties been informed and allowed to comment on the plans at an earlier stage.

Recommendations to all Parties

1. Palestinian villages continue to discharge the largest volume of untreated sewage in the Mountain Aquifer's recharge area. Most of their sewage percolates into the aquifer through cesspits. Similarly, several Palestinian cities have no plans or financing for the treatment of their sewage. Solutions to these problems should be urgently sought.

 Page 94       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

2. Joint research on the threat of pollution of shared groundwater is of vital importance. Several joint studies were carried out in the past, but most experts agree that the issue requires further research. A joint fact-finding committee, supported by donor countries and consisting of the Israeli Water Commission and the Palestinian Water Authority, would advance better understanding as to the impact of untreated sewage already released and identify priority areas for funding of additional sewage treatment solutions.

3. Appropriate training of staff for sewage treatment plants in the recharge area of the Mountain Aquifer should be supported by donor agencies, including the possibility of joint Palestinian—Israeli training activities.

4. The work of civil society NGOs in community education on transboundary water and sewage issues and their link to peace-building is of vital importance. All parties should cooperate with, and donor agencies support, such efforts in Palestinian and Israeli communities.

APPENDIX 2:

COMMENTS OF FRIENDS OF THE EARTH MIDDLE EAST TO THE WORLD BANK TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR THE RED SEA—DEAD SEA WATER CONVEYANCE PROJECT; FEASIBILITY STUDY AND ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL ASSESSMENT.

COMMENTS TO MAY 26, 2003 CONFIDENTIAL DRAFT.

 Page 95       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

The Sustainable Development of the Dead Sea Area

    The project that the World Bank should be commissioned to prepare a ToR should therefore focus on how to promote sustainable development around the Dead Sea area with all the alternative means to raise the water level considered but also other development issues. The water level alternatives would include the Red Dead conduit, the Med Dead conduit, restoring water flows down the River Jordan, a combination of restoring some water flow down the Jordan River and a smaller conduit project and the no water level action alternative. Furthermore other issues such as tourism development, cultural heritage protection, urban and rural settlement, industry and agriculture impacting the Dead Sea area must be investigated and considered. These development issues are over and beyond the question of raising the water level of the Dead Sea. To this extent investigation of World Heritage and Biosphere registration for the Dead Sea area and the development of an integrated management plan and authority need to be included in the ToR.

    In the view of FoEME, investigating the promotion of sustainable development around the Dead Sea should be the issue of the project in question and therefore the focus of the World Bank ToR as this would better reflect the shared vision of all three-core parties. From a December 13, 2001, Jordan Times front page article His Majesty the King of Jordan 'stresses the importance of Dead Sea Preservation.' In the Johannesburg Summit and the Kyoto Water Forum, 'Protecting the Dead Sea' was the title of the Governments of Jordan and Israel presentations. Jordan, Israel and the PA have identified in writing the need for World Heritage consideration for the Dead Sea area.

    Focusing on the sustainable development of the Dead Sea area as the focus of ToR would make better sense of the many sections of the current ToR that go into great detail concerning the lower River Jordan when the Red Dead conduit project alone would have no impact on the lower Jordan River nor the Jordan Valley.

 Page 96       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

APPENDIX 3.

RELEVANT US FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FUNDING RECEIVED BY FOEME:

Good Water Project, Years 2002–2004, $477,000, Wye River Program, US Embassy Tel-Aviv.

Environmental and Socio-Economic Review of Proposed Red Dead Conduit, 2004–2005, $500,000, MERC Program, USAID.

    Mr. SMITH OF MICHIGAN. Thank you very much, and the record will show that the Committee is receiving—and you also wanted to submit those journals at your left hand?

    Mr. BROMBERG. Yes.

    Mr. SMITH OF MICHIGAN. I just wanted the journals in the record.

    [The materials referred to are not reprinted here but are on file with the Committee.]

    Mr. SMITH OF MICHIGAN. Now we are going to Tel Aviv, and Mr. Ihab Barghothi is the Economic Advisor to the Palestinian Water Authority, and on the right side of our screen. Thank you very much for your patience and for being part of this Committee hearing.

 Page 97       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

STATEMENT OF IHAB BARGHOTHI, PH.D., ADVISOR, PALESTINIAN WATER AUTHORITY

Mr. BARGHOTHI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for inviting us to brief you on something about the water authority and the water sector in Palestine. Let me start by saying that I feel sorry for the loss of Senator Paul Simon, who I had the honor to meet on several occasions while studying at Southern Illinois University at Carbondale, and I think that is a great loss to the Senate and to the American people.

Let me start by saying something about the water situation here. Everybody as noted feels that and knows that water is scarce in Palestine and in the Middle East region, and therefore there exists a need to manage the scarce water resources. However, we feel that the management of limited water resources in the Palestinian area and the Middle East is very complicated, and it has been complicated by a political situation. Interim water rights established under the old agreement have not yet been confirmed by final status negotiations for obvious reasons. In spite of the uncertain political situation, government agencies established under the Palestinian Authority have continued to plan for development of the water sector. The Palestinian Water Authority was established in 1995 to serve as the primary regulatory agency governing the Palestinian water sector. By its own definition, PWA 2000, its roles and responsibilities include the following: First of all, to secure Palestinian water rights; second, to strengthen national policies and regulations, then to build institutional capacity and develop human resources, improve information services and assessment of water resources, regulate and coordinate integrated water and wastewater investment and operation, enforce water pollution control and protection of water resources, build public awareness and participation, promote regional and international cooperation.

 Page 98       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    In an effort to fulfill these roles and responsibilities, the Water Authority has successfully developed a visionary national water plan, drafted and ratified a comprehensive national water law, and organized a National Water Council charged with providing ongoing guidance to water sector development.

    Mr. Chairman, everybody knows that we have a huge gap in supply and demand of water resources here, and accordingly, the Water Authority put together a management strategy to manage the scarce resources, and the management strategy basically highlights the need to manage the water supply as well as emphasize the conservation of the water resources to increase the water supply, at the same time invest more into the rehabilitation of distribution systems and then to look at the wastewater as an alternative source of water. And of course on top of it, the idea of building an sustainable institution has been embedded into the strategy. And accordingly, we are trying to reform, rehabilitate, and restructure the water sector in the Palestinian areas by which we would be able to integrate the water services into regional utilities. We believe that will help us to build a more sustainable sector.

    Mr. Chairman, if I may add, from the discussions that I have been hearing so far everybody is drawing a dark picture about the water situation in the Middle East area. Everybody is saying that we have scarce resources, we have problems, and so forth. But we believe in the future and we believe that the Middle East is not doomed to thirst. As an economist, I have been taught in economics schools that the Malthus theory, by which Malthus was predicting that people are doomed to die of hunger because of their resources; however, Malthus was wrong because he failed to have faith and believe in the human capability and technology to put together projects that will invest in the human capabilities to do something for the humanity. And accordingly, I don't have any fear about the future of the Middle East facing this thirst or this gap of scarce resources.

 Page 99       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    We believe in human beings. If they put themselves together and work together and invest in technology, we will be able to provide a better future for the Palestinians as well as Israelis and Jordanians. People, they need to have more faith in the future, and instead of investing in war they have to put more emphasis into the peace because with peace we can build a better future for everybody.

    We as the Palestinian Water Authority, know that it is a very long and tedious process. However, as Mr. President, Abraham Lincoln, used to say, we may be slow walkers, but we will never walk backward.

    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    [The prepared statement of Mr. Barghothi follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF IHAB BARGHOTHI, PH.D., ADVISOR, PALESTINIAN WATER AUTHORITY

93528a.eps

93528b.eps

93528c.eps

93528d.eps

 Page 100       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

93528e.eps

93528f.eps

93528g.eps

93528h.eps

93528i.eps

93528j.eps

93528k.eps

93528l.eps

93528m.eps

93528n.eps

93528o.eps

93528p.eps

93528q.eps

 Page 101       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

93528r.eps

93528s.eps

93528t.eps

93528u.eps

93528v.eps

93528w.eps

93528x.eps

93528y.eps

93528z.eps

93528aa.eps

93528ab.eps

93528ac.eps

 Page 102       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

93528ad.eps

93528ae.eps

93528af.eps

93528ag.eps

93528ah.eps

93528ai.eps

93528aj.eps

93528ak.eps

93528al.eps

93528bx.eps

93528by.eps

93528bz.eps

93528ca.eps

 Page 103       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

93528cb.eps

    Mr. SMITH OF MICHIGAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Barghothi.

    The AID mission in Tel Aviv, our next witness will be Dr. Uri Shamir. Dr. Shamir.

STATEMENT OF URI SHAMIR, PH.D., DIRECTOR OF THE GWIRI, FACULTY OF CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAWRENCE AND MARIE FELDMAN CHAIR IN ENGINEERING, STEPHEN & NANCY GRAND WATER RESEARCH INSTITUTE

    Mr. SHAMIR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you very much. I am glad to appear here in front of the Committee together with my colleague Ihab Barghothi. Let me begin with some background on water and sewage in the region. It has been mentioned before by Committee Members that the whole area is arid or semi-arid and experiences large annual hydrological variability, has suffered periodically sequences of dry years and consequently severe water shortages. I propose to discuss water demand and supply in Israel, a situation that is paralleled in Jordan and the Palestinian areas, and then describe Israel's plans, going finally to the regional picture and to water as a means for regional cooperation.

    Agriculture in Israel used to be a major user of water. More than 70 percent of the potable water was used in agriculture. During droughts the allocation for irrigation could be curtailed and this provided the necessary flexibility for management under conditions of hydrological variability. Water use efficiency in agriculture grew dramatically, greater value of product per unit of water, sometimes also referred to as more crop per drop.

 Page 104       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

As you know, Israel is the world leader in water use efficiency. Recycling and water conservation in industry has also been very successful. In the urban area, consumption per capita is relatively low, as compared to European and United States standards, and conservation efforts are continuing. However, urban demands are growing with the rising population. Today over half of the potable water in Israel goes to the urban areas, and it will grow by 2020 to over 70 percent of the available average natural potential. To meet the rising urban demands potable water allocation in agriculture has been reduced in Israel in the last few years by a factor of more than two. Many field crops have been discontinued, and the remaining crops are high investments and high value, such as orchards and greenhouses. These crops are much less flexible to water use restrictions under conditions of drought. Thus, all potable water consumption for the urban, agricultural and industrial uses is practically inflexible, cannot be used as a buffer for reduction during sequences of dry years. Thus, the only option in parallel with continued conservation and efficient use is to augment the supply of potable water.

In 2001, the Israeli National Water Development Plan was adopted, and it contains the following components: Continued strict protection and careful management of the natural resources, including replenishment of the depleted aquifers to sustainable long term levels; desalination of seawater, 500 million cubic meters a year, about 1/3 of the natural water potential in five to six plants along the Mediterranean coast. The immediate plan has been set to 315 million cubic meters a year. In addition, desalination of brackish groundwater and advance treatment of polluted ground waters, and import of 50 million cubic meters a year from Turkey. This is a political project, the component of the strategic relation with Turkey, even though it cannot compete successfully economically with desalination. And this brings me to the regional picture.

 Page 105       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Large-scale desalination of seawater is the only viable long-term solution for water shortage in the region. Israel has suggested that a desalination plant be constructed for the West Bank on the Israeli coast. The plant would be constructed and operated by donor countries for the Palestinians. The space for the plant and the pipeline access to the West Bank will be provided by Israel. The West Bank would then be fed partially from local groundwater sources, augmented by desalination from a plant that can be increased over time as the demands rise.

    I would like to contrast this with the Red Sea-Dead Sea Project that has been discussed. There you have to construct the entire project and invest all of the 4- to 5 billion dollars estimated today before you get the first benefit. Desalination on the coast can be done incrementally at lower cost, in my opinion.

    Getting back to agriculture in Israel, as in Jordan and the Palestinian areas is not merely an economic activity. It provides other important national benefits, keeping open and green spaces, providing basic food supply, maintaining the social fabric of the agricultural community and keeping the population distributed throughout the land. To sustain this agriculture, the reduced freshwater supply is augmented with treated sewage effluent. The quantity in Israel will be doubled in the coming years. Sewage poses a danger to human health, as Mr. Bromberg has said, to the environment and to water resources. If it is treated properly to high quality standards, it can be used for irrigation, for stream flow augmentation, for wetlands and nature preservation. As urban water use rises with the population, so does the amount of sewage that can be treated and returned for use. About 2/3 of the water supply to the urban area can be recycled. There is therefore a very strong link between water and sewage. There can be no development of water supplies, especially for the Palestinians, without proper treatment of the sewage for reuse or safe disposal.

 Page 106       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Sewage in the West Bank, as has been pointed before, poses a severe threat to Israel, as it flows downhill into Israeli territory as well as into the aquifer and is currently not treated at all or at best poorly treated. There is therefore urgent need to complete the planning, construction and continuous operation of about 16 sewage treatment projects on the West Bank, from the collection networks all the way to the effluent.

    What is the current cooperation in the region on water? Jordan and Israel signed in 1994 a Peace Treaty in which water is a major component. Cooperation between the parties since then is excellent and no major problems have arisen that could not be settled amicably. The Palestinian Authority and Israel signed in September 1995 the interim Oslo II agreement in which water and sewage are prominent elements. The parties have made every effort to adhere to the agreement in spite of difficulties due to the current security problems. Regular meetings take place at all levels—policy, technical and field, and there have been joint declarations, ''to keep water out of the cycle of violence.''

    Water is practically the only domain in which the Palestinian Authority and Israel continue to cooperate effectively, even though this is hampered by the prevailing circumstances. The U.S. continues to play a vital role in helping the parties to work together and in resolving difficult issues. The United States chairs regular trilateral meetings with the Palestinian and Israeli delegations, at which both general and specific problems are resolved.

    USAID has been an important force on the ground helping the Palestinians in addressing their water and sewage problems, especially planning, funding and responsibility for construction of water and sewage work. These activities of the USAID are currently hampered by security problems, but should be sustained nevertheless and resumed once conditions allow.

 Page 107       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Another area of cooperation is joint research projects. They should be encouraged and funded, as it creates solid bridges of personal and institutional cooperation and enhances mutual understanding for joint problem solving.

    What elements can we see for long-term solution? Elements of regional cooperation or management of the shared water resources is the mechanism for building peace in the region, as was stated in the call for us to testify. I believe Gaza is largely self contained. It will continue to get its water from local groundwater, augmented by local desalination and some import from the Israeli system as per the Oslo II agreement. The Mountain Aquifer will be managed jointly by Israel and the Palestinians based on the premises and principles of the Oslo II agreement. Major desalination on the Mediterranean coast and delivery directly to the West Bank funded by donors for the Palestinians, this is the only viable long-term solution for the West Bank.

    The Palestinian-Israeli Joint Water Commission will continue to operate along the principles of the Oslo II agreement. The United States and other donors will help the Palestinians to develop their water systems and especially to construct and operate in a reliable fashion sewage treatment plants in the West Bank. Israel and Jordan will continue to seek jointly additional sources in both their territories, and the Jordan-Israeli Joint Water Commission will continue to operate as per the peace treaty. Israel will continue to control and carefully manage its natural resources and maintain full control of the sources in the north. The parties will continue to collaborate on conservation and efficient water use, protection of the quantity and quality of the natural resources, treatment of sewage and reuse of the effluent.

 Page 108       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    In a broader regional perspective, water from the great rivers in the north could become a component in the regional water and peace scheme. This would engage Lebanon and Syria in regional water management schemes for the benefit of all.

    And, finally, joint projects of applied research, development, and application in desalination, hydrology, water treatment, sewage treatment and reuse should be promoted as valuable components of regional cooperation. Thank you.

    Mr. SMITH OF MICHIGAN. Dr. Shamir, thank you.

    [The prepared statement of Mr. Shamir follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF URI SHAMIR, PH.D., DIRECTOR OF THE GWIRI, FACULTY OF CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAWRENCE AND MARIE FELDMAN CHAIR IN ENGINEERING, STEPHEN & NANCY GRAND WATER RESEARCH INSTITUTE

BACKGROUND: WATER AVAILABILITY AND USE

1. Israel has been using the full potential of its natural water resources for several decades, and has drawn down the sources below dangerous levels during sequences of drought years (e.g., 2001–2002).

2. Large hydrological variability is typical in the region. The average annual natural recharge in Israel's three main sources—the Coastal Aquifer, the Mountain Aquifer and Lake Kinneret (Sea of Galilee)—for the 70 year period 1932–2002 is 1457 mcm(see footnote 5) (1.18 million acre-feet/year; 1,055 mgd;) with a standard deviation of 458 mcm/year. Over this period it has been as low as 657 mcm/year (less than half the average) and as high as 3563 mcm/year (2.45 times the average).

 Page 109       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

All figures in this report are rounded, for clarity of presentation.

3. Water quality in the sources has deteriorated due to over-exploitation and to human activity above the aquifers. For example, over the 33 year period 1970–2003 average Chlorides concentration in the Coastal Aquifer rose from 160 to 260 mg/liter and Nitrates from 34 to 57 mg/liter.

4. The situation of the sources in Jordan and in the Gaza Strip is the same or worse.

5. On the demand side, Israel is a world-pioneer in conservation and efficient water use in agriculture and industry. Water productivity in agriculture grew by a factor of 5–10 over the last several decades.

6. Substantial conservation has also been achieved in the urban sector, and more is being done to constrain the rise in per-capita consumption.

For comparison: residential per capita water use (in litres per capita per day): Jordan—94; Israel—170; Italy—250; Canada—326; US single dwellings—382. Residential (home and yard) is about 2/3 of total urban use.

7. Urban demand keeps rising with growth of the population—from the current 6.7 million to 8.6 million forecasted in 2020. Even with a constant per-capita consumption, this will bring the urban use to about 960 mcm/year, over 70% of the natural potential.

 Page 110       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

8. Fresh water allocation to agriculture has been curtailed drastically—from a former consumption of 1,200 mcm/year to 530 mcm/year.

9. Total demand for potable water over the coming decade is forecasted to rise from the current 1350 to 1535 mcm/year, which exceeds the average natural replenishment and is far greater than the low values of replenishment.

CLOSING THE WATER BALANCE GAP: DESALINATION AND REUSE OF SEWAGE EFFLUENTS

10. Repeated occurrence of water-shortage crises due to droughts led to adoption in 2001 of a national plan to augment the supply through a 10-year program of sea-water desalination. It was initially set for desalination of about 500 mcm/year (360 mgd)—over one-third of the natural potential!—to be produced in 6–7 plants along the Mediterranean coast. Subsequent decisions have reduced the immediate plan to 310 mcm/year.

11. Other sources to be developed: desalination of brackish groundwater in several suitable locations (50–60 mcm/year) and treatment of groundwater that is too polluted to be used directly.

12. Import of 50 mcm/year from Turkey is a ''political project'', justified on the basis of the overall relations between the two countries, not on professional considerations or an economic justification.

13. Agriculture has national values beyond the narrow economic, including protection of open spaces and green environments, self-supply of basic foods, and maintaining the social fabric of the agricultural sector.

 Page 111       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

To sustain the required level of agriculture, the reduction in potable water allocation is compensated by the supply of reclaimed sewage—to be raised from the current level of 270 mcm/year to a projected 530 mcm/year. Soil salination and damage to plants associated with reuse of effluents have to be overcome by advanced (membrane) treatment of the effluents.

14. The quantities of sewage increase with the rise in urban water use. Untreated or poorly treated sewage creates a serious danger to health, to water resources and to the environment.

15. On the other hand, properly treated sewage can be used for irrigation, flow augmentation in streams, and wetlands. About two-thirds of the urban sewage can be reclaimed for reuse.

16. Where there is no use for the treated effluents, they can be discharged into the environment without detriment—provided they are treated to high quality levels.

17. Similar solutions are relevant for Jordan and the Palestinian areas. Therefore Israeli researchers are cooperating with Palestinian and Jordanian colleagues in refining technologies for treatment and reuse of sewage effluents.

18. Israel faces a very serious threat of sewage from the West Bank percolating into the Mountain Aquifer, a major source of potable water for both Israelis and Palestinians, and flowing downhill into its streams.

There is urgent need to complete the planning, construction and operation of some 16 sewage projects in the West bank—collection, treatment and reuse or safe disposal. Funding for these projects, provided to the Palestinians, is a major concern. The plants must be operated by companies with proven international expertise and experience.

 Page 112       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

CONCLUSIONS OF THIS PART

19. In spite of great achievements in efficient water use in Israel, there is a negative balance between demands and the availability of natural supplies, a deficit that is growing with time.

20. The shortage is exacerbated by the large hydrological variability that is typical in the region. Sequences of dry years have resulted in serious deterioration of quantities and qualities in the sources.

21. A similar situation exists throughout the Palestinian areas and Jordan. Their situation is even worse, as they are land-locked (except for the Gaza Strip, and an opening for Jordan at Aqaba) and much of the demand is located at high elevations.

22. The entire region is water-short, and subject to large hydrological variability. Dividing the scarce natural water resources is not a viable solution for all Parties in the region. It must lie in production of very large quantities of new water, primarily desalination of sea-water.

23. Treatment and re-use of sewage effluents for irrigation, for nature and for stream flow augmentation is an important component of the solution, provided the sewage is treated to high quality.

24. Proper solution of the sewage problem in the West Bank is a critical element in solving the regional water and environment problem.

 Page 113       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

EXISTING REGIONAL COOPERATION

25. Jordan and Israel signed a Peace Treaty in October 1994, in which water is a major component. Cooperation between the Parties since then is excellent, and no major problems have arisen that could not be settled amicably.

26. The Palestinian Authority and Israel signed in September 1995 the interim Oslo II Agreement, in which ''water and sewage'' are an important element. The Parties have made every effort to adhere to the Agreement, in spite of the difficult security problems. Regular meetings take place at the field, technical and policy levels, and there is a mutual agreement ''to keep water out of the cycle of violence''.

27. Water is practically the only domain in which the Palestinian Authority and Israel continue to cooperate effectively, even though it is hampered by the difficult security situation.

28. The US has played a critical role in helping the Parties to work together and in resolving difficult issues. The US chairs regular Tri-Lateral meetings with the Palestinian and Israeli delegations, at which both general and specific problems are discussed.

29. The US, through US–AID, has been an important force on the ground, helping the Palestinians in addressing their water and sewage problems. Carrying out studies, and especially funding and responsibility for construction of water and sewage works have a significant impact. These activities of US–AID are currently hampered by security problems, but should be sustained nevertheless, and resumed fully once conditions allow.

 Page 114       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

30. Considerable regional cooperation in applied research is ongoing, and should be encouraged and funded. This is creating solid bridges of personal and institutional cooperation, which enhances mutual understanding for joint problem-solving.

ELEMENTS OF A LONG-TERM SOLUTION: REGIONAL COOPERATION IN MANAGEMENT OF SHARED WATER RESOURCES—A MECHANISM TO BUILD PEACE IN THE REGION

31. Gaza gets its water from local groundwater, augmented by desalination and some import from the Israeli system—as per the Oslo II Agreement.

32. Coordinated management of the Mountain Aquifer by Israel and the Palestinians—based on the principles of the Oslo II Agreement.

33. Major desalination on the Mediterranean Coast (proposed at Hadera) and delivery directly to the West Bank, funded by Donors for the Palestinians. This is the only viable long-term solution for the West Bank.

34. The Palestinian-Israeli Joint Water Commission continues to operate along the principles of the Oslo II Agreement.

35. The US and other Donors help the Palestinians to develop their water systems, and especially to construct and operate over time in a reliable fashion sewage treatment plants in the West Bank.

 Page 115       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

36. Israel and Jordan continue to seek jointly sources in both their territories for additional supply to Jordan, to be paid by Jordan, as per the Jordan-Israel Peace Treaty.

37. The Jordan-Israeli Joint Water Commission continues to operate as per the Peace Treaty.

38. Israel augments its own supplies as described above and maintains full control of its natural water resources in the North.

39. A attractive option would be a larger regional perspective, in which water from the great rivers in the North is a component in a regional ''water-and-peace'' scheme. This would engage Lebanon and Syria in regional water management schemes for the benefit of all.

40. Joint projects of applied research, development and application in desalination, hydrology, water treatment, sewage treatment and reuse are valuable components of regional cooperation. These activities build bridges and contribute to joint problem-solving.

    Mr. SMITH OF MICHIGAN. Dr. Salameh.

STATEMENT OF ELIAS SALAMEH, PH.D., PROFESSOR, UNIVERSITY OF JORDAN

    Mr. SALAMEH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    The Middle East is an area of water scarcity, and historically agriculture developed when the amount of rain was sufficient to support plant life. Irrigated agriculture was practiced along water courses such as the Rivers Nile, Euphrates, Tigris, Jordan, Yarmouk, and others.

 Page 116       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    In the past, availability of water and the technologies used for its exploitation not only determined lifestyles and social economics, but also limited the population to the number which the amount of food produced could support. In the last few decades, the population growth rate has been very high, not only due to natural growth, but also as a result of refugees coming into the area.

    The whole development of the Jordan River Basin since the early 1950s have been concentrated in agriculture, mainly irrigated agriculture, which created job opportunities for the refugees and also for the indigenous populations.

    The development of agriculture has in the Middle East one limiting factor, and that is the availability of food. And the human activities aggravated the natural scarcity of food in the area with the following results: Alarming growth rates of population; growing degradation of available water resources; increasing demand due to higher standards of living; and the still prevailing political hostilities and the various intentions and interests of the different countries.

    The present situation in the area is that water levels are dropping; fossil water resources are being mined; salinization of aquifers is taking place; saltwater intrusions can hardly be avoided; irrigated agriculture, irrigated soils are showing increasing salinization; water quality degradation is on the increase, and water supplied for domestic users does not satisfy the hygiene and living standard demand. As a conclusion, the area is experiencing escalating water crisis, and water shortages are already chronic.

 Page 117       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    The challenge facing the Middle East countries is now how to develop the necessary technologies to better make use of the water resources in the area. This is one of the challenges.

    The other challenge is subsidizing irrigation water. Irrigation water in the area is still subsidized by the different governments, and that will lead to the inability to satisfy the demands.

    Jordan is the first and only country in the world which introduced prices on groundwater extraction for irrigation purposes. Although farmers pay the capital cost and the drilling cost and the running and operation costs of their facilities, they have to pay also for the water extracted for irrigation.

    Desalination of seawater could alleviate the problems of coastal urban areas due to its relatively high cost. Desalination could be justified for drinking purposes, but not for irrigational purposes or for areas which lie far away from the coastline like, say, cities lying 320 kilometers from Aqaba and at the height of more than 1,000 meters above sea level.

    Curtailing irrigated agriculture will have its ramifications on employment and food production in the area.

    The whole problem in the Middle East and the water shortage problem was somehow affected negatively by the population increase of refugees coming from the outside, and the water quality is accordingly continuously degrading in the area. Therefore, now we are in a stage where we say that development in the Middle East area and the water sector of the Middle East area should be basinwide, as taken to basinwide aspects and the framework of sound economies.

 Page 118       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    I can see that the irrigated agriculture sector in the Middle East is supported by foreign laborers. We deliver the water, we deliver everything, but we don't have the workers for that. Importing workers from other countries or other areas just to support the irrigated agriculture sector is not a wise policy in the area.

    The Dead Sea has been declining since the early 1960s, and now the level lies at something like minus 417 meters below mean sea level. And the impacts of the declining Dead Sea is—are, first of all, the decline in the Dead Sea which is accompanied by increasing groundwater flows into the Dead Sea to reach a new equilibrium along the interface, and then along the coastline the damage by the drop in the Dead Sea, and that damage is the formation of sinkholes affecting the whole area, not only in Jordan, but also in Israel and maybe in Pakistan. Therefore, the Dead Sea level should be somehow reraised, and the Dead Sea canal is a must in the area, not because only to produce energy to desalinate water, but also to somehow stop the damage, environmental damage, of declining Dead Sea level and to return the situation to its former situation of the 1960s.

    Jordan has exactly recognized its severe water situation and has accordingly developed its future water strategy with all the necessary programs, action plans, and projects. After that, rigorous planning and investment programs have been developed and have already started to be implemented.

    We thank all donor agencies, USAID, GTZ, JAICA, and other donor agencies for the support of our programs, and we hope that the Red-Dead Canal will be somehow supported for the benefits of present and future generations. Thank you very much.

 Page 119       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Chairman HYDE [presiding]. Thank you very much, Doctor.

    [The prepared statement of Mr. Salameh follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF ELIAS SALAMEH, PH.D., PROFESSOR, UNIVERSITY OF JORDAN

WATER RESOURCES IN THE MIDDLE EAST AND THE IMPORTANCE OF THEIR WISE MANAGEMENT

INTRODUCTION

    Although water is the most abundant among the natural resources, the Middle East (ME) is among the least blessed areas of the world with respect to the availabllity of water resources, Vast areas in the ME are even bedeviled by hyper aridity.

    The history of man in the Middle East (ME) throughout the last three to four millennia has been determined and shaped largely by one major infra-structural element, namely water. This essential resource has great influence over human life when it is scarce. In the ME, this basic factor; water determined the lifestyles of people, their socio-economics and their conflicts.

    Agriculture developed when the amount of rain was sufficient to support plant life. Irrigated agriculture was practiced along water courses such as the rivers: Nile, Euphrates, Tigris, Jordan, Yarmouk, Farie, Kilt, Auja, Haroud and Zerka, springs and desert oases.

 Page 120       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    In the past, availability of water and the technologies used for its exploitation not only determined lifestyles and socio-economics but also limited the population to the number, which the amount of food produced could support. In the last few decades, the population growth rate has been very high, not only due to natural growth but as a result, of the waves of refugees coming into the area.

    The whole development in the Jordan River basin has, since the early fifties been concentrated in agriculture, mainly irrigated agriculture, which entails developing water resources to be used for irrigation. Irrigated agriculture has created job opportunities, through less expensive investments, for both the indigenous and the immigrating population.

    The development of irrigated agriculture has different limiting factors such as availability of suitable land, water, laborer etc. In the JR basin the limiting factor proved to be the availability of irrigation water, which in addition to its scarcity was a subject for conflicting interests of the different riparian countries and use sectors; of agriculture, domestic and municipal uses.

    Thus, human activities aggravated the natural scarcity of water resources in the area, with the following results:

1. Alarming growth rates of population resulting in doubling the population of the different countries, sharing the JR basin, every 18 to 30 years.

2. Growing degradation of the available resources thus reducing their utility at their original quality.

 Page 121       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

3. Increasing demand due to higher standards of living, industrialization and irrigation.

4. The still prevailing political hostilities and the various intentions and interests of the different countries are superimposing the above characteristics, in addition to the fact that the different countries still share some of the water resources.

PRESENT SITUATION AND UNDERTAKEN POLICIES

    Jordan, Palestine (West Bank and Gaza) and Israel are presently over utilizing their water resources by 20%, 15% and 7% respectively.

    Generally, water levels are dropping, fossil water resources are being mined, salinisation of aquifers is taking place, salt water intrusions can hardly been avoided, irrigated soils are showing increasing salinisation, water quality degradation is on the increase and the amount of water supplied for domestic uses does not satisfy the hygiene and living standard demand.

    As a conclusion, the area is experiencing escalating water crises and water shortages are already chronic.

    The challenge facing the ME countries is to develop and introduce the necessary technologies to satisfy water and wastewater systems. The increase in population makes this challenge more difficult to achieve. The traditional policy of developing new water resources to satisfy needs, in the area, is almost exhausted. Now is the time to have new policies and changes in management strategies to fulfill this demand. Investment in leakage detection and maintenance, as an example seems to be a more economic way of increasing the efficiency of water supply. Leaking water from pipes and irrigation facilities represent a great loss because its cost is paid, but without any revenues. That water is collected, purified, pumped and distributed but it does not reach the consumer to pay for it.

 Page 122       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Therefore, Jordan is implementing a rigorous rehabilitation program for its water supply system, with a cost of hundred millions of dollars.

    Subsidizing irrigation water is still a prevalent policy in the area, where governments pay the capital cost of all the large irrigation projects. Although it is expected that farmers would irrigate their crops more efficiently if irrigation water prices would reflect the real cost. Pricing water at a lower cost has led to the inability to satisfy the demand.

    Users of fossil water resources for irrigation pay only the pumping cost of the water, but not for exhausting the non-renewable water resources. Although these practices will certainly lead to the depletion of these resources and the loss of the future water and food security, yet, paying a certain cost might lead to saving and conserving at least part of the water and may lead to reconsiderations of economic feasibilities of certain projects.

    Jordan is the first and only country in the world that has introduced prices on groundwater extracted for irrigation purposes. Although farmers pay, all the capital cost of drilling and the running cost of operation and maintenance, they have also to pay for the extracted amounts of water.

    The introduction of prices for the groundwater extracted for agricultural uses (water extracted for industrial and municipal use is also paid for) was not an easy task, but the Ministry of Water and Irrigation insisted on that for the benefits of the present and future generation and the environment.

 Page 123       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    In the coming decade high cost projects, environmental hazards and tightened budgets will make large water projects unattractive and difficult to implement. Therefore, policy makers should change their strategies to lower the demand for water instead of increasing the supply, especially for irrigation.

    The change to an efficient water economy is not an easy task, but such a change should start and continue. The technologies for that are available. Therefore, allocating more funds for improving the efficiency of water supply systems will make some expensive, environmentally unsound projects, unnecessary.

    In Jordan, water saving devices are exempted of any tax. Water prices increase with increasing consumption. These policy measures aim at improving efficiency and savings in water use and consumption.

    Desalination of seawater could alleviate the problems of coastal urban areas. Due to its relatively high cost, desalination could be justified for drinking purposes, which will also increase the amount of wastewater effluents and hence, the available water for irrigation.

    Curtailing irrigated agriculture might increase domestic water supplies and alleviate the shortages, but such a measure would result in declining food production and foodstuff coverage, lower export revenues, higher hard currency expenditures for food imports, and higher unemployment with all its socio-economic ramifications in the different countries. Curtailing irrigated agriculture must therefore, be coupled with a transfer to industrialization, to guarantee jobs and revenues and to stabilize the social and political systems. Such restructuring, from an agrarian to an industrialized, tourism or trade-dependent economy, would require large investments of time and money, as well as great deal of skilled planning, training and technological expertise.

 Page 124       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    An increasing problem already causing tremendous concerns to the Middle East countries is water pollution, which is not only leading to water pollution but also to diminishing available resources by making these resources less suitable for their present uses, or of no use for any appropriate purpose.

    Governments funding for environmental protection and for guaranteeing adequate water amounts for environmental services is often unavailable or has a very low priority on the agendas.

REFUGEES AND WATER SHORTAGES

    As a result of the different refugees waves from Palestine, Jordanian and Palestinian returnees from Gulf States as a result of the Gulf Wars, in addition to hundred thousands of Iraqis, the population of the country increased by many folds, each time within a few months. This migration put a great deal of pressure on the country's already severe water supply situation, especially during the dry season.

    The citizens of the major urban centers in Jordan, has been since the early eighties suffering from a catastrophic water shortage. Water is pumped only once or twice a week through the networks, where it is then collected and stored in roof tanks for use during the following week or so. Almost every one is living at the hygiene brink, where water use is concerned.

    Israel is also suffering from diminishing water resources, although it obtains around 1/3 of its consumed water from the Jordan River and another 1/3 from the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

 Page 125       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    For the last few years, Israel has been rationing water, mostly affecting the politically sensitive farming sector, which consumes around 75% of the country's water supply.

WATER QUALITY

    It is not the water quantity, but its worsening quality that will bring us to our knees.

    One thing is becoming clearer with every passing day; that the quality of our water resources is degrading rapidly, not only because of active pollution introduced by liquid or solid wastes, but also, and in increasing steps, by passive degradation due to salinization as a result of over-pumping and depletion of our groundwater resources base.

    Water quality-deterioration problems are exacerbating and sharpening the severe water shortage of the area perceived under the prevailing economic, social, scientific and technological situations.

    Regrettably, anti-pollution rules in some of the JR riparian countries are either unavailable or very vague. Even if they exist, they can be, easily circumvented. New rules have to be advanced to account for the prevention and repair of environmental damages.

    In Jordan all towns of more than 20.000 inhabitants has been provided with wastewater collection and treatment systems. Each industry has to treat its effluents before discharging it to recipient wadis or water bodies Additional wastewater treatment plants and reuse schemes are still needed. In addition, some of the existing wastewater treatment plants require improvements to reach at a better effluent quality.

 Page 126       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Misuse of water resources, water pollution, over-utilization or not respecting sustainability principles and intergeneration equity indicate unsound water resources management. In this context, the cause of development should never be used as a reason to sacrifice the water resources whether quantitatively or qualitatively. Because doing so will bring the whole issue of development into vicious circles, in which degradation of water resources as a vital element of the environment may in turn, negatively, impact the development itself.

    Therefore, development should be compatible with the water resources issues, especially their pollution and sustainability in the concerned countries with scarce or poor water resources. Accordingly, the appropriate management of water resources should be basin-wide and, should incorporate the management of their environmental aspects, altogether within the framework of sound economics.

    Therefore, any project generating degradation of water resources without the mechanisms and economic instruments to repair that degradation can be, regarded as a misallocation and misuse of water resources, even if the negative impacts will only affect other riparian countries.

    This implies that any water development plan whether for urban, industrial or agricultural use should include an economic feasibility aiming at beneficial objectives to the society. But, if the basin-wide environmental aspects of water resources development, use, disposal of waste water and reuse are not fully included in that feasibility, the benefits to the society remain partial or even only apparent. In this case the whole development is, in reality, on the long run detrimental to the society and not beneficial.

 Page 127       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

THE DECLINE OF THE DEAD SEA LEVEL

    During the last five decades, water-development projects within the drainage basin of the Dead Sea supported a major part of the increasing agricultural production necessary to meet the food demand of growing population in Jordan, Palestine, Syria and Israel. The projects also created jobs for hundred thousands of refugees moving from one place to another within the area and for migrants coming from other places in the world. Thus, the development of the water resources within the drainage basin of the Dead Sea was very essential for the survival of people and it will continue to be for future generations.

    During the early and intermediate stages of development; the 50's, 60's and 70's of the last century, almost no concerns were expressed about the impacts of the water resources development of the Dead Sea drainage basin on the ultimate base level of all the water resources of the surrounding areas, including the enclosed Dead Sea itself. This development deprived the Dead Sea of a major part of its incoming water, due to which its level continued to drop. The Dead Sea left behind its old shoreline and the nearby tourist facilities, hotels, spas, harbors far from the seawater.

    One of the severest impacts of development and the lowering of the Dead Sea water level is the resulting seaward migration of the salt water/ freshwater interface. This caused billions of cubic meters of fresh groundwater to replace saltwater in the areas between former and present interface positions in order to reach at a new hydrodynamic equilibrium state (375 million m^d/1m drop in sea level).

 Page 128       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    The unique configuration of the shallow interface between freshwater and Dead Seawater (density of 1.23g/cm^3\) is only about 1/10 of the equilibrium depth of the interface between freshwater and oceanic water. This makes the underground of the newly exposed shores, especially those composed of friable salty deposits highly vulnerable to flushing due to their instability and because of the fresh groundwater percolation caused by the retreat of the interface.

    The freshwater flushing causes salt dissolution and fine particle removal, resulting in the creation of underground cavities, which in turn, caused ground-surface collapses in the form of sinkholes. These collapses endanger not, only people, but also infrastructure, hotels, spas, farms.

    These facts have made us recognize that the Dead Sea and its drainage basin as one system requiring a ''comprehensive system analysis'' and an ''integrated program for restoration''?

    The Dead Sea is not a possession of one country in the Middle East. It is not only a possession of all the riparian countries of the Middle East, but also a world heritage site. Therefore, its use, benefits, problems and protection should bring nations together to make the best of its uniqueness. For that courage, wisdom and goodwill are required in order to avoid its destruction and to reach fruitful conservation schemes.

    The Dead Sea disaster should worldwide serve to form an example of the results of piecemeal planning despite the holistic nature of natural systems.

 Page 129       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Now, more than ever before, the Dead Sea level has to be restored to its former elevation of the 60's of the last century. The Red Sea-Dead Sea conduit is becoming more vital for all the Dead Sea riparian countries. This project will not only, rescue the Dead Sea itself, restore the depleting groundwater resources of the surrounding areas, protect the coastal areas from collapses and bring back the humidity to the surrounding areas, but it will serve as a project of free cooperation for the benefits of all riparian states and the world community.

    Jordan has exactly recognized its severe water situation and has accordingly developed its future water strategy with all the necessary programs, action plans and projects. After that, rigorous planning and investment programs have been developed and have already started to be implemented.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

    Although water is the most abundant among the natural resources, the Middle East is among the least blessed areas of the world with respect to the availability of water resources. Vast areas in the Middle East are, even bedeviled by hyper-aridity.

    Shared water resources in the JR basin are to allocate to the riparian states in a fair way through negotiations in order not to allow for future conflicts.

    The development plans of the water resources should be redesigned to fit in a scheme of basin-wide development, in order to avoid conflicts, enhance cooperation and joint management of resources, avoid and alleviate pollution and conserve resources in the context of intergeneration equity.

 Page 130       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    If water resources are to continue yielding adequate amounts of water with suitable qualities, government interventions in the form of regulation, environmental laws, and pollution control standards become pre-conditional. Therefore, any consideration of water resources pollution should involve a fair judgment about the level of pollution, which can reasonably be tolerated and accepted by the society without compensation. The other important issue in pollution control is the legal acceptance of the principle that an activity could be restricted by governmental actions, if it is presumed (not proven) to be harmful.

    This implies that polluters must obtain a ''permission to pollute'', otherwise they should not be allowed to cause any pollution. The permission should specify the quantity and concentration of the effluents allowed to discharge into the recipient water bodies. In such a case, effects on downstream areas have to be taken into consideration. This implies a basin-wide planning and utilization of water resources. Failing to meet the conditions laid down in the permission or to pollute without permission is, to deal with, as a criminal offence, even of states against each other.

    The future of water supply, distribution and uses in the Middle East does not seem to be a continuation of the past. Demand is on the increase, new sources are hardly to find, aquifers are over-exploited and the cost of desalination or imports from water-rich countries is too expensive for the majority of the population.

    Unless advanced concepts of water allocation and use such as socio-economic, environment, efficiency and intergeneration equity are introduced and applied in the near future in a wise, scheduled and comprehensive way, the area will certainly face one of its most severe socio-economic and intergeneration equity problems.

 Page 131       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Droughts in the JR basin during the last decade resulted in the expressed wish to renegotiate the water sharing agreements. Hence, the basin-wide planning should incorporate drought potentials and risks in order to keep the peace treaties in a positive atmosphere by keeping the parties salient about any potential dispute.

    Once the ongoing peace process fades out, the prognosis shows that even the peace accords and treaties have not solved and will not solve the water problems of the area, although, they might put an end to the claims and contra-claims of the different countries sharing the same source of water. If not deeply incorporated in a context of basin wide planning, sustainability and security water shortage problems in the area may calumniate and affect people's health, social security and lives.

    Water does not recognize political borders. It only deals with hydrologic units, which are trans-boundary systems. Therefore, sharing and cooperation among riparian countries are imperative. Lack of cooperation and sharing among riparian countries deprives, first of all, nature of the environmental services of water. An example on that is the story of the Dead Sea declining level caused by diversion of its feeding waters by the different riparian. The drop in the sea level led during the last three decades to migration of its saltwater/fresh water interface in a seawards direction, with an average annual loss of around 375 million cubic meter of fresh water from the Dead Sea surrounding areas to the Dead Sea and to its underground extensions beneath the shores.

    The drop in the Dead Sea level resulted also in the creation of new coastal areas, which due to their geologic nature became unstable after the fresh water started percolating through them. Sinkholes and land collapses were the results, damaging roads, farms, houses etc.

 Page 132       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Chairman HYDE. Mr. Ackerman.

    Mr. ACKERMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    In part, the scarcity problem, or at least the sense of urgency, stems from several years of drought in the region. Is the dry weather trend of recent years expected to continue? And how much does the prognosis for scarcity change if the dry spell ends? And how far can a change in the weather go toward fixing the water shortage? Mr. Shamir?

    Mr. SHAMIR. Congressman, the change in weather or the climate change over time is much less significant than the hydrological variability that we have been experiencing, say, in the last 70 years for which we have records. We have used the historical record to analyze the need in augmenting the natural resources by artificially produced water, namely through desalination. And we are able to overcome the deficits over time if we produce water to the tune of something like 300- to 500 million cubic meters a year.

    The cost of desalination today is in the order of 60 cents per cubic meter. The cost of natural water is in the order of 25 cents per cubic meter, to use a round number. So it is something like twice maybe to three times the cost of natural water. And, indeed, as Professor Salameh has indicated, desalinated water is definitely possible for the urban areas releasing more water and producing then more effluence for irrigation.

    Mr. ACKERMAN. Thank you.

 Page 133       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Mr. Barghothi, do you agree?

    Mr. BARGHOTHI. Well, again, I am an economist, but I should agree with Mr. Shamir. Mr. Shamir knows the science of hydrology better than me. I respect his opinion, and I totally agree with him.

    Mr. ACKERMAN. Thank you.

    Mr. Salameh or Mr. Bromberg, any?

    Mr. BROMBERG. I think the dry spell has ended, and we have enjoyed 2 blessed years of heavy rainfall in the region, which has filled the Sea of Galilee, for instance, to the point where they have almost had to release water. And, nevertheless, we are in a semiarid desert area where droughts will continue.

    I want to respond to the question more to the point that I don't think we can see desalination as a comprehensive solution, as the end-all solution to our water problems. I see desalination as being part of a process to overcome drought years. But because we do live in the desert, water will always remain very scarce. If we are constantly going to be seeking to produce more and more water without dealing with demand management, there will be no end to the number of desalination plants we will require. On the other hand, we can conserve a lot more water by introducing water-saving technologies and raising awareness on water-saving issues.

    We need to consider that desalination requires the burning of fossil fuels, and over time the price of fossil fuels is going to continue to rise, possibly rise dramatically. I think for the Palestinians and for the Jordanians, relying on desal is very, very expensive.

 Page 134       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Mr. ACKERMAN. I thank you for—all of you, for those answers. I can't help but note the excellent cooperation between our two witnesses who are testifying electronically from Tel-Aviv. And it is interesting to note that on the scientific level how well Israelis and Palestinians can get along. And if that can only be transposed to the rest of society throughout the region, we would all be so much better off.

    Mr. Bromberg, you say in your written testimony that at the moment both the Israelis and Palestinians do have the political will to move forward on the sewage treatment plants to preserve the quality of the Mountain Aquifer. But you go on to say the United States and Germany are reluctant to make the investment needed. That is a direct quote.

    What is the reason for the reluctance? Do they see the situation differently than you do in terms of urgency and the value of such a project? Are they concerned, as was Ambassador Satterfield, about the safety of the people involved because of the violent political situation?

    And I guess you are slightly critical that the United States and Germany are reluctant to go ahead. An overriding question in my mind is, why is this up to only the Americans and the Germans, two very Western countries? Where is the Arab world on this? Where is Iran and Syria and Libya? Where are the Saudis? Where are the other Muslim countries throughout the world? Why does the West have to solve this problem? Not that we don't want to help, but why isn't pressure put on others who profess to be so greatly interested in this region?

    Mr. BROMBERG. I really can't answer the question in relation to the other Arab countries. We have not researched that issue, but we have very closely researched the need for building sewage plants above the Mountain Aquifer. As I said earlier, there are 60 million cubic meters of untreated sewage pouring out above the aquifer, which is directly reducing its viability. That aquifer is currently the most important drinking water for Israelis and Palestinians. That sewage pollution will only add to the water scarcity with which we are concerned.

 Page 135       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    I think we heard for the first time from the Administration that there actually is a decision to suspend projects in Gaza. It wasn't clear to me whether that includes also water projects in the West Bank, but if indeed it does, then I think that is extremely unfortunate, because if we believe that water is an issue that promotes peace, that advances cooperation, then suspending water projects at this time certainly is not going to advance peace.

    We certainly condemn the murder, the killing, of the American contractors in Gaza. But I think the point was made earlier that there has been no direct effort to destroy any infrastructure that the U.S. has built or that other donor states have built in the water sector. So I don't think there is the precedent that we can rely on at the moment that would justify a freeze on water projects.

    I also think that we need to highlight who the people are who are suffering. The people that will suffer from a desalination plant not being built in Gaza are the Gazan population, whose hearts we want to capture, because they are currently drinking water unfit for human consumption. The water that we will contaminate in the Mountain Aquifer is water that will be less available for the consumption of Israelis and Palestinians. I think that that is the reason we should be so concerned with this decision to suspend water projects.

    Mr. ACKERMAN. I appreciate that. And I concur with you 100 percent on the importance of water not just in people's lives, but in the process of making peace and stability and winning the minds and hearts of people in Iraq. I don't know if I mentioned Iraq before today, but in Iraq we might recall that the first thing that the people were asking for was water, fresh water, and that the infrastructure be restored or created so they might have that water.

 Page 136       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    I do thank the Chairman for calling this hearing. The issue of water is very important. I only wish some more of our Members who thought it was important earlier, I am sure they are all going to be reading the transcripts, would be able to be here to hear this testimony that we have heard. It is very interesting.

    Chairman HYDE. Thank you, Mr. Ackerman.

    There are some questions that we would like to put to the witnesses both here and in Tel-Aviv, but we have another panel, and it is getting along. We expect votes soon; and I have great fear that we will not reconstitute our Committee after votes. So we are going to ask, if you will be kind enough, should we submit some questions in writing, to respond at your convenience, and I am sure you will.

    [The information referred to follows:]

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD BY THE COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS TO GIDON BROMBERG, ISRAELI DIRECTOR, FRIENDS OF THE EARTH MIDDLE EAST, IHAB BARGHOTHI, PH.D., ADVISOR, PALESTINIAN WATER AUTHORITY, URI SHAMIR, PH.D., DIRECTOR OF THE GWIRI, FACULTY OF CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAWRENCE AND MARIE FELDMAN CHAIR IN ENGINEERING, STEPHEN & NANCY GRAND WATER RESEARCH INSTITUTE, AND HAIM SHAKED, PH.D., DIRECTOR, THE MILLER CENTER, UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI

Questions:

    Please describe to what extent the Israelis have benefited from regional cooperation in water related matters with Palestinians? Jordanians?

 Page 137       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Based on your experience, have discussions in the water sector been going well between Israelis, Palestinians and Jordanians? To what do you attribute this relative stability?

    What are Israel's main sources of water? Where are they located?

    What is the water consumption of Israeli settlers in the West Bank and Gaza? Where do they get their water from? Do they have adequate sewage treatment plants?

    Some high-level Israeli officials have said that importing water from Turkey is more about politics than need. Do you agree? Is importing water an appropriate solution to the problem?

    What does it mean when the water level in the Sea of Galilee is below the ''red line''? Is the ''red line'' adjusted to different levels?

    How much water is allocated to agricultural use in Israel? What percentage of the agricultural sector is represented in Israel's gross domestic product?

    In response to allegations that settlers use a disproportionate use of water in comparison to Palestinians, some assert that all their water, or perhaps all their agricultural water, comes from within the Green Line. Is this accurate? What proportion of the water used for residential or industrial use comes from within the Green Line? Is this from surface water or ground aquifers?

 Page 138       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    How many desalination plants are in Israel? How much water do they supply and to whom? Are there any plans to build any more? How does the price of desalinated water compare with the price of alternatives (i.e., bringing in new supplies from Turkey, conservation, other water generation technologies)?

    In the 1995 Oslo II agreement, Israel recognized Palestinian water rights in the West Bank. Is this agreement a sustainable foundation for enhanced regional cooperation in the future? What about Israel's agreement with Jordan on water-related matters?



RESPONSES FROM GIDON BROMBERG TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD BY THE COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

Question:

    Please explain how community partnerships that protect important water resources have influenced the political climate. Have you found that cooperation in the environmental area promoted positive dialogue between Israelis and Palestinians?

Response:

    The FoEME program, called Good Water Neighbors has brought together 11 communities; 5 Palestinian, 5 Israeli and 1 Jordanian—that constitute 5 sets of neighboring communities. The communities are on either side of the Green Line or border with Jordan. The communities literally see each other and most importantly share a common watershed. The failure of our national governments to advance peaceful relations and dialogue have led some communities that are on the 'front line' to agree to take the initiative themselves and try to solve their common problems, particularly as regards water and environment.

 Page 139       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Our experience not only in the Good Water Neighbors project but in all our joint activities is that once individuals or communities start to dialogue on concrete issues such as environment, where political borders are irrelevant, they begin to understand that we are all dependant on each other and that cooperation is a necessity for the welfare of all our peoples.

Question:

    What role do young people play in the ''Good Water Makes Good Neighbors'' program?

Response:

    One of the main features of the program was to create a group of ''water trustees'' in each community. These are volunteers, mostly young people that meet once or twice a week after or during school hours, depending on the community, to undertake water awareness activities. For the first year of the project, a field researcher focused much of his/her attention on educating this group on their local community water and environment issues. Increasingly, though, these water trustees have served as messengers on water awareness to their communities as a whole. They have undertaken surveys of their own water reality, worked to collect signatures on common water petitions to solve their local water related problems, affixed water saving devices in public buildings, and converted their own schools into water saving buildings. With the start of each new school year, a new group of water trustees has been created in addition to the earlier groups.

 Page 140       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

Question:

    Right now your organization has created eleven existing partnerships. Does your organization have the capacity to increase the communities participating in your programs? How much money and time would it take to accomplish this?

Response:

    When we launched the project in 2001 we had to convince communities to join. Today new communities approach us all the time asking if we can work with them but unfortunately we lack the resources to allow them to join. If funding was found we could triple the amount of communities we are working with to 33 within 6 months. We now not only have the interest and the contacts but we have the expertise to bring in new communities effectively.

Question:

    What are the major challenges to regional cooperation on water resources?

Response:

    The lack of an overall peace agreement between the Israelis and Palestinians is the major obstacle. The Israeli and Palestinian water officials' state off the record that the water allocation issues have for the most part been agreed to. The officials claim however that they cannot be accepted unless part of an overall package. This approach is problematic as it denies us the opportunity to advance on at least one final status issue—water and hence help create the good will that we so badly need to move forward on the other issues.

 Page 141       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Water issues should not be used by either side as a bargaining tool. Water for domestic purposes is a basic human right and treatment of sewage is a necessity to protect the fresh water resource itself.

Question:

    What percentage of the groundwater in the mountain aquifer in the West Bank is allocated to the Palestinians? Israelis? Is this rate proportion to need and population figures?

Response:

    Precise figures are hard to come by and what figures that do exist are disputed. From research undertaken by FoEME however we estimate that at least 80% of the waters of the Mountain Aquifer are utilized by Israel, leaving the Palestinians around 20%. However what constitutes a fair allocation is not simple and cannot be based just on population figures. International law is not clear on water allocation issues but allows much room for interpretation. For some 200 Palestinian villages that are not connected to a water network, the lack of water is great and their need for more water clear. Palestinians must receive a higher proportion of the waters of this aquifer and off the record this is agreed to by some Israeli officials. The tragedy though is the failure to finalize the negotiation on water allocation is preventing cooperation and joint management of the Aquifer which is so badly needed.

Question:

 Page 142       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Have the Israeli, Jordanian, and Palestinian governments been receptive to your organization's concerns? Are there areas that require improvement?

Response:

    In most cases receptive but not cooperative in actions taken on the ground. There is a general lack of understanding as to what the role of the public and advocacy groups are. Officials generally believe water issues to be national security issues and hence are reluctant to make public, information, that is vital for meaningful public participation to take place.

Question:

    What is the impact of use (or overuse) of the aquifers? Who is more responsible for the overuse of aquifers—Israelis within the Green Line, settlers, or Palestinians? Is any remediation possible? Whose water use is most efficient?

Response:

    The Mountain Aquifer is managed as a resource by the Israeli Water Commission. It is this Commission that determines who and how much is pumped out of the Aquifer. Prior Commissioners allowed the Aquifer to be over pumped or managed at its red line level which was very dangerous. The present Commissioner thankfully changed this policy.

 Page 143       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

Question:

    Are there sufficient wastewater recycling plants in Israel, the West Bank and Gaza, and Jordan? If not, what is being done to increase the number of plants available?

Response:

    In general, in Israel proper there is high-level sewage treatment. Over the Mountain Aquifer however, a recent FoEME report revealed that the sewage of some 2 million people who live above the aquifer is not treated at all or insufficiently to prevent water pollution. Apart from El Bira a medium sized Palestinian city, there exists no other operating sewage treatment plant of the Palestinians in the West Bank. Most Israeli settlements also do not treat their sewage adequately if at all. In Gaza sewage pollution is very serious. In Jordan too there is insufficient sewage treatment and the treatment that exists is often inadequate.

    In an area of such water shortage proper treatment of sewage to turn it into a resource at least for agriculture should be a regional priority. The governments need to do much more. Responsibility here lies with the donor countries too. The building of sewage treatment facilities has not received the priority required and projects agreed to have been delayed.

Question:

    Do the water-scarce countries of the Jordan River Basin have the appropriate water infrastructure in place to store and distribute large amounts of desalinated water?

 Page 144       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

Response:

    Not my expertise to answer.



RESPONSES FROM IHAB BARGHOTHI, PH.D., TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD BY THE COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

    Multi Lateral Working Group on Water Resources has benefited the Palestinians through the implementation of a series of projects that aimed at improving the monitoring of the water quality in the region as well as increasing the awareness to the water related issues. The program was implemented in the region with the cooperation of Palestine, Israel and Jordan.

    Meetings with the Israeli experts are done periodically and at different levels. At the Israeli-Palestinian Joint Water Committee, and the Joint Technical Committees. This is done as a co-ordination venue between the two sides on the various projects and programs that would be implemented in the West Bank. Other meetings are being held among the different experts through academic activities and NGOs.

    The USAID is considered the main funding program in the water sector in Palestine, and has been considered as the driving force in bringing greater access of water to the Palestinian population. Such programs have been discussed in the Israeli-Palestinian water committee, and are being used to bring both sides to a common understanding to the water issues in the area. It should be noted that the USAID has been active in the Tri-lateral meetings that are held quarterly between the Palestinian side, the Israeli side and the US government. Such meeting has bridged the gap between the two sides.

 Page 145       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    The Palestinian Ministry of Education has been one of the target groups through which the awareness was raised on the water related issues. This has been done through the multi-lateral working group when a book was published in Palestine, Israel and Jordan under the title ''Water'' and was distributed in schools.

    The agriculture sector uses close to 75 percent of the fresh water when its share in the GDP reaches to less than 30 percent. The Palestinian economy is still an agrarian economy and many Palestinian families depend on the revenue that is generated from the agriculture. Accordingly, the Palestinian Water Authority has the strategy of building wastewater treatment plants, and uses the treated effluent in agriculture. The fresh water would then be reallocated to the domestic.

    The Palestinian Water Authority is the Regulator of the water sector. The Bulk utility is in charge of producing water and distributing it to the communities at the Bulk meters. The water department in the municipality and village council would then be responsible for the distribution of water within the communities' boundaries.

    The only surface water that the Palestinian population has an access to is the Wadi (valley) runoff. Currently, there is no access to the Jordan River. The Palestinian communities depend on the springs and some Wadi runoffs and the water is distributed through water tanking. The sources are not safe and not monitored. In the other areas, the abstraction from the aquifer is the source, and is distributed through the networks. In the West Bank, there is no over-abstraction from the aquifer since a ground water model was built to be a management tool for the aquifer. In the Gaza Strip, the aquifer is being depleted through the over-abstraction. However, the coastal aquifer has a lower water quality than the mountain aquifer in the West Bank due to the sea water intrusion and the infiltration of herbicides and pesticides.

 Page 146       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    The average per capita consumption for the Palestinian individual varies from one governorate to another, and hence it gets between 45 l/c/d and 95 l/c/d. But is should be noted that there are more than 300,000 Palestinians living in close to 240 communities that have no distribution networks, and depend on getting their water supply from the water tankers.

    In the mountain aquifer, the Palestinian side has control over 25 percent of the aquifer while Israel controls 85 percent. Such has a direct impact on the ability of the PWA to put together and implement an effective water policy. However, the PWA has put together its policy and strategy (included in the materials that was sent earlier in the Background) bearing in mind the limitations that we face.

    The PWA has adopted the construction of a series of wastewater treatment plants in the West Bank and Gaza in order to protect the aquifer and find an alternative source of water for agriculture. Such plans have been funded by the German government, and more recently by the USAID. So far, only one operating treatment plant is operational, AL-Bireh treatment, and the efforts are underway to construct 4 more. The main limitation of the construction is permitting in addition of the availability of funds for the capital investment.

    There has been some reported cases where the Israeli settlers from Kiryat Arba' would sell water to the Palestinians from the adjacent city of Hebron. The price of the cubic meter reaches as high as 20 Israeli Shekels (4.44 USD) compared to the average price of 4 NIS (0.89 USD). The sale is not illegal, but it should be noted that the water supply that comes through the Israeli company Mekorot to the Palestinian communities is reduced during the summer times in favor of keeping, if not increasing, the water supply to the Israeli colonies.

 Page 147       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    The Israeli wall has been used to separate the Palestinian communities from their agriculture wells and agriculture land. There have been cases where the wells are located fully on the wrong side of the wall with no or limited access to the site; and in some cases the well is located on one side where the agriculture land is located on the other side. The access to the sites is controlled through some gates that are manned only twice a day, one time in the morning when people want to cross to the other side to tend their land, and the second time in the afternoon when the people are ready to go back to their homes. During the two times, the gates are shut down. No compensation has been given to Palestinians who lost their main means of living.



RESPONSES FROM URI SHAMIR, PH.D., TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD BY THE COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

93528aq.eps

93528ar.eps



RESPONSES FROM HAIM SHAKED, PH.D., TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD BY THE COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

 Page 148       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

Question:

    How much water is allocated to agricultural use in Jordan? What percentage of the agricultural sector is represented in Jordan's economy?

Response:

a) Water allocated to agricultural use in Jordan amounted to 430 MCM in 2003 coming from groundwater and surface water that equals 54.5% of all the used fresh water. In addition, about 76 MCM/yr of treated water were used for restricted irrigation representing about 8% of all water uses.

b) The percentage of agricultural sector is represented in Jordan's economy as direct contribution of 3.2% and as indirect contribution of approximately 10%.

Question:

    If the status quo remains, when will Jordan completely be out of water?

Response:

    Jordan's strategy and policies emphasize the utilization of all water resources. According to the investment plan prepared for the years 2002–2011, which describes the future water projects with a total cost of 3.5 billion US$, Jordan will have a deficit of 345 MCM/yr by the year 2015. To meet the projected deficit Jordan is exploring the development of non-conventional water sources such as, the Red Sea—Dead Sea water conveyance, multi-purpose project.

 Page 149       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

Question:

    What type of water rationing system takes place in Jordan? Do systems vary from rural to urban areas?

Response:

    Water rationing has been taking place in Jordan since the early 1980's, where water is distributed through the water supply network only once a week for 24–48 hours for both rural and urban areas.

    Water prices are regulated through increasing block tariffs, where small consumers obtain subsidized water, whereas big consumers pay more the costing prices.

Question:

    What is the average working budget for the Ministry of Water and Irrigation?

Response:

    The average working budget for the Ministry of Water and Irrigation is around 500 Million US$ per year, including loans, grants and direct government contribution.

 Page 150       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

Question:

    How would you assess Jordan's concern for the environmental degradation of the Dead Sea Basin? Would you say that Jordan has found an adequate balance between development and environmental concerns?

Response:

    Jordan has been at the forefront of raising the issues of the environmental degradation of the Dead Sea Basin through various regulations and schemes. A Master Plan has been developed that clearly defines the planning and environmental impacts of the various development activities such as; tourism, agriculture etc on the Dead Sea Basin. One recent example was shifting the site of the Mujib dam at great expense to help protect one of the ecological sub-systems of the Dead Sea.

    Jordan has been working hand in hand with NGOs, environmental organizations and stakeholders to address the raised environmental concerns of any water project. Jordan has developed its vision of the area through the ''Protecting the Dead Sea Initiative'', which, with the support and backing of region partners, namely Israel aims at saving the environment of the Dead Sea and the surrounding areas through sound polices and long-term vision. Jordan is also exploring the possibility of listing the Dead Sea area as a world Heritage site and/or Man and Biosphere with the UNESCO.

Question:

 Page 151       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Are there sufficient wastewater recycling plants in Israel, the West Bank and Gaza, and Jordan? If not, what is being done to increase the number of plants available?

Response:

    Jordan has a master plan including studies to expand in building wastewater treatment plants including reuse schemes. At present, the municipal wastewater of the main cities is treated in 19 treatment plants. In addition some universities, hospitals, military camps have their own wastewater treatment plants and reuse schemes. All industries in Jordan have to treat their water before discharging it to the environment. There are plans to construct 16 additional municipal wastewater treatment plants to further expand the service and to reuse the expected effluents. These projects will be implemented after securing the financial support.

Question:

    Are the governments of the Jordan River Valley spending enough money on much needed sewerage networks and treatment plants?

Response:

    Jordan has developed a wastewater master plan for the Jordan Valley area. Recently, a wastewater treatment plant was constructed in Al'twal area (Middle Jordan Valley) with the assistance of the Canadians. There are also plans to expand in wastewater treatment in the Jordan Valley area upon the availability of necessary finance. Several wastewater treatment plants in the highland areas were constructed in order to improve the quality of water flowing towards the Jordan Valley to help protect its environment.

 Page 152       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

Question:

    Do the water scarce countries of the Jordan River Basin have the appropriate water infrastructure in place to store and distribute large amounts of desalinated water?

Response:

    No, Jordan does not have the necessary infrastructure for that, and I believe that neither Israel nor the Palestinian Authority posses such systems.

    Chairman HYDE. I want to congratulate our two guests in Tel Aviv. I think the fact that one is a Palestinian and one is an Israeli and they both have a common cause is a sign that this subject has great potential for peacemaking as well as agriculture. So we will excuse you then, and thank you for your marvelous input. And, believe me, your papers will be read. Thank you. And thanks to our friends in Tel-Aviv. Thank you.

    Chairman HYDE. Dr. Franklin M. Fisher is the Jane Berkowitz Carlton and Dennis William Carlton Professor of Microeconomics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, where he has taught since 1960. Professor Fisher has published 16 books and over 150 articles in the area of economics. He has also served for more than a decade as Chair of the Water Economics Project, and he holds a doctorate from Harvard.

    Dr. Haim Shaked is the Founding Director of the Sue and Leonard Miller Center for Contemporary Judaic Studies at the University of Miami. Dr. Shaked is here today representing the Taplin Middle East Peace Project with respect to the Jordan Basin and the restoration of the Dead Sea. Dr. Shaked holds a Doctorate from the University of London School of Oriental and African Studies.

 Page 153       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    We are honored to have you all appear before the Committee today. We salute your patience as well as your learning.

    And, Dr. Fisher, would you proceed with a summary of your statement. If you could confine it and capsulate it to 5 minutes, give or take. The rest of your statement will be made a part of the record.

STATEMENT OF FRANKLIN M. FISHER, PH.D., JANE BERKOWITZ CARLTON AND DENNIS WILLIAM CARLTON PROFESSOR OF ECONOMICS, MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

    Mr. FISHER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I shall try.

    Chairman HYDE. Will you push the button on your mike?

    Mr. FISHER. Yes. Is that better? I said, thank you. I will try to keep it down. My usual talk on this subject runs about 8 hours.

    But in any event, Mr. Chairman, Members of the Committee, it is a privilege to testify before you today. As the Chairman mentioned, I am the Chair of the Water Economics Project, which is an international project of Israeli, Jordanian, Palestinian experts, some of whom have, in fact, testified here today facilitated by the Government of the Netherlands.

    The assertion is often made, and we heard it today, that disputes over water will be a major cause of war, perhaps especially in the Middle East. But there is an outside-the-box way of thinking about water problems and water disputes. That way involves thinking about the economics of water. And when this is done, water disputes and negotiations that appear to be a zero-sum game can be seen to be transformable into win-win situations, with water becoming a source of cooperation rather than of conflict.

 Page 154       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    I begin with an example. No matter how much one values water, one can't rationally value it beyond the cost of replacing the water. That means the cost of desalination on the Mediterranean coast puts an upper bound on the value of water, and one can compute what that is. As Professor Shamir stated, that cost is about 60 cents per cubic meter and, in fact, is expected to fall. That means that a cubic meter of water can never be worth more than 60 cents in the large cities or the coast.

    But water in dispute between Israelis and Palestinians isn't on the coast. A good deal of it is underground in the Mountain Aquifer, and it has its own costs. It would cost roughly 40 cents a cubic meter to extract and convey to the cities of the coast. That calculation, that says that ownership of Mountain Aquifer water can't ever be worth more than about 20 cents per cubic meter per year.

    Now, 100 million cubic meters per year is a very large amount of water in the Mountain Aquifer dispute, and what I have just said is that 100 million cubic meters of Mountain Aquifer water per year is never going to be worth more than roughly $20 million per year, and, in fact, our estimates are that it is going to be worth much less. This is rounding error in the national accounts, particularly for Israel whose pre-intifada GDP was approximately 100 billion per year. To put it more dramatically, even so large an amount of disputed water is not worth the purchase of a fighter plane.

    Now, the major lesson to be learned here is not that desalination is the efficient answer to the water dispute problem. It is an answer; it is not, in fact, an efficient answer at least in the short run. The lesson is rather that it is really important to think about water in terms of water values rather than only in terms of water quantities.

 Page 155       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Water, despite the fact that it is essential for human life, is not beyond price. In fact, there is no shortage of water for human consumption in the region, at least if you permit desalination. The problem is rather that there is no cheap water for agriculture. Water can and should be thought of as an economic commodity, although one that has very special attributes. If one does so, the water problem can be monetized, deemotionalized, and put into perspective.

    Our project has produced a computer-driven tool for the rational analysis of water systems. That tool is called WAS, W–A–S, for Water Allocation System. It produces a simulated market solution that takes into account the special attributes of water and shows how to allocate the available water to maximize the benefits obtained from it. It permits the user of the tool to impose constraints on the solution that reflects social values of water that are not just private values.

    When this is done, WAS, among other things, produces a system of prices called shadow values that can be used to guide decisions just as prices do in actual free-market situations, but that reflect the social value of water. Those shadow values are the efficient prices with which to guide international cooperation in water. For a single country, you can use this tool to evaluate the costs and benefits of proposed infrastructure projects or of new sources of water, and we have done that for all three of the parties under discussion today. But WAS can also be used to facilitate negotiations and in design of a regional system of cooperation.

    I shall begin with negotiations. I have already pointed out that you can use WAS to enable water negotiations to be recast in monetary terms rather than in terms of matters of life and death. Further, by using WAS a party can evaluate the effects on it of different water ownership settlements, and the results can be quite surprising. For example, use of WAS for Israel shows that the loss of the water sources on the Golan, which was mentioned earlier today with regard to the Syrian negotiations, or for that matter of the entire flow of the Hasbani River, a river over which the Lebanese proposal to pump generated very heated controversy not very long ago, that in normal times, in nondrought times, this would cost Israel only about $5 million a year, and even in drought times no more than about $50 million if it lost either one of those water sources entirely. I am not suggesting that it is appropriate for Israel to give up those water sources; I am simply saying this is not the sort of stuff of which wars ought to be made.

 Page 156       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Most important of all, WAS can be used to guide cooperation in water. Such cooperation would take the form of an agreement to trade permits, as it were, to use each other's water at WAS-produced prices. This leads to very large gains to all participants and is a superior solution to the standard water treaty. Project results show that there would be big benefits to both Israel and the Palestinians from such an arrangement; benefits could bring gains to each of them larger than the value of ownership of more or less the disputed water is ever going to be. Beyond that, such an arrangement would bring the gains from a flexible cooperative arrangement in which allocations change for everyone's benefit as populations grow and incomes and technology change. That form of an agreement could turn water from a source of stress into a source of cooperation.

    I now present some examples, bringing this down to a more level of greater specificity.

    Our results strongly show that it would be beneficial for both Israel and the Palestinians if there were a water recycling plant in Gaza with some of the output sold to Israel for agricultural use in the Negev, where there is effectively no aquifer to be polluted. That means that Israel has a positive economic interest in assisting with the financing of such a plant. That is a fairly inexpensive confidence-building measure in an area that does not impinge on the core issues separating the parties.

    Next, without some form of cooperation there is going to have to be desalination in Gaza. Indeed, if the problem is not resolved, they are going to have to pump the desalinated water uphill to the southern West Bank or have Israel propose to do it. That is not an efficient way to supply the West Bank. Under a cooperative agreement, one could avoid this. The Palestinians would use more water on the West Bank; Israel would supply more water to Gaza.

 Page 157       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Now, I should mention two more things, and then I will close. One is that in addition to this tool, we have produced another tool specifically used for analyzing the effects of water issues on crop choice and agriculture, a critical issue as to, among other things, the Palestinians in the West Bank, Jordan's rural population, and, if this were expanded to other areas, the fate of the marsh Arabs in Iraq.

    The other thing I want to point out is that it should not escape attention that similar progress could be made elsewhere; for example, in the rebuilding of Iraq's water system, in aiding infrastructure development in Saudi Arabia, and in the resolution of water disputes among Iraq, Syria, and Turkey, possibly building a regional cooperative water authority. This may be the moment to start making something like that come true, and I certainly believe it is the moment to start expanding on the cooperation already existing among Israel, Palestine, and Jordan.

    The tools are available with which to solve water conflicts and assist the countries of the region in efficiently dealing with water management and infrastructure. And this may be, if I may say so, the time to jump-start an area of agreement between Israelis and Palestinians and actually get moving out of the impasse.

    Chairman HYDE. Thank you, Dr. Fisher.

    [The prepared statement of Mr. Fisher follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF FRANKLIN M. FISHER, PH.D., JANE BERKOWITZ CARLTON AND DENNIS WILLIAM CARLTON PROFESSOR OF ECONOMICS, MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

 Page 158       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

WATER AND COOPERATION IN THE MIDDLE EAST

1. INTRODUCTION

    Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, it is a privilege to testify before you today.

    My name is Franklin M. Fisher, and I am the Jane Berkowitz Carlton and Dennis William Carlton Professor of Microeconomics at MIT, where I have taught for 44 years. Most relevant to this proceeding, however, is the fact that, for more than a decade, I have been the Chair of what is now named the ''Water Economics Project'' (WEP), an international cooperative effort of Israeli, Jordanian, and Palestinian experts, facilitated by the government of The Netherlands with the knowledge—and sometimes the assent—of the three regional governments.

    The assertion is often made that disputes over water will be a major cause of war in the present century, perhaps especially in the Middle East where water and disputes over water are among the seemingly everlasting problems. In particular, water issues are seen as forming an important part of the Israeli-Palestinian problem and are, of course, very important for Jordan as well.

    This comes about because water is usually considered in terms of quantities only. Demands for water are projected, supplies estimated, and a balance struck. Where that balance shows a shortage, alarms are sounded and engineering or political solutions to secure additional sources are sought. Disputes over water are also generally thought of in this way. Two or more parties with claims to the same water sources are seen as playing a zero-sum game. The water that one party gets is simply not available to the others, so that one party's gain is seen as the other parties' loss. Water appears to have no substitute, so that it can only be traded for other water.

 Page 159       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    But there is another way of thinking about water problems and water disputes, a way that can lead to dispute resolution and optimal water management. That way involves thinking about the economics of water and shows, in fact, that water can be traded off for other things. When this is understood, water disputes and negotiations that appear to be a zero-sum game can be transformed into ''win-win'' situations, with water becoming a source of cooperation rather than of conflict.

    In particular, dealing with—and perhaps settling—the Israeli-Palestinian water issue can be done in a way that involves relatively inexpensive confidence-building measures, benefits both parties, and does not impinge on the real core issues of either side.

    The methods that can be used to accomplish these ends already have been developed. I now discuss that development and the methods themselves. (More detailed discussion is elsewhere available.(see footnote 6)

I also submit a less technical forthcoming paper, F.M. Fisher, ''Water Value, Water Management, and Water Conflict: A Systematic Approach'' ,

It should be noted that the estimates of the value of cooperation in these papers are now known to be greatly understated, due to additional information that has been incorporated since they were written.

 Page 160       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

2. THE WATER ECONOMICS PROJECT (WEP): WATER VALUES

To understand the principles used by the WEP, it is convenient to consider the following example—a version of which started the WEP:

Water is a scarce resource, and scarcity can breed conflict. But, no matter how much one values water, that value cannot rationally exceed the cost of replacing the water. Hence, the availability of seawater desalination puts an upper bound on the value of water for any country that has a seacoast. Moreover, that upper bound is not very high, as can be seen in the following rough calculation:

a.

The cost of desalination on the Mediterranean coast of Israel and Gaza is at most 60 per cubic meter and is falling as technology improves.(see footnote 7) That means that a cubic meter of water can never be worth more than 60 in the large cities of the coast.

b.

But the water principally in dispute between Israelis and Palestinians is not on the coast; it is underground in the so-called Mountain Aquifer, much of which lies beneath the hills of the West Bank. That water would cost roughly 40 per cubic meter to extract and convey to the coast. Hence, ownership of Mountain Aquifer water cannot be worth more than 20 per cubic meter per year (60—40).

 Page 161       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

c.

100 million cubic meters (MCM) per year is a very large amount of water in the Mountain Aquifer dispute. It is almost certainly larger than the true distance between the parties' negotiating positions. But 100 MCM of Mountain Aquifer water per year can never be worth more than roughly $20 million per year (100 MCM x 20), and the WEP's estimates are that it is worth much less. This is rounding error in the national accounts—particularly for Israel, whose pre-intifada GDP was approximately $100 billion per year.

d.

To put it more dramatically, even so large an amount of disputed water is not worth the purchase of a fighter plane.

e.

Note, however, that, while desalination plays a central role in this example, it is not the efficient solution to the water problem (although it may contribute). The WEP's results suggest that (under proper management) desalination will not be efficient on the Mediterranean Coast of Israel and Gaza for at least the next 15 years, except in times of extreme drought. The scarcity value of water on the Mediterranean Coast (the shadow value of water as defined below) is unlikely to be high enough to justify either desalination or Turkish imports.

The major lesson to be learned here is that it is important to think about water in terms of water values rather than only in terms of water quantities. Water, despite the fact that it is essential for human life, is not beyond price.

 Page 162       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Indeed, the question of whether there is ''enough'' water is not well posed. As the example shows, any country with a seacoast can have as much water as it wants, provided it is willing to pay for it. But whether it is so willing will depend on water values. And such values are different for different uses, for some uses have a high priority and a high value, while other uses have a low priority and a low value. Proper analysis of water problems must deal with this.

    In fact, there is no shortage of water for human consumption in the region being considered. The problem is rather that there is no cheap water for agriculture. Agriculture that must operate on fresh water is not profitable; hence, agriculture must either be subsidized or must use treated wastewater.

    Further, consider the following: A country that owns water and uses the water itself does not obtain the water for free. Rather it incurs an opportunity cost—giving up the money for which it could have sold the water. Naturally, it will choose to do this if it values the water more than the money and will not do it if it values the money more than the water. But this is no different from the behavior of a buyer that purchases water if it values the water more than the money required to make the purchase and refrains from purchasing if it values the money more than the water. Note that this means that the questions of who owns water and of who optimally uses the water, while both potentially important, are unrelated, different questions.

    In sum, water can and should be thought of as an economic commodity—although one that has special attributes. By doing so, the water problem can be monetized, de-emotionalized, and put in perspective. One finds that water can be traded off for other things. Water negotiations should not be left solely to water negotiators who, quite naturally, have traditionally thought only in terms of water quantities.

 Page 163       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

3. THE WAS TOOL: SIMULATED MARKETS

    Using such principles, the WEP has produced a computer-driven tool for the rational analysis of water systems and water problems. The tool is called ''WAS'' (for ''Water Allocation System'').(see footnote 8)

    WAS deals explicitly with water values. In so doing, it departs from the standard (but inadequate) mode of thinking about water only in terms of quantities and provides guidance along market-driven lines.

    Of course, the standard economic answer as to how to allocate scarce resources is through the use of free markets. However, there are circumstances in which that answer needs to be modified. In particular, the use of actual markets works correctly only if those markets are competitive and then only if all the social benefits and costs of resource use are reflected in private benefits and costs and hence in private profit and loss calculations.

    Neither condition is true of water. In particular, many countries (including Israel and Jordan) subsidize water for farmers, implying that water used for agriculture is regarded as more valuable to society than the price that the users (farmers) are willing to pay. To take another example, water use surely has environmental consequences not borne by private parties alone. Beyond all this, water and water quality have implications for the spread of disease—and societies have interest in that beyond the interest of particular patients.

 Page 164       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    It is possible, however, to produce a simulated market-driven solution that corrects these problems. One way to describe WAS is to observe that it does exactly that.

    WAS models the water economy of the area studied (country, territory, region). It takes information on demand, water sources, and infrastructure—actual or projected—and shows how to allocate the available water to maximize the benefits obtained from it. In so doing, it permits the user of the tool to impose constraints—constraints that reflect the social values of water that are not just private values. (For example, the user can specify that water be made available to certain users at set prices or that a given minimum amount of water be allocated to certain uses.)

    When this is done, the output of WAS also includes a system of prices (''shadow values'') that can be used to guide decisions just as prices do in an actual free market. But these shadow values reflect the social values of water whether private or public. As further described below, these shadow values are the efficient prices with which to guide international cooperation in water.

4. USES OF WAS: SINGLE COUNTRY

    For a single country in isolation, the WAS tool can be used to evaluate the costs and benefits of proposed infrastructure projects. Among other examples, the WEP has used it to evaluate the benefits of:

a water recycling plant in Gaza (see below);

 Page 165       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

projects designed to bring badly needed water to Amman;

the construction of an additional Israeli pipeline to supply Jerusalem.

    WAS can also be used to assess and guide water policies.

    Further, the WAS shadow value of water in a particular location gives the price that a country should be willing to pay for an additional source of water at that location. Such a source can be a desalination plant, the development of a new well area, or even imports from outside.

    For example, Turkey is a water-rich country and has proposed at various times to export water to others by sea or pipeline. The use of WAS by prospective importers of such water (Israel, Jordan, or the Palestinians, for example, or even Iraq) can show the price that they should be willing to pay for it.(see footnote 9)

    In all such evaluations, WAS automatically accounts for the effects of the change in water flows caused by a project and, more generally, for the scarcity value of water including the opportunity costs of changing the amount of water available elsewhere in the system. It is a powerful tool, dealing with demand benefits as well as supply costs.

5. USES OF WAS: NEGOTIATIONS

 Page 166       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

But the uses of WAS are not merely domestic. It can be used to facilitate international negotiations in water and in the design of a mutually beneficial system of regional cooperation in water. I begin with negotiations:

The use of the WEP's tools leads to rational analysis of water problems. In particular, it separates the problems of water ownership and water usage. In so doing, it enables the user to value water ownership in money terms (after imposing his or her social values and policies). This enables water negotiations to be conducted with water seen as something that can, in principle, be traded. Further, since the Project shows that water values are not, in fact, very high (partly because of the availability of seawater desalination), the water ownership problem can be made a manageable one.

Even using the Project's tools to investigate only the water economy of the user's own country, the user can evaluate the effects of different water-ownership settlements. (By making assumptions as to the data, policies, and forecasts of other parties, the user can also gain information as to the effects on them.) This should assist in preparing negotiating positions if the ultimate agreement is to be of the standard water-ownership-division type with no further cooperation.

For example, use of WAS for Israel shows that the loss of the water sources on the Golan or of the entire flow of the Hasbani River (over the Lebanese pumping of which there was heated controversy not long ago) would cost Israel about $5 million a year in non-drought periods and well under $50 million in drought times.

6. USES OF WAS: REGIONAL COOPERATION

 Page 167       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    But the standard form of a water treaty (water quantity division) is not optimal. Perhaps most important of all, the Project shows clearly that continued cooperation in water tends to be for the benefit of all parties. Such cooperation in the form of an agreement to trade water(see footnote 10) at model prices can lead to very large gains to all participants (sellers as well as buyers) and is a superior solution to the standard water-quantity-division agreement. For example, project results show that there are very large benefits to both Israel and the Palestinians from such an arrangement. The gains are far larger than the value of ownership of more or less of the disputed water will ever be. Indeed, under cooperation, the value of a shift of ownership of 10% the Mountain Aquifer would only be about $8 million per year by 2010. By contrast, the value of cooperation itself would exceed $80 million per year, with both parties benefiting. By 2020, such a shift in Aquifer ownership would be worth about $15 million per year, while the value of cooperation would exceed $130 million per year.(see footnote 11)

    Similar results (although not so large ones) hold for a cooperative agreement involving Jordan.

    Beyond the economic gains of such an arrangement are the gains from a flexible, cooperative water agreement in which allocations change for everyone's benefit as populations grow and incomes and technology change. Such an agreement can turn water from a source of stress into a source of cooperation.

    Note that no party to such an arrangement is forced to sell (or to buy) water. Trades take place only when both parties gain. And, indeed, as in all willing trades, both parties do gain. The buyer receives water that it values more than the money it pays; the seller receives money in excess of the value it places on the sold water—money above and beyond the amount needed to compensate its water-users for having to make do with less or more expensive water.

 Page 168       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

7. SOME EXAMPLES

I now present some examples of the way in which the WEP's tools could be used in the Middle East.

a. Israel and the Palestinians

1. Every regional run of the WAS model strongly shows that it would be mutually beneficial for both Israelis and Palestinians if there were a water recycling plant in Gaza with some of the output sold to Israel for agricultural use in the Negev where there is no aquifer to be polluted.(see footnote 12) This means that Israel has a positive economic interest in assisting with the financing of such a plant. That would be a fairly inexpensive confidence-building measure in an area—water—that very many people, experts included, have thought must result in conflict because of ''scarcity''. An agreement on this confidence-building step would not impinge on the core issues separating the parties.

2. The construction of such a plant and the agreement to use it as described could be the first step in a general water-trade agreement of the sort described above. Moreover, in the presence of such an agreement, it would be mutually beneficial for Israel to sell water to Gaza, supplying it through the Israeli National Water Carrier that already runs nearby.(see footnote 13)

3. Without some form of cooperation, with their present water resources, the Palestinians will have to incur the costs of desalination at Gaza. Indeed, if the problem is not resolved, they will have to pump the desalinated water uphill to the southern West Bank. That is obviously costly and inefficient and would be easily avoided by a cooperative agreement of the kind described.

 Page 169       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

b. Elsewhere in the Region

4. The rebuilding of Iraq will necessarily involve the rebuilding of Iraq's water system. WAS can be used to assist in the planning of that enterprise, providing a country-wide analysis of benefits from different infrastructure plans.

5. Such uses are not restricted to Iraq. I also note that Saudi Arabia is about to spend billions of dollars on water infrastructure. The Saudis also could greatly benefit from the use of the WAS tool to guide that program. Indeed, Syria, and other countries without a fully developed water infrastructure could be helped in this way.

It should be noted that the offer of the WAS tool for domestic purposes—in a bilateral arrangement between the US and the receiving country—may be a way to promote the mode of thought about water that leads to regional cooperation.

6. Further, as mentioned in an earlier footnote, in addition to WAS, the WEP has produced a tool (AGSM) specifically for analyzing the effects of water policies and water availability on crop choice and agriculture. The rethinking of agriculture and its water use is critical to what happens to the marsh Arabs in Iraq, to the Palestinians in the West Bank, and to the future of Jordan's rural population.

7. Iraq, Syria, and Turkey have an ongoing dispute over the great rivers. As with other water disputes (including the Israeli-Palestinian one), there are different principles of international law, and they do not lead to the same conclusion. The use of a WAS tool could assist in resolving the disputes, using prices to allocate the disputed water, and doing so to the mutual benefit of all the parties.

 Page 170       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

8. Turkey (despite such disputes) is a water-rich country. It has proposed to sell water to others. This could be the foundation of a general trade agreement for water—and the WAS tool could be used to guide the prices and the regional water flows involved. Indeed, one can imagine a general regional water authority stretching from Turkey through Syria and Iraq to Lebanon, Israel, Jordan, and the coming Palestinian state. This is a bold vision, but now may be the moment to make it come true.

8. A NOTE ON SECURITY

    Naturally, there are a number of issues that arise when considering such a cooperative arrangement. Chief among them is that of security. What if one of the partners to such a scheme were to withdraw? Of course, such withdrawal would be contrary to the interest of the withdrawing party, but, as we have sadly seen, people and governments do not always act in their own long-run self-interest.

    The main cost of such a withdrawal would occur if the non-withdrawing party had failed to build infrastructure that would be needed without cooperation but not with it.. In the case of Israel and the Palestinians, it might appear that such risk would be chiefly Palestinian, since they, but not Israel, would need desalination plants in the absence of cooperation but not in its presence. (Israel, by contrast, already has a highly developed system of water infrastructure and any decision to build desalination plants does not depend on a decision to cooperate or not cooperate with the Palestinians.)

    Interestingly, this conclusion may not hold. WAS results show that it will not be cost-effective (at least in years of normal hydrology) for the Palestinians to build desalination facilities in the Gaza Strip (its only seacoast) simply to supply the growing Gazan population. Rather, with water ownership in the West Bank restricted to present quantities, it would pay (without cooperation) to build such facilities and expensively pump desalinated water uphill to the southern West Bank. But this result also implies that a withdrawal by Israel from a cooperative agreement could be met by Palestinian pumping more than permitted by treaty on the West Bank while building a Gazan desalination plant. This reduces the security issue under discussion.

 Page 171       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

9. WHERE DOES THE WEP STAND POLITICALLY?

I add a few remarks on how these ideas are viewed by various governments (to the extent that they are known at all).

The Israeli-Jordanian-Palestinian project has been facilitated and financed by the government of The Netherlands, which still stands squarely behind it.

Nabil Sha'ath, Palestinian Foreign Minister, has been a strong supporter for a long time. Moreover, the Palestinians have been negotiating with the Dutch over a bilateral continuation of the WEP and appear eager to have it continue. On the other hand, the Project is highly controversial in the Arab press, being sometimes erroneously described as a Zionist plot to force the Arabs to sell ''their'' water.

This reflects the fact that the WEP's way of thinking about water is not well understood among the general population (not only the Palestinians) and, indeed, seems revolutionary. Considerable progress has been made, however, among water experts and some government officials.

I do not know how the present Israeli government regards these matters. Some earlier governments were in support. Prime Minister Sharon has never had a serious exposition of the subject.

The attitude of the Israeli Water Commissioner's office varies over time—often depending on non-water events. Not surprisingly, there is a ''not invented here'' syndrome (although the WEP has several Israeli leaders). Israel, with its well-developed infrastructure, has the least to gain domestically from the use of WAS—although it has much to gain internationally.

 Page 172       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

The current Jordanian Water Minister, Hazim El-Naser, is a former leader of the Jordanian team of the WEP. He has told the Dutch, however, that the project is now a low-priority one for Jordan—a position that is not necessarily shared by all his colleagues, at least some of whom look forward to a regional use of WAS with Jordan a principal participant.

Approaches have been made to Syria from time to time. When this was first done some years ago, there was very substantial interest from the Ministries of Economics and Irrigation, but, as one might expect, the attitude of the Syrian Foreign Office has consistently been that they will discuss nothing until the Golan is given back. That is short-sighted, since they could well use a WAS model for their own domestic purposes and since their principal water disputes do not involve Israel at all. It might now be possible for the US government to convince them of this.

I have recently had positive signs from Lebanon indicating interest both in WAS model for domestic purposes and in regional matters.

10. CONCLUSION: THE TIME IS RIPE

The tools are now available with which to solve water conflicts and assist the countries of the region in efficiently dealing with water management and infrastructure.(see footnote 14) This can be done by thinking in terms of water values rather than quantities and using a simulated market-driven mechanism to guide policies, projects, and cooperation. If that is done, the nature of agriculture in the region could be rationalized based on rethinking water availability and cost on a regional and national basis.

 Page 173       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

Moreover, American military control of Iraq, the need for a dramatic sign of improved US/Turkish cooperation, the need for Syria to find an area in which it can cooperate, Presidential involvement with the Israel-Palestine Road Map, and, above all, the need to find an area of cooperation permitting a bypass of the deadlock between Israelis and Palestinians are all part of a mosaic in which a strong American-led initiative that is market driven could be very successfully advanced.

93528as.eps

93528at.eps

93528au.eps

93528av.eps

93528aw.eps

93528ax.eps

93528ay.eps

93528az.eps

93528ba.eps

 Page 174       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

93528bb.eps

93528bc.eps

93528bd.eps

93528be.eps

93528bf.eps

93528bg.eps

93528bh.eps

93528bi.eps

93528bj.eps

93528bk.eps

93528bl.eps

93528bm.eps

93528bn.eps

 Page 175       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

93528bo.eps

93528bp.eps

93528bq.eps

93528br.eps

93528bs.eps

93528bt.eps

93528bu.eps

93528bv.eps

93528bw.eps

Chairman HYDE. Dr. Shaked.

STATEMENT OF HAIM SHAKED, PH.D., DIRECTOR, THE MILLER CENTER, UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI

Mr. SHAKED. Mr. Chairman, I have a 5-minute presentation. I timed it. I hope that is a relief.

 Page 176       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    I am very pleased to have the opportunity to testify before the Committee, and, if I may take sides, to commend you, Mr. Chairman, on the decision to devote a hearing to this complex and urgent subject.

    Over the past 45 years I have been studying the Middle East in various capacities. I do not presume to have the answers, but I do believe that I have gained certain insights into the Middle Eastern situation, and I think I know what may or may not work in that troubled but extremely important region.

    The Taplin Middle East Peace Project at the University of Miami's Miller Center consists of several initiatives dealing with innovative ways of building peace between Israelis and Arabs. One such initiative, the subject of my testimony today, deals with the problems of the Jordan River Basin generally and specifically the severe crisis in its Dead Sea sub-region, caused primarily by negative water recharge.

    The Dead Sea, the lowest point on Earth and ecologically and historically unique, is dying rapidly. I circulated some aerial photographs which were taken by the Jordanian Ministry of Water and Irrigation, and I think these three photographs, one of which is a simulation, tell the world the whole story of what is happening in the Dead Sea.

    In recent years a broad range of national, international, and non-governmental stakeholders have become involved in the effort to save the Dead Sea, including, formally and publicly, Israeli and Jordanian Government ministers. Also, a series of conferences were held, notable amongst them those organized by Friends of the Earth-Middle East, whose Director is Mr. Gidon Bromberg, from whom we heard.

 Page 177       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    A number of alternative solutions have been suggested: Restoring the flow into the Dead Sea of the Jordan waters or pumping water from the Mediterranean or the Red Sea to replenish the Dead Sea. All three alternatives are highly complicated and very costly. The fourth alternative, business as usual, is, of course, catastrophic ecologically and eventually also economically.

    While much has been said and written about this, forward movement is impeded to a large extent by the divergent approaches taken by various stakeholders. These fall roughly into the following categories: National actors in the region, primarily Jordan and Israel, and to a certain extent also the Palestinians and Syria; non-governmental organizations; international financial institutions; public and private corporations; and potential donor countries. One of the problems inherent in stakeholder-driven solutions is that they inevitably (and legitimately) reflect individual stakeholder interests. A successful approach may well require going beyond the specific agendas of any single stakeholder, and even beyond the specific issues of the Dead Sea sub-region.

    The Dead Sea is part of a larger system and is affected directly by what happens in other parts of the Jordan River Basin, and therefore the solution to its problem may well require a comprehensive, systemic approach. Here we have been inspired by a unique American-Canadian institution, the International Joint Commission, known as IJC, established in 1910 as a consequence of the Boundary Waters Treaty of 1909 governing the waters across the United States-Canadian border. The IJC reflected the need to overcome a century of conflict and tension along a 5,600-mile-long border, with its mandate, ''to apply the treaty and help prevent and resolve water resource and environmental disputes between the two countries through processes that seek the common interests of both,'' it provided a way of managing critical relations between unequal partners with different interests.

 Page 178       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    One of the reasons for the outstanding success over more than 9 decades of the IJC is its status as an international body as well as its structure that expresses the partners' primary interest in successful regional management rather than the assertion of sovereignty or political primacy of one party over the other. The IJC manages resources by consensus rather than by majority fiat.

    Mr. Chairman, I would like to take this opportunity to announce that we at the University of Miami plan to convene an unofficial gathering of all relevant stakeholders. Its purpose will be to examine the possibility of adopting a regional management model similar to the IJC to the needs of the Jordan River Basin generally and the reclamation of the Dead Sea specifically. We have already secured a significant portion of the necessary funding.

    Finally, it is our hope that this proposed gathering will contribute to dealing with one critical issue facing this part of the Middle East. The alternative to this, I fear, might be the Biblical solution to the problems of the Dead Sea area, the destruction of the Cities of the Plain, Sodom and Gomorrah, with fire and brimstone. This Biblical solution must, of course, be averted.

    We believe that this can be done. And if I may, being a historian, insert a piece of little known history.

    Over 150 years ago, in the year 1848, a U.S. Naval Lieutenant Commander landed on the eastern shores of the Mediterranean, in the city of Acre, with two collapsible boats, and took them with a camel caravan to the Sea of Galilee and then went down the river all the way to the Dead Sea. Along the way, Lieutenant Commander Lynch produced the first modern scientific charts of the River Jordan and the Dead Sea. These charts have been used until quite recently. The importance of this is not only in the charts. I believe that this was the first time ever that the flag of the United States was hoisted in the Holy Land. So there is tremendous historic continuity for this House being involved, because when Lynch came back, he submitted a report including his two maps to the U.S. Congress.

 Page 179       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    Chairman HYDE. That is very fascinating. Thank you, Doctor.

    [The prepared statement of Mr. Shaked follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HAIM SHAKED, PH.D., DIRECTOR, THE MILLER CENTER, UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI

    Chairman Hyde and honorable members of the House Committee on International Relations, I am pleased to have the opportunity to address you today and to contribute to the discussion on innovative approaches to peace building in the Middle East within the context of this hearing on ''Water Scarcity in the Middle East: Regional Cooperation as a Mechanism toward Peace.''

    My name is Haim Shaked. I am the Dr. M. Lee Pearce Professor of Middle East Peace Studies; the Founding Director of the Middle East Studies Institute and the Sue and Leonard Miller Center for Contemporary Judaic Studies; and, a professor in the Department of International Studies, the College of Arts and Sciences at the University of Miami. Over the past thirty-five years, I was one of the founders and the Director of the Moshe Dayan Center for Middle Eastern and African Studies; and Dean of the Faculty of Humanities at Tel Aviv University, I created the Lauder School of Government, Diplomacy and Strategy at the Interdisciplinary Center in Herzliya, Israel's first private university and I established the Graduate School of International Studies at he University of Miami.

 Page 180       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    This background, by way of introduction, is to give the Committee some indication of my decades' long professional study of and interest in regional issues of war, peace, politics and governance. I do not presume to have ''the answers''—a presumption that this Committee may have encountered before and is foolhardy, given the sharp twists and turns of events in the Middle East in modern times. I do believe, however, that over the years I have gained certain insights into what may or may not work in that troubled but extremely important part of the world.

    Having said that, I am grateful for this opportunity to appear before this distinguished Committee. First, if I may, I would like to commend you, Mr. Chairman and your staff, on the decision to devote a hearing to the extremely complex and urgent subject of water scarcity in the Middle East. In this connection, I would like to describe some of the work being done at the University of Miami's Miller Center as part of the Taplin Middle East Peace Project, particularly with respect to the Jordan River Basin and the reclamation of the Dead Sea.

    The Taplin Peace Project is a cluster of peace building initiatives that are funded by a generous grant from the Sol Taplin Foundation and initiated as a result of the efforts of Mr. Aaron Podhurst, a member of its Board and a Trustee of the University of Miami. The overall management of the Taplin Middle East Peace Project is in my hands and those of my colleague Professor Eugene Rothman, who has an extensive background in peace building in the Middle East and elsewhere.

    The major thrust of the Taplin Project is to look at innovative ways of peace building in the Middle East between Israelis and Arabs, using new approaches to specific problems in order to develop an ever-expanding basis for cooperation and collaboration. These small steps are important for three reasons: (a) to encourage a peace building momentum, developing what might be called ''the habit of cooperation''; while (b) at the same time laying the groundwork for the ''day after'', or, in other words, what could happen the day after peace ''breaks out''; and (c) highlighting—for the benefit of political negotiators—concrete ''peace building blocks and dividends''. The last two points are critical in view of the painful series of events that have become the hallmark of the past three and a half years of Israeli-Palestinian relations.

 Page 181       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

An example of the 'Taplin approach' to a peace building project is the Middle East Public Health Diplomacy Initiative currently being organized jointly by the University of Miami, the Hebrew University's Kuvin Center for Tropical and Infectious Diseases and Al-Quds University's School of Medicine. The background to this initiative is the fact that it is obviously difficult to control and contain infectious diseases in times of conflict because of the absence of trans-border collaboration. The expectation, therefore, was that the incidence of such diseases would increase during the recent intifada. Because of the innovative approaches used by the Hebrew University and Al-Quds University, and against all odds, cooperation between Palestinian and Israeli medical professionals has continued rather than come to a halt.

This success story has become the basis for a peace building project that extends beyond the Middle East and the creation of a broad-based coalition for its implementation. The Taplin Project's Co-Director, Professor Rothman and I, with the support of an international coalition of scientists and policy makers, headed by Dr. Sanford Kuvin, founder of the Kuvin Center and scholars from the University of Miami (Professors Sherri Porcelain and John Beier of the Global Public Health Group, assisted by Professor Clyde McCoy, Chair of the Department of Epidemiology), have been working to bring together Israeli, Palestinian, Egyptian, Jordanian, North American, South American and Caribbean partners to adapt the best practices of the successful Israeli-Palestinian effort to control infectious diseases as a model that can be applied to other areas. Thus, Palestinian-Israeli interaction can be expanded to include other parts of the Middle East, such as Iraq, or in the Western Caribbean, especially Haiti. In addition to serving the very important interests of global public health, this initiative is also a 'health diplomacy-for-peace initiative' that can contribute to peace building. We hope to enlist the support of the American and Canadian governments and international non-governmental organizations in this collaborative effort to promote global public health and peace building.

 Page 182       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    The ''health diplomacy'' model is not unrelated to the subject of this Hearing which focuses on issues of water scarcity in the region and how regional cooperation can both alleviate or even resolve acute problems and simultaneously contribute to peace building. Within this conceptual framework, one of the major thrusts of the Taplin Project is the adaptation of the approaches just described to deal in an innovative manner with the problems of the Jordan River Basin, generally, and the severe crisis in the Dead Sea, specifically.

    In this connection, I would like to note that the Jordan River Basin and the Dead Sea have a long historic but little-known connection to the United States. Over 150 years ago, in 1848, an American Naval Lieutenant Commander, William F. Lynch, landed in Acre on the Eastern Mediterranean with two collapsible boats, arranged a camel caravan to carry them across the land to the Sea of Galilee, then went down the Jordan River into the Dead Sea. Lynch's maps of the Jordan River basin and Dead Sea, submitted as part of his report to the United States Congress, were the first modern systematic and scientific efforts to survey and chart the Jordan River and the Dead Sea and were in use until quite recently. To the best of my knowledge, it was Lynch's expedition that hoisted the flag of the United States in the Holy Land for the first time in history.

    Much, however, has dramatically changed in the condition of the Dead Sea in the century and a half following this expedition. In this connection, Israel's Minister of the Environment, Yehudit Naot, recently warned that ''the Dead Sea is dying, and only a major engineering effort can save it.'' This sentiment echoes an earlier statement made by King Abdallah II of Jordan that ''The Dead Sea is an important economic and tourist asset which should be environmentally preserved.''

 Page 183       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Some background: The Dead Sea, a body of water that is 1,320 feet below sea level—the lowest point on earth, is 38 miles long and about 11 miles wide and is situated primarily between Israel and Jordan, while in a relatively small section, the north-western shore of the Dead Sea is contiguous with the West Bank/Judea. This body of water and its surroundings, ecologically and historically unique, also constitutes a major economic resource supporting Israeli and Jordanian industries, such as potash, as well as tourists who visit the Dead Sea mainly for its waters that are known for their high level of salinity and concentration of minerals and reputed healing powers. All this—including unique natural ecosystems—is threatened because the Dead Sea is, ironically, dying.

    Until a few decades ago, the high levels of Dead Sea water evaporation were balanced by its only source of surface water, the Jordan River that flows into it from the North. However, for the last forty or more years, Israel and Jordan have been diverting large amounts of the Jordan's waters for drinking and agricultural use without providing replacement water. A five-year drought has further exacerbated the problem.

    As a result, the Dead Sea has receded in places over the last twenty years by as much as 2000 feet and, if remedial action is not taken soon, the sea will continue to recede approximately 3 feet a year, until it reaches a new equilibrium in about 400 years after a water-level decrease of 300 to 400 feet. This will lead to the disappearance of adjacent ground water, and. Consequently, the buckling and collapse of surrounding land—sinkholes are already a problem—and the loss of nearby wildlife and vegetation, a process that has begun and now is threatening to become a major detriment to the Dead Sea's ecosystem.

 Page 184       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    In recent years, recognizing the severity of the problem, a broad range of national, international and non-governmental actors and stakeholders have become involved in the effort to ''save the Dead Sea.'' The governments of Israel and Jordan through the Israel Ministry for National Infrastructures and the Jordanian Ministry of Planning, signed an agreement in September 2002 to develop a joint approach to restore the Dead Sea; the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) and its affiliate, the International Development Research Centre (IDRC), funded hydrological studies by Friends of the Earth Middle East; the Israel Geological Institute carried out a modeling study to forecast the results of some of the proposed solutions; The Kingdom of Jordan's Ministry of Water and Irrigation has been working on plans to remedy the situation; and, recently, the World Bank began working on the Terms of Reference (TOR) for a major feasibility study on efforts to reclaim the Dead Sea.

    A series of conferences and symposia were held, notable amongst them were those organized by groups such as Friends of the Earth—Middle East, including ''One Basin, One Strategy'' in 1999 or, more recently, the parallel conferences held in Israel and Jordan, ''The Dead Sea between Life and Death.'' Concrete steps for regional cooperation, especially between Israel and Jordan, moved ahead, including an agreement between the two countries on a monitoring and data management program in the Red Sea as part of the Red Sea Marine Peace Park Cooperative Research, Monitoring and Management Program (RSMPP). This continues with the organization of an international conference on water demand management by the Government of Jordan to be held at the Dead Sea at the end of May and the beginning of June 2004,

    A number of alternative solutions have been suggested. The most natural, of course, would be to restore the flow of the Jordan waters that have been diverted. This, however, would require new water sources to provide primarily Israelis and Jordanians but also Palestinians with substitute water supplies for their drinking and irrigation needs.

 Page 185       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    A second proposal is the ''Med-Dead'' solution, namely, to construct a canal or pipeline from the Mediterranean Sea through the Judean Hills/West Bank shared by Israelis and Palestinians, or around, that is, within the Green Line, north or south of the Judean Hills to the Dead Sea. This solution faces political obstacles; tremendous engineering difficulties; high costs economically; and, finally, the ecological challenge of mixing the waters of the Mediterranean with those of the Dead Sea.

    The third most recent proposal is the ''Red-Dead'' solution, which has come to be known as the ''Peace Conduit''. It calls for the channeling of water from the Red Sea to the Dead Sea. The water carrier (canal and/or pipeline) would pass through Jordan and—like the ''Med-Dead'' proposal—exploit the altitude differential between the Red Sea and the Dead Sea in order to generate energy and desalinate seawater. Initial estimates indicate that the project's costs might be as high as $4 billion and would involve moving 1.9 billion cubic meters of Red Sea water per annum—with half pumped into the Dead Sea and the other half being used for drinking and/or agricultural purposes. Like the ''Med-Dead'' solution, the ''Red-Dead'' proposal involves overcoming major political, engineering and economic obstacles, as well as the ecological challenge of mixing the waters of the Red Sea with those of the Dead Sea.

    The ''Peace Conduit'' proposal figured prominently in a recent World Bank document, Red Sea-Dead Sea Water Conveyance Project—Feasibility Study and Environmental and Social Assessment. It stated that the goals of this project include saving the Dead Sea, providing drinking water to the peoples of the region, and serving as a symbol of peace and cooperation. The report is part of the process of preparing agreed-upon Terms of Reference (TOR) for the major feasibility study that should precede any such project.

 Page 186       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    The successful completion of the TOR is not proving to be easy. A number of versions have already been drafted and rejected. Agreement is prevented to a large extent by the divergent approaches taken by various stakeholders as well as regional political complications. Environmental organizations, such as Friends of the Earth- Middle East, a key group in promoting the efforts to save the Dead Sea, argue that insufficient consideration has been given to the various critical elements involved in any of the above solutions, including the ''Peace Conduit.'' They have argued that all activities in areas such as engineering, social, institutional, economic, and environmental must be considered using a sustainable development approach.

    The stakeholders in the process that seeks to arrive at a solution to the problems of the Dead Sea and its environs fall roughly into the following categories: national actors in the region—namely Jordan, Israel and the Palestinians—reflecting their own national interests; leading non-governmental organizations, such as the Friends of the Earth-Middle East—whose agendas are environmentally-driven; international financial institutions who are concerned, on the one hand, with the broader international issues of regional peace and stability and, on the other hand, with an efficient, technically feasible, economically viable and cost-effective process for saving the Dead Sea; public and private corporations in such fields as engineering, construction, electricity, desalination, tourism (including medical-tourism); and potential donor countries.

    The national actors, the non-governmental organizations and donors have over the past ten years carried out studies and organized gatherings to look at the science and/or policy aspects of saving the Dead Sea. Yet, the waters of this unique resource continue to recede rapidly! One of the problems in mounting an effective effort, first, to arrest the drying out of the Dead Sea and, then, replenish it with water from other sources may be an outcome of the fact that many of these efforts are stakeholder-driven and, therefore, inevitably (and legitimately) reflect individual stakeholder interests and agendas. A successful approach may well require going beyond the specific agenda of any single stakeholder or group of stakeholders and even beyond the specific issues of the Dead Sea itself. The Dead Sea is part of a larger system, it is affected directly by what happens in other parts of the Jordan River Basin and, therefore, the solutions to its problem may well require a systemic approach.

 Page 187       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    As part of the Taplin Project, my colleagues (Professor Rothman and Professor Fernando Miralles-Wilhelm of the University of Miami's Department of Engineering and the University's Center for Ecosystem Science and Policy) and I have been examining alternate approaches towards the broader issues of management, policy, science and peace building with respect to the Dead Sea and the Jordan River Basin. The purpose of this effort has been to find ways to encourage the development of new and innovative regional models that also can help focus the efforts to save the Dead Sea.

    Our work in this respect does not seek to replicate the excellent efforts of the various governments, agencies and organizations that have been working in the field. Instead, our efforts are directed at the development of a broader conceptual framework that can provide the means for arriving at a regional Jordan River Basin-oriented solution that at the same time will also contribute to the reclamation of the Dead Sea.

    Our point of departure was to examine the issues that affect the entire Jordan Rift Valley, that is, the area stretching from Mount Hermon/Jabal Ash-Shaykh in the North to the Gulf of Aqaba/Eilat in the South. This broader regional approach encompasses issues as varied as the potential peaceful exploitation of Mt Hermon/Jabal Ash-Shaykh; the restoration of Lake Hulah; the reclamation of the Dead Sea; and, Israeli-Arab (Jordanian, Egyptian, Saudi Arabian) collaboration on issues related to the Red Sea.

    Each of these issues has a life of its own, but they are all linked by one common denominator—water. Therefore, they all constitute one system—the remediation of which might be facilitated by a common approach, or better yet, by a common system of management providing an integrated framework for the science and policy necessary to deal with these and other issues now and in the future. What seems to be called for is a macro structure, innovative and flexible, that could then facilitate the resolution of each of the specific problems mentioned above.

 Page 188       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Regional management has been present in the Middle East since the days of the ancient Egyptians and Babylonians. Since the First World War there have been numerous suggestions and plans for the regional management of the Jordan River Basin. This continues today, with proposals by environmental organizations such as Friends of the Earth-Middle East for the establishment of a Dead Sea Basin Biosphere Reserve to the call, in 2000, by Dureid Mahasneh, the former Secretary General of the Jordanian Jordan Valley Authority, for a ''jointly managed commission . . . to be formed to enable the implementation of these [Dead Sea] projects. Such a commission,'' he continued, ''granted international support and managed through private sector type initiatives, is necessary to cut red tape, execute projects and prevent future water conflicts in the region.'' However, more often than not, the obvious merit of such an approach has been defeated by the relentless logic of conflict and politics in the Middle East.

    Perhaps, the answer can be found elsewhere. Perhaps, working models from other regions and river basins could be adapted to serve the pressing needs of the Middle East. In this connection, we have been inspired and assisted in our work by a unique American-Canadian institution, the International Joint Commission (IJC), and, specifically, by the Canadian Section and its Chair, the Right Honorable Herb Gray, former Deputy Prime Minister of Canada, and his staff.

    The IJC was established in 1910 as a consequence of the Boundary Waters Treaty of 1909 governing the waters that cross the U.S.-Canadian border. The IJC was a reflection of the need to overcome a century of conflict and tension along that border and to manage the water resources that crossed the border. It was a way of managing critical relations between unequal partners with different interests. One historian, John W. Holmes, writing on the 70th anniversary of the creation of the IJC, described its dynamics involved as follows:

 Page 189       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

''At last Washington had reconciled itself to the existence of Canada as a large and permanent, if regrettable, fact of continental politics. . . . As for the Canadians . . . they had now overcome their natural fear of joint institutions to embrace one that was imaginatively designed to protect their interests. . . . It promised equity without interfering with national sovereignty.''

    The similarities and relevance to the Middle East are striking.

    The common view of the IJC is that this low profile but highly successful organization governs the water and air quality of the Great Lakes that lie between the United States and Canada. In fact, this function, while important, accounts for only 25% of its activities. The work of the IJC encompasses the basins and waters that make up almost the whole of the U.S.-Canadian border, from the Atlantic to the Pacific coasts, including the Alaska-Yukon-British Columbia boundary, in all, 5625 miles.

    According to the IJC, its mandate is ''to apply the [Boundary Waters] treaty and help prevent and resolve water-resource and environmental disputes between the two countries through processes that seek the common interests of both.'' In other words, the IJC has become an instrument for the regional management of the waters and basins between the two contiguous countries. The application of this broad mandate indicates remarkable parallels with the needs of the Jordan River Basin. As the IJC has indicated, '' a major responsibility . . . is to evaluate progress toward restoring and maintaining the chemical, physical and biological integrity of the waters of the Great Lakes ecosystem.''

 Page 190       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

One of the reasons for the outstanding success of the IJC is its status as an international body and its structure, one that expresses the partners' primary interest in successful regional management rather than the assertion of sovereignty or the political primacy of one party over the other. The IJC consists of six Commissioners, three appointed by the President of the United States and three appointed by the Prime Minister of Canada. There is an American Co-Chair and a Canadian Co-Chair. Unlike most other bi- and multi-partite international agencies, the number of voting participants is even and the Co-Chairs, therefore, do not have casting votes. Rather than give rise to a continuing deadlock where 3-3 votes along national lines become the rule, this approach transformed the IJC into an agency that manages resources by consensus rather than by majority fiat. Only once throughout its first 91 years did the IJC record a vote. IJC Commissioners—upon being appointed—sign a declaration confirming their impartiality. They deal with regional problems without being subject to instructions from their respective governments. In its own words, ''The Commission acts as a single body seeking common solutions rather than as separate national delegates representing the positions of their Governments.''

However, the management of a border basin area in excess of 5000 miles requires more than a central management structure, no matter how cleverly designed. The IJC, therefore established a subsidiary structure that involved the setting up of more than 20 boards to assist it in fulfilling its mandate. The board members are drawn from the two countries, but work as individuals in their personal and professional capacities, not as national or organizational representatives. This joint fact-finding approach enables the IJC to reach a consensus on different issues on their merits rather than as part of political linkages. This structure, thus, has the strength of central management while enjoying the flexibility of focusing on specific issues and problems.

 Page 191       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    The IJC is one of over 130 organizations involved in managing trans-border, or ''shared'' bodies of water and basins and represented in the International Network of Basin Organizations (INBO) in Paris. A similar body, MENBO, the Mediterranean Network of Basin Organizations, with over 60 member entities helps serve regional interests. Thus, the IJC type of structure is widespread and appears to hold much promise as a model for the management of the Jordan River Basin and the various elements of that system. A model based on the best practices of INBO, MENBO and IJC could provide a mechanism for the overall collaborative management of Jordan River Basin water resources and, within that framework, facilitate the resolution of specific problems such as the reclamation of the Dead Sea, pollution in the Gulf of Aqaba/Eilat or management of the Jordan River and its tributaries.

    Equally important is the fact that this model, one that ''promised equity without interfering with national sovereignty,'' as noted above, could contribute to peace building in the region. It provides the opportunity for partners to pursue public interest needs with respect to water resource management and protect their legitimate national interests in a fair and effective manner.

    Mr. Chairman, Honorable Members of the Committee, I would like to take this opportunity to publicly announce for the first time that the next stage of the work of the Tapllin Project will be the convening by the University of Miami of an unofficial gathering of all relevant stakeholders, interested non-governmental organizations, representatives of international financial institutions, potential donor countries and the private sector.

    The purpose of this conference will be to examine the possibility of adapting a regional management model similar to the IJC to the needs of the Jordan River Basin, generally, and the reclamation of the Dead Sea, specifically. This conference has already received the moral and material support of the University of Miami's Center for Ecosystem Science and Policy, headed by Professor Mary Doyle and the Taplin Foundation. Two other requests for seed-money grants are under consideration. We have also been encouraged to proceed by national and international agencies as well as private sector organizations, hitherto uninvolved in this issue.

 Page 192       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Representatives of the IJC will be invited to participate, in the hope that they can serve as informal midwives to the birth of a concept and organizational structure that may hold much promise for dealing with the problems of water scarcity and management in the area today as well as in the future after critical political issues are resolved by the relevant parties through their governments.

    Without prejudging the outcome of this international consultation, we will propose the consideration of a multi-tiered multi-national approach that will focus on the possibility of: (a) first, an Israeli-Jordanian model; (b) then, an Israeli-Jordanian-Palestinian model; and, (c) finally, an Israeli-Jordanian-Palestinian-Syrian one.

    At the same time, we hope that this gathering will examine, within the structure described above, the ways and means for establishing a consensus on management, science and policy with respect to the reclamation of the Dead Sea. It would seem imperative, on the one hand, to deal with the immediate crisis of the Dead Sea within a broader Jordan River Basin conceptual and organizational framework and, on the other hand, to actually test this broader framework by applying it to the reclamation of the Dead Sea. In no way should the broader Jordan River Basin concept hinder or delay the design and implementation of specific concrete solutions to the urgent Dead Sea problem.

    It is our belief that the development and elaboration of this model is neither an ''academic'' undertaking nor an ''end of days'' exercise. Instead, we feel that the effort to deal with water scarcity and management can be carried out regionally while at the same time focusing on the specific. If the desired final outcome is the establishment of a broad-based regional management model, this does not preclude beginning with the reclamation of the Dead Sea. The initial effort can be to create the microcosm of an IJC-like structure whose first effort will be to focus on resolving the immediate problems facing the Dead Sea. With an eye to the broader regional context, this structure can deal with the specifics of what needs to be done and how this can be done effectively in order to save the Dead Sea. If successful, this then could become the basis for the expansion of the model throughout the Jordan River Basin.

 Page 193       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Mr. Chairman, Honorable Members, it is our sincere hope that this proposed gathering and its underlying ideas will contribute to arriving at a means of dealing with some of the critical issues facing this part of the Middle East, namely, water scarcity and peace building. The alternative to this, I fear, may be the Biblical ''solution'' to the problems of the Dead Sea area—the destruction of the Cities of the Plain, Sodom and Gomorrah, with fire and brimstone.

    This Biblical ''solution'' must, of course, be averted and we believe that it can be done.

    Thank you.

    Chairman HYDE. Dr. Fisher, does the discrepancy in development levels between the countries of the Jordan River Basin weaken their ability to use market mechanisms to allocate water?

    Mr. FISHER. I don't think so. I don't believe it does. Let me point out that what my project is involved with is not an actual market, but a simulated market mechanism. And no matter whether there are poor—whether countries are poor or countries are rich, it is still true that willing trades bring gains. And in the proposal the project brings, nobody sells unless they are willing to sell; and, of course, nobody buys unless they are willing to buy. And as I said before, everybody gains.

    It is not required that actual markets be set up. I think that is both infeasible and incidentally won't lead to the right results. What is required is some form of regional agreement to operate jointly a mechanism that tells you what the optimal flows of water are and who should get compensated for giving up water.

 Page 194       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Chairman HYDE. In an article entitled, ''Water Policy in Israel,'' published in 2000 by the Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies in Israel, Steven Plaut, P–L–A–U–T, states, and I quote:

''The main problem with Israeli water policy is that it is a politicized system instead of a market system. Administrative and bureaucratic considerations dictate water allocation, not economic considerations.''

    Do you agree with this statement?

    Mr. FISHER. Is Professor Shamir going to carry what I say back home?

    Chairman HYDE. Most likely.

    Mr. FISHER. I was afraid of that.

    It is true on the one hand that Israeli water policy has an awful lot of political issues in it. To take one which I guess could be described as political, Israel subsidizes water for agriculture. It does so in large part not just because the farmers have political power, which may, in fact, be true, but because it is part of the Zionist dream to return to the land, and that is considered important.

    There is nothing wrong with that. In the proposal that I am putting forward, Israel could exercise those kinds of values before you get to the market point. I do think it is true that Israeli water policy has traditionally rested very largely on political agreement, technical expertise to be sure, and not a serious analysis of the economics of water, but I am hopeful that that might, in fact, change.

 Page 195       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Chairman HYDE. One more question. Some high-level Israeli officials have said that importing water from Turkey is more about politics than need. Do you agree? Is importing water an appropriate solution to the problem?

    Mr. FISHER. Okay. I am happy to comment on that. Our project finds that Israel—I am going to get to Turkey, I promise.

    Chairman HYDE. Sure.

    Mr. FISHER. Is that Israel does not, in fact, need desalination plants on the Mediterranean coast except—or won't for the next several years, except in years of drought, which is important. And the problem is simply that the desalination is expensive. It is not that there isn't enough water; as I said before, it is that it is too high-priced for agriculture.

    Now, water from Turkey, as I understand it, is going to have a landed cost that is higher than the cost of desalination now is. That means that the same result says no. If you are going to run this simply as a rational economic system, you do not want to be bringing water in from Turkey. If you wanted that water, you should be desalinating it, and probably you shouldn't be doing either.

    Israel nevertheless has contracted to bring in water from Turkey, and although I am not privy to the discussions, it is my general view that I do agree with the statement you read; namely, Israel is very anxious to maintain good relations with Turkey. The Turks have done a good deal to prepare the infrastructure to bring the water to the coast and sell it; and that the treaty is undertaken not for purely economic reasons and not purely for reasons connected with water, but as part of the general political relations between the two countries.

 Page 196       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Chairman HYDE. And, Dr. Shaked, what is the environmental impact of mixing water from the Red Sea into the Dead Sea?

    Mr. SHAKED. I am afraid I am not an expert in the specific sciences which are required to give you a proper answer. I know that some studies are being conducted. I am aware of a study conducted by Friends of the Earth-Middle East. I know also that everyone who has been involved in looking at this project has stated that much more research is required in order to determine the answer to your very important question. It also goes to the question of bringing water from the Mediterranean into the Dead Sea.

    Chairman HYDE. Well, I thank you. And we will adjourn our hearing now, but I want to commend you for your very instructive testimony and statements. This is a fascinating and vital, meaning life-and-death, issue. It is a disappointment that more Members aren't here, but I can assure you we have eager staff, as well as Members, who will read these matters and use this as the basis for further hearings on this very important subject. So I thank you for your great contribution and for your patience.

    The Committee stands adjourned.

    [Whereupon, at 1:42 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.]

(Footnote 1 return)
Lack of adequate sewage and solid waste infrastructure leading to water pollution and high disparity in water consumption levels between Palestinians, Jordanians and Israelis remain however issues of real concern that if not resolved could result in the further intensification of the Middle East conflict.

(Footnote 2 return)
However there does not exist a funding mechanism to support further cross border community cooperation. The US government grant received by FoEME and some 16 other organizations to support cross border activities will cease at the end of this year. It was granted under a one-time appropriation called the Wye River Program, providing supplemental funding appropriation to facilitate the implementation of the Wye River Accords signed between the Israelis and Palestinians in 1998. A recent Congressional initiative to provide financial support to NGOs that promote reconciliation and coeistance efforts specific to the Middle East is very much welcomed by FoEME.

(Footnote 3 return)
From a December 13, 2001, Jordan Times front page article His Majesty the King of Jordan 'stresses the importance of Dead Sea Preservation.' In the Johannesburg Summit in 2002 and the Kyoto Water Forum in 2003, 'Protecting the Dead Sea' was the title of the Governments of Jordan and Israel presentations. Israel and the Palestinian Authority have identified the need for World Heritage consideration for the Dead Sea area.

(Footnote 4 return)
FoEME has strongly advocated regional cooperation for the Dead Sea and published 6 reports related to Dead Sea Development issues. Two recent pertinent reports are; 'Let the Dead Sea Live—Concept Document for World Heritage and MAB Listings of the Dead Sea Basin' 2000 and 'Sustainable Management of Dead Sea Basin Water Resources—A Comparative Analysis with North American Experience,' 2004.

(Footnote 5 return)
1 million cubic meters (mcm) = 810.7 acre-feet = 264.17 million gallons. 1 mcm/year = 0.724 mgd.

(Footnote 6 return)
The most complete published paper is F.M. Fisher, et al. ''Optimal water management and conflict resolution: The Middle East water project'', Water Resources Research 38 (11), 25(1)–25(13), November 2002, submitted with this testimony. This paper contains examples of the use of the tools for both infrastructure analysis and conflict resolution.

(Footnote 7 return)
Indeed, I am informed that current contracts call for a cost of $.50 per cubic meter. This makes the conclusions in the text even stronger.

(Footnote 8 return)
There is another tool (''AGSM'') that permits the analysis of the effects of varying water policies and availability on crop choice and agriculture generally. I shall not discuss that in detail here.

(Footnote 9 return)
As observed above, we find that it is unlikely that Israel will find it economically efficient to import water from Turkey except in drought years. Of course, such imports may be deemed desirable for non-economic reasons.

(Footnote 10 return)
Or, to avoid sovereignty issues, to trade short-term permits to use each other's water.

(Footnote 11 return)
The quantitative results given are for normal years, as opposed to drought. With drought, the values rise, but the result as to the greater value of cooperation still holds.

(Footnote 12 return)
I am informed that the construction of such a plant was actually considered some time ago.

(Footnote 13 return)
A small amount of water is already so supplied.

(Footnote 14 return)
I should perhaps add that those tools are available without charge as would be my own time and efforts to assist in their understanding and use.