Water Diplomacy: Is Israel Justified in Withholding Water from Jordan?
The question of whether Israel has the right to withhold water from Jordan beyond the stipulations of their peace treaty has become a contentious issue in Middle Eastern diplomacy. This article delves into the complexities of this issue, examining the historical context, current political dynamics, and the potential for compromise.
Historical Context and Rationale
One of the key aspects of the peace treaty signed between Israel and Jordan is the lease of agricultural land in Jordan, which, though under Jordanian sovereignty, is owned by individuals of Israeli descent. This agreement is part of the extensive network of bilateral relationships that have been cultivated over the years. However, the core question remains: should Israel, if Jordan does not extend parts of the peace treaty related to the agricultural land, stop providing water beyond the treaty provisions?
According to Mr. Sattler, neither country should take a hardened stance because of Jordan's historical grievances with Israel. Conversely, Mr. Sattler also suggests that Israel has leverage due to Jordan’s weakness. This duality underscores the complexity of regional diplomacy and the interplay of power dynamics.
Israel's Water Dependence
Israel relies on water resources critically. According to estimates, Israel needs tens of millions of cubic meters of water each year. In this context, Jordan and the Palestinian Authority (PA) can demand concessions due to their weakened position. By highlighting their vulnerability, these parties can exert pressure and leverage for their demands.
The narrative of weakness is often employed to portray a moral high ground, emphasizing the collapse of the regime in case of assistance stoppage. However, this approach can be seen as a manipulation of power dynamics, where the weak use their perceived vulnerability to negotiate favorable terms.
Compromise and Flexibility
The core question of whether water should be withheld is less black and white when viewed through the lens of diplomacy. Instead, there is a need for compromise and flexibility. This involves finding a balanced middle ground that addresses the concerns of both parties without completely straining the peace treaty.
As diplomats from both countries engage in meetings, they are likely to find a ‘grey medium of compromise.’ Such a median solution could reduce the gripes that Israel has against Jordan by addressing the specific grievances and redefining the terms of the water provision.
Importance of Jordan to Israel
For Jordan, the relationship with Israel is of utmost importance. The Jordanian king and his country are under significant pressures, including economic, political, and religious factors, as well as the influence of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). Israel recognizes that it can serve as a valuable ally and support system for Jordan in times of need.
Israel understands that its eastern border remains relatively stable, which provides a degree of security. Therefore, while withholding water could be a policy card, it also carries significant risks, including potential escalation of tensions and further destabilization of the region.
Conclusion
The issue of water supply from Israel to Jordan touches upon complex political, economic, and security concerns. While Israel has the right to demand adjustments to the peace treaty, it also faces the challenge of maintaining a stable relationship with Jordan. Finding a mutually beneficial solution that respects the spirit of the peace treaty while addressing specific grievances remains crucial for the stability and prosperity of both nations.