Global Policy Forum

By Abdel Rahman Tamimi*

Much has been written about the apartheid wall and the reason for its existence. Israel maintains that it is a temporary structure erected for the purposes of security. Palestinians see it as a simple land grab, designed for the express purpose of ensuring that any future Palestinian "state" will be no more than a collection of isolated bantustans, a state on paper only.

Control over water resources may provide a clue as to the purpose of this wall. Control over water resources has long been one of the primary objectives of Israeli settlement policy, even dating back to before the existence of Israel. From the 1930s on, the Zionist movement focused its settlement activities on fertile land. The policy has been consistent ever since, from the Jordan Valley to the coastal aquifers in the west and south. It is no accident that the Gaza settlements lie on top of the Gaza Aquifer in the Strip.

Since the overexploitation of the waters of the Jordan River and the Coastal Aquifer, the aquifers of the West Bank, particularly the Western Aquifer, became the center of focus. Consequently, the Israeli occupation authorities prohibited Palestinians from digging wells in those areas, and Israeli officials publicly stressed the importance to Israel of maintaining control over the mountainous regions of the West Bank that straddle the aquifer. In 1991, for example, then Israeli Minister of Agriculture Rafael Eitan told the Jerusalem Post that Israeli water needs made it imperative for Israel to retain control over those areas.

Indeed, the Oslo Accords tried to cement Israeli control over the water resources there, and as late as the Camp David negotiations the Israeli side clearly stated that it would not accept any autonomous Palestinian control over the Western Aquifer.

Overlay a map of the wall on a map of the West Bank's aquifers, and the picture becomes clearer. The course of the wall neatly takes in the main basin of the Western Aquifer. Former Israeli Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu's defense minister, Yitzak Mordechai, during his tenure proposed that the green line should be moved 6-15 km east for this purpose. The wall has achieved this in fact.

With complete Israeli control over the Western Aquifer, Palestinian agriculture will cease to exist in the northern areas of the West Bank, leaving those farmers no choice but to either become cheap labor on Israeli settlements or seek alternative employment in the major Palestinian cities. Some villages, including Nazlat Issa, Baqa Al Sharqiyyeh, Izbet Jubara, and Al Tayyeh will be unable to survive, further cementing Israeli control over the land.

This is a process that has already started. The building of the wall has so far resulted in the confiscation of 36 ground water wells, a total loss of 6.7 million cubic meters of water per year. A 35,000 meter-long drip irrigation network has fallen under Israeli control, and 10,000 heads of livestock have lost access to grazing land. For the year 2003, the cost to Palestinian agriculture production has been 2,200 tons of olive oil, 50,000 tons of fruit, and 100,000 tons of vegetables. In formerly fertile areas a process of desertification has begun, with 83,000 trees uprooted and 14,680 dunams already turning barren.

To illustrate the effect on a single village, Jayyus, just east of Qalqilya, has lost 72 percent of its irrigated land to the wall, seven ground water wells, and 300 families have lost 100 percent of their income.

The decimation of the agriculture industry could in turn also have serious repercussions for final status negotiations over water. The Palestinian side will find it harder to justify its claim over water resources if its need has declined along with the industry. Its hand will be weakened. The wall will leave the Palestinian areas dry and thirsty, and it is designed for that purpose.

About the Author: Abdel Rahman Tamimi is the director of the Palestinian Hydrology Group for Water and Environment Resources Development.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This page contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Global Policy Forum distributes this material without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. We believe this constitutes a fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 U.S.C íŸ 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.