Jordan water issue

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Jordan water issue became a conflict between Israel and the Arab countries over the water of the Jordan River ( Hebrew נהר הירדן Nahar HaJarden , meaning "the descending river"; Arabic نهر الأردن, DMG Nahr al-Urdunn ).

Prehistory and Johnston Plan

Partition plan of the UN from 1947
Jordan water issue (Israel)
Dan source
Dan source
muzzle
muzzle
Jordan River in Israel

The United Nations resolution of November 1947 dividing Palestine into three parts did not provide for any regulation of the water supply. The Palestine War led to the 1949 armistice agreements to larger area profits of Israel, as the United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine envisaged.

One of the most important problems facing Israel was to ensure adequate water and food supplies for the steadily growing population. Israel tried to make areas in the Negev desert fertile and diverted water from the Jordan via pipelines, 77 percent of which came from Arab sources and 23 percent from Israeli sources. In 1951, Syria accused Israel of violating the resolutions of the UN Security Council on demilitarized zones during drainage work on the swamps of the Hule Plain at the foot of the Golan Heights . Israel drained much of the swamps from 1951 to 1958 in order to make the soil usable for agriculture.

In 1952 and 1953, the United Nations Relief Organization for Palestine Refugees in the Middle East (UNRWA) presented a plan on how the neighboring countries should regulate the abstraction of water. According to this, it was planned that Jordan would receive 45 percent (360 million cubic meters), Israel 40 percent (320 million cubic meters) and Syria and Lebanon together 15 percent (120 million cubic meters). The negotiations on this were supported by the USA. The US President's negotiator ( Special Representative of the President of the United States ) and former President of the US Chamber of Commerce, Eric Allen Johnston , offered the neighboring states a 66 percent reimbursement of the Jordan Valley Unified Water Plan or Johnston Plan of 66 percent (around 120 million US dollars). The plan for the Jordan water system was accepted by the Israeli government under Moshe Sharet and also initially approved by Syria, Lebanon and Jordan, but was rejected by the Arab League in October 1953 because, from the Arab perspective, it would have meant indirect recognition of the State of Israel.

Israeli and Arab water abstraction plans

In 1953 there was another conflict between Israel and Syria when Israel began to take water from the Jordan in the area of ​​the demilitarized zone and to feed it into a first section of an overall irrigation system. Israel thereupon refrained from direct abstraction from the Jordan and planned water abstraction from the Sea of ​​Galilee and channeled this into a pipeline system, the first phase of which was opened in 1955. The Arab League repeated its resolutions several times, according to which a discharge of the Jordan water through Israel could also be prevented by military means. In 1950, a collective defense pact between the member countries of the Arab League was adopted. In addition, plans were initiated by the Arab states to divert the source rivers of the Jordan as far as possible. For this purpose, the Hasbani in Lebanon and the Banyas (also called Hermon River ) in the northern Golan Heights should be dammed and withdrawals from the tributary Jarmuk should be forced until they are completely drained.

Another Arab plan envisaged damming the Hasbani in southern Lebanon and draining the backwater to the Litani through a canal connection , as well as draining the water from the banyas in Syria through an irrigation system into the area between Banyas and Jarmuk. According to these plans, the Jordan would only have received spring water from the Dan in northern Israel. Since both dams should have been built in the immediate border with Israel and Israel had declared that it would intervene against such plans with military means, Lebanon and Syria refrained from carrying out the projects as long as a sufficiently large Arab military power was not created could prevent Israeli intervention. Due to the Suez crisis in 1956, the attempt to create a joint Arab military power and a United Arab High Command with Egypt, Syria and Jordan also failed .

Israeli sewer and pipe system

In 1959 Israel began nationalizing the water supply with the aim of better use, and various agencies and societies were established to plan and control water use and to develop infrastructure. The Mekorot company was responsible for the construction and operation of larger waterworks . In the same year, the construction of the now approx. 6,500 km long supply system National Water Carrier began against protests of the Arab states.

In the autumn of 1963 the water distribution system had been advanced to such an extent that a first test diversion from the Sea of ​​Galilee to the Negev desert was announced for the spring of 1964 .

Arguments from both sides

The arguments of the Arab states against a drainage of the Jordan water to irrigate fertile areas in the Negev desert:

  1. By unilateral extraction from the water system, Israel violates the internationally recognized principle that neighboring states must come to an agreement on this scale of a project.
  2. Israel is endangering the Jordanian areas on the Jordan Rift through its water supply system, which is becoming increasingly salty as a result of the extraction.
  3. The partial conversion of the Negev desert into fertile land will enable Israel to feed around 2.5 million more people in an area that the Arabs are entitled to under the UN partition plan. The population growth and the increase in agricultural projects could pose serious military threats to the Arab-Palestinian claims in the area.

Israel's position on the Arab argument:

  1. As the acceptance of the Johnston Plan shows, Israel had worked for a multilateral solution. Since the Arab states were against this project for political reasons, they violated the principle of a multilateral solution obligation. In addition, Israel is not drawing more water than it was allowed under the Johnston Plan.
  2. Regarding the salinization of the Jordan Rift, Israel found that the Jordan is so salinated by the salt water springs in Tiberias that the water it exits from the Sea of ​​Galilee would only be usable again through the water inflow of the Yarmuk . Since Jordan with the 1959 began construction of the East Ghor Canal (Engl. East Ghor Canal Main) deduce much of this is a fresh inflow through the Yarmuk taking place any more. In addition, seepage water returning to the Jordan Rift through the East Ghor Canal carries with it large amounts of dissolved salts, so that the water of the Jordan Rift is no longer sufficient to irrigate the Israeli Jordan Valley.

Arab resistance to the Israeli water supply system

In response to the planned withdrawal of water by Israel, the Arab League convened the Council of Kings and Heads of State for a summit in Cairo from January 13-16, 1964. As early as December 23, 1963, during a speech in Port Said at a summit meeting of the Arab League, the President of the United Arab Republic (UAR) Gamal Abdel Nasser called for the question of the threat posed by Israel to the Arab states to be discussed.

At the end of the summit, a final communiqué was announced on January 16, 1964 with the following content:

“In its first session at the headquarters of the Arab League in Cairo, following a call by the President of the United Arab Republic, Gamal Abdel Nasser, from January 13-16, 1964, the Council of Kings and Heads of State of the Arab League examined the threats and repeated acts of aggression Israel has committed since it expelled the Arab people from Palestine and settled in its land, where they practiced segregation against the Arab minority. The delegations also examined the consequences of Israeli policies based on aggression and a fait accompli, as well as failure to comply with United Nations resolutions affirming the right of the Palestinian people to return to their homeland, with Israel facing numerous condemnations of organizations that depend on the world organization does not take any account. After examining the new, serious aggression that Israel is planning to use against Arab waters by diverting the waters of the Jordan in order to achieve the Zionist expansion goals, to increase its forces of aggression and to be able to establish new bases that will ensure the security and progress of the Arab states as well as world peace will be threatened, in accordance with the right to self-defense and convinced of the just claim of the Palestinian people to self-determination and liberation from the pressure of Zionist imperialism , convinced that the Arab solidarity is the only means of defending the imperialist intentions, to the realization the common, legitimate Arab interests and for the improvement of the standard of living of the Arab nation as well as for the execution of the reconstruction and development programs, the Council adopted the resolution on the practical measures to counter the present Zionist Defense and technical threats accepted, as well as to organize the Palestinian people with a view to participating in the liberation of their homeland and in determining their future. "

According to the Egyptian newspaper Al-Ahram , the following was decided in detail at the summit:

  • Formation of a joint high command of the Arab armed forces, whose first commander in chief is the Egyptian general Abd al-Hakim Amir .
  • Lebanon, Jordan and Syria are to receive a total of £ 15 million a year in grants to upgrade their armed forces, the majority of which is provided by Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Iraq.
  • A committee was set up to coordinate and implement the programs for the drainage of the Jordan Source Rivers from May 1964. A financial fund of £ 6.5 million has already been made available for such projects.

Israeli response to the Arab League Summit

The Israeli Prime Minister Levi Eschkol gave the following speech to the Knesset on January 20, 1964 (excerpt):

“Last week the heads and representatives of 13 Arab states met in Cairo at the invitation of the President of Egypt to discuss the measures that could thwart the Israeli water plan. At the close of the conference, a statement was issued containing threats against Israel and referring to decisions at the military level. What remained in the dark in the declaration was later explained by the Secretary General of the Arab League ( Abdel Khaliq Hassuna ), who announced the establishment of a military, administrative and financial apparatus for the implementation of a so-called "Arab Jordan Plan", which responded to the Diversion of the source rivers of the Jordan. The source rivers are not to reach Israeli territory, and the salinity of the remaining Jordan water is to be increased by this plan ... "

“It has been a few days since the Conference of Arabs Heads of State concluded, and it is important that the world understand the dangerous implications of the decisions made in Cairo and the declarations that have subsequently been published. All states that participated in the conference are members of the United Nations. According to the Charter of the United Nations , it is the duty of all members to avoid not only the use of force, but also the threat of using force against another state. Obeying the principles of the Charter of the United Nations is the only hope of humanity to free itself from the terrible nightmare of war and create a better world based on justice, law on peace ... The longing for peace in ours Time is deeply rooted in the hearts of people of all nations and all continents, and it is precisely at this time that the heads of the Arab states openly and explicitly declare that they are planning an attack against another state that is an equal member in the family of peoples, and right now they are announcing their intention to take up this plan again and realize it ... "

“The Cairo Conference was about hostility to Israel; however, the main subject it dealt with was Israel's water plan. On this point the conference came to a twofold conclusion: it painted a distorted picture of our legitimate and constructive project, and it spoke of a sabotage plan on the water issue, which attacks our rights and is based on envy, violation of the law and malicious malicious intent ... "

The Johnston Plan from an Israeli perspective

“Eleven years ago (1953) the Arab states and Israel agreed to the mediation of the President of the United States, who sent the late Ambassador Erik Johnston as a special envoy to this part of the world to have a party-approved regional plan for the exploitation of the water of the Jordan, the Jarmuk and their tributaries. At the beginning of the negotiations, the Arab states, on the one hand, and Israel, on the other, submitted special plans for the allocation of the waters of the Jordan and the Yarmuks. Ambassador Johnston conducted parallel and coordinated negotiations with the Arab governments and with Israel for almost three years. After long and exhaustive arguments in which Arab, Israeli and international engineers took part, Johnston presented a regional master plan based on generally applicable laws and customs of international law. Johnston's proposal granted Syria and Lebanon, without restriction, all the amounts of water that were required of them in the Arab plan. The master plan also assigned the Kingdom of Jordan the amounts of water it had requested to irrigate its arable land.

This award was based on a detailed and objective investigation. In other words, the needs of Jordan, Syria and Lebanon have been fully met by the master plan. As Ambassador Johnston stated in an article published in the New York Times on August 10, 1958, the Arab states and Israel had agreed to the overall plan in every factual and technical relationship. In October 1955, however, the Arab League decided against the ratification of the plan not for reasons related to the water allocations, but because it fundamentally opposes any, even indirect, cooperation with Israel.

However, the three years of negotiations were not in vain. A consensual allocation of the water was determined, based on criteria that are recognized around the world and that have not been challenged by the participating states. Now, in 1964 - eleven years after starting negotiations on the master plan - Israel will begin to divert its share of the waters of Lake Kinereth (Sea of ​​Galilee) in accordance with that plan. "

Web links