December 27th-January 18th 2009-2010 marks the one-year anniversary of Israel’s brutal ‘Operation Cast Lead’ against the people of besieged Gaza.

Free Gaza is asking groups around the world to show Spanish Film-Maker Alberto Arce and Mohammad Rujailah’s ‘To Shoot an Elephant’ (2009) – an award-winning documentary filmed during Operation Cast Lead, detailing war crimes and the impact on ordinary people, journalists and paramedics. This massacre intensified and escalated an existent policy of ethnic cleansing and deliberate destruction as well as re-inflicted a new Nakba on the Palestinian people.

The 22-day attack left more than 1,400 dead, the vast majority of them
civilians, including nearly 400 children. It left over 5000 injured, displaced 50,000 and made 20,000 homeless (until today).

More than 3,600 homes were completely destroyed and 11,000 partially destroyed.

Over 258 people died because Israeli forces prevented rescue services from reaching them. Most people were bombed to death in or close to their homes, with over a third (519) cut down by Israeli Drones and another 473 by jet planes.

Israel used white phosphorous, Unmanned Aerial Vehicles, F16s, Apache and Cobra Helicopter gun ships, Naval Vessels, Tanks, APCs, Caterpillar Military Bulldozers and soldiers armed with M16s to systematically kill people and destroy Gaza’s infrastructure, businesses and agricultural land and property.

• Therefore, we also re-iterate the call from Palestinian Civil Society,
issued in 2005, for a comprehensive Boycott, Sanctions and Divestment campaign (BDS) against Israel as the primary means to promote human rights and an enforcement of international law.

• We also ask activists to take direct action in solidarity with
Palestinians throughout the Middle East, in refugee camps outside of Palestine, struggling against apartheid inside ’48, as well as those resisting the ethnic cleansing of Jerusalem and steady bantustanisation of the West Bank.

Arms companies such as Rafael, Elbit Systems, Lockheed Martin, EDO-ITT, Caterpillar, and companies cementing occupation such as Ireland’s CRT (Cement Roadstone Holdings) (Apartheid Wall) Veolia and Alstom (Jerusalem Light Railway), Carmel-Agrexco (Illegal colonies and agriculture) and Edelman PR as well as Israeli Embassies and the institutions that collude with the occupation such as the European Union.

The deadly closure of Gaza continues, the colonisation of East Jerusalem and the West Bank continues, and the inalienable right of refugees to return to their homes still remai ns out of reach for millions. Grassroots resistance to Israel’s ongoing attacks has never been as urgent as it is today.

REMEMBER GAZA – STAND UP FOR PALESTINE — TAKE ACTION!

http://toshootanelephant.com/

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1133749.html

Egypt building iron wall on Gaza border to stop tunnel smuggling

Egypt has begun the construction of a massive iron wall along its border with the Gaza Strip, in a bid to shut down smuggling tunnels into the territory. The wall will be nine to 10 kilometers long, and will go 20 to 30 meters into the ground, Egyptian sources said. It will be impossible to cut or melt.

The new plan is the latest move by Egypt to step up its counter-smuggling efforts. Although some progress had been made, the smuggling market in Gaza still flourishes.

Egyptian forces demolish tunnels or fill them with gas almost every week, often with people still inside them, and Palestinian casualties in the tunnels have been steadily rising.

Recently, Egypt examined several possibilities of blocking the tunnels, and joint American-Egyptian patrols have been seen in Rafah attempting to detect tunnels using underground sensors.

Construction of the wall has already begun. It will be made of enormous slates of steel, reaching deep into the ground. However, it is not expected to stem smuggling completely.

Several defense sources told Haaretz they believe that once captive soldier Gilad Shalit is released, Israel will have to re-examine the benefits of closing Gaza off. The closure has been undermined by the tunnel system, which provides not only munitions but food, cars, motorcycles, drugs, medicine and fuel, much more than what Israel allows into the Strip through the official border crossing.

The tunnels also allow people to cross in and out of the Strip, including terrorists who linked up with pro-Al-Qaida groups in Gaza and tried to carry out attacks in Egypt, defense sources said.

The smuggling industry is so institutionalized that tunnel operators purchase licenses from the Rafah municipality, allowing them to connect to electricity and water. Hamas has also been ensuring no children are employed in the tunnels, and is taxing all smuggled goods.

The Egyptians often intercept munitions before they can enter the Strip and have stepped up checks at internal roadblocks and checkpoints in the Sinai. Observers say mounting American pressure is in part responsible for increasing Egyptian efforts to combat the smugglers.

How foolish of me to believe the occupier (Israel) is exploiting the occupied (the Palestinians) by stealing not only their lands, but their water as well. Gosh, I’m so confused – here’s another article by a “self-hating” Jew who sides with the Palestinians on the issue and he actually lives there:

Jeff Halper: “The [Jewish-only] settlement blocs are consciously built atop the [occupied] West Bank aquifers from which Israel draws about 30 percent of its water in violation of international law, which prohibits an Occupying Power from utilizing the resources of an occupied territory. Indeed, 80 percent of the water resources of the West Bank and Gaza are under Israeli control, and a full 80 percent of the water coming from the West Bank goes to Israel and its settlements. Only 20 percent is allocated to its 2.5 million Palestinian inhabitants, and they receive none of the water pumped from the Jordan River. As for consumption, the settlers use six times more water per capita than Palestinians. Per capita water consumption in the West Bank for domestic and urban use (drinking, washing, consumption by public institutions, watering parks, and so on) is only 60 liters per person per day, far below the minimum water consumption of 100 liters per person per day recommended by the World Health Organization; Israelis consume 350 liters per person per day. Mekorot, the Israeli water carrier, which controls all the water of the country, allocates 1,450 cubic meters of water per year to each settler, while a Palestinian receives only 83. Around 215,000 Palestinians living in 270 West Bank villages have no running water at all. The destruction of Palestinian wells and water mains, which has intensified with the construction of the ["separation"] wall over the main aquifers, creates months of water shortages, while the need to purchase water from Israeli tank trucks, costing $3 during the rainy season and up to $8 in the dry months, is beyond the financial resources of the impoverished population. As a final blow, Palestinians are forbidden to collect rainwater in open reservoirs.”

Yikes, here’s another one. They’re everywhere!

Drought and Israeli Policy Threaten West Bank Water Security
by Stephen Lendman

Fresh water is precious everywhere but especially in one of the driest, hottest places on earth – the Middle East. It’s why it’s a strategic resource and the reason countries like Israel do everything possible to secure a reliable supply. In the words of former prime minister Moshe Sharett: “Water to us is life itself.” It shapes Israeli policy going back to the early Mandate period.

A Brief History

Post-WW I, Zionists wanted Sykes-Picot borders altered to include the Jordan River, Lower Litani, east coast of the Sea of Galilee and Lower Yarmouk headwaters and tributaries. These affect Palestine, southern Lebanon, Syria and the Jordan Valley. Efforts to secure them fell short because French opposition blocked them. But it didn’t prevent further regional hydrological studies. They were needed because by WW II’s end accommodating a growing Palestinian and Jewish population grew acute.

Israel’s “War of Independence” followed in 1947-48. It assured water sovereignty as well. Israel was free to act unilaterally – to tap and develop all available resources plus whatever it could seize later on. They’d be needed after Israel’s 1950 Law of Return was passed. It granted Jews worldwide special rights – to emigrate freely and become citizens of the land of Israel. It brought in waves of new immigrants requiring considerable water resources for them, but Israel’s supply was inadequate. At the time, four states shared the Jordan-Yarmouk watershed. Developing it was essential. Each had growing needs so securing a dependable supply was vital.

Several regional water-sharing proposals failed in part because Israel linked them to recognizing the Jewish state. It also rejected solutions not in its strategic interest and acted unilaterally instead. Take its National Water Carrier project. Construction began in the late 1950s and early 1960s and became the country’s largest water project – to transfer Sea of Galilee northern water to highly populated areas in the center and south and to facilitate efficient water use. To neighboring Arab states, however, it was a hostile act, and they responded with their own diversion plans. Israel viewed them as a national security threat.

Confrontation followed. The National Water Carrier was targeted. Israel retaliated against Syrian construction sites. Skirmishes broke out, and the 1967 war resulted. Officially it began on June 5, 1967. Others, including Ariel Sharon, said it started two and a half years earlier when Israel acted against diverting the Jordan River. Earlier, Ben-Gurion warned that Jews and Arabs would battle over strategic water resources and determine Palestine’s fate. Its people as well. Aside from other strategic aims for land and regional control, Israel secured water rich lands in southern Lebanon, Jordan, the Golan, and West Bank.

It fully exploited them and is a key reason why the Golan was never returned. West Bank water is another issue. It has three principle aquifers supplying about one-quarter of Israel’s needs, including for its settlements and nearly all of what West Bank Palestinians get. They are:

– the Yarkon-Tanninim Aquifer supplying Israel with about 340 million cubic meters (mcm) of water annually – to Jerusalem and Tel Aviv mainly; Palestinians get far less – about 20 mcm a year;

– the Nablus-Gilboa Aquifer supplying about 115 mcm annually, largely for agricultural irrigation in Galilee-based kibbutzim and moshavim cooperative settlements;

– the Eastern Aquifer supplying about 40 mcm a year to Jordan Valley-based settlements; another 60 mcm go to Palestinians.

Water also comes from the upper Jordan River and its tributaries – the Sea of Galilee, the Yarmouth, and lower Jordan River. Palestinians are denied most of it. As their population grows, shortages have become more acute because of Israel’s restrictive policies.

Israel’s Water Policy in the Territories

The policy works this way – to preserve an unequal division of western, eastern, and northern West Bank aquifer supply. It was the same for Gaza’s aquifer prior to disengagement. The result is a hugely disproportionate distribution policy causing growing shortages for Palestinians. Israel does little to alleviate it. It invests little in infrastructure leaving 20% of West Bank Palestinians unconnected to a running-water system:

– around 227,000 in 220 West Bank towns and villages;

– another 190,000 only partially connected; and

– even in towns and villages with a water network, most often supply is irregular – only on some hours of the day and sometimes rotationally; in distant areas, supply may be disconnected for days or weeks; it’s part of Mekorot’s (Israel’s National Water Company) discriminatory policy to assure settlers are adequately supplied.

In addition, Israeli maintenance (for Palestinians) is shoddy. Water pipes are old and leak, and in some cases more than 50% of fresh water is lost. Qalqiliya and Tulkarm have been especially affected.

Consider the disparity between Israeli and Palestinian supply. For Palestinians, per capita West Bank consumption is 60 liters a day – for domestic, urban, rural, and industrial use. It’s far below the minimum 100 daily liters required according to the World Health Organization. In contrast, look how much Israelis get – 280 liters a day per capita for domestic, urban and rural use or about four and a half times more than Palestinians. Including industrial use, and it’s 330 liters or five a half times Palestinian consumption.

Israeli Violations of International Law on Water in the Occupied Territories

By integrating Occupied Territory water resources into its legal and bureaucratic system and denying Palestinians the right to develop them for their own use, Israel violates international law under Articles 43 and 55 of the 1907 Hague Regulations. Also Article 27 of the Fourth Geneva Convention relating to treating “all protected persons….with the same consideration by the Party to the conflict in whose power they are….”

Then there’s Article 6 of the UN Convention on the Law of the Non-Navigational Uses of International Watercourses. It requires water division between states to be reasonable and equitable. Not according to a specific formula but with regard to seven factors:

– the watercourse’s shared natural features – its geography, climate, hydrology, and so forth;

– each state’s social and economic needs;

– its population;

– how watercourse use in one state affects another;

– watercourse existing and potential uses;

– watercourse resources conservation, protection and development and the cost of measures to assure them; and

– planned or existing use alternatives.

Taking international law and all the above factors into account, Palestinian rights are severely compromised.

Water security is crucial for Israel. Securing and preserving supply essential. In the occupied West Bank, Arabs are prohibited from drilling new wells without special permission, but it’s practically impossible to get and won’t likely change. Many existing wells were also sealed to restrict Palestinians to a very low quota, far below Israelis. Most West Bank water goes to Israel and the expanding settlement population. Jordan River water is also diverted – from 50 to 75%. As its population grows, so does its water needs. It was one among other factors behind the 1982 Lebanon invasion – to control the Litani River in the country’s south. It remains out of reach today, but a richer resource would be to secure access to major rivers like the Nile, Euphrates or Seyhan and Ceyhan in Turkey.

Since the 1990s, water and other environmental issues were among the most important in Israeli bilateral relations. Its October 1994 peace treaty with Jordan included five annexes. Two addressed water and environmental concerns.

The water rich Golan has been a stumbling block toward a similar deal with Syria. It’s much the same in bilateral Palestinian talks. The Territories’ water resources have been over-exploited for years, but precious little of it for Palestinian use. It’s a major destabilizing factor and obstacle to real peace and security. So many issues are at stake. One rarely discussed is the inequitable distribution of scarce and valued water resources.

Summer Drought Compounds the Problem

Israelis nearly always have enough water for their needs – agricultural, drinking, bathing, watering lawns, washing cars, and filling swimming pools for those who have them. In contrast, Palestinians have precious little. In summer it’s always worse, but this year, 2008, the most severe draught in a decade made it grave. In the northern West Bank, consumption is at about one-third the minimum required. It’s because rainfall this year has been less than two-thirds normal. In southern areas, it’s barely over half. Cities like Tubas, Jenin, Nablus and the Southern Hebron hills have been especially impacted.

According to Palestinian Water Authority estimates, the West Bank’s water shortfall is from 42 to 69 mcm. Its consumption is 79 mcm making emergency supplies needed. Throughout the West Bank, per capita consumption is about 66 liters (for domestic, urban, rural and industrial use), far below the World Health Organization’s 100 liter minimum for personal needs.

Making matters worse is the price of privately purchased water that constitutes 50% of West Bank supply – from 15 to 30 shekels or three to six times higher that Israelis pay. Because of this year’s shortfall, it’s heading higher and putting an impossible burden on impoverished Palestinians to buy enough of it. The alternative is drinking from questionable sources after amounts collected in cisterns run dry – stagnant water or from dirty springs that may expose users to frequent and serious illnesses.

Oslo II’s Broken Promise

The 1995 Oslo II agreement assured “the equitable utilization of joint water resources for implementation in and beyond the interim period.” It never happened because Israel’s Palestinian dealings are nearly always duplicitous. It sets traps and uses devious language to assure interpretations go its way.

Post-Oslo II, a Joint Water Committee (JWC) was established to approve new West Bank water and sewage projects. It’s composed of an equal number of Israeli and Palestinian representatives, but that’s where equality ends. All decisions are by consensus, but no procedure is in place to settle disputes when agreement can’t be reached. As a result, Israel can veto Palestinian requests for new wells – even though Oslo II assured it.

Desalinization Plans

The publication New Scientist has covered “the latest science and technology news, reports, developments and research” for over 50 years. In May 2004, it reported that Israel had a “secret plan for a giant desalination plant to supply (privatized) drinking water to (Palestinians in) the West Bank.” It was to preserve fresh water supplies for Israelis, but here’s the catch. Israel won’t fund it nor can Palestinians. It means the world community or possibly the US would have to do it. Just as bad, if it’s ever completed, is the cost as leading hydrologists point out: “desalinating seawater and pumping it to the West Bank….would cost around $1 per cubic meter,” an impossible amount for Palestinians to pay at an exchange rate of 3.3 shekels to the dollar. Many if not most Israelis as well.

Nonetheless, Alvin Newman, USAID’s Tel Aviv head of water resources, supported the project, and with good reason. If funding is secured, it would mean lucrative business contracts for favored USAID contractors. Palestinians, on the other hand, are fearful. They object to desalinization plans dependent on their abandoning claims to West Bank water – resources beneath their own land. Ihad Barghothi, Palestinian Water Authority’s head of water projects said at the time: “We cannot do that (nor do we) have the money or expertise for desalination.”

Gaza is another issue. It depends almost exclusively on small wells tapping the coastal aquifer. But as the water table falls, it’s being increasingly polluted by salt sea water. UN scientists conclude that within 15 years (from 2004) Gaza will have no drinkable water and will have to import its needs. But even now the World Health Organization reports that Gaza’s water quality falls below its acceptable standards due to the aquifer’s degradation. Besides that, 40% of Gaza homes lack running water, according to the Palestinian Water Authority.

Another possible solution is an approved and apparently funded so-called ocean depth reverse osmosis plant to provide the Territory’s supply. It’s another method of desalinating sea water, but here again there’s the cost.

New Scientist points out that if these two projects become reality they’ll make “Palestine more dependent on desalination than almost any other nation in the world.” And given the cost of desalinated water, it will be out of reach for the great majority of impoverished Palestinians.

Palestinian Resilience and Nonviolent Resistance

Palestinian resilience is impressive despite overwhelming obstacles. Take Nahhalin village, 20 kilometers southeast of Bethlehem where the Applied Research Institute of Jerusalem (ARIJ) is active. For the past 17 years, it’s represented Palestinian interests – economic, social, natural resources management, sustainable agriculture, politics, and water management.

In 2007, it began a waste water treatment project it will replicate in other rural areas to provide new sources of water for irrigation. In Nahhalin, ARIJ’s water and environment research unit will install on-site waste water treatment systems for about 180 homes accommodating 1800 people. The project is scheduled for completion in 2010. Wherever else it’s used, it’ll manage waste water and improve access to fresh supplies. ARIJ believes its plan is one of the most feasible and economical ways to provide a sanitary use for household waste water. When in place, it’ll increase agricultural productivity and food security, a vital Palestinian concern.

ARIJ sees other benefits as well. Treatment units will be manufactured locally to provide much needed jobs. In addition, these type projects further peace and are powerful nonviolent resistance acts.

The Palestinian Hydrology Group (PHG) complements ARIJ’s efforts with its own projects. It’s an NGO “promot(ing) the role of women in civil societies in managing local water and its related environmental resources to ensure transparency, good water governance and just and equal provision of water and sanitation services to the rural and marginal communities in the West Bank and Gaza.”

One of its projects is in the northern West Bank villages of Jayyus and Karr Jammal near Qalqilya where Israel’s Separation Wall cuts off off farmers from their lands. PHG is helping them maintain pumps and irrigation systems so they have greater control of their natural resources despite overwhelming Israeli restrictions. It’s another expression of their nonviolent resistance and it’s spreading.

International law is supportive. It recognizes non-discriminatory access to adequate fresh water as a fundamental human right and requires occupying powers to assure it. The UN General Assembly also affirmed Palestinians’ right to self-determination and control of their natural resources – in Resolutions 1803 (1962), 2672C, (1970), 2787 (1971) and 3098D (1980).

In December 1966, it adopted the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Article 1(1) affirms self-determination, and Article 1(2) states: “All peoples may, for their own ends, freely dispose of their natural wealth and resources without prejudice to any obligations arising out of international economic cooperation, based upon the principle of mutual benefit, and international law. In no case may a people be deprived of its own means of subsistence.” It’s now up to the international body to enforce its own rulings.
______________________________________________
Oh man, I can’t believe it. Here’s another bunch of “self-hating” Jews who agree with AI:

19.07.2009 | Rabbis For Human Rights

Israel leaves the inhabitants of the West bank thirsty
Join us in a protest against the water shortages caused by the occupation

Dry water taps – no water for drinking or bathing, many months during the summer heat. Since March this is the situation of many families in the villages Qarawat Bani Zayed, Kufr ‘Ein, Ramani & Nabi Salah, 15,000 people. In the same time, these Palestinian villagers can see beyond the settlements’ fences a different situation. They see green lawns and sprinklers irrigating the whole day. A similar situation exsists in many other parts of the West Bank.

We hereby call activists to join and donate money to the protest campaign

Checques can be made to Rabbis For Human Rights,

9 Harechavim St. Jerusalem, 93462, Israel.

Or to account No.153380 in Bank Hapoalim branch 782, Aza, Jerusalem.

N.B.: Mention for water campaign

In a later announcement we shall give details about the water convoy to Qarawat Bani Zayed that will take place on 07/08/09

Further activities will consist of demonstrations, petitions, letters, appeals to MKs, embassies and intl. organizations.

Details and comments: Yuval 050-7336117, Yakov 050-5733276, 09-7670801 email: manor12 AT zahav.net.il

Background: Since the occupation in 1967, Israel took control over most of the water sources in the West Bank, and uses them for Israeli clients and especially for settlers. The mountain acquifer is considered a joint (Palestinian-Israeli) water reservoir that Israel is permitted to use – but not in the current way when 80% of the water is taken by Israel and the remaining 20% are allocated to the millions of Palestinian inhabitants. Other water sources, as in the Jordan valley, are used almost exclusively by Israelis and only meager quantities are left for the usage of Palestinians. The Palestinian inhabitants of the south Hebron area having a serious problem of water shortage as well. In Israel and the settlements, the mean per capita water consumption for domestic and municipal usage is 235 lites per day, and in the occupied territories it is 66 litres per day only. 227,500 people in 220 villages are not connected to the water system. An additional 190,000 people have only partial water supply.

The Oslo accords reaffirmed the Israeli control over the water supply and pumping. The Palestinians assumed that it was a temporary agreement, and according to the time table that was established then, by May 1999 an independent Palestinian state would be established with control over its natural resources. The continuing water shortage increases the anger and frustration the Palestinians feel.

The small quantity of water supplied to the Palestinians is not distributed equally. As the water runs through the pipes the quantity reduces and as a home is situated higher up the pressure diminishes, and as a result the highest situated homes do not receive supply at all.

The village Qarawat Bani Zayed, situated on a mountain slope, is an example to this difficult situation. Lately Israeli peace activists visited this village and heard of this difficult situation. Many inhabitants of this village have to purchase water from water tanks at high prices – up to NIS 40 to 1 cubic metre of water, ten times its price in Israel or the settlements. Abud spring that gave them water before the occupation was caught by Mekorot, the Israeli water supply company, and only a small portion of its water currently arrives at the village.

Supplying enough water to the Palestinian civilians – for their homes, public and agricultural needs is not a favour or act of compassion. This is a legal and moral obligation whose violation is a serious crime against international law.

Organisations participating: Anarchists against the fence, Bat Shalom, Gush Shalom, The Israeli Committee Against Home Demolitions, The Israeli Committee Against Torture, The Alternative Information Centre, Yesh Gvul, Sadaqa-Reut, Coalition of Women for Peace, Physicians for Human Rights.

David, David, didn’t you know that leftist anti-Zionist bigots are used to “utterly squash” everything that questions their narrow-minded ideology? Do you belong to this species too?

Anyway, in your defence, we also know that children love to cry wolf to be heard.

As for the AI-report “Troubled water”: it is biased and based on lies. A couple of examples of AI falsehoods regarding the water issue for you people of genius:

1) In “The day the bulldozers came…”: (http://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/day-bulldozers-came-20091027)
AI states:
“The village of Beit Ula, where Mahmoud lives, is not connected to the Palestinian water network. Instead the community, located north-west of Hebron, relies on rainwater, which it collects and stores in pots dug in the ground, known as cisterns….”

Well, AI doesn’t seem to be well informed or lies deliberately: The applied Research Institute-Jerusalem, a Palestinian organization, has a 17-page town profile of Beit Ula, which states on page 13:
“• Water Services: Beit Ula has been connected to the water network since 1974. Provided by the Palestinian Water Authority (PWA), almost 70% of town households
are connected to the network. Harvesting wells and 10 natural springs are alternative resources to the water network for the domestic and agricultural needs of the town. ” (proxy.arij.org under “profile” and click Beit Ula – pdf)

2) The AI report claimes on page 10 that “Palestinians have access to an average of no more than 60-70 liters per capita per day, and some survive on much less even than this, as little as 10-20 liters per person per day.” This statement has no source or footnote. Regrettably AI didn’t notice or probably ignored willingly a March 22, 2009 press release from the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics marking World Water Day, which completely contradicts AI’s claim about per capita daily water use, stating:

“Data [from the Water Statistics Report 2007] shows that the quantity of water supplied for domestic use in the Palestinian Territory was 175.6 MCM in 2007, and that the daily allocation per capital of the supplied water for domestic use in the Palestinian Territory was 135.8 (liter/capita/day).” (www.pcbs.gov.ps/Portals/_pcbs/PressRelease/WaterPress07E.pdf)

That is double the AI figure! Baby, don’t cry ….

3) In another disparity between Amnesty and official
Palestinian figures, Amnesty claims (page 10):

“The total amount of water available to Palestinians from these various supplies [Jordan River, various aquifers, and water purchased from Israel] in recent years has been a maximum of some 170-180 MCM/Y, which reportedly fell to a mere 135 MCM in 2008, for a population of 2.3 million.”

In contrast, the above mentioned Water Day PCBS press release states:
According to the Water Statistics Report 2007 the annual available water quantity in the Palestinian Territory was 335.4 MCM in 2007.

4) On page 12 of the new AI-report we can read:

“Under the new Israeli military regime imposed in the OPT, Palestinians could no longer drill new wells or rehabilitate or even just repair existing ones, or carry out other any water-related projects (from pipes, networks, and reservoirs to wells and springs and even rainwater cisterns), without first obtaining a permit from the Israeli army. In theory such permits for drilling or rehabilitating wells could be obtained after a lengthy and complicated bureaucratic process; in practice, most applications for such permits were rejected.

Well, AI seems again to ignore facts, as the significant development in infrastructure since 1995. The World Bank states:

“The water and wastewater sector has come a long way since 1995:
- A capable national institution, the Palestinian Water Authority (PWA), has been built;
- The foundations for policy and operational coordination with Israel have been established;
- Several existing municipal distribution networks have been rehabilitated, new networks
developed, and supplies improved; and several new wells have been drilled and many
rehabilitated;
- Backbone primary network of bulk-water carriers are under construction in the West Bank
and ready to be launched in Gaza;
- In Gaza not only have municipal networks and systems have been significantly upgraded,
under an internationally recruited management contractor, effective managerial and
operational systems have been established;
- A new water law rationalizing the sector has been passed …”
(www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/…/Final0PID0032608.pdf)

Again Ai claims on page 12:

“Only 13 permits were granted in the 29 years from 1967 to 1996 (when the PWA was established), but all of these were for projects for domestic use only and they were not sufficient to make up even for the replacement of wells that had dried up or fallen into disrepair since 1967. . . .

The regime put in place by the Israeli army not only prevented the development of new Palestinian wells and infrastructure, but also limited the use and upkeep of existing ones. It prevented the rehabilitation of old wells. . .”

False: There were no severe restrictions on drilling new wells, and nearly 50 new well were drilled for the Palestinian population. Besides, during this period Israel drilled or permitted the drilling of over 50 new wells for the Palestinian population, laid hundreds of kilometers of new water mains and connected hundreds of Palestinian villages and towns to the newly built water system.

To conclude something about Palestinian children in the WB and how they brave their hot sommers:

Haaretz – Last update – 01:25 08/08/2007
W. Bank swimming pools help Palestinians brave the heat
By Avi Issacharoff

DURA – Lifeguard Ahmed Rajoub jumps to his feet and whistles loudly. “Stop it right now,” he shouts at a group of boys causing a ruckus.

“This pool is the pride of the West Bank,” he says, still eyeing the boys. The clover-leaf-shaped pool, one of whose walls is adorned with the word “welcome” in Arabic, formed out of small stones, is not the only attraction at Al-Khahuf (the caves). “Come back in the evening, you can even see the sea from here,” Rajoub says. The view from this small recreation complex in the village of Dura, near Hebron, is indeed breathtaking.

Al-Khahuf sits on a topographical saddle between two hills that slope westward toward Beit Govrin. The hills are covered with terraces of grape vines, olive orchards, figs and other fruit trees. This Tuscany in the West Bank couldn’t seem more removed from the Israeli occupation or the Palestinian infighting.

“Swimming pools have become trendy in the West Bank,” says Rajoub, 30. “It’s because of the occupation. We used to be able to travel freely to the beach in Israel. Everybody from Hebron would go on Friday. But now we’re not allowed. We had to find alternatives.”

Nowadays, every city in the West Bank has a pool or a recreational complex: Bethlehem has one similar to Al-Khahuf, while Ramallah has more than 10. One of Jenin’s swimming champs committed a suicide bombing at Jerusalem’s Sbarro restaurant in August 2001. Nablus has a pool reserved for women, and an Olympic pool. Another pool and recreation complex sits between Nablus and Tubas.

Al-Khahuf draws about 2,500 people on an average weekend day, Rajoub says. Abdullah Abu-Znayid, the owner’s brother, gives us a tour of the small caves hewn into the mountainside. The first is for VIPs. “This is where important people come to drink coffee. Jibril Rajoub and Mustafa Barghouti have been here,” he says.

Despite the heat, the women are fully clothed. “Arabs do not allow mixed swimming,” the owner, Abd al-Karim, explains. Most of the women are sitting near the ferris wheel, looking longingly at the bathers. Al-Karim says he would soon be opening a pool for women, by popular demand.

Al Karim says people denounced him when he first opened the pool. “Even in the mosque, they were afraid I’d sell alcohol here. But after a few months, they saw there was no alcohol and no problems. Now, the Islamic Movement sends its campers here.”

Entrance costs NIS 10. “I make a living. And because it’s cheap, Arab Israelis come here too.

At the petting zoo, which has a camel, a pony and a giant snake, we meet Tamara, a young East Jerusalemite here for the first time.

“Israel is still better,” she sniffs. “Can you compare this to Tel Aviv?”

David, David, didn’t you know that leftist anti-Zionist bigots are used to “utterly squash” everything that questions their narrow-minded ideology? Do you belong to this species too?

Anyway, in your defence, we also know that children love to cry wolf to be heard.

As for the AI-report “Troubled water”: it is biased and based on lies. A couple of examples of AI falsehoods regarding the water issue for you people of genius:

1) In “The day the bulldozers came…”: (http://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/day-bulldozers-came-20091027)
AI states:
“The village of Beit Ula, where Mahmoud lives, is not connected to the Palestinian water network. Instead the community, located north-west of Hebron, relies on rainwater, which it collects and stores in pots dug in the ground, known as cisterns….”

Well, AI doesn’t seem to be well informed or lies deliberately: The applied Research Institute-Jerusalem, a Palestinian organization, has a 17-page town profile of Beit Ula, which states on page 13:
“• Water Services: Beit Ula has been connected to the water network since 1974. Provided by the Palestinian Water Authority (PWA), almost 70% of town households
are connected to the network. Harvesting wells and 10 natural springs are alternative resources to the water network for the domestic and agricultural needs of the town. ” (http://proxy.arij.org/vprofile/vdata.php and click Beit Ula – pdf)

2) The AI report claimes on page 10 that “Palestinians have access to an average of no more than 60-70 liters per capita per day, and some survive on much less even than this, as little as 10-20 liters per person per day.” This statement has no source or footnote. Regrettably AI didn’t notice or probably ignored willingly a March 22, 2009 press release from the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics marking World Water Day, which completely contradicts AI’s claim about per capita daily water use, stating:

“Data [from the Water Statistics Report 2007] shows that the quantity of water supplied for domestic use in the Palestinian Territory was 175.6 MCM in 2007, and that the daily allocation per capital of the supplied water for domestic use in the Palestinian Territory was 135.8 (liter/capita/day).” (www.pcbs.gov.ps/Portals/_pcbs/PressRelease/WaterPress07E.pdf)

That is double the AI figure! Baby, don’t cry ….

3) In another disparity between Amnesty and official
Palestinian figures, Amnesty claims (page 10):

“The total amount of water available to Palestinians from these various supplies [Jordan River, various aquifers, and water purchased from Israel] in recent years has been a maximum of some 170-180 MCM/Y, which reportedly fell to a mere 135 MCM in 2008, for a population of 2.3 million.”

In contrast, the above mentioned Water Day PCBS press release states:
According to the Water Statistics Report 2007 the annual available water quantity in the Palestinian Territory was 335.4 MCM in 2007.

4) On page 12 of the new AI-report we can read:

“Under the new Israeli military regime imposed in the OPT, Palestinians could no longer drill new wells or rehabilitate or even just repair existing ones, or carry out other any water-related projects (from pipes, networks, and reservoirs to wells and springs and even rainwater cisterns), without first obtaining a permit from the Israeli army. In theory such permits for drilling or rehabilitating wells could be obtained after a lengthy and complicated bureaucratic process; in practice, most applications for such permits were rejected.

Well, AI seems again to ignore facts, as the significant development in infrastructure since 1995. The World Bank states:

“The water and wastewater sector has come a long way since 1995:
- A capable national institution, the Palestinian Water Authority (PWA), has been built;
- The foundations for policy and operational coordination with Israel have been established;
- Several existing municipal distribution networks have been rehabilitated, new networks
developed, and supplies improved; and several new wells have been drilled and many
rehabilitated;
- Backbone primary network of bulk-water carriers are under construction in the West Bank
and ready to be launched in Gaza;
- In Gaza not only have municipal networks and systems have been significantly upgraded,
under an internationally recruited management contractor, effective managerial and
operational systems have been established;
- A new water law rationalizing the sector has been passed …”
(www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/…/Final0PID0032608.pdf)

Again Ai claims on page 12:

“Only 13 permits were granted in the 29 years from 1967 to 1996 (when the PWA was established), but all of these were for projects for domestic use only and they were not sufficient to make up even for the replacement of wells that had dried up or fallen into disrepair since 1967. . . .

The regime put in place by the Israeli army not only prevented the development of new Palestinian wells and infrastructure, but also limited the use and upkeep of existing ones. It prevented the rehabilitation of old wells. . .”

False: There were no severe restrictions on drilling new wells, and nearly 50 new well were drilled for the Palestinian population. Besides, during this period Israel drilled or permitted the drilling of over 50 new wells for the Palestinian population, laid hundreds of kilometers of new water mains and connected hundreds of Palestinian villages and towns to the newly built water system.

To conclude something about Palestinian children in the WB and how they brave hot sommers:

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=890972

Tsk, tsk. You forgot to accuse B’Tselem of being comprised of “self-hating Jews.”

Give it up pal!! Your arguments and assertions have been utterly squashed.

As for B’etselem, they are mainly Israeli Jews largely from the Meretz and Labor parties who criticise also the Palestinians terrorist methods, not only the Israeli policies in the WB and Gaza. They could and should be for you a example for more balanced criticism.

But apart from this, B’tselem itself isn’t above suspicion. NGOMonitor characterizes the NGO as follows:

B’TSELEM – The Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories was established in 1989 by “a group of prominent academics, attorneys, journalists, and Knesset members” largely from the Meretz and Labor Parties.
*
Key staff: Jessica Montell, Executive Director; Najib Abu Rokaya, Fieldwork Director; Sarit Michaeli, Communications Director; Risa Zoll, International Relations Director
*
States that it “acts primarily to change Israeli policy in the Occupied Territories and ensure that its government, which rules the Occupied Territories, protects the human rights of residents there and complies with its obligations under international law.” B’Tselem does not report on human rights violations within Israel.
*
B’Tselem’s reports are repeated by international NGO superpowers such as Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch as well as Palestinian NGOs. B´Tselem also presses its political agenda actively in the Israeli courts and the Knesset.
*
Analysts have shown that B’Tselem’s methodology is problematic, often inconsistent, and reflects the organization’s political agenda. The organization identifies casualties according to their supposed activity at the moment of death, and therefore those “killed while not engaged in hostilities” – including terrorists, terror leaders and organizers, and rioters – are occasionally mislabeled “civilians.” Relies on statistics and reports of other NGOs, despite the political agendas and credibility problems of these other groups.
*
B’Tselem categorizes suicide bombings and rocket attacks targeting Israeli civilians as “war crimes” and “a grave breach of the right to life”, according to international humanitarian law. Yet its political agenda is evident in the minimal attention it gives to intra-Palestinian human rights abuses (including torture, extra-judicial executions and abductions).
*
Regularly minimizes Israeli security concerns, and ignores the fact that checkpoints, for example, have been instrumental in preventing attacks against civilians within Israel.
*
The 2006 budget was approximately 7 million shekels ($2 million at 2008 rates). Main funders include the EU and numerous European governments, Christian Aid (UK), DanChurchAid, Diakonia (Sweden) and other church groups, the Ford Foundation, and the New Israel Fund (Israel).

* you know I’m right.

Even canaanites ca 4800yrs ago were leaving it for greener pastures; settling among sumerians, akkadians, and assyrians. And the division by race, culture, cultishness, and linguistic differences alone wld make livving there a hell for many ‘jews’.
tnx

http://dissidentvoice.org/2009/12/walled-in-by-myth-and-deceit/

http://www.water.gov.il/NR/rdonlyres/A111EFEF-3857-41F0-B598-F48119AE9170/0/WaterIssuesBetweenIsraelandthePalestinians.pdf

Israeli strategies aimed to negate the very presence of the Palestinian people. Major Israeli designs intended to coerce the Palestinians to vacate the land. Practices, such as land confiscation, house demolition and even killings, enabled Israel tighter control over Palestinian land including water its most valuable resource.

Immediately after the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip in 1967, Israeli military authorities issued several Military Orders (MO) to ensure tight control over water resources. On 17 June 1967, Military Order 92 was issued. It covered the following:

a-All water resources in Gaza and the West Bank are considered government property;
b-All permits for artesian wells are cancelled;
c-All information or data regarding water resources is strictly classified7.
On 15 August 1967, another Military Order was issued placing all authority over water matters, exclusively, in the hands of a military officer. Military Order 1015 issued on 27 July 1982 and was amended by Military Order 1039 on 5 December 1982 determined the nature and quantity of crops Palestinians may plant, especially, in irrigated parts. It also demanded that Palestinian farmers reduce their crops to lessen water consumption8 . Similarly, in the Gaza Strip, two Military Orders were issued declaring water resources governmental and ordering Palestinians to seek permission from the military governor for any project involving water.

These Military Orders enabled Israeli occupation authorities absolute control over Palestinian water resources. These authorities have often refused to grant any permission to dig artesian wells or to build any water networks. Dr. Paul Korch wrote in Middle Right: “Since the occupation of the Palestinian territories by Israel the military authorities did not grant a permit to a single village to dig any wells. Between 1967 and 1983 only seven wells were allowed and those were for domestic consumption”. Additionally, Israeli authorities prohibit restoration of old wells. Owners of wells that existed prior to June 1967 were forced to place meters to determine exact amounts of water drawn from their wells.

The Palestinian Planing Center reported that Israeli Water Commission exercised direct and tight control over Palestinian water resources since 1967. Two Israeli companies, Tahal was responsible for regulating water policies while Mekorot, was entrusted with digging artesian wells and sales of water in the Occupied Palestinian Territories.

Comparison between Israeli and Palestinian Water shares

Most studies on water shares have shown that a Palestinian individual consumes on average, for all purposes, 30 liters of water per day. While an Israeli settler uses, for domestic purposes only, 350 liters/day, i.e. ten times the amount used by a Palestinian individual. This number does not include water consumption for industrial or irrigation purposes.

In a comparative study prepared by Fahmi Shahin, a researcher with LAWE, the Palestinian Society for Human Right and the Environment, have shown that an Israeli settler in the settlements of Qiryat Arba’a or Kharsina, uses ten times as much as any Palestinian living in the nearby city of Hebron. Table (3)9shows the big difference in consumption in the two adjacent urban areas. The reason for such difference is that the amount of water destined for the city of Hebron is pre-determined by the Israeli authorities. Daily needs for water in the city of Hebron exceeds the amount reaches every household. Table (3) also shows the reduction in water supplied to the Palestinians between 1997 and 1998. Additionally, Israeli settlers often vandalize the water networks in the Hebron District, which causes frequent disruption in water supplies. Often, Israeli settler’s cut-off water supply to the city of Hebron for prolonged periods; they physically wreck the water mains in the area; they divert large amounts of water, destined to Hebron, for irrigation of settlers’ farms in the area.

In violation of its agreement with the city of Hebron, Mekorot, the Israeli company responsible for providing Hebron with water often reduces the amount of water it pumps to the city without notice. According to the agreement, Mekorot is supposed to pump 25,000 cubic meters daily to the city. Instead, it only pumps 5500 cubic meters daily. This amount is often reduced especially in the summer.

The District of Bethlehem, only 35% of its population of 150,000 Palestinians, received water through the local network in the first half of 1999. Water supplies, earmarked for the District, were reduced by 30% in 1999. The District of Bethlehem receives 300 cubic meters/hour while the actual need surpasses 1500 cubic meters/hour. A recent study by Palestinian NGOs have determined that in 1989 the 100,000 Israeli settlers in the Occupied Palestinian Territories have consumed 60 million cubic meters while a million and a half Palestinians consumed only 137 million cubic meters of water in the period.10

Repercussions of Israeli Polices on Palestinians

The on-going massive reduction in water supplied to the occupied territories and the escalating prices of water, Palestinian crops could no longer compete with Israeli agricultural goods. Irrigated areas in the occupied territories dropped from 37% to 3.7%. The occupation authorities imposed harsh conditions on Palestinian agriculture. They even determined what type of crops to be planted and the amount of water to be used for irrigation. Many Palestinian farmers abandoned their farms, which were later confiscated by the Israeli authorities using Military Orders especially made-up for this purpose. Many of those farmers went to work, as cheap laborers, in Israeli factories. Others, looking for a decent living, immigrated elsewhere. Yet many farmers and landowners, which could not cope with heavy losses, joined the long lines of the unemployed, adding to the already devastating social and psychological problems in the Palestinian society.

Furthermore, Palestinian factories in the occupied territories, suffer great losses because of reductions in water supplies. Many factories, in the food, stone-cutting or construction industries were forced to close down. Many of its workers became unemployed. Hospitals, because of water shortages, suffered unending problems with hygiene and several units for kidney dialysis were shut down.

Water shortages in the Occupied Palestinian Territories have added more to the sufferings inflicted on the Palestinians that it affected all aspects of life. In most areas, a Palestinian could not get the chance to bathe even once a week. Dirty dishes are often stacked for days waiting for water. Over 300 Palestinian communities lack water networks. Other communities are prohibited by the Israeli authorities to effect any repairs in their decaying old networks.

The fast expansion of Israeli settlements in the occupied territories have added more to the existing water shortages, especially, in surface water which feed the aquifers. Sewage and wastewater from Israeli settlements is absorbed, untreated, by the soil, which affects the quality of fresh water reserves in the aquifers.

Israeli excessive consumption of enormous amounts of water from aquifers underneath the Palestinian Territories in addition to its blocking of surface-water running north-south, have caused immense damage to the aquifers. Seawater has begun to seep underneath the Gazan soil and have raised salinity in the Gaza aquifers to unacceptable levels. Dozens of people have reported liver and kidney ailments because of high salinity levels. A Dutch study reported that Gaza would have a serious problem with drinking water in the year 2000. Salinity levels reached 4500-5000 mg/liter in several artesian wells11. Internationally acceptable levels do not exceed 50 mg/liter.

http://dair-ga.tripod.com/water.htm

Thanks so much for your invaluable contribution to this discussion!!
I have included it my already huge file on Israel’s despicable, criminal beyond words and racist in the extreme theft and waste of (e.g., swimming pools) of Palestinian owned water resources.

But thanks for the World Bank confirmation that Palestinians can access only 20% of THEIR OWN WATER. More on water below.

Water and the Wall

• Many of the most important underground wellsprings in the West Bank are located just to the east of the Green Line dividing Israel from Palestine. Israel has built the Wall not only to annex land but also to annex many of these wells in order to divert water to Israel and illegal West Bank settlements.

This water reservoir, located in the village of Attil, Tulkarem district, is isolated by the Wall from the community it serves. It is in the area between the Wall and the Green Line, which Israel is attempting to annex in violation of the Road Map and of international law.

• The Wall is not only an Apartheid Wall, but also a water wall. Some of the largest Israeli settlements (such as Ariel and Qedumin) are built over the Western mountain aquifer, directly in the middle of the northern West Bank agricultural districts, and this is exactly where the wall cuts deepest into Palestinian territory to surround and annex this vital water source.

• The building of the Wall has caused the village of Falamya in Qalqiliya district to lose its main source of water. In Jayyous, a village near Falamya, all of its seven water wells have been annexed or destroyed by the Apartheid Wall.

• In the West Bank, around 50 groundwater wells and over 200 cisterns have been destroyed or isolated from their owners by the Wall. This water was used for domestic and agricultural needs by over 122,000 people. To build the Wall, 25 wells and cisterns and 35,000 meters of water pipes have also been destroyed [5].

• In 2003, the losses incurred by Palestinian farmers due to the Wall diverting water resources has been 2,200 tons of olive oil, 50,000 tons of fruit, and 100,000 tons of vegetables [6].

• The Wall is obstructing many water run-off flows in the Qalqiliya region that normally divert water to prevent flooding. During heavy rains in February 2005, Israeli soldiers refused to open drainage pipes in Qalqiliya, which led to heavy flood damage to crops and homes there. The Wall also caused severe flooding in Zububa and other villages.

Under the conditions brought about by the siege imposed by Israeli occupation forces, civilians in the occupied territories are suffering from lack of access to necessary resources for the maintenance of their daily needs and basic health. We have reached a state of emergency in the water sector in the Occupied Territories. We must call for an immediate end to the siege upon the water sector.

Water issues under the Oslo Accords

The interim agreement that Israel and the Palestinian Authority signed in September 1995 (Oslo 2) includes the most updated understanding on water that has been reached in the peace process framework. It is also more detailed than previous documents. The subject appears in article 40 of the Protocol on Civil Affairs (Annex 3). Israeli officials relate to it as a turning point at which responsibility for the water sector is transferred to the Palestinian Authority. However, this agreement did not significantly change the scope of Israeli control.

The point of departure for the understanding on division of water from the shared sources is that the quantity of water that Israel consumes, both within the Green Line and in the settlements, will not be reduced. According to this principle, any additional water for the Palestinians would be produced from previously unutilized sources, and not by re-distribution of existing sources. This means that almost every addition of water to the Palestinians under this agreement must come from the Eastern Aquifer of the West Bank, which, according to the agreement itself, is the only source that had not been fully utilized prior to signing of the agreement.

In the Oslo Accords, Israel recognized that the Gaza Strip and the West Bank comprise one territorial unit. However, the Interim Agreement stipulates that, regarding water resources, the Gaza Strip will constitute a separate water sector. Other than the small quantity that Israel undertook to sell, residents of the Gaza Strip will have to meet their needs solely from resources located within its borders, i.e., they are not allowed to obtain water from the West Bank. The failure of the Interim Agreement to re-distribute the water resources shared by the West Bank and Israel prevented any “surplus” of water in the West Bank that could increase the supply of water to the Gaza Strip. As a result, the severance of the Gaza Strip and the West Bank continued, further damaging the Gaza Aquifer because of the necessity to continue the over-extraction.

Pursuant to the Interim Agreement, the parties established the Joint Water Committee (JWC), the body charged with approving every new water and sewage project in the West Bank. The JWC is comprised of an equal number of representatives of Israel and the Palestinian Authority. All its decisions are made by consensus, and no mechanism is established to settle disputes where a consensus cannot be attained. This method of decision-making means that Israel is able to veto any request by the Palestinian representatives to drill a new well to obtain the additions stipulated in the agreement.

Israel’s control of extraction of water from the shared aquifers is not limited to its veto power in the JWC over new drillings. If a well approved by the JWC is situated in Area C, which is under Israel’s complete control, the High Planning Committee of the Civil Administration must also approve the project.

The shared water sources and the control over them

Israel and the Palestinians share two main water sources. The first is the Mountain Aquifer, a system extending over approximately 130 Km, from Mount Carmel in the north to Beersheva in the south. The aquifer is some 35 Km wide – from the Dead Sea and the Jordan Valley on the east, to the eastern border of the coastal strip on the west. The aquifer is fed by rain that falls mostly on the mountains of the West Bank and seeps into it. The water then flows eastward and westward to the reservoir areas, from where it is drawn by wells. This source supplies about one-quarter of the water needs of Israel and the Israeli settlements and almost all the running water that Palestinians in the West Bank receive.

The second joint source of water, according to international law, is the upper Jordan River and its tributaries: the Sea of Galilee, the Yarmuh, and the lower Jordan River . Although only the Jordan River is shared geographically, the water Israel draws from the Sea of Galilee and the Jordan River sources directly affects the amount of water in the river itself. This source supplies approximately one-third of Israel ‘s water needs, and also serves Jordan , Syria , and Lebanon . Palestinians do not receive any water from this source.

Demand for water by Palestinians in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip has been increasing since the 1920s. The main reason for the increase is, in addition to natural population growth, the increased number of homes connected to a central water network. The demand for water in the Occupied Territories increased at a greater rate since the beginning of the Israeli occupation in 1967 because of the relative increase in the Palestinian standard of living following integration of the economies of the Occupied Territories and Israel .

However, Israel ‘s tight control of the water sector in the Occupied Territories prevented development that would enable the water sector to meet Palestinians’ increasing demand for water. Israel instituted restrictions and prohibitions that had not existed under Jordanian and Egyptian control. These restrictions and prohibitions are a principal reason for the water shortage and the resultant water crisis.

Israel ‘s water policy in the Occupied Territories has benefited Israel in two primary ways:
1. Preservation of the unequal division of the shared groundwater in the West Bank ‘s Western Aquifer and Northern Aquifer. This division was created prior to the occupation, a result of the gap between economic and technological development in Israel as opposed to the West Bank . However, the gap would have likely diminished had Israel not prevented it.
2.
3. Utilization of new water sources, to which Israel had no access prior to 1967, such as the Eastern Aquifer (in the West Bank ) and the Gaza Aquifer, primarily to benefit Israeli settlements established in those areas.
For residents of the Occupied Territories, the primary result of the change in the law and transfer of powers over the water sector to Israeli bodies was the drastic restriction on drilling new wells to meet their water needs. According to military orders, drilling a well required obtaining a permit, which entailed a lengthy and complicated bureaucratic process. The vast majority of applications submitted during the occupation were denied. The few that were granted were solely for domestic use, and were less than the number of wells that, after 1967, had ceased to be used due to improper maintenance or because they had dried up.

It should be emphasized that the legal and institutional changes that Israel instituted in the water sector in the Occupied Territories are not intrinsically unacceptable. They conformed to the approach taken in Israel ‘s water sector and could, in principle, have led to a more efficient supply of water to the Palestinians. However, Israel utilized these changes to exclusively promote Israeli interests, almost completely ignoring the needs of the Palestinian population, which was left to face a growing water shortage.

The water crisis in the Occupied Territories resulted not only from the restrictions Israel placed on Palestinian residents, but also from Israel ‘s relatively minimal investment in water infrastructure. The neglect in infrastructure was conspicuous in two areas: in construction of infrastructure to connect rural communities to a running-water network, and in maintenance (to prevent loss of water) of the existing networks. When the Interim Agreement was signed, 20 percent of Palestinians in the West Bank were not connected to a running-water network. In mid-2006, about 10 percent of the population n the West Bank was not connected to a running-water system. Despite the sharp decline, because of the increase in population, the number of persons who are not connected to a running-water system has remained about the same, 215,000 compared to some 200,000 in 2000. The water-pipe leaks resulting from improper maintenance led in some instances to a loss of more than 50 percent of the quantity of water supplied. This was true, for example, in Qalqiliya and Tulkarm.

Villages not connected to a water network

The water shortage is especially hard on residents of Palestinian villages that are not connected to a water network. As of June 2006, some 215,000 Palestinians in 220 villages lived in communities without a running-water network. In the winter and fall, these residents collect rainfall in cisterns next to their homes and use the water for all their needs. In the spring and summer months, when the water in the cistern was been depleted, the residents rely on water from nearby springs and on water brought to them by owners of private water-tankers.

There are also hundreds of thousands of Palestinians who live in communities with a central running-water network that supplies water irregularly in limited amounts and does not reach everyone in the community. For this reason, some Palestinian authorities supply water in the summer months on a rotation basis: each neighborhood receives water once every few days, for one day or several hours at a time. To supplement the water supplied, these residents have to buy water brought to them in privately owned water-tankers.

Per capita water consumption for household and municipal use in communities connected to a central running-water network in the West Bank is sixty liters a day. In Israel , per capita daily use is 280 liters, more than 4.5 times greater.

While the cost of water supplied by a central running-water network ranges from three to five shekels per cubic meter, the water-tanker owners charge from fifteen to thirty shekels per cubic meter, depending on the supplier and the location of the community. With forty-six percent of the residents living under the poverty line and more than twenty-seven percent of them unemployed, water purchases are a heavy financial burden for a substantial segment of the local population. According to research of the Palestinian Hydrology Group, there are many cases in which water purchases amount to ten percent of the family’s expenses. This summer, many families will have especially great difficulty in meeting this burden, in part because of Israel ‘s decision, following the ascension of Hamas to power, not to transfer to the Palestinian Authority the tax monies that Israel collected for it.

In light of the situation, many families will have to further reduce their water consumption, thus making it harder for them to meet their basic needs such as personal hygiene, housecleaning, dishwashing, and clothes washing. Research studies have shown that a shortage of water causes a decline in personal hygiene. This can lead to incidents of disease such as skin disorders, for example.

The principal reason for the water shortage in the West Bank is the unfair distribution of the water resources shared by Israel and the Palestinians. One of these resources is the Mountain Aquifer which is composed of a few reservoirs of groundwater that lie on both sides of the Green Line. Although this aquifer is the sole water source for residents of the West Bank, Israel uses eighty percent of it, leaving only the remaining twenty percent for the Palestinians. Israel refuses to alter this distribution or to allow the Palestinians access to alternate water sources such as the Jordan River basin, thus preventing the Palestinian Authority from either connecting additional communities to a running-water network, or from increasing the water supply in locations where a running-water network exists.

Another cause of the water shortage is the poor infrastructure that Israel handed over to the Palestinian Authority in 1995 in the framework of the Oslo Agreements. Since then, the Palestinian Authority has improved the infrastructure, but it still does not meet minimal standards. Forty percent of the water carried through the pipes is lost by leakage.

In addition, Mekorot, the Israeli water company, which supplies more than one-half of household and urban water consumption in the West Bank (the rest is supplied by Palestinian bodies), reduces the quantity of water sold to Palestinians in the summer months by fifteen to twenty-five percent to meet consumption needs in Israel and in the settlements.

Israel’s policy regarding water supply in the West Bank is illegal and discriminates on racial grounds. It flagrantly breaches international law which requires Israel to ensure proper living conditions for the local population and to respect the Palestinians’ human rights, including the right to receive a sufficient quantity of water to meet their basic needs.

International law on water
In examining international law, it is necessary to distinguish between Israel’s obligations as an occupying state to the population under its control on one hand, and the use of water sources shared by Israel and the Palestinians, which are considered international waters, on the other.

A. Administration of the water sector in occupied territory
1. Prohibition on altering legislation
Article 43 of the 1907 Hague Regulations prohibits an occupying state from changing the legislation in effect prior to occupation. The military orders that Israel issued regarding the water resources and the supply of water in the Occupied Territories significantly changed the legal and institutional structure of the water sector. The water resources in the Occupied Territories were integrated into the legal and bureaucratic system of Israel, severely limiting the ability of Palestinians to develop those resources.

2. Illegal utilization of water resources
Article 55 of the Hague Regulations limits the right of occupying states to utilize the water sources of occupied territory. The use is limited to military needs and may not exceed past use. Use of groundwater of the Occupied Territories in the settlements does not meet these criteria and therefore breaches article 55.

3. Discrimination between Palestinians and Israeli Settlers
Article 27 of the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 prohibits an occupying state from discriminating between residents of occupied territory. The quantity of water supplied to the settlements is vastly larger than that which is supplied to the Palestinians. Similarly, the regularity of supply is much greater in the settlements. This discrimination is especially blatant during the summer months when the supply to Palestinians in some areas of the West Bank is reduced in order to meet the increased demand for water in the settlements receiving their water from the same pipelines.

B. Utilization of shared international water sources
Under international law, the main principle for division of shared water between states is the principle of equitable and reasonable use. This principle is based on the limited-sovereignty doctrine, which provides that, because all parts of the drainage basins of watercourses are hydrologically interdependent, states are not allowed to utilize water located in their territory as they wish, but must take into account the other states that share the resource.

This principle does not state a precise formula quantifying the rights of each state sharing an international watercourse. Rather, it lists the factors to be considered in negotiations between the states to determine the division. Article 6 of the UN Convention on the Law of the Non-Navigational Uses of International Watercourses enumerates seven of these factors:
1. The natural features of the shared watercourse (geographic, climatic, hydrologic, and the like);
2. The social and economic needs of the watercourse states;
3. The population dependent on the watercourse in each watercourse state;
4. The effects of the use of the watercourses in one watercourse state on other watercourse states;
5. Existing and potential uses of the watercourse;
6. Conservation, protection, and development of the water resources of the watercourse and the costs of measures taken to that effect;
7. The availability of alternatives to a particular planned or existing use.
Taking into account the components of the principle of equitable and reasonable use, examination of the current division of water between Israel and the Palestinians leads to the conclusion that this division violates Palestinian rights and contravenes international water law.

The gap in water consumption between Palestinians and Israelis

The discrimination in utilization of the resources shared by Israel and the Palestinian Authority is clearly seen in the figures on water consumption by the two populations. Per capita water consumption in the West Bank for domestic, urban, and industrial use is only 22 cubic meters a year, which translates into 60 liters per person per day.

There is a huge gap between Israeli and Palestinian consumption. The average Israeli consumes for domestic and urban use approximately 104 cubic meters a year, or 280 liters per person per day. In other words, per capita use in Israel is four and a half times higher than in the Occupied Territories . To make a more precise comparison, by also taking into account industrial water consumption in Israel, per capita use per year reaches 120 cubic meters – 330 liters per person a day – or five and a half times Palestinian per capita consumption.

The World Health Organization and the United States Agency for International Development recommend 100 liters of water per person per day as the minimum quantity for basic consumption. This amount includes, in addition to domestic use, consumption in hospitals, schools, businesses, and other public institutions. Palestinian daily consumption is 40 percent less than the recommended quantity.

Digest THAT!