Jordan River Basin Group: MehR Saleem , Tahir Abbasi and Mohsin Munir

1. Jordan River BasinGroup: MehRSaleem, Tahir Abbasi and MohsinMunir Israel Jordan Treaty-1994

2. Background • Jordan and Israel share Jordon River Basin’s (JRB) two largest streams: the Jordon River and the Yarmouk River and the GW sources associated with them. • JRB has 5 riparians: Jordon, Israel, Syria, Lebonon and Palestine – but the treaty in question was bilateral between Jordan and Israel. • Prior to the Treaty in question, the two countries had over drawn water and this had resulted in environmental degradation and long term water insecurity. • In 1994, Jordan and Israel signed a peace treaty re water sharing and seasonal transfers across borders within the basin.

3. Issues • 1: How to best manage water from Jordan River and YarmoukRiver and water sharing by Jordan and Israel? • 2: How to avoid overdrawing of water and damaging environment and ensuring future water security?

4. Positions taken by the Parties • Historial Position leading to 1994 Treaty: Positional Bargaining/Distributive Position. Zero sum led to failed negotiations resulting in (a) overdrawing of water; (b) critically damaging environment; (c) damaging long term water security. • 1994 Treaty: Problem Solving/Integrative Position

5. Any role of third party • In 1950s, US mediated but the parties used zero sum approach because of political concerns and the negotiations failed.

6. Diplomatic techniques and maneuvers used and tactical and strategic approach adopted 1. Creating Value: Expanding the pie: • Jordan had highly seasonal flows and no water storage capacity and, therefore, needed a system to transfer water to Israel’s Lake Tiberias in winter and Jordan had to trust Israel to return it to Jordan in summer – they did this thus creating more “virtual” water and more effective use of available supply. • Also, scientific and technical information was generated collaboratively by the parties leading to creation of value. • Israel got GW rights and Jordon got supply of desalinated water from Israel • Used uncertainty to generate opportunities for value creation (collaborative data collection, Shared gains approach, Technological solution to bulid dams and saline water)

7. Diplomatic techniques and maneuvers used and tactical and strategic approach adopted 2. Flexibility: by working towards creating storage capacity for Jordon 3. Met conflicting interests: by Israel extracting 12 MCM in summer and 13 MCM in Winter. Jordon was allowed to store 20 MCM. Also, Israel conceding the land in the south in exchange for Jordon giving Israel the right to continue extracting GW and Israel also conceding land in the north while Jordon granted Israel the right to continue agriculture for 25 years

8. Diplomatic techniques and maneuvers used and tactical and strategic approach adopted 4. Joint fact finding and monitoring: joint work in the field measuring stream flows and planning projects resulting in confidence building measures; 5. Focusing on relationship: Where they were and where they wanted to be: worked towards building relationship through collaborative approach and joint gain solutions; 6. Involved non state actors in implementation; 7. Trust building through constituting Joint Water Committee and jointly collecting data and creating knowledge and undertaking scientific analysis together

9. Thank You