Integrating High and Low Politics: Lessons from the Israeli-Jordanian Water Regime'

Abstract

ABSTRACT So far, debate over resolution of water disputes in protracted conflict settings tended to emphasize either the “functionalist” argument that cooperation in technical matters might serve as a vehicle/or achieving peace, or the “realist” rationale according to which cooperation in water utilization only succeeds after resolution of political conflict. The empirical example treated is the Jordan River Basin, with on emphasis on the bilateral relations between Israel and the Kingdom of Jordan. By depicting the complementary role of bilateral political negotiations and multilateral talks on technical matters in the Arab-Israeli peace process the article argues that the two approaches do not necessarily exclude each other but should rather be integrated. The author argues that, while substantial cooperation in such a sensitive field as water requires the previous settlement of visceral political concerns, parallel talks on technical aspects of water management proved to be a helpful complement to the traditional diplomatic approach. In the Israeli-Jordanian case they both eased compromises over the issue of water distribution and improved the psychopolitical setting for resolution of the larger political struggle. Adapted to local conditions, this formula may become a model of procedure for resolution of riparian disputes within protracted conflict settings in other parts of the world.