248
for precious river water, to protect the environment and to access political and fi nancial support for projects to protect the Dead Sea and Jordan River. This degree of
cooperation could encourage international parties to consider how they might support regional water supply projects for Jordan (and Palestine) through bulk conveyance, which are considered next.
Supporting Studies on Inward Transfer of Turkish Water
With Jordan’s long-term need for bulk water, exploring the potential for the import
of Turkish water (Gruen 2007 ; Wachtel and Liel 2009 ; IPCRI 2010 ; Yorke 2013 ,
pp. 127–131) has become a priority as prospects for the mega RSDS Conveyance
Project wane. Turkey would like to export water to the extent it has capacity (SFG
2011 , pp. 39–41) and has historically favoured Middle East destinations for political
reasons. The SFG’s initiative to build cooperation around water between Turkey and
the Arab states is therefore crucially important. Diplomacy and studies could keep
open the option of water transfer to Jordan and its neighbours in the face of competing purchase offers from Mediterranean countries and lead to related deals on the
transport of gas, oil and electricity to underpin growth. Given the potential contribution of Turkish water to Jordan’s ability to meet long- and even medium-term needs,
studies of the options deserve technical and fi nancial support:
• Transfers from Manavgat River: Most promising would be Jordan’s purchase of
water conveyed from Turkey’s Manavgat facility by tanker or fl oating bag.
Imports of up to 400 × 10
6 m
3 /year would be signifi cant and could be negotiated
as part of a set of bilateral accords with Turkey or as a regional package involving
Israel, or as a straightforward purchase of potable water for the medium term,
pending a long-term solution. Conveyance by tanker is considered technically
more reliable than by bag.
26
• Transfers from the Seyhan and Ceyhan Rivers: Turkey’s past interest in the idea
of a pipeline to Syria and Jordan (Gruen 2007 ; Rende 2007 ; Wachtel and Liel
2009 ) has receded since development around the rivers has dented export capacity. Still, an estimated 1,000–1,500 × 10
6 m
3 would be available to 2020, though
fl ows would be intermittent. A modifi ed pipeline in the context of a possible
future Marshall-type plan for Syria’s reconstruction with international guarantees and a legal framework might therefore appeal to all parties as well as attract
the needed funding. The plan’s self-suffi ciency in terms of energy to convey the
water would be an added plus. Scientifi c analysis to identify the scale of Turkey’s
future export capacity would be required as well as commitments by participating countries on joint monitoring and management.
• A third option would be an undersea network of pipelines through the
Mediterranean to carry water, gas, oil and fi bre optics (Personal interviews 2010;
26 For discussion on Spragg bag technology, see www.internationalwaterlaw.org/blog/category/
middle-east
V. Yorke
for precious river water, to protect the environment and to access political and fi nancial support for projects to protect the Dead Sea and Jordan River. This degree of
cooperation could encourage international parties to consider how they might support regional water supply projects for Jordan (and Palestine) through bulk conveyance, which are considered next.
Supporting Studies on Inward Transfer of Turkish Water
With Jordan’s long-term need for bulk water, exploring the potential for the import
of Turkish water (Gruen 2007 ; Wachtel and Liel 2009 ; IPCRI 2010 ; Yorke 2013 ,
pp. 127–131) has become a priority as prospects for the mega RSDS Conveyance
Project wane. Turkey would like to export water to the extent it has capacity (SFG
2011 , pp. 39–41) and has historically favoured Middle East destinations for political
reasons. The SFG’s initiative to build cooperation around water between Turkey and
the Arab states is therefore crucially important. Diplomacy and studies could keep
open the option of water transfer to Jordan and its neighbours in the face of competing purchase offers from Mediterranean countries and lead to related deals on the
transport of gas, oil and electricity to underpin growth. Given the potential contribution of Turkish water to Jordan’s ability to meet long- and even medium-term needs,
studies of the options deserve technical and fi nancial support:
• Transfers from Manavgat River: Most promising would be Jordan’s purchase of
water conveyed from Turkey’s Manavgat facility by tanker or fl oating bag.
Imports of up to 400 × 10
6 m
3 /year would be signifi cant and could be negotiated
as part of a set of bilateral accords with Turkey or as a regional package involving
Israel, or as a straightforward purchase of potable water for the medium term,
pending a long-term solution. Conveyance by tanker is considered technically
more reliable than by bag.
26
• Transfers from the Seyhan and Ceyhan Rivers: Turkey’s past interest in the idea
of a pipeline to Syria and Jordan (Gruen 2007 ; Rende 2007 ; Wachtel and Liel
2009 ) has receded since development around the rivers has dented export capacity. Still, an estimated 1,000–1,500 × 10
6 m
3 would be available to 2020, though
fl ows would be intermittent. A modifi ed pipeline in the context of a possible
future Marshall-type plan for Syria’s reconstruction with international guarantees and a legal framework might therefore appeal to all parties as well as attract
the needed funding. The plan’s self-suffi ciency in terms of energy to convey the
water would be an added plus. Scientifi c analysis to identify the scale of Turkey’s
future export capacity would be required as well as commitments by participating countries on joint monitoring and management.
• A third option would be an undersea network of pipelines through the
Mediterranean to carry water, gas, oil and fi bre optics (Personal interviews 2010;
26 For discussion on Spragg bag technology, see www.internationalwaterlaw.org/blog/category/
middle-east
V. Yorke