Thou shall not covet thy neighbor's water: a look at the journey both Texas and the Middle East must embark upon to solve the kinks in their water regulation.

Since the 1970s, there has been a growing tension between Turkey, Syria, and Iraq over water. (99) This is due to the Tigris-Euphrates River system being the only real source of water in the region. (100) For six thousand years, the basins formed by both the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers have been part of a number of struggles for domination. (101) Turkey sits toward the north of both Syria and Iraq. For Syria, the main water source is the Euphrates River, (102) which flows down from Turkey and then into Iraq. (103) Iraq, on the other hand, relies both on the Euphrates River water supply as well as water from the Tigris River that flows from Turkey into Iraq, thus giving them an additional source of water. (104) Notably, Iraq is the country with the highest consumption of water from the Euphrates River among the other countries in the region. (105) In 1987, a protocol was signed, which allowed for Syrian access to the Euphrates River Basin. (106) However, "Turkish development efforts have increasingly threatened to marginalize and even eliminate Syrian access to water." (107) One such development effort is the Southeast Anotolia Project (GAP). (108) The goal of this project was the development of the area consisting of nine provinces in the Euphrates-Tigris basins known as the "GAP Region". (109) Originally, the GAP started as an energy production and irrigation project but has since been expanded to cover urban, rural, and agricultural infrastructures. (110)

It has been argued that this development has essentially given Turkey control of the only upstream water source for Syria. (111) In fact, the GAP will have a great impact on the water supply of Syria and Iraq flowing from the Euphrates River. (112)

3. Jordan--Palestine--Israel

Turning toward another water conflict in the Middle East, the Jordan, Palestine, and Israel region demonstrates the problems of overuse due to population growth and pollution. (113) Their water source originates in Lebanon and has a total average flow of around 1,200 cubic meters a year. (114) This water system is made up of both the Jordan and Yarmouk Rivers. (115) The Jordan River basin is viewed as the most controversial in the region due to it being the most developed and politically intricate. (116) Because a number of states that rely on the Jordan River for water are not able to harvest enough water to meet their needs, they must also rely on groundwater aquifers as a main source of water. (117) This reliance is due to Jordan's per capita water consumption, which, although one of the lowest among countries in the Middle East, is still more than the amount of water it can harvest from rainfall and from the Yarmuk River. (118) In 1994, the Israeli-Jordanian Treaty was signed, creating guidelines regarding the distribution, preservation, and availability of water from the Yarmouk and Jordan Rivers. (119) However, despite this agreement, conflict is continually rising. (120) In 1999, the climate of the region and harsh droughts caused Israel to be unable to adhere to the stipulations of the 1994 treaty and cut the annual allocation of water to Jordan by half. (121) This caused Jordan to be unable to sustain its current levels of water consumption and move toward a water rationing system. (122) Because of Jordan's limited access to water resources, its escalating water deficit is expected to reach 250 cubic meters by the year 2010. (123) With Jordan placing a high value on the "hydraulic imperative" and Israel's decreasing internal water sources, fears of a grab-for-resources is increasing among the two countries. (124)

Israel, on the other hand, has relied almost entirely on its National Water System, which is made up of the West Bank Mountain Aquifer, the Coastal Aquifer, and the Lake Kinneret Basin. (125) Because of this reliance, the "Mountain Aquifer underneath the West Bank is a point of contention between Israelis and Palestinians." (126) More specifically, one of the major issues between Israel and Palestine is Israel's blocking of Palestinian access to water supplies. (127) This has caused Israel to overexploit available resources in order to expand agricultural and industrial ventures. (128)

4. Saudi Arabia

Saudi Arabia serves as another demonstration of a country quickly approaching a water crisis. The difference between Saudi Arabia and the countries discussed above is that this particular country's problem arises from a lack of permanent bodies of waters and rivers. (129) Because of this, Saudi Arabia is forced to rely heavily on underground sources of water. (130)

A number of these underwater resources have been contaminated in various ways as a result of the Gulf War. (131) This contamination was caused, in part, by agricultural-related seepage and Iraq's burning of oil wells during the conflict. (132) Additionally, the Gulf War brought increased strain on water resources due to the bombing of water treatment facilities by U.S. troops. (133) Further straining water resources, multiple oil spills in the Persian Gulf damaged Saudi Arabian desalination facilities. (134)

As can be seen, water serves as a catalyst for conflict among various Middle Eastern countries. As with neighbors in Texas, neighbors in the Middle East recognize the importance of protecting water rights in order to ensure continued access to this valuable resource. And, as might be imagined, conflict soon follows this recognition.

III. PROSCRIPTIVE MEASURES FOR BOTH TEXAS AND THE MIDDLE EAST

Both Texas and the Middle East have severe problems with their water regulation systems. If poor management and conflict over water continues, then it will not be an available resource for future generations. (135) The issue of water security is of increasing importance due to the already existing water shortage, which will only become more prevalent in the coming years. (136) The question arises: What can be done in these two areas to ensure the water lasts? A brief examination of various theories of water rights provides guidance to answering this question.

One theory is that of absolute territorial sovereignty over water within the state's boundaries. (137) This theory is demonstrated in the 1895 Harmon Doctrine that addressed a dispute between the United States and Mexico regarding pollution in the Rio Grande River. (138) Under this doctrine, "an upstream State can freely deplete or utilize a river's flow within its boundaries without considering the effect of its actions on a downstream State." (139) However, this theory has become increasingly disfavored due to its inability to accord differences between areas sharing the common resource. (140)

The next theory to examine is the principle of prior appropriation. This theory does not give preference to either the upstream or downstream state, but rather to the state that used the water first. (141) However, as with the previous theory, this theory has not received wide international support. (142)

Another theory known as absolute territorial integrity rests on the idea that a downstream state should not have its flow of water interrupted regardless of priority. (143) Again, this is a theory that has received little international support. (144) This is due to the view that this theory places a burden on an upstream state without placing a similar burden on the downstream state. (145) Under a more general umbrella of theories, including sic utere, (146) "restricted territorial sovereignty," (147) and "restricted territorial integrity" (148) theories, a state may use water within its territorial boundaries so long as it does not prejudice the rights of access to water for other states. (149) This more general group of theories view whether a state has prejudiced another state by looking toward the degree of harm to the state allegedly prejudiced. (150) The final, more contemporary theory, known as the community of interests theory, "treats the entire river as one hydrological unit that should be managed as an integrated whole." (151) A problem arises with this theory in that it does not account for the lack of political cooperation between the various states. (152) With a basic knowledge of these above theories, the solutions discussed below may offer some guidance as to what both Texas and Middle Eastern countries can do to improve their water regulation systems.

A. Reasonable Use Standard

One solution for each area's water problems rests in what is known as reasonable use. (153) In 1997, the International Law Commission established the Convention on the Law of the Non-Navigational Uses of International Water Courses (the Convention). (154) Although the Convention deals with international watercourses applicable to neighboring Middle Eastern countries, it may also serve as a guide for neighbors in Texas. In determining the level of reasonable utilization, the Convention sets forth seven factors to consider. (155) These factors include:

(a) [g]eographic, hydrographic, hydrological, climatic, ecological and other factors of a natural character; (b) [t]he social and economic needs of the watercourse States concerned; (c) [t]he population dependent on the watercourse in each watercourse State; (d) [t]he effects of the use or uses of the watercourses in one watercourse State on other watercourse states; (e) [e]xisting and potential uses of the watercourse; (f) [c]onservation, protection, development, and economy of use of the water resources of the watercourse and the costs of measures taken to that effect; (g) [t]he availability of alternatives, of comparable value, to a particular planned or existing use. (156)