UBC Faculty Research and Publications

Negotiating Hydro-Scales, Forging States: Comparison of the Upper Tigris/Euphrates and Jordan River Basins Harris, Leila; Alatout, Samer 2010

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
52383-Harris_L_M_et_al_Negotiating_hydro-scales_forging_states_2010.pdf [ 458.69kB ]
Metadata
JSON: 52383-1.0132707.json
JSON-LD: 52383-1.0132707-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 52383-1.0132707-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 52383-1.0132707-rdf.json
Turtle: 52383-1.0132707-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 52383-1.0132707-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 52383-1.0132707-source.json
Full Text
52383-1.0132707-fulltext.txt
Citation
52383-1.0132707.ris

Full Text

! Leila&M.&Harris& & Corresponding!author:! lharris@ubc.ca! Samer&Alatout& Negotiating)Hydro.Scales,)) Forging)States:)Comparison)of) the)Upper)Tigris/Euphrates)and) Jordan)River)Basins) Final)Version:) L.M.)Harris)and)S.)Alatout.)2010.) Negotiating)Hydro.Scales,)Forging) States:)Comparison)of)the)Upper) Tigris/Euphrates)and)Jordan)River) Basins.)Political(Geography(29:)148. 156.) ) DOI:)10.1016/j.polgeo.2010.02.012) ) Citations)of)this)work)should)use)the) final)version)as)noted)above)! ! Final!version:!L.M.$Harris$and$S.$Alatout.$2010.$Negotiating$Hydro9Scales,$Forging$States:$Comparison$of$the$Upper$ Tigris/Euphrates$and$Jordan$River$Basins.$Political$Geography$29:$1489156.! 1! Abstract( In!this!comparative!study!of!two!water!basins!in!the!Middle!East,!we!examine!the! hydro<political! construction! of! scale! as! central! to! state! and! nation! building,! and! their!territorial!consolidation.!We!argue!that!scalar!negotiations!and!constructions! of!freshwater!became!central!to!the!very!consolidation!of!both!Turkey!and!Israel.! The!examples!we!offer!also!illustrate!the!usefulness!of!a!performative!approach!to! scale,!benefiting! from!but!moving!beyond!a!politics!of! scale!approach.!The!com< parative!focus!on!hydro<scalar!politics!and!performativities!in!relation!to!state!and! nation!building!offered!a)!lends!to!an!enriched!understanding!of!water!politics!in! these! two! contested! river! basins,! b)! enables! fuller! understanding! of! how!water! becomes!central!to!the!processes!by!which!nations,!states,!and!territories!are!con< solidated!in!this!region,!and!c)!contributes!to!recent!debates!in!political!geography! by!demonstrating!the!value!of!scalar!and!performative!approaches.!Underscoring! these!linkages,!the!analysis!differs!from!many!works!on!water!in!the!Middle!East,! contributes! to! studies! of! state! and! nation! building! as! contested! processes,! and! avoids!the!assumption!of!state!or!national!scales!as!ontological!pre<givens.! ! ! Introduction:(Water(Scales(and(Critical(( Hydropolitics( ! In! justifying! Turkish<state! led! damming! and!development!of!the!Tigris!and!Euphrates! rivers! in! Upper! Mesopotamia,! planners! are! quick! to! note! that! the! twin<rivers! represent! over!one!quarter!of!Turkey’s!fresh!water!re< sources!and!a!similar!percentage!of!Turkey’s! hydroelectric!potential.!!During!the!first!dec< ade! of! the! Israeli! state,! 1948<1959,! water! experts! strongly! disagreed! over! the! esti< mates! of! the! water! potential! and! the!most! appropriate!institutional!and!technical!appa< ratuses! to! utilize! that! potential! (Alatout! 2007b,!2008a!and!b).! ! !To!date,!many!inves< tigations!of!water!politics!or!state!building!in! the! Middle! East! have! largely! ignored! the! tight!link,!implicit!in!both!cases,!between!hy< dro<politics,! technical!and!political! construc< tions!of!scale,!and!state!and!nation!building.! Here,!we!extend! insights! from!other!studies! (e.g.!Giglioli!and!Swyngedouw!2009!for!Sicily;! Swyngedouw!1999! for! Spain,)! by! investigat< ing!these!linkages!in!two!Middle!Eastern!con< texts.! ! Drawing! on! the! contemporary! example! of! Turkey! and! the! historical! exam< ple! of! Israel,! we! find! that! the! scalar! and! technical! constructions! of! hydrologic! geog< raphies!have!been!enrolled! in!the!service!of! defining! and! consolidating! the! national< territorial! spaces! of! both! Turkey! and! Israel,! as! well! as! in! supporting! state<building! pro< jects—understood!as! the! construction!of!an! administrative! framework! that! lays! claim! to! those!territories.! Conceptually,!we!argue!that!a!scalar!per< spective! is! crucial! to! debates! about! water! resources! (consistent! with! earlier! work! by! Alatout! 2008a;! Feitelson! and! Fishhendler! 2009;! Harris! 2002;! Sneddon! et! al.! 2002;! Sneddon! and! Fox! 2006;! and! Swyngedouw! 1999).! !We!also!push! this! further!show!that! attention!to!scalar!constructions!around!wa< ter,! in! particular,! are! crucial! to! understand! processes! related! to! state! and!nation!build< ing,! be! those! contemporary! or! historical! (Swyngedouw! 1999;! see! also! the! call! Kuus! and!Agnew!2008)! to!examine! states! as!pro< cesses,!rather!than!as!pre<existing!entities).! Towards! this! end,! we! find! that! analytics! offered! by! recent! discussions! on! the! per<! ! Final!version:!L.M.$Harris$and$S.$Alatout.$2010.$Negotiating$Hydro9Scales,$Forging$States:$Comparison$of$the$Upper$ Tigris/Euphrates$and$Jordan$River$Basins.$Political$Geography$29:$1489156.! 2! formativities! of! scale! (Kaiser! and! Nikiforova! 2008)! particularly! fruitful.! ! While! sharing! many!elements!of!politics!of!scale!approach< es,!performative!approaches!place!emphasis! on! the! iterative! and! contested! dynamics! of! scalar! constructions.! ! Performative! ap< proaches!also!emphasize!the!maintenance!of! scalar!notions!through!focus!on!the!necessity! of! iterative! citation! to! lend! the! appearance! of!scalar! fixity.!The!performative!analytic!al< so! leaves! open! the! possibility! for! shifts! of! constructions! over! time! and! in! response! to! particular!contestations.!!! We!begin!by!providing!a!brief!conceptual! discussion! of! the! politics! and! performativi< ties!of!scale!in!relation!to!broader!debates!in! geography.!We! then! use! this! framework! to! explore! hydro<geographies! of! Turkey! and! Israel.!There!are!numerous!reasons!why!the! comparison! between! the! contemporary! ex< ample!of!Turkey!and!the!historic!example!of! Israel! is! compelling! and! informative.! Most! importantly,! a! focus!on! scalar!hydro<politics! is!central!in!both!cases!for!the!consolidation! and! maintenance! of! strong,! centralized! states.!!Further,!while!the!literature!on!water! politics!in!the!region!is!vast,!only!a!handful!of! scholars!have!made!explicit! connections!be< tween! scalar! constructions! of! water,! state! building,! and! territorial! consolidation! (Alatout! 2008a;! Feitelson! and! Fishhendler! 2009;!Harris!2002).!!We!conclude!by!synthe< sizing!major!themes!of!the!paper!and!under< scoring! the! mutual! constitution! of! techno< political! processes,! hydrologic! scalar! con< structions,! and! geopolitical! considerations! (Alatout! 2008b;! Sneddon! and! Fox! 2006;! Swyngedouw!1999;!and!McCarthy!2005).!! ! Politics(and(Performativities(of(Scale( ! There! has! been! a! flurry! of! debate! in! re< cent!years!on!the!value!of!scalar!analytics!for! understanding! socio<!natural!processes! (Kai< ser! and!Nikiforova!2008;! Leitner! et! al! 2008;! and!Moore!2008).!Marston!et!al! (2005)!sug< gest! that! it! might! be! better! to! abandon! ‘scale’! altogether! given! key! ambiguities! and! conceptual! traps! associated! with! the! term! (e.g.! hierarchical! understandings).!While!we! find!such!cautions!useful,!we!defer!to!several! thoughtful! responses! to! their! work! (Kaiser! and! Nikiforova! 2008;! Leitner! and! Miller! 2007),! and! argue! that! continuing! attention! to!scalar!processes,!discourses,!and!practices! is! crucial! for! understanding! socio<political! and! nature<society! relations! (see! also! Boyle! 2002;! Paasi! 2004;! and! Neumann! 2009).!! Among! those! demonstrating! the! usefulness! of!these!approaches,!some!have!emphasized! the! political! construction! of! scale,! i.e.,! the! ways! scales! are! framed,! consolidated,! and! invoked!for!political!ends! (Delaney!and!Leit< ner! 1997;! Swyngedouw! 1999).! Others! have! analyzed! ‘scale! frames’! and! 'scalar! narra< tives'!invoked!by!certain!actors!or!encoded!in! laws!and!institutions!(Alatout!2007a;!Gonzá< lez! 2006;! Kurtz! 2003;! McCarthy! 2005;! and! Taylor! and! Buttel! 1992).! !With! attention! to! scale,! a! range! of! interesting! questions! are! brought! to! the! fore:! How! and!why! are! cer< tain! ‘scales’! invoked! in! relation! to! political! discourses,! and! what! influence! might! this! have?! !What!does! framing!an! issue!as!a! ‘lo< cal’,! ‘regional’,! ‘national’,!or!‘global’!concern! mean!for!enabling!or!curtailing!potential! re< sponses?! Or,! how! might! activists! seek! to! strategically!deploy!notions!of!‘global!human! rights’,! ‘global!environmental! responsibility’,! or! other! scalar! constructions! to!push! a! par< ticular! agenda?! ! Scholars! have! also! asked! how!and!why!certain!‘scales’!are!constructed! in! relation! to! different! political<economic! projects! (e.g.,! ‘local!knowledges’! in! the!case! of! indigenous! rights,! or! devolution! trajecto< ries!vis<à<vis!neoliberalism)?! !One!of!the! im< portant! insights! that! emerge! from! this! literature! is! that! scales! themselves! should!! ! Final!version:!L.M.$Harris$and$S.$Alatout.$2010.$Negotiating$Hydro9Scales,$Forging$States:$Comparison$of$the$Upper$ Tigris/Euphrates$and$Jordan$River$Basins.$Political$Geography$29:$1489156.! 3! not! be! understood! as! pre<given,! but! rather! as! the!outcomes!of,!or! constituted! through,! discourse!and!practice.!! In!studies!focused!on!nature<society!rela< tions,!several!contributions!have!highlighted! scale!as! key! to! contextualizing! recent! socio< natural! and! institutional! shifts! (Mansfield! 2001;!McCarthy!2005;! and!Neumann!2009).! Among!them,!Boyle!(2002)!suggests!that!the! scaling! of! environmental! governance!makes! a!difference!for!the!kinds!of!transformations! of!nature!that!are!possible.!!!Drawing!on!the! case! of!waste! governance! in! Ireland,! he! ar< gues! that! ecological! projects! are! both! pro< duced!by,!and!implicated!in!the!structuration! of!scale.!Together!with!Neumann!(2009)!the< se!authors!argue! for! closer!engagement!be< tween!political!ecology!and!scale!discussions! in! geography.! ! For! Boyle,! this! opens! up! a! host!of!interesting!issues!for!analysis,!includ< ing!power!discussions!in!terms!of!who!is!able! to!define!the!scalar!scaffolding!against!which! solutions!to!ecological!problems!are!framed,! or!in!terms!of!how!scale!might!be!central!to! supporting! or! limiting! particular! political! economic! accumulation! strategies.! ! Neu< mann! (2009)! identifies! still! other! themes! to! advance!a!political!ecology!of!scale,!including! the!possibility!of!more!focused!attention!on! the!state,!and!its!ability!to!recalibrate!scales,! particularly! to! consolidate! authority.! ! These! are!precisely!the!types!of!questions!we!take! up! here,! with! the! specific! aim! to! illustrate,! and! understand,! linkages! between! hydro< politics,! scale,!and!state!and!nation!building! in!our!two!case!studies.!! While! our! analysis! is! consistent! with! the! politics!of!scale!approaches,!we!also!wish!to! push! these! discussions! further! by! engaging! recent! literature! on! ‘performativities! of! scale’! as! outlined! by! Kaiser! and! Nikiforova! (2008).!!These!authors!argue!that!we!need!to! be! attentive! to! the! iterative! processes! and! practices! through! which! scales! become! (seemingly)! fixed! and! naturalized,! and! to! what!effects.!!As!they!write,!! “The! performativity! of! scale! focuses! attention! not!on!the!production!of!scales!and!scalar!hier< archies! as! end! products! of! social! construction,! but! on! ‘the! reiterative! and! citational! practices! by! which! discourse! produces! the! effect’! of! scale.!Instead!of!treating!scales!as!things!in!the! world! that! (inter)act! …! performativity! ap< proaches! (seek! to!understand)!scale!as!a!natu< ralized!way!of!seeing!the!world,!and!explore!the! enacted!discourses!that!over!time!work!to!pro< duce!‘scale!effects’!(543,!emphasis!added)”! ! The!approach!is!thus!responsive!to!Mars< ton! et! al’s! (2005)! critique! that! some! works! on! scale! are! problematic! to! the! extent! that! scales!are! taken!as! fixed,!pre<given,!or!hier< archical.!Indeed!the!challenge!of!a!performa< tive!approach!is!precisely!to!analyze!the!very! practices!by!which!scales!seemingly!become! fixed!or!naturalized.! !Responding!directly! to! Marston! et! al! (2005),! Kaiser! and! Nikiforova! (2008)!argue!to!write!‘scale’!out!of!the!geog< raphy!and!social!science!lexicon!would!work! precisely! to! hide! the! processes,! discourses,! and!practices! through!which! scales!are!con< structed,! thus! obscuring! important! power! dynamics!that!rely!on!‘scale!effects’!(see!also! Jonas!2006;!Leitner!and!Miller!2007).! With!a!performative!approach!to!scale,!a! key!question!becomes:!what!are!the!iterative! and! citational! discourses! and! practices! that! work! to! stabilize!particular! scalar! categories! and!what!are! the!effects!of! these!materiali< zations! over! time?! ! This! approach! thus! dif< fers! slightly! from! other! constructivist! approaches! in! that!we!are!not! interested! in! excavating! an! originary! moment! of! scale! construction,! but! underscoring! the! iterative! practices!that!are!necessary!to!maintain!par< ticular! scalar! effects! (cf.! González! 2006).!! Further,! a! performative! approach! accentu< ates!the!possibility!that!scalar!discourses!and! practices!necessarily! shift! (with!citationality,!! ! Final!version:!L.M.$Harris$and$S.$Alatout.$2010.$Negotiating$Hydro9Scales,$Forging$States:$Comparison$of$the$Upper$ Tigris/Euphrates$and$Jordan$River$Basins.$Political$Geography$29:$1489156.! 4! meaning! is! constantly! shifting! even! when! producing!sedimented!understandings).!! Before! turning! to! the! case! studies,! it! is! worth!mentioning!that!several!previous!stud< ies!have!highlighted!political!constructions!of! scale! in! relation!to!water! resources! (Alatout! 2008a! and! b;! Bakker! 2003;! Harris! 2002;! Sneddon!2003;!Swyngedouw!1999;!and!Biro! 2007).! ! These!works! have! collectively!made! the! case! that! scalar! practices! are! central! to! understanding! water! resources! and! hydro< geographies.! ! Indeed,! Sneddon! and! Fox! (2006)! argue! that! a! scalar! focus! is! founda< tional! to! a! critical! hydro<politics.! !Other! key! contributions! include! that! offered! by! Swyngedouw!(1999)!on!shifting!scales!of!wa< ter! governance! in! relation! to! Spanish! state! and! nation! building,! or! that! offered! by! Biro! (2007)!with! interest! in! exploring! the! effects! of! naturalizing! particular! scales! of! water! is< sues! (e.g.! what! does! it!mean! to! speak! of! a! global! water! crisis,! or! to! naturalize! local! scales! of! governance?).! ! Consistent! with! studies!of! this! type! and!politics! of! scale! ap< proaches!we! ask:!What! are! the! political! ef< fects! of! techno<scientific! or! policy! constructions! of! scale! in! relation! to! water! resource! issues! in! the! Tigris! Euphrates! and! Jordan! basins,! both! contemporary! and! his< torical?! !How!do!states!or!other!actors!stra< tegically! invoke! certain! notions! of! scale! to! further! particular! agendas?! ! Extending! the! analysis! through! a! performative! approach! we!also!attend!to!other!key!issues:!!How!is!it! that! scales! themselves! are! produced! as! ‘scale!effects’!through!these!iterative!invoca< tions!and!deployments?!!And,!how!might!at< tention! to! shifting! and! iterative! scalar! constructions! of! water! geographies! enable! new! insights! related! to! state! and! nation! building! processes! in! the! Middle! East! or! elsewhere?!!We!now!turn!to!the!Turkish!and! Israeli!case!studies.! ! Upper(Tigris(Euphrates(basin,(Turkey( ( “To!mitigate!the!effects!of!the!GAP!project1!on! downstream!countries,!Turkey!has!proposed!to! Syria!and!Iraq!a! joint!study!of!the!utilization!of! the!waters!of! the!Euphrates<Tigris!basin,! taken! as! a!whole,! arguing! that!with! proper!manage< ment!there!should!be!enough!water! for!every< one.! ! This! proposal! has! been! turned! down,! as! the! two! Arab! states! claim! a! right! to! a! major! share! in! this! Turkish! resource.”! (Mango! 2001:! 197,!emphasis!added)! ! One! can! readily! find! quotes! such! as! the! one!above! throughout! the! literature!on!wa< ter! in! the!Middle! East,! and! with! respect! to! the! Tigris! and! Euphrates! rivers! specifically.!! This!quote!is!notable!for!a!few!reasons.!!An< drew!Mango!informs!the!reader!that!Turkey! has! offered! options! to! its! downstream! neighbors!and!had!the!Turkish!proposal!been! accepted,! there!would!be!enough!water! for! everyone.! ! Regrettably,! Turkey! has! been! turned!down.!!More!important!for!our!analy< sis,!his!choice!of!language!pits!Turkey!against! Arab! states! downstream! (the! binary! Turk< Arab! is! established).! ! Perhaps! most! critical,! the! waters! are! firmly! cast! in! this! quote! as! Turkish,! minimizing! claims! to! the! waters! from!Syria! and! Iraq.! ! Even! as!Mango! repre< sents!an!academic!voice,!this!quote!nonethe< less! offers! a! clear! example! of! the! political! and!nationalist!constructions!of!scale!in!rela< tion!to!water!geographies!in!the!basin.!!With! examples! of! this! type,! the! waters! are! read! through! particular! constructions! of! nation,! state,! and! territory—at!once!deemphasizing! alternative!constructions!(e.g.,!of!a!resource! shared! by! all! co<riparians).! Throughout! this! section,! we! draw! on! similar! discourses! of! state!planners,!politicians,!and!academics!to! unpack! the! effects! of! common! hydro<scalar! politics!and!performativities.! !! ! Final!version:!L.M.$Harris$and$S.$Alatout.$2010.$Negotiating$Hydro9Scales,$Forging$States:$Comparison$of$the$Upper$ Tigris/Euphrates$and$Jordan$River$Basins.$Political$Geography$29:$1489156.! 5! Techno9political$ consolidation$ of$ the$ Turkish$ nation,$state,$and$territory$ ! Previous!work!on!the!Tigris<Euphrates!ba< sin! has! emphasized! that! attention! to!multi< ple! scales! of! analysis! adds! a! degree! of! complexity!to!ongoing!debates!on!both!river! development!and!‘water!and!conflict’!(Harris! 2002).! For! instance,!much! of! the! discussion! of! costs!and!benefits!of!water!development! projects! such! as! the! GAP! in! southeastern! Turkey!focuses!solely!on!the!‘national’!scale,! inevitably!obscuring!other!key!dynamics! (lo< cal,! regional,! etc.)! that! are! also! crucial! for! such!assessments.! ! If!one!considers!reduced! quantity! and! quality! of! water! flows! in! the! rivers!at!the!basin<wide!scale!(including!out< comes! in! downstream! Syria! and! Iraq),! for! instance,! a! very! different! sense! of! the! out< comes!associated!with!ongoing!water!diver< sion! and! damming! efforts! comes! to! light.!! Similarly,! highlighting!more! local! scales! and! dynamics! might! bring! attention! to! histories! of! conflict! related! to! the! Kurdish! issue,! as! GAP! is! occurring! in! a! region! that! has! also! been!a! locus!of!violence!and!concerns!relat< ed! to! Kurdish! cultural! rights! (ibid! ,! Harris! 2008;!Öktem! 2005).! !With! these! sorts! of! il< lustrations,!it!has!been!argued!that!we!need! to!be!attentive!to!multiple!temporal!and!spa< tial!scales!in!analysis!of!changing!water!uses! and!conditions.! !For!debates!related!to! ‘wa< ter! and! conflict’! in! particular,! a!multi<scalar! perspective! exposes! weaknesses! of! over< focus!on!state!or!national!scales,!often!hiding! other! key! intra<state,! or! regional! processes! (Harris!2002;!Sneddon!and!Fox!2006).!! The! point! that! is! only! implicit! in! these! works,!and!that!is!emphasized!here,!is!that!it! is! also! imperative! to! analyze! the! ways! that! particular!hydro<scalar!constructions!are!de< ployed!for!particular!political!ends!(politics!of! scale),!and!serve!to!consolidate!the!very!ide< as! of! state,! nation,! and! territory! (performa< tivities! of! scale).! ! In! addition! to!ways! these! elements!are!suggested!by!the!Mango!quote! above,! consider! that! figures! offered! by! the! GAP! Regional! development! Administration! (GAP<RDA)! related! to! the! need! to! develop! the! basin,! such! as:! Tigris<Euphrates! waters! represent!28%!of!Turkey’s!freshwater!poten< tial,!25%!of!Turkey’s!hydroelectric!potential,! and!90%!of!Euphrates!river!water!originates! in!Turkey!(e.g.!Bilen!2000;!Ünver!1997).!The< se! technical! ‘facts’! about! water! geography! are! frequently!presented! in!such!a!way!that! they!appear!to!be!apolitical!and!indisputable,! based! on! (objective)! science.! ! However,! in< voking! these! types! of! statistics! at! once! serves! to! cite,! and! reify,! the! ‘national’! scale! (taken! as! the! indisputable! scale! for! hydro< logic! assessments,! water! potential,! or! cost< benefit! analyses),! the! legitimacy! of! Turkish! territory! (despite! overt! challenges! to! such),! and! the! Turkish! state! itself! as! the! appropri< ate!entity! to! ‘develop’! the!rivers.! !The!Turk< ish!state!is!positioned!as!having!the!ability!to! provide! such! statistics,! and! is! also! implicitly! situated!as!the!‘natural’!unit!to!carry!out!any! needed!alteration!of!the!rivers.!Such!invoca< tions!are!significant;!especially!when!we!con< sider!that!the!southeast!of!Turkey!where!the! rivers! originate! is! also! a! majority! Kurdish< speaking! region,! and! the! seat! of! decades< long!Kurdish!separatist!movement.!! $ Naturalness$of$a$conjoint$basin?$$ $ As! another! example! of! the! ‘politics! of! scale’! of! the! Tigris! and! Euphrates! rivers,! many! scholarly! and! government! documents! highlight! that! it! is! necessary! to! analyze! the! rivers!as!a! joint!basin.! ! In!a!book!written!by! researcher!Özden!Bilen,!yet!published!by!the! GAP<RDA! (2000),! it! is! noted! repeatedly! that! based! on! ‘technical’! facts! (read:! objective! scientific! truths! that! cannot! be! challenged),! the! twin! rivers! must! necessarily! be! consid<! ! Final!version:!L.M.$Harris$and$S.$Alatout.$2010.$Negotiating$Hydro9Scales,$Forging$States:$Comparison$of$the$Upper$ Tigris/Euphrates$and$Jordan$River$Basins.$Political$Geography$29:$1489156.! 6! ered!conjointly!as!one!unit.!!For!instance,!the! author!writes! in! the!preface,! ‘in! the!Middle! East,! it! is! a! rather! frequently! used! method! for!political!purposes!to!distort!facts!by!play< ing!with! figures! related! to!water! resources.’!! To! remedy! this!Bilen!offers! to!undertake!an! “actual! (technical)! assessment! of! the! water! problem!in!the!Middle!East!(xvi)’!As!the!anal< ysis! here! reveals,! his! ‘technical’! assessment! is!nonetheless!infused!with!politics!(see!also! Altinbilek,!2004).!!!! Similar! statements! are! made! elsewhere! by! independent! scholars,! for! instance,!Bagis! (1997:!579)!writes!“The!Euphrates!and!Tigris! have! to! be! considered! together! as! forming! one! single! transboundary! watercourse! sys< tem! with! the! two! rivers! joined,! not! just! at! their! natural! confluence,! the! Shatt<al<Arab! waterway,! but! also! by! manmade! canal…! Consequently…!Irrigation!water!for!areas!fed! by!the!Euphrates!may!also!be!supplied!from! the! Tigris.”! ! Yet! another! clear! example! is! provided!by!political! scientist!Aysegül!Kibar< oglu!(2002),!“We!observe,!in!conformity!with! the! expert! judgments! of! geographers,! that! the!Euphrates!and! the!Tigris! are! considered! as! forming!one! single! transboundary!water< course!system!(160).”! Even! the! term! ‘twin! rivers’!often!used! to! denote! the! Tigris! and! Euphrates! signals! a! natural!and!necessary! conjoining.! ! In!Bilen’s! language,! “It!is!misleading!to!focus!on!the!River!Euphrates! or!the!River!Tigris! in! isolation!from!each!other.! These! two! rivers! form! one! single! basin! having! an!annual!potential!of!87.2!BCM!and!should!be! taken! as! part! of! the! same! system.! There! is! no! natural!barrier!between!the!two!rivers!and!they! come!very!close!to!each!other!in!Iraqi!territory.!! It!is!even!very!difficult!to!demarcate!the!water< shed! boundaries! in! Iraq! near! the! confluence! point.! For! this! reason,! the! relevant! literature! gives! the! watershed! of! both! rivers! jointly! as! 884,000!Km2.!!The!list!of!river!basins!published! by! the! UN! also! cites! this! figure”! (2000:! 50).! (Emphasis!added)! With! this! statement,! it! is! noted! that! it! would!be! ‘misleading’! to! focus!on!the!rivers! in! isolation.! ! The! necessity! of! thinking! of! them!as!a!single!basin!is!backed!up!by!scien< tific/hydrologic! data! (their! joint! poten< tial/capacity,! even! as! clearly! this! doesn’t! logically!support!the!necessity!of! joining!the! basins,! but! rather! simply! provides! an! esti< mate!of!the!potential!of!both!rivers),!by!the! topography! and! geography! of! the! region,! and!by!invoking!the!United!Nations!as!an!im< portant,!internationally!recognized!body!that! has! treated! the! Tigris<Euphrates! as! an! inte< grated! watershed! (the! hyphen! also! stylisti< cally! accentuates! the! necessary! linkage! of! the!rivers).! !What!is!served!by! invoking,!and! cementing,! the! naturalness! and! inevitability! of!a!conjoined!basin?! First,! there! is! a! clear! politics! associated! with! citing! a! conjoined! basin,! particularly! from! the! Turkish! perspective.! ! As! some! of! the! legal! bases! for! making! claims! to! trans< boundary!waters!rely!on!a!notion!of! ‘contri< butions’! to! the! waters! from! a! particular! territory,! to! consider! the! rivers! conjointly! ensures! that! Turkey! figures! as! the! majority! contributor,! providing! an! estimated! 52.9%! percent! to! both! rivers.! ! If! the! rivers! were! considered! separately,! Turkey! would! figure! as!contributing!an!overwhelming!majority!on! the!Euphrates!(90%),!but!only!approximately! 40%! to! the! Tigris.! Under! this! principle,! Iraq! would! have! effective! claim! to! Tigris!waters,! contributing! 60%! (Harris! 2005! and! 2007).! Given!that!the!Tigris!represents!about!150%! of! the! flow! of! the! Euphrates,! Turkey! has! a! clear!interest!in!being!able!to!assert!majority! contributions!to!the!conjoint!system.! Second,! related! to! this,! the! idea! of! ‘ex< cess’! flow! in! the!Tigris! is! invoked!by!Turkish! planners!and!academics!to!argue!that!waters! should!be! transferred! from!the!Tigris! to! the! Euphrates!(as!is!being!done!with!the!existing! canal! in! Iraq).! ! The! possibility! of! transfer! of!! ! Final!version:!L.M.$Harris$and$S.$Alatout.$2010.$Negotiating$Hydro9Scales,$Forging$States:$Comparison$of$the$Upper$ Tigris/Euphrates$and$Jordan$River$Basins.$Political$Geography$29:$1489156.! 7! waters!between!the!rivers!is!affirmed!by!the! analytical! construction! of! a! joint! river! basin! (it! is! one! system,! so! water! ‘naturally’! flows! between! them).! ! To! be! able! to! add! to! the! Euphrates! flow! also! effectively! displaces! at< tention! from! Turkish!withdrawals! from! that! river.!In!an!interesting!discussion!on!the!pos< sible! transfers! from! the! Tigris! to! Euphrates,! Altinbilek!(2004:!16)!echoes!the!quote!at!the! beginning!of!this!section,!“a!Turkish!offer!to! compensate!for!the!scarcity!in!the!Euphrates! by! the! surplus! in! the! Tigris! was! rejected.”! Here,!we!see!the!same!discursive!maneuver! with!the!idea!that!the!rational!technical!solu< tion!of!water!transfers!was! ‘offered’!by!Tur< key,! only! to! be! turned! down! by! its! co< riparians.!! Later! in! that! piece! Altinbilek! (2004:! 32)! writes,!“the!analyses!of!the!water!budget!for! the! Euphrates<Tigris! basin…all! indicate! that! the! Euphrates! basin! will! experience! water! deficiency! and! the! Tigris! basin! may! have! a! surplus!of!water.”!!Again,!there!is!a!clear!pol< itics,!and!politics!of! scale,!embedded! in! lan< guage!of!this!type.!!The!river!system!is!taken! as!one!unit,!and!Turkey! is!able!to! ‘offer’!ex< cess! waters! from! the! Tigris! to! compensate! for!scarcity!(even!as!Iraq!provides!the!majori< ty!contributions!to!that!river).!In!terms!of!the! effect!of! this!narrative,!we!see!repetition!of! the!storyline!in!which!Turkey!is!positioned!as! hero,! having! extended! an! offer,! only! to! be! rebuffed.! If! shortages! are! experienced,! it! would! be! the! fault! of! downstream! states,! given!that!they!did!not!accept!the!assistance! and! solutions! offered! by! Turkey.! ! Even! sug< gesting!the!possibility!of!surplus!in!the!Tigris! in! future! scenarios! is! effectively! to! negate! Iraqi! claims! and! planned! uses! of! these! wa< ters,!instead,!making!them!appear!‘available’! for!use!by!the!co<riparians.! ! $ Contesting$alternate$scales:$ resisting$ region9 al$constructions$of$the$“Middle$East”$$ ! The! insistence!on! treating! the! rivers!con< jointly!is!also!interesting!in!contrast!with!the! frequent! insistence! expressed! by! Turkish! planners! and! academics! that! water! issues! should! not! be! dealt! with! on! the! regional! scale,!particularly!for!the!Middle!East!on!the! whole.! ! Apart! from! the! likelihood! that! re< gional! constructions! may! call! attention! to! the! interests! and! needs! of! all! states! that! share!the!rivers,!Turkey!also!has!rejected!re< gional! constructions! for!other! reasons.! !His< torically,! and! contemporarily,! the! argument! has! frequently! been! made! that! ‘solutions’! must! consider!water!use!and!availability! for! the! entire! Middle! East,! often! with! ideas! of! transfers! from! ‘water! rich’! to! ‘water! poor’! regions.!In!these!constructions,!Turkey!often! figures!as!‘water!rich’!relative!to!many!of!its! neighbors!with! frequent!proposals! that!Tur< key! could! divert! some! of! its! ‘excess’! water! capacity! to! alleviate! ‘regional’! water! con< cerns.!!Such!proposals!have!been!floated!re< peatedly! over! the! past! decades,! and! have! been! included! in!negotiations!related!to!the! Middle!East!peace!process.!Examples!of!such! include! options! that! proposed! by! Hillel! (1994)!related!to!a!Middle!East!regional! ‘so< lution’! for!water!sharing,!or!other!proposals! that!have!called!for!a!direct!diversion!of!1.1! BCM! from! the! Euphrates! to! be! distributed! between! Syria,! Jordan,! Israel! and! the!West! Bank.! Discussing! these! proposals! that! sug< gest!that!Turkey,!or!the!Tigris<Euphrates!spe< cifically! could! better! serve! water! needs! in! Jordan! and! Israel! to! the! south,! Bilen! coun< ters,!! “the! water! problem! in! the! Middle! East! has! been! conceptualized! as! constituting! a! unified! whole.!!However,!such!an!approach!would!only! complicate! technical! matters! further! (2000:! 32).”!! !! ! Final!version:!L.M.$Harris$and$S.$Alatout.$2010.$Negotiating$Hydro9Scales,$Forging$States:$Comparison$of$the$Upper$ Tigris/Euphrates$and$Jordan$River$Basins.$Political$Geography$29:$1489156.! 8! He! goes! on! to! say! that! for! instance,! the! idea!has!been!floated!that!Turkey!could!give! just!1%!more!to!the!water!flow!presently!al< located!to!Syria!on!the!Euphrates!(above!the! 500! m3/second! currently! agreed! upon).! If! this!were!to!occur,!Syria!would!not!need!wa< ter!from!the!Yarmuk,!and!those!waters!could! then! be! allocated! exclusively! to! Jordan! and! Israel!downstream.!Bilen!responds!by!saying! “such!a!plan!is!not!possible!at!all!in!terms!of! both! technical! considerations! and! interna< tional!law”!and!further!suggests!that!any!ad< ditional! allocation! would! simply! disappear! through! leakage! and! evaporation,! so!would! be! unwise! (32).! Bilen! attempts! to! seal! off! such!‘region’<wide!constructions!for!address< ing!water! issues! in!other!ways!as!well:! “it! is! necessary!to!take!each!of!the!rivers,!Euphra< tes<Tigris,! Orontes,! Jordan,! Litani! and! the! Nile,! separately! and! produce! solutions! as! such! (32).”! This! insistence! on! keeping! the! rivers!separate!in!discussing!solutions!is!strik< ing! compared!with! statements! noted! above! that! insist! that! the! Tigris! and!Euphrates! riv< ers!must!be! considered! jointly.! ! Indeed,! the! tension! between! insistence! on! considering! rivers! separately,! yet! listing! the! ‘Euphrates< Tigris’!as!a!single!entity!is!striking!(the!use!of! the!hyphen!here!does!a!lot!of!work!to!allow! this!sentence!to!read!logically).! $ Realizing$a$Kemalist$Vision$and$other$nation9 alist$hydrologic$constructions$ ! If! connections! to! Turkish! nationalism! are! not!yet!clear! from!the!above!discussion,!we! provide! a! few! additional! illustrations! to! make! this! point.! ! In! Turkish! planning! docu< ments,! the! very! concept! of! developing! the! rivers! is! attributed! to! Mustafa! Kemal! Ata< türk,!the!founder!of!modern!Turkey.!It!is!said! that! Atatürk! noticed! these! untapped! re< sources! and! raised! the! possibility! that! the! rivers! could! be! used! more! effectively.! The! attribution!of! the! idea! to!develop! the! rivers! to!Turkey’s!leading!national!figure!discursive< ly! connects!water! resource! development! to! the! very!establishment! and! sanctity!of! ‘Tur< key’,! and! to! Kemalist! bases! of! Turkish! state! building!and!nationalism.!Atatürk!is!the!sym< bolic! figure!of! the!nation,! and!his! image! in< vokes!ideals!related!to!‘Turkishness’,!and!the! unification!of!Turkish!citizens!and!territory!in! one! state! and! nation! (Harris! 2008;! Öktem! 2005).! ! Based! on! a! singular! construction! of! ‘Turkishness’! regardless! of! ethnic! and! lin< guistic!differences,!this!unification!necessari< ly! results! in! the! disenfranchisement! of! Armenians,!Kurds,!and!other!minority!popu< lations!(ibid).!Atatürk’s!invocation!also!recalls! military!campaigns!that!he! led!following!the! collapse!of! the!Ottoman!Empire.!He! rose! to! prominence! as! a! military! general! who! de< fended! Turkish! territory! against! ‘colonizing’! influences!at!the!end!of!WWI!(credited!with! removing! Greece,! France,! and! others! who! were!seeking! to!exert!control),!enabling! the! establishment!of!an!independent!Turkish!re< public!in!1923.!!! As! such,! the! discursive! linkages! between! Atatürk! and! Turkey’s! ongoing! water! devel< opment! serves! to! also!underscore! the!need! to! defend! Turkish! autonomy—lending! force! to! the! idea! that!Turkey!must! independently! determine! the! fate! of! the! rivers.! Former! President!Demirel!said!in!reference!to!claims! on! the! Tigris! and! Euphrates! from! down< stream!Syria!and!Iraq,!“Water!is!an!upstream! resource! and! downstream! users! cannot! tell! us! how! to! use! our! resource.! ! By! the! same! token! oil! is! an! upstream! resource! in! many! Arab!countries!and!we!do!not!tell!them!how! to!use!it”!(Bagis,!1997:!577).2!!In!such!exam< ples,! discursive! construction! of! the! rivers! connects!directly!to!ideals!of!Turkish!nation,! state,! and! territory,! linking! water! resources! (and! certain!hydro<scales)! to! the! legitimacy,! sanctity,!and!unity!of!‘Turkey’.!! ! Final!version:!L.M.$Harris$and$S.$Alatout.$2010.$Negotiating$Hydro9Scales,$Forging$States:$Comparison$of$the$Upper$ Tigris/Euphrates$and$Jordan$River$Basins.$Political$Geography$29:$1489156.! 9! These! examples! show! clear! politics! asso< ciated!with! invoking!the!‘national!scale’,!the! conjoint! ‘basin’! or! in! resisting! constructions! at! broader! ‘regional’! scales.! ! The! performa< tive!approach!to!hydro<scalar!discourses!and! practices! here! also! underscores! the! many! instances!in!which!the!legitimacy!of!the!Turk< ish! state,! the! sanctity! of! Turkish! territory,! and!even!the!unity!of!the!Turkish!nation!are! implicitly!(or!explicitly)!invoked!and!iterative< ly!cited.!The!Turkish!state! is!also! repeatedly! cited! as! the! appropriate! entity! to! use! and! maintain!the!waters.!!As!we!detail!further!in! the!conclusion,!a!performativity!of!scale!ap< proach!serves!to!highlight!the!effects!of!the< se! iterative! citations—suggesting! ways! that! Turkish! ‘nation’,! ‘state’! and! ‘territory’! are! constituted! as! effects! of! these! reiterative! scripting!of!hydrologic!geographies.! We!now!turn!to!the!example!of!Israel!and! the! Jordan! River! basin.! While! the! evidence! and! approach! is! somewhat! distinct! from! those! offered! for! the! Turkish! case,! the! out< comes! are! the! same—consolidation! of! par< ticular!scalar!geographies!in!relation!to!water! resources! hold! similar! significance! for! invo< cations!and!reifications!of!nation,!state,!and! territory.! ! Jordan(River(Basin,(Israel3(( ! Science! and! policy! debates! during! the! 1950s!in!nascent!Israel!resulted!in!contested! discourses! and! ideals! on! the! nature! of! the! state,! its! water! potential,! and! appropriate! approaches! to! water! management.! ! In! this! section,!we!detail!1)!Ben<Gurion’s!dominant! political! concept!of!mamlakhtiyut,!which! fo< cused! on! building! strong! state! institutions! and! centralizing! Jewish! political! life! within! the! state,! (2)! the! technoscientific! struggles! over!the!water!potential!of!Israel!and!its!res< olution! in! favor!of!water!scarcity,! (3)! the! in< stitutional! and! technical! struggles! over! the! management! of! water! resources! and! its! resolution! in! favor! of! centralization,! and! (4)! the! spatial! and! territorial! struggle! over! de< termining! appropriate! scales! of! water!man< agement! and! its! resolution! in! favor! of! the! national! space!as!a! singular! category.!These! four! elements! (mamlakhtiyut,! technosci< ence,!institutional!and!technical!politics,!and! spatial!politics)!are!clearly!related;!indeed,!it! was! the! very! articulation! of! these! elements! with! one! another! that! served! (in! part)! to! consolidate! the! contemporary! Israeli! state.! Sharing! many! foundational! elements! with! the! Turkish! example! discussed! above,! the! discourses,! practices,! and! institutions! in! the! Israeli! example! similarly! highlight! construc< tions!and!contestations!of!hydrologic!scale!as! central! to! consolidation!of!particular! visions! of! nation,! state,! and! territory.! Indeed,! we! suggest!that!the!Israeli!state!and!its!territori< al!expression!must!be!understood!as!having! emerged,!in!part,!as!an!effect!of!these!inter< linked! hydro<scalar! contestations! and! per< formativities.! In! the!early!years!of! the! Israeli! state,! the! country’s!annual!water!potential!was!a!hotly! contested! category.! Prior! to! Israel’s! estab< lishment,! the! water! potential! of! Palestine! played!a!role!in!determining!the!annual,!‘ap< propriate’,! level! of! Jewish! immigration.! The! British! mandate,! through! its! Water! Depart< ment,!on!the!one!hand,!argued!that!the!wa< ter!potential!was!too!meager!to!allow!for!an! open!immigration!policy!into!Palestine.!Zion< ist!water!and!political! experts,!on! the!other! hand,!argued!that!Palestine’s!water!potential! was! abundant! and! allowed! for! an! open! im< migration!policy!(Alatout!2007b!and!2009).!! One!would! reasonably! assume! that! after! the!establishment!of! Israel! in!1948,!debates! over! the!water!potential!of! the! state!would! be!resolved! in!favor!of!abundance.!After!all,! at!this!time!Zionist!experts!now!controlled!all! scientific!and!political! institutions.!However,!! ! Final!version:!L.M.$Harris$and$S.$Alatout.$2010.$Negotiating$Hydro9Scales,$Forging$States:$Comparison$of$the$Upper$ Tigris/Euphrates$and$Jordan$River$Basins.$Political$Geography$29:$1489156.! 10! a! continued! focus! on! abundance! was! not! borne! out! historically.! ! Instead,! consensus! slowly! emerged! around! the! idea! of! water! scarcity,! with! important! implications! for! state!and!nation!building!in!this!context.! These!debates!also!proved!to!be!strongly! tied!to!different!spatial!and!institutional!poli< tics! of! the! ensuing! decades! (cf.! Menahem! 2001;! Feitelson! 2005).! On! the! one! hand,! frameworks! of! abundance! were! linked! to! institutional! politics! of! decentralization! and! to!a!hybrid!spatial!politics! that! incorporated! different!scales!of!water!management!(privi< leging! both! the! local! and! the! regional! over! the! national).! On! the! other! hand,! frame< works! of! scarcity! promoted! strong! institu< tional! politics! of! centralization! and! a! framework! that! focused! on! the! nation! and! its!territory.!In!both!cases,!the!politics!of!wa< ter!potential!were!tightly!coupled!with!a!pol< itics! of! scale,! each! underscoring! different! conceptualizations!of! the! role! and! future!of! the! Israeli! state.! !To!make! the!case! for!how! technical,! scientific,! and! administrative! de< bates! related! to! water! resources! served! to! cement! particular! scalar! imaginaries! related! to! state,! nation! and! territory! in! Israel,! we! offer! our! discussion! of! the! four! interlinked! processes:!mamlakhtiyut,! technoscience,! in< stitutional!politics,!and!spatial!politics.! ! BenGGurion(and(the(concept(of(( mamlakhtiyut(( ( Ben<Gurion’s! notion! of! mamlakhtiyut,! is! often! translated! as! statism,! with! particular! meaning! for! Israeli! identity!and!politics!dur< ing! the! years! immediately! following! Israel’s! establishment! (Avi<Hai! 1974;! Troen! and! Lu< cas!1995).!Mamlakhtiyut!is!important!for!our! story!because! it! provided! the!needed! legiti< macy!not!only! for! centralizing!water! institu< tions,! but! also! for! framing! water! management!in!national<territorial!terms.! For! Ben<Gurion,! mamlakhtiyut! under< scored!the!state!as!essential!for!the!meaning! of!Jewish!history,!identity,!and!life.!According! to!this!idea,!the!state!is!not!only!representa< tive! of! the! Jewish! people,! but! more! im< portantly,! is! where! the! Jewish! people! acquire! meaning! (Avi<Hai! 1974;! Troen! and! Lucas!1995).!By!extension,! the! fulfillment!of! Jewish! subjectivity! is! possible! only! through! support!of!the!state!and!its!mandates.! Water!policymaking!became!one!of!those! sites! of! struggle! between! forces! of! centrali< zation! and! those! against! it.! The! vast! spaces! of! the! Negev! desert,! border! areas! between! Israel! and! its!neighboring! states! at! the! time! (Lebanon,! Syria,! Jordan,! and!Egypt),! all! con< stituted!security!threats,!either!because!they! were! presumably! empty! or! because! they! were!heavily!populated!by!Palestinians.!!The! dispersal! of! new! Jewish! immigrants,! who! doubled! the! state’s! Jewish! population! by! 1952,! required! a! water! policy! that! would! make! the! settlement! of! the! Negev! desert! and!border! towns!possible.! It!was! then! that! the! many! water! and! hydroelectric! plans! drawn!throughout!the!first!half!of!the!twen< tieth! century! and! manifest! in! the! Lowdermilk/Hays!plan!of!1948!became!a!real! possibility!(Hays!1948).!! While! policymakers! from! all! stripes! agreed! on! the! water! conveyance! project,! they! agreed! on! little! else:!What! institutions! should!represent!state!interests!in!water!pol< icymaking?!Was! the! technical! apparatus! for! conveying!water!from!the!north!to!the!south! to!be!a!centralized!apparatus! that! regulates! all! the!water! of! the! state! or!was! it! to! be! a! limited!mandate! for! conveying!water! to! the! Negev!Desert?!Consequently,!was!the!water! to! be! managed! in! a! singular! fashion! throughout! the!whole! state! or!was! it! to! be! treated! differently! depending! on! local,! mu< nicipal,! and! regional! conditions?! In! other! words,!during! the!early!1950s,! the!question!! ! Final!version:!L.M.$Harris$and$S.$Alatout.$2010.$Negotiating$Hydro9Scales,$Forging$States:$Comparison$of$the$Upper$ Tigris/Euphrates$and$Jordan$River$Basins.$Political$Geography$29:$1489156.! 11! of!the!appropriate!institutional!scales!for!the! management! of! Israel’s!water! resources! re< mained! an! open,! and! hotly! debated,! ques< tion.!! ! Water$abundance$versus$water$scarcity$ ! Without!denying!the!richness!and!diversi< ty!of!water!expertise! in!early! Israel,! it! is! im< portant!to!note!that!two!schools!of! thought! dominated!early!debates!on!water!availabil< ity.! ! These! are! detailed! at! greater! length! elsewhere!(Alatout!2007a,!2008a,!2008b),!so! here!we!provide!only!a!brief!overview.!!One! group,! led!mainly! by! Simcha! Blass! (Director! for!the!Water!Department!of!the!Ministry!of! Agriculture),!argued!that!the!water!resources! were!abundant.!This!was!based!on!the!theo< retical! potential! for! water! based! on! esti< mates!of!rainfall!and!rates!of!percolation,!as! well!as!a!biblical<historical!narrative!that!un< derstood! Palestine! to! be! a! land! of! abun< dance!that!was!able!to!support!a!population! of! more! than! ten! million! (e.g.,! Lowdermilk! 1944).!! This! Biblico<theoretical! conception! ran! counter! to! the! framework! championed! by! Aaron!Wiener,!Chief!Engineer!of!Mekorot,!a! Zionist! institution! established! in! 1937! that! was! given! a! monopoly! over! the! excavation! and! distribution! of! water! resources! in! the! early! years! of! the! state.!While! for! Blass! na< tional!water!policy!should!take! into!account! the! abundance! of! water,! promised! by! the! theoretical<historical! narrative,! Weiner! thought! national! water! policy! could! not! af< ford! the! luxury! of! unproven! resources! and! should!be!organized!around!water!stress!as!a! fundamental! fact,! empirically! demonstrated! and! known.! He! summarized! his! view! suc< cinctly! as! “the! annual! potential! of! water! is! the!water!you!already!have.”4!Differences!on! the! issue!of! the!water!potential! spread! to!a! number! of! issues! including! those! of! appro< priate! institutional! arrangements,! appropri< ate! technical! apparatuses,! and! even! appro< priate!water!pricing.!! In!1952!a!new!public!company,!Tahal,!was! established,! in! part! to! resolve! the! conflicts! between!the!Water!Department!of!the!Min< istry!of!Agriculture!and!Mekorot!and!to!take! charge! of! national! water! planning.! Headed! by! Blass,! and! with! Wiener! as! the! Deputy,! both! frameworks! were! forced! to! coexist! in! the! same! institution.! Without! delving! into! the!details!of!the!story!(for!more!see!Alatout! 2008b),!Tahal!drilled!more!than!200!explora< tory!wells!in!order!to!map!out!Israel’s!hydro< logical! potential.! By! 1953,! little! evidence! appeared! to! support!Blass’s!position!and!by! the!end!of! the!year!he!resigned!his!position! as! Director.! ! Even! faced!with! this! dearth! of! evidence,! Blass! never! changed! his! mind! about! the!water! potential! of! the! state.! ! He! often!emphasized!that!the!dominance!of!the! security!notion!was!due!to!the!unwillingness! of! the! Israeli! state,! like! the!British!Mandate! before! it,! to! spend!money! to! discover! new! sources!of!water.!He!was!replaced!by!Wiener! who! stayed! at! the!helm!of! Tahal! until! 1977! and!who!remained!important!to!Israeli!water! policymaking!throughout!that!time.! Even! with! Blass’s! resignation,! the! shift! from!a!conception!of!abundance!(more!than! 3,000! mcmy)! to! one! of! scarcity! (less! than! 1,800! mcmy)! was! gradual.! Between! 1950! and! 1957! seven! interim! and! two! master! plans! for! the! development! of! water! re< sources! were! published! (the! first! three! by! the! Water! Department! and! the! rest! by! Tahal).! While! initially! on! the! rise,! the! esti< mates!of!the!water!potential!were!gradually! decreased! —with! the! plan! of! 1957! putting! the!estimate!at!1,500!mcmy!(Alatout!2008b).!! $ $ $! ! Final!version:!L.M.$Harris$and$S.$Alatout.$2010.$Negotiating$Hydro9Scales,$Forging$States:$Comparison$of$the$Upper$ Tigris/Euphrates$and$Jordan$River$Basins.$Political$Geography$29:$1489156.! 12! Centralization$ of$ institutional$ and$ technical$ apparatuses$ ! Water! estimates,! i.e.,! assumptions! about! water! abundance! and! scarcity,! are! not! only! important!for!what!they!might!say!about!the! environmental! conditions! at! the! time.! Their! significance! lies! in! the! role! they! played! in! underwriting!a!host!of!political!and!technical! apparatuses!that! led!to!the!centralization!of! water! policymaking! and! consolidation! of! centralized!Israeli!state!apparatuses.!In!brief,! the! debates! about! abundance! and! scarcity,! and! their! eventual! resolution! in! favor! of! scarcity,!served!as!iterative!citations!of!a!par< ticular! scalar! politics! for! the! effective! man< agement! of! Israel’s! water! resources—one! that!moved!away! from!decentralization!and! furthered!a!centralized!state!apparatus.!! In! this! way,! the! conflict! between! Blass! and! Wiener! was! not! limited! to! differences! over! water! estimates! but! extended! to! ap< propriate! styles! of! water! governance! with! scalar! and! territorial! political! implications.! Two! tightly! coupled! elements! were! im< portant:! first,! what! type! of! technical! appa< ratus! was! needed! for! the! management! of! water! resources,! and,! second,!what! type! of! institutional! apparatus! was! needed! for! re< source!governance?!! Blass! thought!of! the!National!Water!Car< rier!(NWC),!which!was!to!convey!water!from! the!upper!reaches!of!the!Jordan!River!to!the! Negev!Desert,!as!a!stand<alone!technical!pro< ject,!that!should!be!separated!from!local!and! regional! networks! for! water! management.! Nothing!in!the!mandate!to!divert!Jordan!wa< ters!to!the!Negev!Desert!for!Jewish!immigra< tion! and! settlement! necessitated! that! the! NWC!be!an!instrument!for!centralizing!all!of! the! water! resources! of! the! state! and,! for! Blass,!it!was!precisely!the!idea!that!there!was! enough! water! to! satisfy! the! needs! of! the! state! that! allowed! him! to! imagine! multiple! management!schemes!operating!on!different! geographic! scales.! Even! as! the! NWC! was! clearly! a! national! project,! then,! Blass’s! con< ception! of! abundance!meant! that! the! state! did! not! need! to! control! all! water! resources! to!fulfill!this!mandate.! Wiener!had!a!different!understanding.!For! him,!conveying!water! from!the! Jordan!River! was! important! to! overcome! scarcity! in! the! desert.! More! important,! however,! was! the! idea!of!water!scarcity!itself.!!As!a!paramount! concern,! scarcity! necessitated! the! careful! management! of! water! resources.! Conse< quently,!he!argued!that!the!NWC!needed!to! be!a!centralized!technical!apparatus!through! which!all!of! Israel’s!water!would!be!regulat< ed.!Contrary!to!Blass,!then,!he!saw!no!room! for! local! and! regional! technical! networks! as! this! could! lead! to! the! inefficient! manage< ment!of!water.! Instead,!water!management! for!Weiner!was! necessarily! singular! and!na< tional<territorial—coordinated! by! the! state! and!the!state!alone.!!! These!differing!opinions!on!water!poten< tial! and! the! needed! technical! apparatus! for! its!management!were! thus! articulated! insti< tutionally! as! well.! While! Blass! strongly! ar< gued! for!a!hybrid! institutional! framework! (a! cabinet!level!position!for!the!management!of! the! Jordan!waters!and!a!decentralized! insti< tutional! structure! for! the! management! of! local! and! regional!water! resources),!Wiener! argued! for! a! centralized! institutional! appa< ratus!for!the!management!of!all!water!to!en< sure!it!was!used!as!efficiently!as!possible.!! In! the!end,! the! fact! that! scarcity!became! the!hegemonic!discourse!of!the!mid<!to!late< 1950s,!Wiener’s!positions!won!the!day!in!al< most! all! other! aspects:! the! NWC! became! a! centralized! technical! apparatus! through! which!all!the!water!of!the!state!was!regulat< ed;! water!management!was! centralized! un< der!the!Water!Commissioner!in!the!Ministry! of!Agriculture,!albeit!distributed!among! two!! ! Final!version:!L.M.$Harris$and$S.$Alatout.$2010.$Negotiating$Hydro9Scales,$Forging$States:$Comparison$of$the$Upper$ Tigris/Euphrates$and$Jordan$River$Basins.$Political$Geography$29:$1489156.! 13! main! institutions! (Tahal! for! water! strategic! planning! and! Mekorot! for! distribution! net< works).! ! From$hybrid$to$singular$territorial$$ framework$$ ! As!we!have!seen,!the!construction!of!wa< ter!scarcity!as!fact!legitimized!the!centraliza< tion! of! both! technical! and! institutional! apparatuses!of!water!management,!thus!ful< filling! Ben<Gurion’s! political! philosophy! of! mamlakhtiyut.!Indeed,!it!was!the!very!articu< lation! of! Weiner’s! ideas! with! mamlakhtiyut! that! enabled,! at! least! in! part,! their! ascend< ancy! as! the! dominant! framework.! For! the! first! time,! there! was! a! techno<institutional! apparatus! that! not! only! represented! the! state,! but! also! served! to! fulfill! its!mandate.!! By! extension,! debates! over!water! resources! (e.g.,! their! scarcity! or! abundance,! and! ap< propriate! scales! of! water! management)! helped!to!consolidate!the!very!ideas!of!Israe< li!state,!nation,!and!territory.!! These! debates! over! water! potential,! wa< ter!management,!and!institutional!structures! all! depended! on! and! constructed! different! spatio<territorial! scales.! For! Blass,! the! in< gathering! of! Jewish! immigrants! required! thinking! of! the! national! space! as! a! whole.! However,!his!faith!in!the!abundance!of!water! allowed!him!to!also!maintain!a!complex!no< tion!of!space!that!was!not!limited!to!the!na< tional!territorial!scale,!but!allowed!for!water! resources! to! be! governed! at! smaller! scales.!! This!hybrid!notion!included!a!role!for!nation< al<territorial! constructs,! as! well! as! manage< ment! linked! to! very! local! scales,! be! that! a! kibbutz!or!a!municipality.!5! Wiener! promoted! different! hydro<scalar! conceptions.!While! he! agreed!with!Blass! on! the! importance! of! the! national<territorial! scale! for! the! project! of! ingathering! and!dis< persal,!he!believed!that!given!water!scarcity,! only! the! national! scale! was! appropriate! for! water! management.! He! often! argued! that! there!was!no!place!for!inefficiency,!and!thus! no! place! for! local! management! (believing! local! and! regional! governance! to! be! inher< ently! inefficient!and!politically!driven).!Thus,! the!only!appropriate!spatial!arrangement!for! water!resources!was!national<territorial,!and! the! only! appropriate! institutions! were! cen< tralized!and!statist.6!! As! we! have! suggested,! in! the! end,! Wie< ner’s!conception!prevailed,!in!part!due!to!its! articulation!with! other! national! ideals.! ! It! is! precisely! at! the! intersection! of! these! ideas! and! contestations! that! we! can! understand! the! Israeli! state!as!an!expression,!and!as!an! outcome,!of!these!complex!scalar!performa< tivities!related!to!water.!Scarcity!as!a!general! framework!of!government!in!the!early!years! of! the! state! (of! territory,! of!money,! of! peo< ple,!of!resources)!justified!the!emergence!of! a! strong,! centralized! state! in! a! number! of! policymaking! areas! not! limited! to!water! re< sources! management! (education,! labor! ex< change,! defense,! etc.).! However,! this! case! shows!the!centrality!of!negotiations!and!con< testations! over! scales! of! water! governance! to! the! consolidation! of! Israeli! state,! nation,! and!territory.7!!! ! Conclusions:(Scalar(politics(of(State(and(naG tion(building( ! In!this!paper!we!offer!a!study!of!two!dis< tinct! yet! compelling! cases! for! the! intercon< nections! between! politics! of! hydrological! scale!and!nation<!and!state<building.!Our!ex< amples! are! chosen,! in! part,! because! of! the! strength!of!these!connections! in!both!cases,! with! both! cases! showing! that! the! repeated! invocation! and! expression! of! hydro<scales! have! been! foundational! to! consolidate! and! maintain! nations,! territories,! and! state! forms.!!Our!selection!of!these!two!case!stud<! ! Final!version:!L.M.$Harris$and$S.$Alatout.$2010.$Negotiating$Hydro9Scales,$Forging$States:$Comparison$of$the$Upper$ Tigris/Euphrates$and$Jordan$River$Basins.$Political$Geography$29:$1489156.! 14! ies!is!also!significant!given!that!hydro<politics! continue! to! play! central! roles! in! contempo< rary!geopolitics!of!the!Middle!East,!and!given! that!these!two!cases!in!particular!are!central! to!any!discussion!of!politics,!watersharing,!or! socio<political!exclusions!in!the!region.! To!recap,! in! the!Turkish!example,!we!see! numerous!instances!where!assumptions!and! assertions!about!scale!with!respect!to!water! resonate! very! clearly! with! ongoing! political! negotiations! (e.g.,! the! need! to! consider! the! Tigris!and!Euphrates!rivers!jointly!or!to!avoid! regional!water!proposals).!!The!invocation!of! certain! ideas!about!water!also!serve! to!per< formatively!cite!the!very!ideas!of!Turkish!na< tion,! of! territory,! and! the! legitimacy! of! the! Turkish! state! in! developing! and! managing! water!resources.!!These!iterative!citations!at! once!displace!and!marginalize!other!possible! claims! to! resources! (e.g.,! either! by! down< stream!states,!or!by!the!Kurdish!populations! in!the!southeast,!for!instance).!! In! the! Israeli! example,! we! see! that! the! ‘hydrological’!debates!over!the!water!poten< tial! of! the! state! were! resolved! in! favor! of! scarcity.!While!interesting!in!their!own!right,! debates!over!water!potential!are!even!more! interesting!with!respect!to!the!scalar!politics! they! invoke! and! underwrite.! As! we! detail,! the!resolution!of!debates!over!the!water!po< tential! of! Israel! in! favor! of! scarcity! also! de< cidedly! favored! statist! and! national< territorial!institutional!approaches.!Especially! with!their!articulation!with!Ben!Gurion’s!na< tion! of! mamlakhtiyut! (in! ways! that! parallel! connections! to! ideals! of! a! unitary! state! and! nation! linked! to! Kemalism! in! the! Turkish! case),! this! meant! greater! centralization! of! administrative! apparatuses! for! the!manage< ment! of!water! resources,! creating! a! strong,! centralized!nation<state.!! Even! as! we! have! argued! that! states! are! consolidated! in! relation! to! certain! scalar! constructions!of!water!resources,!these!con< structions!are!not!fixed,!are!frequently!chal< lenged,!and!may!shift!over!time!in!important! ways!(such!as!Kurdish!or!Palestinian!opposi< tion!movements!in!both!contexts!or!the!shift! from! abundance! to! scarcity! in! Isra< el/Palestine).!A!key!insight!we!draw!from!all! such! examples! is! that! debates! about!water,! whether! the! ‘facts’! of! hydrology! and! water! potential! or! ideas! about! appropriate! scales! for!water!governance,!may!be!central!to!the! very! definition! and! consolidation! of! nation,! territory,! and! state.! Although! emphasizing! these!processes!in!Israel!and!Turkey,!we!con< sider! that! these! processes! are! likely! to! be! significant! in!other!contexts!as!well—among! others,! one! can! think! of! other!Middle! East< ern!states!such!as!Jordan!and!Egypt,!in!addi< tion! to! similar! processes! in! Spain! (Swyngedouw!1999).!!!! Just!as!we!do!not!consider!these!process< es!to!be!exclusive!to!the!contexts!we!study,! we!also!do!not!consider!that!it!is!only!in!the! realm! of!water! that! such! processes!may! be! traced.!Similar!scalar!constructions!and!poli< tics! can! likely! be! observed! with! respect! to! the! military,! educational! policy,! or! other! processes.! As! such,! our! analysis! focused! on! water! management! shares! strong! affinities! with! others! who! have! argued! that! nations! become! naturalized! through! maps,! muse< ums,!or!print!media![as!with!Benedict!Ander< son’s! classic! discussion! (1991),! or! Radcliffe! and! Westwood! (1996)! for! a! contemporary! example!from!Ecuador].!! With! this! intervention,! we! would! like! to! also!emphasize!a!theoretical!argument!about! nation<states.!While!many!Weberian!(Weber! 1978)! state! theorists!emphasize! the!military! (Tilly!1985)!and!socioeconomic!(Mann!1993)! consolidation! of! the! territoriality! of! the! state,! our! example! points! to! non<military! and!non<economic!processes! through!which! territoriality! is! also! constructed! (Jasanoff! 2004).!Water!politics—including!hydrological!! ! Final!version:!L.M.$Harris$and$S.$Alatout.$2010.$Negotiating$Hydro9Scales,$Forging$States:$Comparison$of$the$Upper$ Tigris/Euphrates$and$Jordan$River$Basins.$Political$Geography$29:$1489156.! 15! knowledge! production,! competing! method< ologies,!conflicting!views!on!what!constitutes! evidence,!contested!notions!on!what!consti< tutes!a!river!basin,!or!competing!views!about! appropriate!water!management—all! have! a! hand!in!the!construction!of!the!nation<state,! and! associated! visions! of! territoriality! and! government.!!! Returning!to!our! focus!on!performativity,! our! approach! emphasizes! that! states,! and! territories!are!never!fixed,!even!if!there!is!an! appearance!of!fixity!though!repeated!invoca< tion!of!the!conjoint!Tigris<Euphrates!system,! or!of!scarcity!in!the!Israeli!context.!!We!have! endeavored!to!lay!bare!some!of!these!possi< ble! effects! of! these! hydroscalar! construc< tions! and! linked! naturalizations.! ! ! Doing! so! allows!for!an!analysis! that!highlights!diverse! and!iterative!practices!that!operate!to!main< tain!the!territorial,!nationalist,!or!institution< al! underpinnings! of! state! forms! (Kuus! and! Agnew! 2008).! As! such,! we! are! able! to! take! seriously!Wainwright’s!(2005)!call!to!critically! investigate! the! consolidation! of! territories,! or!political!units,!particularly! for!work! inter< ested! in!resource!use!and!access.! !As!he!ar< gues,! if! we! fail! to! consider! such! dynamics,! we!risk!obscuring!key!dimensions!of!‘politics’! that! often! condition! differential! access! to! resources! (see! also! Alatout,! 2006).! ! Instead! of! taking! territory,! resources,! or! population! as!given!in!our!scholarship,!the!task!is!rather! to! uncover! how! various! territorial! expres< sions! emerge! and! are! reinforced! through! discourse! and! practice.! As!Wainwright! asks,! ‘how!is!it!that!particular!geographies!become! naturalized!and!sedimented!through!political! and! cultural! practices?’! Part! of! the! answer! for! the! two! cases! we! study! rests! with! the! technopolitical! invocations! of! scale! in! rela< tion!to!hydro<geographies!! More!discussion!on!ways!that!politics!and! performativities! of! hydro<scales! operate! in! other!contexts,!or!ways!that!politics!and!per< formativities! of! scale! might! further! enrich! key!debates!in!political!geography!and!politi< cal!ecology,!including!attention!to!marginali< zation!of!certain!spaces!and!populations8!are! all!likely!to!be!productive!avenues!for!future! work.! ! Pursuits! along! these! lines! will! likely! result! in! novel! insights! related! to! the! inter< citational!practices!that!link,!and!co<produce! scale,! states,! histories,! and! water! geogra< phies.! ( Bibliography( ( Alatout,!S.! (2009).!Bringing!abundance! into!envi< ronmental!politics:!Constructing!a!Zionist!network!of! water! abundance,! immigration,! and! colonization.! Social!Studies!of!Science,!39!(3),!363<394.!! ! Alatout,! S.! (2008a).! States! of! scarcity:! Water,! space,!and!identity!politics!in!Israel,!1948<1959.!Envi< ronment!and!Planning!D:!Society!and!Space,!26,!959< 982.! ! Alatout,!S.!(2008b).!Locating!the!fragments!of!the! state! and! their! limits:! Water! policymaking! in! Israel! during!the!1950s.!Israel!Studies!Forum,!23!(1),!40<65.! ! Alatout,! S.! (2007a).! State<ing! natural! resources! through!law:!The!codification!and!articulation!of!wa< ter! scarcity! and! citizenship! through! law.! The! Arab! World!Geographer,!10!(1),!16<37.! ! Alatout,! S.! (2007b).! From! water! abundance! to! water!scarcity:!A!‘fluid’!history!of!Jewish!subjectivity! in! historic! Palestine! and! Israel.! In! Reapproaching! borders:! New! perspectives! on! the! study! of! Israel< Palestine! ed.,! S.! Sufian! and!M.! Levine,! pp.! 199<219.! Lanham,!MD:!Rowman!and!Littlefield.! ! Alatout,! S.! (2006).! Towards! a! bio<territorial! con< ception! of! power:! Territory,! population! and! envi< ronmental!narratives!in!Palestine!and!Israel.!Political! Geography,!25,!601<621.! !! ! Final!version:!L.M.$Harris$and$S.$Alatout.$2010.$Negotiating$Hydro9Scales,$Forging$States:$Comparison$of$the$Upper$ Tigris/Euphrates$and$Jordan$River$Basins.$Political$Geography$29:$1489156.! 16! Altinbilek,! D.! (2004).! Development! and!manage< ment!of!the!Euphrates<Tigris!basin.!Water!Resources! Development,!20!(1),!15<33.! ! Anderson,! B.! (1991).! Imagined! communities:! Re< flections! on! the! origin! and! spread! of! nationalism.! New!York:!Verso.! ! Avi<Hai,! A.! (1974).! Ben<Gurion,! state! builder:! Principles! and! pragmatism,! 1948<1963.! Jerusalem:! Israel!Universities!Press.! ! Bagis,!A.!(1997).!Turkey’s!hydropolitics!of!the!Eu< phrates<Tigris!basin.!Water!Resources!Development,! 13!(4),!567–581.!! ! Bakker,! K.! J.! (2003).! A! political! ecology! of!water! privatization.!Studies!in!Political!Economy,!70,!35<58.! ! Bilen,! Ö.! (2000).! Turkey! and!water! issues! in! the! Middle! East! (updated,! 2nd! edition).! Ankara:! GAP< RDA,!Republic!of!Turkey.! ! Biro,! A.! (2007).!Water! politics! and! the! construc< tion!of!scale.!Studies!in!Political!Economy,!80,!9<30.! ! Boyle,! M.! (2002).! Cleaning! up! after! the! Celtic! Tiger:! Scalar! ‘fixes’! in! the! political! ecology! of! Tiger! economies’! Transactions! of! the! Institute! of! British! Geographers,!27,!172!–!194.!! ! Davis,!U.,!Maks,!A.! and!Richardson,! J.! (1980).! Is< rael!water!policies.!Journal!of!Palestine!Studies,!9!(2),! 3<32.! ! Delaney,! D.! and! Leitner,! H.! (1997).! The! political! construction!of!scale.!Political!Geography,!16!(2),!93< 97.!! ! Feitelson,! E.! (2005).! Political! economy! of! groundwater! exploitation:! The! Israeli! case.! Interna< tional! Journal! of!Water! Resources!Development,! 21! (3),!413<423.! ! Feitelson,!E.!and!Fishhendler,!I.!(2009).!Spaces!of! water! governance:! The! case! of! Israel! and! its! neigh< bors.!Annals!of!the!Association!of!American!Geogra< phers,!99!(4),!728<745.! ! Giglioli,!I.!and!Swyngedouw,!E.!(2008).!Let’s!drink! to! the! great! thirst!! Water! and! the! politics! of! frac< tured! techno<natures! in! Sicily.! International! Journal! of!Urban!and!Regional!Research,!32!(2),!392!–!414.!! González,!S.!(2006).!!Scalar!narratives!in!Bilbao:!A! cultural! politics! of! scales! approach! to! the! study! of! urban!policy.! International! Journal!of!Urban!and!Re< gional!Research,!30!(4),!836<857.! ! Gruen,!G.!E.!(2000).!Turkish!waters:!Source!of!re< gional!conflict!or!catalyst!for!peace?!Water,!Air,!and! Soil!Pollution,!123!(1<4),!565<579.! ! Hays,!J.!(1948).!The!TVA!on!the!Jordan:!Proposals! for! the! irrigation! and! hydroelectric! development! in! Palestine.! Washington,! D.C.:! Commission! on! Pales< tine!Surveys.! ! Harris,! L.! (2008).! Postcolonialism,! postdevelop< ment,!and!ambivalent!spaces!of!difference!in!South< eastern!Turkey.!Geoforum,!39,!1698<1708.! ! Harris,! L.! (2007).! Tigris<Euphrates.! In! Encyclope< dia!of!environment!and!society,!vol!5!ed.,!P.!Robbins,! pp.! 1736<1739.! Thousand! Oaks,! CA:! Sage! Publica< tions.! ! Harris,! L.! (2005).! Navigating! uncertain! waters:! Geographies!of!water!and!conflict,!shifting!terms!and! debates.!In!Geography!of!war!and!peace!ed.,!C.!Flint,! pp.!259<279.!Oxford:!Oxford!University!Press.! ! Harris,! L.! (2002).!Water!and!conflict! geographies! of! the! Southeastern! Anatolia! Project.! Society! and! Natural!Resources,!15,!743<759.! ! Hillel,!D.! (1994).!Rivers!of!Eden:!The! struggle! for! water! and! the! quest! for! peace! in! the! Middle! East.! Oxford:!Oxford!University!Press.! ! Jasanoff,! S.! (2004).!States!of!knowledge:!The!co< production! of! science! and! social! order.! Cambridge:! Routledge.!! ! Jonas,!A.!(2006).!Pro!scale:!Further!reflections!on! the!'scale!debate'!in!human!geography.!Transactions! of!the!Institute!of!British!Geographers,!31,!399<406.! ! Kibaroglu,! A.! (2002).! Building! a! regime! for! the! waters!of!the!Euphrates<Tigris!river!basin.!Alpen!aan! den!Rijn,!Netherlands:!Kluwer!Law!International.! ! Kaiser,! R.! and! Nikiforova,! E.! (2008).! The! per< formativity!of! scale:!The! social! construction!of! scale! effects! in!Narva,! Estonia.! Environment!and!Planning! D:!Society!and!Space,!26!(3),!537–562.!! !! ! Final!version:!L.M.$Harris$and$S.$Alatout.$2010.$Negotiating$Hydro9Scales,$Forging$States:$Comparison$of$the$Upper$ Tigris/Euphrates$and$Jordan$River$Basins.$Political$Geography$29:$1489156.! 17! Kliot,! N.! (2000).! A! cooperative! framework! for! sharing! scarce!water! resources! in! Israel,! Jordan!and! the! Palestinian! Authority.! In! Water! in! the! Middle! East:! A! geography! of! peace! ed.,! A.! Wolf! and! H.! Amery,! pp.! 191<217.! Austin:! University! of! Texas! Press.! ! Kurtz,! H.! E.! (2003).! Scale! frames! and! counter< scale! frames:! Constructing! the! problem! of! environ< mental! injustice.! Political! Geography,! 22! (8),! 887< 916.! ! Kuus,! M.! and! Agnew,! J.! (2008).! Theorizing! the! state! geographically:! Sovereignty,! subjectivity,! terri< toriality.!In!SAGE!handbook!of!political!geography!ed.! K.! Cox,! M.! Low,! J.! Robinson,! pp.! 95<106.! Thousand! Oaks,!CA:!Sage!Publications.! ! Leitner,! H.,! Sheppard,! E.,! and! Sziarto,! K.! (2008).! The! spatialities! of! contentious! politics.! Transactions! of! the! Institute! of! British! Geographers,! 33! (2),! 157< 172.! ! Leitner,! H.! and! Miller,! B.! (2007).! Scale! and! the! limitations! of! ontological! debate:! a! commentary! on! Marston,!Jones,!and!Woodward.!Transactions!of!the! Institute!of!British!Geographers,!32,!116<125.! ! Lowdermilk,!W.! (1944).!Palestine:! Land!of!prom< ise.!New!York:!Harpers!and!Brothers!Publishers.! ! Mango,! A.! (2001).! Turkey:! the! urge! to! reform.! Middle!Eastern!Studies,!37!(1),!195–224.! ! Mann,! M.! (1993).! The! sources! of! social! power,! vol.! 2:! The! rise! of! classes! and! nation<states,! 1760< 1914.!Cambridge,!UK:!Cambridge!University!Press.! ! Mansfield,!B.!(2001).!Thinking!through!scale:!The! role! of! state! in! globalizing! North! Pacific! fisheries.! Environment!and!Planning!A,!33,!1807<1827.! ! Marston,! S.! A.,! J.! P.! Jones! III,! and! K.!Woodward! (2005).! Human! geography! without! scale.! Transac< tions!of!the!Institute!of!British!Geographers,!30,!416< 432.! ! McCarthy,!J.!(2005).!Scale,!sovereignty,!and!strat< egy! in!environmental!governance.!Antipode,!4,!731< 753.! ! Menahem,!G.!(2001).!Water!policy!in!Israel!1948< 2000:! Policy! paradigms,! policy! networks,! and! public! policy.!Israel!Affairs,!7,!21<44.! Moore,!A.!(2008).!Rethinking!scale!as!a!geograph< ical! category:! From! analysis! to! practice.! Progress! in! Human!Geography,!32,!203<225.! ! Neumann,!R.!(2009).!Political!ecology:!Theorizing! scale.! Progress! in! Human! Geography,! 33! (3),! 398< 406.! ! Öktem,! K.! (2005).! Reconstructing! geographies! of! nationalism:!Nation,! space,! and!discourse! in! twenti< eth!century!Turkey.!Unpublished!thesis!(PhD),!School! of!Geography!and!Environment,!University!of!Oxford.! ! Paasi,! A.! (2004).! Place! and! region:! Looking! through!the!prism!of!scale.!Progress!in!Human!Geog< raphy,!28!(4),!536<546.! ! Radcliffe,! S.! and!Westwood,!S.! (1996).!Remaking! the!nation:!Place,!identity!and!politics!in!Latin!Ameri< ca.!London:!Routledge.! ! Sneddon,!C.!and!Fox,!C.!(2006).!Rethinking!trans< boundary!waters:!A! critical!hydropolitics!of! the!Me< kong!Basin.!Political!Geography,!25,!181<202.! ! Sneddon,! C.! (2003).! Reconfiguring! scale! and! power:! The! Khong<Chi<Mun! Project! in! Northeast! Thailand.! Environment! and! Planning! A,! 35,! 2229< 2250.! ! Sneddon,!C.,!Harris,!L.,!R.!Dimitrov,!and!U.!Özesmi! (2002).! Contested! waters:! Social! conflict,! spatial! scale! and! sustainability! in! aquatic! systems.! Society! and!Natural!Resources,!15,!663<675.! ! Swyngedow,! E.! (1999).!Modernity! and! hybridity:! Nature,! regeneracioismo,!and! the!production!of! the! Spanish! waterscape.! Annals! of! the! American! Geog< raphers,!89!(1),!443<465.! ! Taylor,!P.!and!Buttel,!F.!(1992).!How!do!we!know! we! have! global! environmental! problems?! Science! and! the! globalization! of! environmental! discourse.! Geoforum,!23!(3),!405<416.! ! Tilly,!C.! (1985).!War!making!and! state!making!as! organized!crime.!In!Bringing!the!state!back!in!ed.,!P.! Evans,!D.!Rueschemeyer!and!T.!Skocpol,!pp.!169<186.! Cambridge,!MA:!Harvard!University!Press.!! !! ! Final!version:!L.M.$Harris$and$S.$Alatout.$2010.$Negotiating$Hydro9Scales,$Forging$States:$Comparison$of$the$Upper$ Tigris/Euphrates$and$Jordan$River$Basins.$Political$Geography$29:$1489156.! 18! Troen,!S.!and!Lucas,!N.!(1995).!ed.!Israel:!The!first! decade!of!independence.!Albany,!NY:!State!Universi< ty!of!New!York!Press.! ! Ünver,! I.! H.!O.! (1997).! Southeastern!Anatolia! In< tegrated! Development! Project! (GAP),! Turkey:! An! overview!of!issues!of!sustainability.!Water!Resources! Development,!13!(2),!187<207.! Wainwright,! J.! (2005).! The! geographies! of! politi< cal! ecology:! After! Edward! Said.! Environment! and! Planning!A,!37,!1033<1043.! ! Weber,!M.!(1978).!Economy!and!society:!An!out< line!of! interpretive!sociology.!Berkeley:!University!of! California!Press.! !                                                 1!GAP!stands!for!‘Southeastern!Anatolia!Project’,!a!large<scale!damming!and!water!diversion!project!in! the!upper!Tigris<Euphrates!basin!(Harris!2002!and2008;!Öktem!2005!for!critical!analyses,!including!re< lationship!of!this!project!to!Kemalism!and!effects!for!Kurdish!populations;!and!Ünver!1997!for!over< view).! 2!According!to!Gruen!(2000:!572),!the!official!position!of!Turkey!is!in!fact!that!the!Euphrates!is!not!an! international!river,!but!rather!a!transboundary!river.!!As!such,!Turkey!maintains!exclusive!sovereign! rights!to!the!water!until!it!crosses!the!border.!!However,!the!International!Law!Commission!considers! all!shared!rivers!to!be!‘international!watercourses.’!!!! 3!During!our!period!of!concern,!riparian!states!of!the!Jordan!River!were!Israel,!Jordan,!Lebanon,!and! Syria.!We!do!not!consider!the!Israeli!case!to!be!one!of!exception,!even!as!it!is!exemplary!for!our!argu< ment.!Similar!processes!of!scalar<!and!hydro<politics!were!likely!to!be!at!work!in!all!of!these!riparian! states,!as!well!as!on!a!regional!scale!(Alatout!2009).! 4!Interview!25!August!1997! 5!To!illustrate,!Wiener!described!what!he!thought!of!as!Blass’!“obsession”!with!“local!and!regional!pro< jects”!and!his!“failure”!to!see!the!importance!of!a!nationally!organized!and!centralized!project.!In!Wie< ner’s!words,!Blass!“was!unable!to!move!beyond!his!experiences!in!the!1940s”!(when!he!worked!as!a! water!consultant!for!Mekorot).!This!is!an!overly!simplistic!reflection!on!Blass’!position,!which!argued! both!for!national!planning!and!regional!and!local!planning!(Interview!with!Wiener!on!6!September! 1998).! 6!This!is!the!story!of!Israeli!scalar!hydro<politics!from!the!1950s!until!the!early!1980s.!More!recent! shifts!in!scalar!politics!further!confirm!the!central!thesis!of!this!article:!politics!of!hydrological!scale! matter.!An!excellent!recent!work!(Feitelson!and!Fishhendler!2009)!demonstrates!the!fluidity!of!scalar! constructions!in!this!context.!They!conclude!that!the!national!territorial!scalar!construction!of!early! statehood!in!Israel!gave!way!to!a!hybrid!construction!of!scale!with!multiple!frameworks!operating! concurrently.! 7!As!we!mentioned!briefly,!Israeli!water!policymaking!along!with!its!national!<territorial,!and!institu< tional,!scalar!focus!became!possible!in!part!by!the!necessary!othering!of!Palestinian!inhabitants!and,! more!forcefully,!by!denying!their!presence!as!a!political!community!with!historical!rights!to!the!water! resources!of!the!region.!For!example,!many!water!development!projects!were!legally!entrusted!to! Jewish!development!agencies,!including!the!Jewish!National!Fund!(JNF)!and!the!Zionist!Organization.! Unlike!the!state!focus!on!equality!of!all!citizens,!these!entities!promoted!Jewish!immigration!and!set< tlement!in!ways!that!had!clear!consequences!for!exclusion!of!Palestinians,!including!expropriation!of! large!tracts!of!land!for!water!works!that!did!not!benefit!those!communities!(Davis!et!al.!1980!and! Alatout!2007a).!! 8The!processes!of!state!and!nation!building!detailed!here!are!made!possible!through!the!negation!of! minority!rights!to!territory!and!resources.!!Despite!our!recognition!of!the!centrality!of!these!questions,! we!bracket!these!issues!in!favor!of!focusing!on!the!more!general!questions!of!this!paper.!For!more!on! the!importance!of!the!Kurdish!question!to!questions!of!water!development!and!constructions!of!Turk< ish!identity!and!state!see!Harris!2002,!Harris,!L.!2008,!and!Öktem,!2005.!For!more!on!issues!of!im< portance!for!the!Palestinian!population!in!the!process!of!Israeli!state!building!and!hydro<geographies,! see!Alatout!2007b,!Feitelson!2005. 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.52383.1-0132707/manifest

Comment

Related Items