Don’t turn Gaza into another Zone Rouge, a land poisoned by World War I

The seemingly unending conflict between Israel and Palestine has not only been a human tragedy and a source of great suffering and death but it has also compromised the integrity of nature: the natural fabric that has evolved through millenniums of processes to create a livable environment for all species in the region. Understandably, what has been popularised as being at risk with the ongoing Israeli-Palestine conflict are issues of security, statehood, self-governance, land rights and the toll on human lives.

However, with the current unprecedented, destructive nature of the Israeli aggression following the October 7 surprise attack launched by Hamas inside Israel, there has been a total ignorance displayed by the media on the fragility of the natural world and the dire consequences to communities. Notoriously in military circles the protection of nature is of little concern relative to the strategy to defend, conquer and be victorious. However, this cavalier attitude does not preempt the potential for catastrophic results lasting decades if not centuries following conflicts.

Will Gaza turn into another ‘Red Zone ‘or Zone Rouge: a 1200 sq. km. poisoned land in northern France, where one of the bloodiest battles of WWI was fought between the French and German Forces? Now, over a century ago, the area is still uninhabitable, with some parts being virtually devoid of vegetation. When war is over and nature is crushed, the notion that: “to the victor go the spoils” will be no reward at all.

The Israel-Palestinian arid territory has been blessed with natural groundwater reservoirs, aquifers, from time immemorial. This includes the Mountain Aquifer (MA) primarily underlying the occupied West Bank and the Coastal Aquifer (CA) which is overlaid in part by Gaza. The aquifers are a paleo geologic feature, created millions of years ago. The MA is of the Late Cretaceous Period (100.5 mya) and the more recent CA is of the Late Neogene Period (5.3 mya). The CA occurs at a depth of 8-60m deep (west to east), while the Mountain Aquifer extends even deeper below the surface.

Aquifers owe their replenishment and purity to their ‘recharge’ areas that overlie them. These are generally porous surfaces that are critical for the natural maintenance of the aquifers. Recharge areas are identifiable by the coarse texture of surface soils and overburden. In addition rivers/wadis and their floodplain as well as wetlands play significant role in the recharge of aquifers. The mountainous area of the occupied West Bank marks the Jordan River Basin divide and serves as the main rainfall collection for the MC and a critical source of its recharge. Streams/wadis originating west of the divide, fed by aquifer effluent (springs) flow to the Mediterranean coast, crossing over and replenishing the CA through infiltration.

There are no political boundaries to natural systems and so it is for the interconnected nature of the Israel-Palestine Aquifers. The GCA, being topographically on lower elevations, is at the ‘receiving-end’-virtually vulnerable to human activities in the upper reaches of the watershed, in Israel and the occupied West Bank

Aquifers are mainly karstic characterised by porous formations of sandstones, limestone and other materials that have high storage and conductive capacity. Their waters have been harboured thousand or even millions of years ago. They supply about 60 percent of the global potable water. Needleless to say, they are totally indispensable in desert environments. In ancient times, the MA and CA provided most of the Israel-Palestinian region with plentiful, pristine water that sustained a high quality of life.

A population pressure-cooker

In Gaza, a sustainable water supply from the CA persisted up to the late 1940s, about the time of the founding of the State of Israel. Just prior to the end of the British Mandate in Palestine, Gaza comprised an area three times that of the present Gaza with a population of about 151K (137 people/sq. km). But in time the area of Gaza would be reduced dramatically and its population density increase exponentially.

Between 1947-49 some two hundred thousand Palestinians from 247 villages in southern Palestine were confined to Gaza. This displacement has been referred to by Palestinians as the ‘Nakba’, or ‘Catastrophe’. It was disastrous in more than one way in the major negative effects it had on the natural water resources. In 1949 the Gaza district, having increased its population by over 75 percent, suffered further intensification: a reduction of its territory by 50 percent as part of the Egyptian-Israel Armistice Agreement. And, in 1950 there was a further 17 percent reduction due to a negotiated amendment of the agreement. The Gaza enclave had then 3.5 times the population and only 7.5 percent of the groundwater supply available to the former British Mandate. This confinement set the stage for a population pressure cooker that would in time create unprecedented population density and lead to a sweeping catastrophe on all fronts: water quality deterioration and quantity reduction, public health degradation, economic instability and political turmoil and conflict.

The current limited territory of Gaza has a pathetic area of 365 square kilometres and one that constitutes a particularly arid environment makes it quite scarce resource highly dependent on external supplies. With a population of 2,226,544 and a record, global high density of 6,100 people/square kilometres, this dependence becomes overwhelming, setting up a security risk and ensuing potential conflicts with neighbouring states for resources. In addition, the ongoing deficiencies in furnishing critical supplies (energy, water, food, etc.), by Israel to the Gaza enclave, particularly during the current siege, has placed inordinate stress on local resources. They are now exceeding their carrying capacity and leading towards a biophysical collapse of natural systems. This is not a theory but a reality as the demise of the GCA is now apparent. Any future establishment of a Palestinian State will need to consider adequate territory to lessen the burden of the high density and pressure on local resources.

The misguided notion that nature is resilient

Nature is resilient and one would have concluded, albeit erroneously, that the 18,370 square kilometres vast CA Basin, extending into Egypt, Israel and Palestine, with its most ‘productive zone’ along the Mediterranean coast, would compensate for the high water demands and any compromised quality occurring within Gaza. In conjunction with Israel, this productive zone has an area of about 1600 square kilometres and runs 120 kilometres north, from the Egyptian border to Mt. Carmel National Park in Israel. Again the assumption here could have been that the sheer volume of the productive zone would buffer the much smaller GCA, only 25 percent of the zone. It would then have seemed plausible to think that the contiguous groundwater flow, dilution, aquifer recharge and other factors could still maintain acceptable yields and water quality standards. This however has now been proven wrong; as with other natural factors, hydrogeology is quite complex and aquifer behaviour is controlled by many processes that require analysis, modelling and monitoring.

It is disconcerting that a vast, vital natural feature that has evolved over millions of years can be made dysfunctional in mere decades.

The GCA is the only freshwater supply of Gaza and; in an arid environment, it’s a precious commodity- worth its weight in gold’ one may say. Unfortunately, the current quality and quantity of the GCA has deteriorated and diminished so drastically that it’s now severely impacting the health and well-being of the Palestinian population. A staggering 96+ percent of domestic water supply from the GCA is non-potable—a recipe for an outbreak of water-borne diseases and curtailed longevity. The polluted aquifer water is saline and laden with nitrate and chloride compounds rendering it unsafe for human consumption. The yield of the aquifer has been so perilously diminished by over-pumping that it is now unable to deliver the per capita requirements. The minimum daily water supply per capita set by WHO is 100 litres. Gaza residents however are only able to obtain about 88 litres! The neighbouring State of Israel is said to provide over 200 litres per capita to its citizens!

One of the contributors to the salinity of the GCA has been excess extraction of groundwater. This displaces the so called ‘salt-water wedge’ from the coastline further inland enabling salt water intrusion and consequently a reduction of the ‘aquifer’s’ fresh water volume. In addition the over-pumping lowers the water table causing the overburden to settle and subsidence to occur at the surface.

What also has been disconcerting is the proposal by Israeli Forces to flood the estimated 500 km Hamas tunnels with sea water—unfortunately the undertaking appears to be underway. The tunnels dug deep into a porous overburden and potentially extending into Israel are certainly not water tight and would allow saltwater to percolate down to the aquifer. This would further add to its salinity and that of the ground above. The impact could go beyond a threshold that will burden any potential efforts for the rehabilitation of the GCS and its fresh water quality. In addition the water pumped into the tunnels would act as underground rivers and undermine the ground above resulting, as with over-pumping, in the subsidence of the surface and creation of major structural issues for existing and future infrastructure.

Desalination is not a sustainable solution

The desalination plants although critical in an arid environment create enormous volumes of hyper-saline waste water (brine) that is discharged to the sea. This severely impacts marine life and spikes coastal salinity, invariably adding to the saline level of the CA through salt water intrusion. The brine waste product ranges from 50-75 percent of sea water being treated, depending on the desalination method used. Consequently, over half of the sea water brought into a desalination plant is discharged back as brine. And the brine is not solely laden with salt; it carries heavy metals and chemicals used in the dissolution process that are flushed out as part of the waste flow adding to the environmental impact. Desalination facilities are exceptionally expensive to build and are energy hogs to operate. They are a last-resort for the provision of potable water and one that may need augmentation due to the overexploitation of the GCA. The wealthy oil producing nations of the Middle East are the ones that can best afford them--certainly not an option for the oppressed Gaza, without foreign investment. Furthermore desalination is not a sustainable, environmental solution--safeguarding the fresh water resources on a local and regional basis, in peace and in war, needs to be a priority.

Adding insult to injury is the fact that the GCA over the years has been progressively deprived of recharging and replenishing itself. This has largely occurred due to expanding urbanisation within a constricted area and a record breaking urban density. As a result critical aquifer recharge surfaces have been ‘sealed-over’ by buildings and pavement impeding the infiltration of precipitation and surface waters into surface soils and percolation down to the aquifer below.

Poisoning the land

The cumulative impact of bombs and other explosives used in the current military conflict in Gaza will have a long-term effect on people and the natural environment. Elevated heavy metals, white phosphorus and other carcinogenic metals are released when explosives are detonated. These pollute the air, soils, surface and groundwater including aquifers. Dust from bombed debris entrained with explosive toxins lingers in the air and can migrate over long distances impacting the respiratory system of both local and nearby populations as well as the regional ecosystem.

The critical energy supply (electricity and fuel) cut off by Israel into Gaza has impaired the function of various facilities including sewage treatment plants which consequently discharge untreated sewage directly into the Mediterranean Sea. In Gaza, estimates indicate that in the month of Oct. 2023 alone, some 130,000 c.m. per day of sewage were released untreated. With the sewerage infrastructure damaged by the bombardment, sewage spills onto streets, mixes with stormwater, subsequently infiltrating into porous soils and contaminating wells, in time this makes its way to the aquifers below adding to the contamination of drinking water supplies.

The natural systems know no political boundaries, and the environmental sphere of influence due to the scale of the war in Gaza invariably will also migrate into Israel through aquifer contamination and air quality deterioration; the latter is particularly due to the westerly prevailing winds across Gaza.

Just in the first week of the conflict (post October 7) the Israeli army carpet bombed Gaza, dropping around 1000 bombs per day and carried out more than 10,000 airstrikes by December 10. In addition to the bombing many thousand artillery shells fired into Gaza as well as Israel have added to the misery. In Gaza up to 50 percent of buildings have been destroyed or damaged. According to a recent aerial assessment the bombing of Gaza by Israel ‘is the most destructive of this century’.

Twenty-five thousand metric tons of bombs were dropped on Gaza in the first month alone surpassing the most intense bombing events of WW2. This is the equivalent in weight of the two atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. At the 100-day mark of the conflict, some 25,000 civilians and combatants in Gaza had been killed, over 60,000 injured and 1.2 million residents displaced. These stats in such a short time frame are unprecedented and clearly reflect the scale of destruction in Gaza. Pending a thorough impact analysis in post-conflict, it may take generations to repair the natural environment let alone the infrastructure.

While the perception that genocide is taking place in Gaza is gaining traction worldwide may be debatable but there should be no doubt that an ‘ecocide’ is well under way.

The Reparation of Nature—a call for a Lasting Peace

Decades of conflict and instability in Gaza has been deleterious to natural systems and impacted the health and well-being of its population. It is a clear example of the consequences that await a society when natural constraints and stewardship mandates are ignored be it by internal or external forces. The current conflict between Israel and Palestine has dramatised the perilous state of natural resources particularly water. Availability of local resources is not only of economic benefit but essential in procuring a secure, independent self-sustaining existence. And certainly reliable, clean fresh water supply is fundamental to human life and self-preservation. Indeed it is also a human right.

Can prioritising and restoring nature (at the end of the current conflict) be the piece of the puzzle that has been missing in the quest for a lasting peace between Israel and Palestine? Arguably the survival of nature equals the survival of people, and eventual lasting peace.

Could a mutual reparation of nature, of life-sustaining natural factors, lead to a lasting peace in the region? Can nature’s model of symbiotic relationships foster peace? It has no political boundaries, it’s unprejudiced and it nurtures all! There ought to be no opposition to a unilateral undertaking to protect, restore, enhance and secure the ever essential water resources of the region. A collective impetus for an impartial, mutually beneficial undertaking will lead to reciprocal goodwill. Such will could buttress a religious mandate as well--the scriptures of Judaism and Islam both honour calling for the stewardship of nature--God’s creation.

The ‘rebuilding’ of Gaza will apparently warrant an extraordinary expenditure of over $50 billion. When the budget is eventually set it will be incumbent on all participants to appropriate a realistic sum to the restoration of the natural systems particularly the water resources—it is after all a humanitarian imperative. To this end, an integrated ‘Ecological Plan’ is envisioned for Gaza and neighbouring Israeli lands that are ecologically interrelated. It is hoped that a substantive effort to repair and mitigate the natural environment will not only lead to enhanced health and well-being of people but also foster a lasting peace in the region.