CONTEMPORARY EURASIA VIII (2) ContEurVIII2 | Page 103

SHOGHIK TADEVOSYAN
were given equality in terms of the number of representatives,
opportunities, and obligations. Similarly, due to the International Water
Law, both sides were given equal right, that is the Palestinians’
compliance with the principle of “no significant harm” and Israel’s
conformity to the principle of “equal and reasonable utilization” of
water resources. 65 However, the gap here between theory and reality
should be highlighted.
Although the JWC was initially called upon to coordinate Israeli-
Palestinian water relations over shared water resources and to bring about
cooperation between them, the asymmetry is so significant that it is not a
way of “cooperation.”Perhaps it can be called “asymmetric cooperation,”
if such a thing is possible. Thus, the Palestinians, by signing the Oslo II
Agreement and agreeing to its terms, entered into the game conforming
tothe rules of the game determined by Israel (see Tables 2 and 3).
Relative ideational power asymmetry
Supremacy in the ideational or discursive power context should be
added to all the above-mentioned asymmetries, which, as already
mentioned, is an essential component to have influence and to avoid
explicit confrontation. Israel has managed to create a number of
narratives to some extent justify its actions. The Israeli narratives are
important tools to hide the realities on the ground.
In a nutshell, the stories created by Israel, which it has applied, can
be presented as follows. First, Israel is a dry country, and it needs more
water to meet its population’s needs. Second, as a result of constant

65 Jan Selby, “Cooperation, Domination and Colonisation: The Israeli-Palestinian Joint
Water Committee,” Water Alternatives 6, no. 1 (2013): 1-24.
103