Who will save the Dead Sea from dying?

The Dead Sea: The salt deposits are a wonderful sight but the sea is in danger of drying up soon beyond the sustainable limit. The water level is hitting dangerous record lows, losing almost a meter per year. The lake surface presently is nearly 400 meters (1,300 feet) below sea level, making it the lowest spot on Earth.



Lately the shopping centers around the world are flooded with a new generation of cosmetic products prepared with chemicals and minerals from the Dead Sea: Facial creams, Lotions, Body mud, Bath salt, Scrubs, Balms, Herbal sachets etc. The healing power of these products seems to have reached a universal marketing network and has legions of consumers.



And yet, paradoxically, the Dead Sea itself is dying. It may well dry up within fifty years if water is not replenished to raise the level, but no one seems to do much about it.



Healing skins and offering a fresh healthy skin to women are laudable objectives to achieve. No one denies that. Excavating and selling tons and tons of potash and other minerals is very helpful to the Israeli and Jordanian economies. Building new luxurious hotels and spas all around the Dead Sea seems sound investments as they keep the tourists coming to heal their bodies and minds.



However, the fundamental question is still not addressed after decades of discussion and inaction: Who will save the Dead Sea from totally drying up?





The Dead Sea shrinking water levels have already split it into two non communicating lobes. The Jordan River from the North is bringing in less and less water to the lake due to extensive irrigation projects. Both Israel (left) and Jordan (right) are not doing nothing substantial to save the Sea. Also note the totally arid landscape. Deep waters are dark blue, while pale blue shows salt ponds and shallow wetlands to the south.



The Dead Sea is a small lake, presently between Jordan and the occupied West Bank and Israel proper. Beside being the lowest point on earth, about 420m (1380 ft) below sea level, it is also one of the saltiest lakes in the world. The surrounding areas is mostly very arid mountains, with many visible man made and natural caves both for human settlements and more recent military purposes. The lake and the area is extremely rich a wide range of chemicals and minerals, most importantly potash that is extensively used in manufacturing fertilizers as well as magnesium etc. And of course those magic and not so magic cosmetic products flooding the world markets.



But here are some very disturbing data about the lake:



-The Dead Sea has been shrinking at the rate of one meter per year and could completely dry up within the next 50 years if substantial water is not brought in.

-The water level has receded from 394 metres below sea level in 1960s to 420 meters below sea level today.

-The surface area has shrunk by at least 33 per cent over the last 56 years, roughly from 950 square kilometers to 637 square kilometers.

-The average annual inflow has decreased from 1,200 million cubic meters of water to around 250 million cubic meters as water from the Jordan river and other feeder streams are diverted for irrigation and industry.

-Dead Sea water is about ten times more saline than ocean water and that salinity increases as the water evaporates and the level decreases. Needless to say that the Dead Sea is called "dead" because there is practically no plants and fish due to the extreme salinity. That makes it a very fragile and unique in every sense.





Dead Sea Scrolls: They were found near Wadi Qumran in eleven caves between 1947 and 1956. Some of these priceless first century documents were sold on the local flea market for a few dollars! They consist of about 900 biblical texts written on parchment and papyrus by a Jewish sect in the northwest region of the Dead Sea. They were discovered by an Arab shepherd who accidentally fell into one of the caves.







The Dead Sea has only one significant tributary: the Jordan River / Sea of Galilee channel. In the mid 20th century, about 1.5 billion cubic meters used to find its way to the Dead Sea. Today that volume is down to only about 5-10%,because of dams, canals, irrigation and other human uses and abuses. Rainfall in that very arid region is only around 100mm/year that mostly evaporates and does not help refill the Dead Sea.

Tragically, there has been no coordinated system of water development and responsible management in the region. Israel and Jordan have historically pursued their own selfish water development projects independent of one another, competing for the same very scarce resources.







Salt and other minerals are free to take. Help yourself, but do not forget to bring a shovel to join the party!





Granted, there is no easy and cheap way to fix the problem and save the Dead Sea. Israeli and Jordanian commitment to a large scale projects such as either the "Mediterranean-Dead Sea'' or "Red Sea-Dead Sea" canals is becoming urgent to implement. The project to pump water from the Red Sea looks the more plausible than the Mediterranean option, but Jordan surely can not afford it alone.





Pumping sea water to the Dead Sea may be very costly but is relatively easy in engineering terms. The 400 m altitude difference between the Red Sea and the Dead Sea will be of great help. Sea water will have to be pumped, desalinized and sent to the Dead Sea, possibly with some hydro electrical stations built along the way. The project may be totally within the Jordanian borders, which complicates the funding and sharing of the cost burden with Israel, the Palestinian authority and the International community. 



On the other hand a project to use water from the Mediterranean may also be feasible but will involve very complicated sets of agreements and legal wranglings between the constantly feuding concerned parties.

















Dead Sea Marketing: Cosmetics, hotels, spas, mass tourism are flourishing. Fertilizer components are shipped around the globe by the tons. But at this rate there will not be much left soon to advertise those "magic" products as the water is evaporating fast. The Dead Sea is in fact moribund.







Environmental questions also remain as to how to regulate the Dead Sea water salt content and preserve its very unique constitution and habitat despite all the planned sea water inflow. There is the issue of a chemical incompatibility of the waters. Some studies even raise questions about the the impact of pumping water from the Red sea on the fragile coral reefs there (in the Gulf of Aqaba).

 

Depending on which solution is eventually adopted, the Palestinian Authority must also be consulted and made a partner in any mega project to save the Dead Sea. The concerted efforts of such very "friendly" bodies such as Israel, the Palestinian authorities and Jordan does not inspire much hope.



The issue is extremely urgent, the project is feasible, yet the multi billion dollar funds and the political will to implement anything is lacking. The international community does have a leadership role to play to make such a project work in that volatile area, but not much is done except consultations and promises.

This is a messy situation with no easy solution in sight. Too many cooks in the kitchen and the food is already burning.













Floating on the Dead Sea is easy. Even certified non- swimmers such as myself would float in a water with 34% salt content with such extreme buoyancy!





Visitors around the world have been coming to this natural wonder for thousands of years. The Dead Sea is unique both as a natural wonder and as a historical world monument. Endless communities have lived and found home and refuge around it since prehistorical times. John the Baptist baptized Jesus in the now almost dry Jordan river, and today he would have found pretty difficult to gather enough water for such an act.

The Dead Sea is moribund, there may not be left that much to see in a relatively short time. Therefore, I count myself among the lucky.









© Krikor Tersakian August 2009

What if Malthus was right? The world needs to double food production in next 50 years or else...

Super rich and Super poor: Stunning and disgusting contrast in Sao Paolo: The rich and their private balconies complete with swimming pools and excellent views on the shantytown next door!





In his book "Essay on the Principle of Population" (1798), the English economist and demographer Thomas Malthus (1766-1834) claimed that the human population was increasing every twenty-five years in a geometrical ratio (that is 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, 256…), while the food supply was increasing only in an arithmetical ratio (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8...).



While the world population doubles every now and then, food resources show a much more modest rise, far less than what is needed to feed the extra masses. Malthus claimed that this huge disparity will always exist no matter what, and that is the root of the major problems humanity will always face. The world's population today stands at more than 6 bl, will hit 7bl in 2012 and 9bl in 2040 but very unequally distributed over the continents. (Note: The first billion milestone was reached in 1827. Since then the population explosion to 7 bl is absurd and non sustainable. Malthus wrote his book even before the world had reached the 1 bln mark).



Malthus argued that the supply of food production and our capacity to increase it is a much weaker force than the huge and constant population growth. Therefore wars, poverty, famine, disease, epidemics and other calamities decimating human lives are just understandable and natural consequences of this constant food shortage. These human tragedies are the only way to keep the population in check and hence balance our numbers with the actual food supply.





Very thirsty: Humans are not the only ones suffering from the water shortages. Endless wars were fought over water supplies. For example, the Near East countries from Turkey to Israel and surrounding Arab nations have all strained inter-relations over water disputes. Wars are anticipated for the control of fresh water supplies.





Malthus published his views from 1789 until 1826 with several editions and additions of his famous book. He explained clearly his views about subsistence level principles and wage pressures on the economic realities. he concluded that it was becoming essential to engage in a serious struggle for survival for each individual, society and by extension nation.







His underlying conclusion was that however we try, the population growth will keep exerting even more pressure on the overall system resulting in the human catastrophes. In other words, prosperity will always be distributed in a very unequal way, poverty will never be eradicated, widespread hunger and constant wars over resources (water, land, oil, mines etc) will ensure the right natural "balance".



Malthus’ theories and axioms greatly influenced people like Darwin, Adam Smith and major political leaders around the world both from the left and the right. Darwin's views in "The Origin of Species" were most influenced by Thomas Robert Malthus and his ideas.



Nationalist extremists and colonialists used his theories as proof of their "vision" for survival and need for aggressive and illegal territorial expansions. The rather distorted concept of "vital living space" or Lebensraum" was professed by Adolf Hitler as an official excuse for the need more "German" land. He saw his aggressions in the light of survival for his nation by annihilating others.



Leftist philosophers and political thinkers like Marx and Engels did not approve of Malthus and accused him of justifying the abuse of the working class by the capitalist forces. They counter argued that the working classes remain poor because of the abuses and not natural forces.





Thomas Malthus: Famine, disease, massacres, poverty and wars etc. are only normal and will always be with us to limit population and even out with the food supply. Love him or hate him, Malthus was an exceptional thinker and he may well have the last "laugh". . A major catastrophe in many regions may be on the horizon if food production is not almost doubled in a few decades.



Basically Malthus was accused of being a negative thinker devoid of any moral values and a proponent of theories of gloom and doom. He was seen as someone excusing such things as child labor for survival, capitalist abuses, megalomaniac leaders and proponents of an unjust world. Malthus was stating what he perceived as a universal truth that will always hold true. Malthus' theory specifically states that increases in productivity is never enough to keep pace with the population growth, so the only solution is positive voluntary population check, such as birth control, celibacy, abortion etc. A good illustration is China’s strict quotas for children per family: a very Malthusian policy to avoid large scale catastrophe.



Despite all the opposition, Malthus remains an unequaled force in the history of human thought and his axioms are very difficult to ignore or discard. Moreover time may definitely be on his side as the humans exert more and more pressure on the planet's increasingly scarce resources and our failure to increase food production proportionally to the population increase.



Safe drinking water: About a fifth of humanity lacks access, according to United Nations data, while 44 percent of the world's population live in areas affected by high water stress, and this figure is expected to increase to 47% by 2030.



Economic theories can be dismissed as just theories, but Malthus nailed in the sad truth: Humans multiply too fast for our planet. We are too successful for our own good. Therefore we better accept the idea that all the horrible things like poverty, vice, corruption, famine and bloodshed are a direct result of our own genetic unchecked growth potential and biological aggressiveness.



If food and resources fall in short supply and therefore only war, famine, disease and other natural consequences keep the human number in check, then are men good in nature like some philosophers such as Jean Jacques Rousseau and many others believe? Do constant killings and wars all justifiable in the context of survival?



According to some British studied published lately in Kent, England, the next 50 years will be extremely challenging for humans in general in terms of food production with enough quantities at a reasonable pricing. Basically, the world needs to almost double its food output and the only way to really boost that is by major technological breakthroughs. One such technology is the GM (genetically modified foods).





Very Hungry: line ups will definitely grow longer: Food shortages are here to stay and they will get worse according to the demographic projections. Famines are inevitable to check the growth in numbers.



The Genetically Modified foods are crops that have traits altered by the addition of DNA from a different organism. They are vegetables, fruits and field crops and the different ways in which they can be altered to protect them from disease, harsh weather, long distance travel etc.



Enhancing desired traits in food crops as well as domesticated animals is as old as the earliest human settlements. Since ancient times, farmers used the process of artificial selection to grow plants with desired qualities and breed better and more efficient animals. However these methods are time consuming and it is very difficult to introduce new traits into a specific population. In contrast, using genetic engineering, scientists can take the gene that controls the trait from one organism and insert it into another organism that does not have the gene to make it better. GM and other modern technologies may face opposition, but reality will soon sink in and necessity will give in to ideological opposition.







"Stop Monsanto" sign in a field and the Genetically Modified Food technology it represents. Is the American giant firm just an easy target or do they really represent a real threat to humanity? Malthusian theory may well give Monsanto reason. The world will soon experience an increasing food costs, along with energy and environmental dire realities. Some activists see the new technologies as evil but they have no positive proposals.





The total arable land in the world does not necessarily increase. Therefore the crop yields per area should increase considerably through better seeds, smarter fertilizers, better management and cutting losses to disease and parasites. Managing limited water resources and checking the emission of greenhouse gases resulting from farming activities of all sorts are other major challenges. The non renewable nature of fossil fuels and finding alternative energy sources are the major tests ahead.

Can the future be bright and can the World avoid major Catastrophes as predicted by Malthus? Unfortunately he may well have the last laugh, as our march toward the 10 billion "milestone" is only a few of decades away.



© Krikor Tersakian, Montreal, Canada

First Anniversary of Georgia's bloodied nose

Georgia's ill fated attempt to reclaim South Ossetia and Abkhazia was a total disaster. Was it wrong advice from "friends" or just an Indiana Jones style adventure from Tbilisi? Russia did not lose time to crush the over optimistic Georgians and practically annex South Ossetia and Abkhazia. Click on map to enlarge.

August 7-8, 2008 were memorable days.

The whole world was glued to the TV sets for the stunning opening ceremony of the Beijing Olympics. The "Bird's Nest", or the Beijing National Stadium had become the epicenter of the world.

Yet on practically the same day, the tiny Caucasian state of Georgia had launched massive attacks on the secessionist South Ossetia province, directly challenging Russia. The timing of the Georgian attack was very bizarre and intriguing: A major offensive within a few hours of the Beijing Olympics opening ceremonies? What was going on and who was really pushing for such a suicidal showdown?

The Georgian government claimed it was only responding to the constant shelling and intimidation from South Ossetia and was forced to send in its tanks to retake the rebel-held regional capital Tsikavali. Tbilisi wanted to swiftly reoccupy South Ossetia, but this large scale offensive was bizarre both in its timing and the ultra optimism about its possible success. Moscow did not find all this funny and the Russian Bear got ready to pounce back, and it did.



Georgia's tensions with Russia and the two breakaway regions have always been high since the collapse of the Soviet Union, but they became even higher ever since Mikhael Saakashvili came to power on 25 January 2004. The new President was determined to move Georgia much closer to the Western sphere and out of the Russian zone of influence, as if Russia did not exist next door. Georgia demanded the closure of all Russian military bases on its territories, put itself firmly in the Western camp, established supposedly very close ties with the "Oil and Gas obsessed" Bush administration and even applied to join NATO as a full member state: this was the ultimate insult to Russia.



Georgia's anti Russian stance since the fall of the Soviet empire was amplified by the training of the Georgian troops by some 170 NATO military advisers and were supplied with Western military fatigues and some military hardware. The Georgians obviously came to have a highly overestimated and distorted image of their new military might and political support from the forces opposing Russia. And that proved to be a fatal miscalculation.



Mr Saakashvili was also eagerly waiting for the day he would try to bring a military solution to the Ossetia and Abkhazia problems and restore Tbilisi's authority over these regions once and for all, just like he had successfully done in Adjaria-Batumi in 2004. (Important to note that Adjaria has no common borders with Russia, an crucial fact in Georgia's military success).







The message from this Russian soldier to the Georgians is finger clear. The picture is of a Russian convoy on the battlefront. The Russian easily crushed all forms of organised Georgian armed resistance.





Moscow's response was pretty swift, with mounting pressure to destabilize the Georgian Government through South Ossetia and of Abkhazia, which both share long borders and close ties with Russia. Moscow claimed to be under the obligation to defend the Russian citizens of these provinces and moved towards the recognition of these regions as "independent". Just like the West had acted to recognize the legitimacy of Kosovo's Independence from Serbia. Therefore the rationale was straight forward:If the West can recognize a separate Kosovo, then why not recognize independent Ossetia and Abkhazia? Georgia called all these developments as "shameless land grabs", while Moscow called them "self determination of these freedom seeking Russian citizens".



The war between the two looked inevitable, but few expected Saakashvili to send in his troops first! The ant attacking the elephant type of a mismatch.



In any case, something went wrong with president Saakashvili's entourage, when he decided to force a war. He had indeed timed this military attacks to coincide with the Olympics despite the claims otherwise, but that looked a bit like a medieval military strategy. Countries used to attack enemy states when the other King was away for a while on a hunting expedition in the remote woods or attending a prince's week long wedding festivities...



Vladimir Putin was in fact in Beijing when the news of the attacks broke out, but he did not waste any time to fly to the conflict zone and assume direct control of the events and assume the driver's seat. Within a few hours Moscow had already moved in. The Russian army recaptured South Ossetia and the tanks were on their way to Gori, into Georgia proper. The Russians soon cut the main road linking the capital Tbilisi to the ports on the Black Sea. All significant military and strategic sites in Georgia were bombarded and the country's fragile infrastructure heavily damaged or simply occupied. The Russian Black Sea fleet imposed a total maritime embargo. Poti and the nearby town of Seneki were taken. Russian troops reached the outskirts of Tbilisi and established checkpoints. The Tbilisi international airport was shut down, while the military airfields of Marneuli and Vaziani were heavily bombed.



Like in most wars, the civilian populations paid the ultimate price, as tens of thousands were ethnically cleansed and expelled from their homes. More than 400 people lost their lives, thousands injured and many more lost their homes and were unfortunately displaced.

A Georgian woman holding her baby cries over her damaged home in Gori, Georgia, just outside the breakaway province of South Ossetia Aug. 10, 2008. (David Mdzinarishvili/Reuters)









Georgia was practically fragmented into pieces and Tbilisi government was reduced to a mere scared spectator's role, hiding in underground shelters and arranging for the occasional candlelight press conferences to the media.



Naturally the war affected the whole region. Landlocked Armenia was deeply affected, as that neighbouring country's main supply and transit routes pass through Georgia and Poti's harbour in particular. The security of Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline was also endangered, which made some people in Washington very nervous!



Same story in Abkhazia, where the secessionist forces took total control of all the disputed territories and expelled the collapsing Georgian regulars from the disputed and highly strategic Kodori Gorge (see map). They reasserted their absolute independence from Tbilisi and reaffirmed their strategic alignment with Mother Russia.



The short war turned out to be very ugly, a brutal lesson in regional "real-politics". Moscow was in no joking mood and sent a very loud and clear message: "Do not mess with me in my own historical backyard, and that includes the Caucasus". The same message to NATO was also crystal clear: "Better know your limits, because we are going to set them in any case!"



The war ended in August 17, and by that time there was not much left to fight for.



Either Tbilisi was badly misled by its over enthusiastic patrons and allies, or it had decided to adopt a fatalistic "It's now or never'' type of cow-boy approach to re-establish its authority over south Ossetia and Abkhazia. The jury is still out, but the real reasons for such adventurous approach were probably a mix of the two scenarios.





Who looks more scared: Georgian President Saakashvili or his bodyguards?

Note the use of NATO sub-machine guns as opposed to the classical Russian AK-47s, as part of Georgia's deliberate "Western" image remake.







The war was indeed short and very unequal. The total capitulation of Georgia was not surprising. Rather more surprising was Moscow's swift and determined response as well as the lack of any tangible support from Georgia's supposed allies in the West. Tbilisi's flirtation with NATO and especially Washington was exposed to its bare bones and Saakashvili had nowhere to hide. Moscow could have taken him down along with his government, but chose to spare his life and not to topple the Government. Tens of thousands of Georgian refugees were not as fortunate as their well spoken but obviously so wise president. They are still suffering today.



As a result, South Ossetia and Abkhazia became even more independent than before. The Georgian army will need years to rebuild itself and its credibility as a viable fighting force. The country's infrastructure was heavily damaged and a huge humanitarian problem. Not many positives for Georgia.

Most observers blame Saakashvili for this catastrophe. The United States and NATO could not do much except for sending couple of warships with "humanitarian aid'' to support the victimised Georgian brothers. Tbilisi's government was reminded something most seventh graders around the world would know: You do not mess with Russia in his own backyard, otherwise you will get a very bloodied nose, crippled arms and an amputated leg or two.

Georgia cried foul and blamed the separatist movements, but her own treatment of Georgia"s minorities does not inspire much confidence. The very sorry state of the Armenian minority in the southern Javakhk-Akhalkalaki region is another serious case of concern. Tbilisi needs to have a hard look in the mirror before formulating any kind of accusations of separatism toward the want away minorities. Javakhk’s Armenians face almost systematic discrimination, their churches confiscated and converted, schools forgotten and the region's already archaic infrastructure abandoned. There is a state of total desolation and neglect of Javakhk's socio-economic situation, in a concerted effort to alter that province’s ethnic composition and assimilate the population into "mainstream" Georgian.





President Serge Sarkisyan of Armenia greeting his Georgian counterpart in Yerevan. Saakashvili assured that he is sparing no efforts to improve the treatment of the Armenian minority in Georgia, but concrete results are scarce. Some felt that Armenia gave the Georgian President too much respect he did not fully deserve. Armenia is landlocked, badly needs Georgia for most external trade and transit and suffered huge financial losses because of the war. The borders with Turkey and Azerbaijan are closed due to embargo and conflict.





So what was the mystery behind Georgia's ill-fated adventures? Were there promised political as well as military support which failed to materialize? Did Saakashvili think that his western education, fluent English language skills, media savvy approach and CNN-friendly sound bites would be enough to stop the Russian tanks from crushing his troops and destroying his country?



Now Saakashvili can certainly kiss goodbye to South Ossetia and Abkhazia, both firmly attached to Russia. His very risky poker move backfired and his allies and advisers did not have a plan B to rescue him from losing face and territory. On the eve of the war's first anniversary, a NATO spokesman in Brussels even announced that "Georgia is not yet ready for NATO membership", an admission of total failure.





Both NATO and Uncle Sam were reduced to marginal observers while Putin was firmly in the driver's seat.





Even American vice president Joseph Biden's recent address to the Tbilisi Parliament could not mask the plain and painful truth. Financial aid to reconstruct Georgia may pour in from the West but that is not enough to stop Russian tanks or retake lost territories. There are definite limits of what Washington and NATO can accomplish in the Caucasus. All the flag raising ceremonies, bonfires, candle vigils marking the first anniversary of the war will not do much in terms of getting South Ossetia and Abkhazia back.



As Elton John would sing:



It's sad, so sad,

It's a sad, sad situation,

And it's getting more and more absurd.

Oh it seems to me that sorry seems to be the hardest word.

© Krikor Tersakian,  Aug 5, 2009