Follow us on social

Dry

When Saudi Arabia comes to town and buys all your water

Oil is not the only issue: the Kingdom is getting Arizona resources for a steal, and it's leaving citizens with little to nothing.

Analysis | Middle East

Over the past several years, Saudi Arabia has added eight new wells, increasing production to new heights and even leading to accusations of over-pumping. No, not at the Ghawar oil field, but in the groundwater of rural Arizona. 

Since 2014, the Saudi company Fondomonte has been pumping unlimited amounts of groundwater in the desert west of Phoenix to harvest thousands of acres of alfalfa crops. The alfalfa is then shipped back to Saudi Arabia to feed their cattle. 

But a recent investigation from Arizona Central has revealed that Fondomonte, a subsidiary of Riyadh-based Almarai, has the bargain of a lifetime: for only $25 per acre annually, it can pump as much water as it wants. Nearby farmers pay six times more than the Saudi company. 

This modern day watergate has become a campaign issue ahead of the contentious midterms but candidates across the ballot appear to agree that this is bad. Democratic candidate Katie Hobbs tweeted that “Our water should be for Arizonans, not for sweetheart deals to foreign corporations to grow crops to then send back to their country.” Republican candidate Kari Lake has even gone a step further, calling to terminate the Fondomonte lease and “examine all existing leases to ensure Arizona’s water and natural resources primarily benefit Arizonans, not overseas corporations.” 

Other companies are taking advantage of this fire sale on precious water resources in rural Arizona too, including alfalfa farms affiliated with the UAE and plenty of domestic companies. But Fondomonte is among the largest and most controversial — because it is actually depleting the groundwater of the Butler Valley, a valuable transfer basin that is seen as a potential water supply for Phoenix.  

Fondomonte’s Butler Valley property is part of a larger strategy of buying up land across the Southwest for alfalfa production. The Saudi company owns thousands of acres across Arizona and has expanded operations in Eastern California.

The Arizona State Land Department, which leased the land to Fondomonte, refuses to disclose how much water Fondomonte is pumping, or whether the state would consider charging more for agricultural leases. According to one estimate, the company could be pumping as much as 18,000 acre-feet per year — enough to supply 54,000 single-family homes — raising concerns that the groundwater will disappear faster than it can be replenished. Alfalfa is one of the most water-intensive crops there is, and the current breakneck pace of production is threatening to stop the flow of the Colorado River entirely. 

To Arizonans, the one-sided deal with the Saudi company has become a hot-button issue, particularly since Saudi Arabia dictates global oil prices. “We’re not getting oil for free, so why are we giving our water away for free?” asked La Paz County Board of Supervisors Chairman Holly Irwin, who represents Butler Valley. “Saudi Arabia has stated their intention to rob Airzonans at the gas pump, but they are already stealing our water,” said Rep. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.). 

Ironically, lawmakers should look to none other than Saudi Arabia to learn from their mistakes. Saudi Arabia has almost completely exhausted its own groundwater through unrestricted pumping. A 2004 investigation found that the kingdom’s water sources were nearly depleted because “wealthy farmers had been allowed to drain the aquifers unchecked for three decades.” As the wells dried up, Saudi Arabia has been forced to take conservation much more seriously, even outlawing the production of alfalfa in 2016. Today, around 50 percent of water consumed in Saudi Arabia comes from desalination plants, a costly, high-energy process. 

Having depleted their own water resources back home, Saudi Arabia knows the dangerous consequences of unsustainable agricultural practices. Why should they — or any other company for that matter — be allowed to do the same in the American Southwest? 


design 36/shutterstock
Analysis | Middle East
Mike Waltz: Drop Ukraine draft age to 18
Top Photo: Incoming National Security Advisor Mike Waltz on ABC News on January 12, 2025

Mike Waltz: Drop Ukraine draft age to 18

QiOSK

Following a reported push from the Biden administration in late 2024, Mike Waltz - President-elect Donald Trump’s NSA pick - is now advocating publicly that Ukraine lower its draft age to 18, “Their draft age right now is 26 years old, not 18 ... They could generate hundreds of thousands of new soldiers," he told ABC This Week on Sunday.

Ukraine needs to "be all in for democracy," said Waltz. However, any push to lower the draft age is unpopular in Ukraine. Al Jazeera interviewed Ukrainians to gauge the popularity of the war, and raised the question of lowering the draft age, which had been suggested by Biden officials in December. A 20-year-old service member named Vladislav said in an interview that lowering the draft age would be a “bad idea.”

keep readingShow less
Zelensky, Trump, Putin
Top photo credit: Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky (Office of Ukraine President/Creative Commons); US President Donald Trump (Gabe Skidmore/Creative Commons) and Russian President Vladimir Putin (World Economic Forum/Creative Commons)

Trump may get Russia and Ukraine to the table. Then what?

Europe

Russia’s dismissive response to possible provisions of a Trump settlement plan floated in Western media underscores how difficult the path to peace in Ukraine will be. It also highlights one of the perils of an approach to diplomacy that has become all too common in Washington: proposing settlement terms in advance of negotiations rather than first using discreet discussions with adversaries and allies to gauge what might be possible.

To achieve an accord that Ukraine will embrace, Russia will respect, and Europe will support, Trump will have to revive a tradition of American statesmanship — balancing power and interests among capable rivals — that has been largely dormant since the Cold War ended, and U.S. foreign policy shifted its focus toward democratizing other nations and countering terrorism.

keep readingShow less
Tulsi Gabbard
Top photo credit: Former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, President-elect Trump’s nominee to be Director of National Intelligence, is seen in Russell building on Thursday, December 12, 2024. (Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call/Sipa USA)

Tulsi Gabbard vs. the War Party

Washington Politics

Not long after Donald Trump nominated Tulsi Gabbard to serve as his director of national intelligence (DNI), close to 100 former national security officials signed a letter objecting to her appointment, accusing her of lacking experience and having “sympathy for dictators like Vladimir Putin and [Bashar al-]Assad.”

Trump has now made many controversial foreign policy nominations that stand at odds with his vows to end foreign wars and prioritize peace and domestic problems — including some who are significantly less experienced than Gabbard — yet only the former Hawaiian Congresswoman has received this level of pushback from the national security establishment so far.

keep readingShow less

Trump transition

Latest

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.