by Seyoum Teshome Akele
The Nile case has again started becoming hot among riparian nations, particularly Egypt and Ethiopia, and somehow Sudan, too. This is not the first time we (Ethiopians) happened to witness this kind of superfluous confrontation as well as naïve ownership claim, especially by Egypt, not fully understanding yet the nature and complexity of River Nile, like any other shared international rivers. The first being some 8 or so years back. And the second was again in 2009/10 when most of the upstream countries, including Ethiopia, signed the Cooperative Framework Agreement (CFA) towards creating a more equitable share (and ownership) in using and managing the Nile waters even if it had been really dragged as Egypt kept using different techniques to its deferment.
Here I will focus on some important contributing factors/aspects, including legal perspectives, but setting aside what Egyptian politicians and their water resource “experts” started multiplying, i.e., the use of “power” and “legal” means, in maintaining Egypt’s dominant share of the Nile waters. Also, I’ll see the relationship between Egypt and Ethiopia, and how it has affected the water use for over centuries. And lastly, I will highlight possible ways of addressing the problem of sharing the Nile River, from a scientific perspective, not just among the key stakeholders, in this case Egypt, Ethiopia and Sudan, but among other co-riparian states too. Because, the River is by its nature the longest and covers as many countries as 10 with an estimated total population of 300 million.
First, Egypt has been until recently succeeding in influencing any water use and development projects in Ethiopia with the help of its influencing power through its well-established links (with donor nations) as well as overly representation or presence in the international institutions such as the World Bank, IMF and the UN. Whereas, Ethiopia has been poorly represented internationally, especially in lending institutions, water institutions, seminars and conferences where stakeholders’ views are shared and taken into account while designing water guiding policies, principles, frameworks and agreements with regard to the allocation of resources (mainly financial and technical) despite the fact that Ethiopia is the major water contributor to its transboundary rivers–particularly Nile towards which it contributes as much water as 86 percent. Of course this poor representation within the most influential global actors such as the World Bank and the UN is not unique to Ethiopia, but to other poor countries in Africa and Asia, proving how injustice and greed rule the world!
Second, Egypt has also managed to clinging over the colonial treaties (1929) which gave Egypt not only in exploiting the largest possible Nile water share ever, but it also gave her the right to veto over any upstream water projects. Accordingly, Egypt has been a hydro-hegemonic state capable of dominating the river basin as a whole.
Third, Ethiopia’s continued civil war and seemingly never-ending internal problem coupled with conflicts in the horn that Egypt has always been involved (be it direct or indirect one, as it was proved in their recent live transmission as if we did not know them yet) gave Egypt the upper hand in sustaining monopolistic use of Nile. Up until now, it is probably in Ethiopia where there are a number of insurgents and strong opposition due to the undemocratic and oppressive nature of the government in power. And here, in my view, the ruling party, more appropriately Woyane, takes the full responsibility. That is why as big a national issue as “Yehidasew Gidib”, where every citizen should have a greater stake on, has been totally politicized and subjected to criticism!
Who would trust a government that betrayed the people and the country—making us landlocked while fighting a senseless war with our brothers and sisters in Eritrea, ceding a great deal of land to Sudan, killing Agnuanks, systematic killing and massive displacement of ethnic Amharas, jailing and harassing ethnic Ormos, Journalists, Opposition members, Activists, etc. Because if we were more stable and democratic, then we would have avoided the loopholes that foreign enemies, such as Egypt, have been able to take advantage of. Even the dam itself has become one of the most controversial issue simply because the government is unrepresentative and least accountable. Otherwise, I stand on my ground that no one will ever dare to oppose any development—especially on Blue Nile (Abay) that we Ethiopians have grown with a great sense of anger and madness for not being able to use it to feed ourselves while others in the downstream have managed to build their economy, and even gone as far as making it appear to be part of their own historical identity.
Nevertheless, thanks to the change in the geo-politics of the horn (including the independence of the Southern Sudan, here partly thanks to the Dergue regime) as well as presence of alternative sources of funding (China), now there is a clear indicator that the power has already been shifting from the downstream (Egypt) to upstream countries. That is why perhaps Egyptian sounded like arrogant and uninformed decision makers who came out mad and frustrated (I know it is their turn!), through their own media, and tell the world that they are terrorist who would like to bomb another sovereign country’s dam or anything they believe is good to cause a destruction. The funny part Egypt thinks Nile is all about Egypt, and sometimes about Ethiopia and Egypt. But, the fact is, it is all about at least the 160,000,000 people who live within the entire basin or 300,000,000 (in the long term) people in the basin countries (Burundi, the DRC, Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Rwanda, Sudan, South Sudan, Tanzania and Uganda)–who would eventually need to use their fair share of the Nile for their socio-economic development. Because, in reality, no one would like to charity his only left money and go hungry while awaiting the alms of others. That would of course be too heavenly, which we happened to have been doing that for Egyptians until now, but not anymore! You Egyptians are too avaricious!
After all, who are the Egyptians to tell us that we should sit and live on less than a dollar a day while they are enjoying with a per capita GNP of at least 1300 USD! Who are they to do whatever they would like in the downstream (including the 1959 quota agreement with Sudan, excluding Ethiopia and the rest basin countries) yet they object any upstream water use which was even signed by the majority of the riparian states in 2010? They also claim that they have got a legal right, which doesn’t existing at all given none of these countries ratified it. Yes there are guiding principles on how to share transboundary rivers, but not as such a golden rules that one needs to strictly abide by. If there were, the Egyptians would have been again the ones to lose as they violate those principles. In fact the UN Convention that Egypt itself did not sign, and so did Ethiopia, reads as follows:
“The 1997 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Non-Navigational Uses of International Watercourses is the only treaty governing shared freshwater resources that is of universal applicability. It is a framework convention, in the sense that it provides a framework of principles and rules that may be applied and adjusted to suit the characteristics of particular international watercourses. Some key guiding principles set out in the document include: the equitable and reasonable utilization of international watercourses; the application of appropriate measures to prevent harm to other States sharing an international watercourse; and the principle of prior notification of planned measures. For the Convention to become legally binding, at least 35 nations must ratify it.”
There is no country on planet Earth that lets its water flow untouched for the sake of people down the stream. I must quote what a US hydrologist who did so much field work on Blue Nile (Abay) has said, “it makes no sense at all that America has to use up all its water sources, leaving almost nothing to flow down to Mexico, and on the other hand Ethiopian farmers have to go hungry while the richest and longest river flows in their neighborhood only to nourish lives in Egypt.’’ Who are Egyptians to tell us that water development such as hydroelectric dam will reduce their water flow and hence we should revert to the erratic rainfall while they have done nothing to conserve and reduce waste from the water that is already out there in their forsaken dams and agricultural fields?
According to Food and Agricultural Organization(FAO), Egypt is actually having 20 billion cubic meter water sources (such as underground, rain water, waste, reuse of agricultural drainage, etc.) besides to the 55.5 billion cubic meter which was allocated in its 1959 agreement with Sudan. And out of these, much is used for agriculture (the most water consuming) activities. Yet, they want to oppose a dam which is believed to be a very efficient and effective way of regulating the water itself as it reduces siltation apart from its being very less prone to evaporation, unlike to what is the case in Cairo (Aswan Dam).
Now it is time for Egypt to recognize the shift in power, and hence benefit from cooperation than trying their terrorist style of destabilizing Ethiopia (including causing bloodshade between Muslim and Christian Ethiopians who have a long history of peaceful coexistence–the Agaro slaughtering of priests and kids while they were in church service in 2007/8 is a case in point). War has never been and will never be an option to dealing with a shared water resource, but COOPERATION. Because it is practically impossible for Egypt to concur Ethiopia (which is the only way, though never a viable option, to control Blue Nile-Abay in Ethiopia, so to speak). Of course, according to researches, no country has fought a war over water, other than Israeli that did occupy Palestine for the sake of Water. Even if it happens to be initiated, perhaps for political purpose, from both sides, definitely the loser is going to be Egypt. I did not mean in terms of casualties (which would cost us so much, because we have been in war almost since our very existence—and every Ethiopian has that sense of nationalistic bravery and independence in his/her blood. But that helped countries like Egypt benefit at least in the short run, even being under the rule of their slave masters.)
Lastly, I would like to recap here (as I, too, believe are the right ways) the suggestions made by a Conflict and Peace Research Professor, Ashok Swian, who also studied Nile for long, should Egypt and Sudan (which is already interestingly cooperating with out wanting Egypt to decide on her behalf, which has become another head ache to Egyptians) in order to have a more sustainable and equitable use of Nile. These are:
The Nile case has again started becoming hot among riparian nations, particularly Egypt and Ethiopia, and somehow Sudan, too. This is not the first time we (Ethiopians) happened to witness this kind of superfluous confrontation as well as naïve ownership claim, especially by Egypt, not fully understanding yet the nature and complexity of River Nile, like any other shared international rivers. The first being some 8 or so years back. And the second was again in 2009/10 when most of the upstream countries, including Ethiopia, signed the Cooperative Framework Agreement (CFA) towards creating a more equitable share (and ownership) in using and managing the Nile waters even if it had been really dragged as Egypt kept using different techniques to its deferment.
Here I will focus on some important contributing factors/aspects, including legal perspectives, but setting aside what Egyptian politicians and their water resource “experts” started multiplying, i.e., the use of “power” and “legal” means, in maintaining Egypt’s dominant share of the Nile waters. Also, I’ll see the relationship between Egypt and Ethiopia, and how it has affected the water use for over centuries. And lastly, I will highlight possible ways of addressing the problem of sharing the Nile River, from a scientific perspective, not just among the key stakeholders, in this case Egypt, Ethiopia and Sudan, but among other co-riparian states too. Because, the River is by its nature the longest and covers as many countries as 10 with an estimated total population of 300 million.
First, Egypt has been until recently succeeding in influencing any water use and development projects in Ethiopia with the help of its influencing power through its well-established links (with donor nations) as well as overly representation or presence in the international institutions such as the World Bank, IMF and the UN. Whereas, Ethiopia has been poorly represented internationally, especially in lending institutions, water institutions, seminars and conferences where stakeholders’ views are shared and taken into account while designing water guiding policies, principles, frameworks and agreements with regard to the allocation of resources (mainly financial and technical) despite the fact that Ethiopia is the major water contributor to its transboundary rivers–particularly Nile towards which it contributes as much water as 86 percent. Of course this poor representation within the most influential global actors such as the World Bank and the UN is not unique to Ethiopia, but to other poor countries in Africa and Asia, proving how injustice and greed rule the world!
Second, Egypt has also managed to clinging over the colonial treaties (1929) which gave Egypt not only in exploiting the largest possible Nile water share ever, but it also gave her the right to veto over any upstream water projects. Accordingly, Egypt has been a hydro-hegemonic state capable of dominating the river basin as a whole.
Third, Ethiopia’s continued civil war and seemingly never-ending internal problem coupled with conflicts in the horn that Egypt has always been involved (be it direct or indirect one, as it was proved in their recent live transmission as if we did not know them yet) gave Egypt the upper hand in sustaining monopolistic use of Nile. Up until now, it is probably in Ethiopia where there are a number of insurgents and strong opposition due to the undemocratic and oppressive nature of the government in power. And here, in my view, the ruling party, more appropriately Woyane, takes the full responsibility. That is why as big a national issue as “Yehidasew Gidib”, where every citizen should have a greater stake on, has been totally politicized and subjected to criticism!
Who would trust a government that betrayed the people and the country—making us landlocked while fighting a senseless war with our brothers and sisters in Eritrea, ceding a great deal of land to Sudan, killing Agnuanks, systematic killing and massive displacement of ethnic Amharas, jailing and harassing ethnic Ormos, Journalists, Opposition members, Activists, etc. Because if we were more stable and democratic, then we would have avoided the loopholes that foreign enemies, such as Egypt, have been able to take advantage of. Even the dam itself has become one of the most controversial issue simply because the government is unrepresentative and least accountable. Otherwise, I stand on my ground that no one will ever dare to oppose any development—especially on Blue Nile (Abay) that we Ethiopians have grown with a great sense of anger and madness for not being able to use it to feed ourselves while others in the downstream have managed to build their economy, and even gone as far as making it appear to be part of their own historical identity.
Nevertheless, thanks to the change in the geo-politics of the horn (including the independence of the Southern Sudan, here partly thanks to the Dergue regime) as well as presence of alternative sources of funding (China), now there is a clear indicator that the power has already been shifting from the downstream (Egypt) to upstream countries. That is why perhaps Egyptian sounded like arrogant and uninformed decision makers who came out mad and frustrated (I know it is their turn!), through their own media, and tell the world that they are terrorist who would like to bomb another sovereign country’s dam or anything they believe is good to cause a destruction. The funny part Egypt thinks Nile is all about Egypt, and sometimes about Ethiopia and Egypt. But, the fact is, it is all about at least the 160,000,000 people who live within the entire basin or 300,000,000 (in the long term) people in the basin countries (Burundi, the DRC, Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Rwanda, Sudan, South Sudan, Tanzania and Uganda)–who would eventually need to use their fair share of the Nile for their socio-economic development. Because, in reality, no one would like to charity his only left money and go hungry while awaiting the alms of others. That would of course be too heavenly, which we happened to have been doing that for Egyptians until now, but not anymore! You Egyptians are too avaricious!
After all, who are the Egyptians to tell us that we should sit and live on less than a dollar a day while they are enjoying with a per capita GNP of at least 1300 USD! Who are they to do whatever they would like in the downstream (including the 1959 quota agreement with Sudan, excluding Ethiopia and the rest basin countries) yet they object any upstream water use which was even signed by the majority of the riparian states in 2010? They also claim that they have got a legal right, which doesn’t existing at all given none of these countries ratified it. Yes there are guiding principles on how to share transboundary rivers, but not as such a golden rules that one needs to strictly abide by. If there were, the Egyptians would have been again the ones to lose as they violate those principles. In fact the UN Convention that Egypt itself did not sign, and so did Ethiopia, reads as follows:
“The 1997 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Non-Navigational Uses of International Watercourses is the only treaty governing shared freshwater resources that is of universal applicability. It is a framework convention, in the sense that it provides a framework of principles and rules that may be applied and adjusted to suit the characteristics of particular international watercourses. Some key guiding principles set out in the document include: the equitable and reasonable utilization of international watercourses; the application of appropriate measures to prevent harm to other States sharing an international watercourse; and the principle of prior notification of planned measures. For the Convention to become legally binding, at least 35 nations must ratify it.”
There is no country on planet Earth that lets its water flow untouched for the sake of people down the stream. I must quote what a US hydrologist who did so much field work on Blue Nile (Abay) has said, “it makes no sense at all that America has to use up all its water sources, leaving almost nothing to flow down to Mexico, and on the other hand Ethiopian farmers have to go hungry while the richest and longest river flows in their neighborhood only to nourish lives in Egypt.’’ Who are Egyptians to tell us that water development such as hydroelectric dam will reduce their water flow and hence we should revert to the erratic rainfall while they have done nothing to conserve and reduce waste from the water that is already out there in their forsaken dams and agricultural fields?
According to Food and Agricultural Organization(FAO), Egypt is actually having 20 billion cubic meter water sources (such as underground, rain water, waste, reuse of agricultural drainage, etc.) besides to the 55.5 billion cubic meter which was allocated in its 1959 agreement with Sudan. And out of these, much is used for agriculture (the most water consuming) activities. Yet, they want to oppose a dam which is believed to be a very efficient and effective way of regulating the water itself as it reduces siltation apart from its being very less prone to evaporation, unlike to what is the case in Cairo (Aswan Dam).
Now it is time for Egypt to recognize the shift in power, and hence benefit from cooperation than trying their terrorist style of destabilizing Ethiopia (including causing bloodshade between Muslim and Christian Ethiopians who have a long history of peaceful coexistence–the Agaro slaughtering of priests and kids while they were in church service in 2007/8 is a case in point). War has never been and will never be an option to dealing with a shared water resource, but COOPERATION. Because it is practically impossible for Egypt to concur Ethiopia (which is the only way, though never a viable option, to control Blue Nile-Abay in Ethiopia, so to speak). Of course, according to researches, no country has fought a war over water, other than Israeli that did occupy Palestine for the sake of Water. Even if it happens to be initiated, perhaps for political purpose, from both sides, definitely the loser is going to be Egypt. I did not mean in terms of casualties (which would cost us so much, because we have been in war almost since our very existence—and every Ethiopian has that sense of nationalistic bravery and independence in his/her blood. But that helped countries like Egypt benefit at least in the short run, even being under the rule of their slave masters.)
Lastly, I would like to recap here (as I, too, believe are the right ways) the suggestions made by a Conflict and Peace Research Professor, Ashok Swian, who also studied Nile for long, should Egypt and Sudan (which is already interestingly cooperating with out wanting Egypt to decide on her behalf, which has become another head ache to Egyptians) in order to have a more sustainable and equitable use of Nile. These are:
- Supporting and working on a more comprehensive strategy, through Nile Basin Initiative (NBI), for mutual benefit sharing,
