Nascent Spurts towards
Promises and Possibilities for
Egypt, Ethiopia and
Sudan- Reporter Interview
Costantinos Berhutesfa
Costantinos, PhD
School
of Graduate Studies, AAU
Why do Ethiopia and the upstream riparian states want to harness the Nile?
Costantinos:
In 1984, a famine began to
strike Ethiopia with apocalyptic force. Westerners watched in horror as the
images of death filled their TV screens: the rows of fly-haunted corpses, the
skeletal orphans crouched in pain, the villagers desperately scrambling for bags
of grain dropped from the sky. What started out as a trickle of aid turned into
a billion-dollar flood. The rescue effort was plagued by delays and
controversy, and some one million Ethiopians eventually died, but more would
have perished if the world had not responded so generously. Such were the horrors of famine
perpetrated by rogue governments that toady we assert that famine is or should
be history.
Ethiopia, a
nation known as the water tower of North-East Africa has been the epicenter of
famines while surface water resources in Ethiopia flow in 12 major river
basins. It is estimated that an average of 122.19 billion cubic meters of water is
annually discharged from the Abay, Tekeze, Baro, and Omo-Gibe river basins with
an estimated 3.5 million ha of irrigable land. Hence, the long-term objective
is to establish once and for all a nation that can ensure its citizenry human
security. Nile and Gilgel Gibe are just two of the many projects expected to
contribute to this vision. Understandably, the Ethiopia has now launched major economic and social
rehabilitation scheme to make famine history. Indeed, the economy has recently been growing at 10% and provides opportunities to
finance development within. Development practitioners and pundits ensemble,
believe that massive food production and the energy required to fuel such
development is the only way that the nations can shed the stigma of famine.
Reporter – What are the essences of the Nile
Controversy
Costantinos:
The Nile is a river shared by ten riparian States that are among the
ten poorest in the world and that necessitate the development of the Nile Water
resources by all riparian States. The 1929 agreement was signed between Great
Britain (albeit representing its colony, Egypt) and Great Britain, which also represented
at the time Uganda, Kenya, Tanganyika (now Tanzania) and Sudan. The document
gave Cairo (under colonial administration by London) the right to veto projects
higher up the Nile that would affect its water share. The treaty for the full utilization of the Nile, concluded between
Egypt and the Sudan in 1959, divides the entire flow of the Nile between the
two countries. Other riparian countries, notably Ethiopia - a country with a
projected population of 88 million today and which contributes about 86% of the
annual discharge of the Nile - to date use only less than 1% of it. Ethiopia could
not develop its water resources to feed its needy population, mainly because of
policies of international financial institutions (augured on formers colonial powers),
which have made it difficult for upper riparian countries to secure finance
without the consent of Egypt, have a significant contribution in this regard.
Foreign investments for the development of the Nile waters have been almost out
of the question. The downstream riparian States, therefore, have maintained the
right to veto the development endeavours of the upstream States.
The Nile status quo was such that Ethiopia, whose name has almost
become synonymous with drought and famine, is condemned to be a bystander,
while few downstream States have almost utilized the entire water flow.
Moreover, to make matters worse, they keep on introducing new mega-irrigation
projects even further. As a result, upper riparian countries are naturally left
with very little choice other than to resort to a reciprocal measure of
unilateralism even if as feared by many that it may trigger conflict, it indubitably
is a better motive for cooperation.
What is The Nile
Basin Initiative?
Costantinos:
Founded in 1999, the initiative brings together Nile Basin
countries to develop the river in a cooperative manner, share substantial
socioeconomic benefits, and promote regional peace and security. The
Co-operative Framework was vehemently rejected by Egypt and Sudan on the basis
of their claimed legal and historical rights over the full amount
of water, as stated in the 1929/59 agreements. The Initiative is predicated on
the fact all riparian states except Egypt and Sudan believe that the status quo
was unfair, unreasonable, humiliating, exploitative and represent a threat to
water security; only then they will be able to co-operate with other riparian
states and seek a win-win settlement.
The United Nations, the World Bank, and other international bodies,
which were perceived by some riparian States to be part of the Nile quagmire
for too long, have decided to be part of the solution. The facilitation by the
World Bank and the United Nations Development Program engendered two
all-inclusive projects: the Nile Basin Initiative (NBI) and the Nile
Cooperative Framework. Because they involve all the riparian countries, these
projects are qualitatively different from their predecessors. Given the degree
of mistrust characterizing the Nile, securing the participation of all these
countries in projects dealing with the development of the Nile Waters should be
considered a significant move in the direction of cooperation. The NBI vision
to achieve sustainable socioeconomic development through the equitable utilization of and benefit from the common Nile Basin water resources-is
endorsed by all riparian States. They have even gone beyond the statement of
vision and attempted to articulate and translate it into project portfolios.
This attempt at defining and articulating the vision and translating it into
projects is a significant achievement.
It is no secret that the unwritten but real strategy of NBI is to
secure the consensus of all the riparian countries on the less controversial
issues by postponing the key but difficult issues of the Nile to a future date
or for succeeding generations. There is no disagreement on the fact that the
projects under NBI essentially have confidence building as their main
objective. Questions, therefore, arise on whether these “confidence-building”
measures stand a chance to improve the chronic state of mutual mistrust and
suspicion that have characterized the development of the Nile Waters. Institutionalization
of cooperation on the Nile is imperative. With the view to address the legal
and institutional aspect of cooperation, “a Cooperative Framework Project (D3)”
was initiated in 1997. This pioneer, all-inclusive project is designed to have
the “establishment of a functioning Basin-wide multidisciplinary framework for
legal and institutional arrangements”, and the “development of a process with
clear objectives that will lead to determination of equitable and legitimate
right of water use in each riparian country”.
What are the
possibilities for harnessing The Nile to everyone’s advantage
Costantinos:
A lot of progress has been registered under the Nile Cooperative
Framework Project over the past few years. The panel, composed of three experts
from the Nile riparian countries, has managed to identify, despite the
prevailing sense of mistrust, key issues and articulate their differences.
Attempts on attaining convergence on some of the important issues have been
made. Ways and means to get around dividing issues were also explored. It is
encouraging to note that the panel of experts has developed a draft Cooperative
Framework Agreement, understandably marred by many square brackets. The fact
that a new agreement has been signed by six states is a step forward. The
differences between these States, especially that of Egypt and Sudan, on some
of the important provisions of the draft agreement may be resolved if the
experts' work can be complemented by the goodwill, determination and courage of
the political leaderships of the riparian States and, of course, the positive
outlook of the international community.
The new dam to be built in Benishangul-Gumuz will have a reservoir
capacity of twice that of Lake Tana. This will ensure constant flow of the Nile
every during drought times in the Ethiopian highlands that provide the flow. On
the other hand, the proper management of the Nile waters by downstream riparian
states in Sudan and Egypt is essential. The technology to use the water
efficiently (because the Aswan Dam looses an equivalent amount of water used by
Egypt, to evaporation) must be a priority for Egypt. Protests that are not
based on scientific facts and solid evidence should not hamper the regions
fledgling development projects. Further transport of the Nile waters to the
Sinai Peninsula and on wards to the Middle East, must also be thought-out
carefully. It is in this way that Ethiopia and other upstream riparian states
can also harness the Nile (without drastically affecting the effective water
security of Egypt and Sudan).
In conclusion, fighting economic insecurity requires development in
the Nile by all riparian States, while addressing more systematically to the
limit the impact of the reduction of the Nile discharge. Cooperation,
therefore, may mean less water for them and, as such, it is not surprising that
non-cooperation has remained the Nile modus operandi for no less than a century.
Countries like Ethiopia have reached the stage where they are left with no
choice other than to utilize the Nile Waters and are making it clear to all
that the only viable alternative is cooperation; that is not a zero-sum game.
In fact, a balance must be created between what is logically tenable in terms
of the incessant dependency on international charity and ‘unsubstantiated’
militancy against such development projects, without which, that dependence
will not be addressed. Notwithstanding colonial, economic, political and sundry
rationale for the monopoly of the Nile waters, attempts must be made to
identify the impediments and the need for strategic partnership and alliances.
It can be done. Yes it can be done. A skilled and committed leadership of all
riparian states can mitigate conditions that are hostile to achieving such
synergy between states and equitable growth and prosperity among the region.
Then and only then can we say that Egypt is the Gift of the Nile, and The
Mighty Nile is the Gift of Ethiopia.
No comments:
Post a Comment