Time to win recalcitrant behavior on GERD negotiations
Against all odds Ethiopia, Sudan and Egypt have begun another round of negotiations this time via video-conference specifically on the “guidelines and rules for the first filling and annual operation” for the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD). Taking note of the 2015 Declaration of Principles (DoP) which stipulates from the outset that; cooperation based on mutual understanding, common interest, good intentions, benefits for all, and the principles of international law, Ethiopia again reiterated the need for the three countries to focus on and approach the negotiation with good faith and commitment to achieve a win-win outcome.
The ongoing negotiation being not on the allocation of the Blue Nile waters, Ethiopia is saying it will be bound by the guidelines and rules for first filling and annual operation of the GERD that it will sign with the two downstream countries. Despite bold comments on the social media suggesting Ethiopia should not necessarily commit itself to any of such trilaterally signed guidelines, the three countries, however, are negotiating on technical issues on the first filling and annual operation of the GERD. Accordingly, based on the filling schedule of the GERD, the countries so far “reached understanding on the first stage filling, volume of environmental flow, guidelines for first stage filling and the approach to drought management rules.”
Nevertheless, as the latest negotiations took off the Egyptian establishments on other hand start crying foul by inserting accusations against Ethiopia’s stance on the process. Egypt’s Ministry of Water Resources and Irrigation Spokesperson Mohammed Sebaey has already casted pessimism for the “prospects of achieving a breakthrough” during the ongoing GERD negotiations accusing Ethiopia for “hindering any breakthrough”.
It is unfortunate for this and other establishments as well as prominent individuals to misread Ethiopia’s stance and ambition with the project from the start. Ethiopia has made clear that the parties have made progress and “if the ongoing negotiation is to falter it is only because of Egypt’s obstinacy to maintain a colonial based water allocation agreement that denies Ethiopia and all the upstream countries their natural and legitimate rights.”
Regardless of the technical and scientific aspects of the negotiations on the GERD – which are complex, the political stakes have been higher; also grabbed by the heavy hand of history to turn the negotiations into a zero-sum game. Previous talks have often been referred to miss the grid of good faith and yet experts say if these talks were guided by science and law, the parties would have reached an agreement years ago. To substantiate these trends from the aforementioned argument, this writer recalls the first tripartite joint national committee talks held on February 2015 in Addis Ababa. The 12 members committee, which was given a six-month deadline, met to finalize the terms of references (TOR) of the Tripartite National Committee (TNC) and the rules of procedure and to formulate a timeframe to carry out the report. The agenda of the time was onto holding further study on hydrological simulation and the trans-boundary socio-economic impact assessment of the dam. After two major studies were conducted by consultancy firms the committee meeting did not take details of the study as its business with consensus, but provided the pathway for the firms to engage in.
Until the course switches from Cairo the Egyptian committee led by Prof. Dr. Ashraf El-Ashaal, with all the minor suggestions to the then talks such as “document authentication, verification and quick task implementation,” was calling the parties in the room for “cooperation, trust and transparency” to lead them to a new era of working together to achieve win-win situation. This writer quoted him as saying “no one should leave empty hand or loser.”
Egypt’s claims of a historical right to the waters of the Nile and insistence to maintain a veto power on future upstream projects have already been doomed. This claims have been challenged by upstream countries that demand a more equitable utilization of the river. Unlike the perceived unilateralism among Egyptian establishments there were clear demonstration of greater political will to reach an agreement and a greater preparedness to adopt a cooperative posture from Ethiopia.
The GERD sought to be a source of regional cooperation and it is projected to produce electricity for over 100 million Ethiopians and millions more in the region. Despite Ethiopia recognizing Egypt’s need for Nile water as a 98% essential resource Egypt, however, fears that the pace at which Ethiopia fills the reservoir will reduce its water supply from the Nile River. And this fear shades the intent of good faith to achieve a win-win outcome throughout the negotiations. While echoing the GERD not to cause significant harm through advocating for equitable utilization of the resource Ethiopia calls for cooperation in understanding the water needs of upstream and downstream countries across all their lands and commitments to be guided by the Declaration of Principles that stipulates relevant international principles that are adequate for a GERD project.
The filling of the GERD reservoir will commence within few weeks, and this writer would prefer to remain hopeful that breakthrough will be reached to an agreed guidelines and rules for the first filling and annual operation of the dam overcoming any sort of recalcitrant behavior mainly from Egyptian side.
For Ethiopia Abbay or Blue Nile River is indispensable resource from many spectrum. It may appear next to impossible to withstand the mounting pressure from external forces, and Ethiopian negotiators would be better served by deluging into discerning talks as always. Although many on the social media from both Ethiopia and Egypt are engaged in making statements of warmonger, yet no such approach would help neither parties nor is lucrative by its nature. This also comes under a strong belief that hostilities between the two over the dam can only be resolved diplomatically while Ethiopia should unmistakably reexamine any perceived appeasement approaches that challenges its good faith towards its natural rights of the river.
The Ethiopian Herald June 16, 2021
BY KIRAM TADESSE
