Since the foundation for the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD) has been laid in April 2011, the negotiations concerning the dam have been carried out in the capitals of Ethiopia, Egypt, and Sudan. After a decade of the tripartite talks, the negotiations have created mutual understanding among the parties, although conclusions have been reached mainly due to Egypt’s intransigent and selfish motives. Especially, when Ethiopia is on the verge of filling the dam Egypt has launched her final lap strategies to miscarriage the project.
Assuming as if the negotiations have already failed and as a sidestepping strategy too, Egypt has resorted to calling for mediation and seeking a political solution to what is purely a technical issue. In this regard, first, President Abdel-Fattah el-Sissi during the U.N. General Assembly in New York had invited President Donald Trump’s administration to step into the negotiation as a mediator.
Adding insult to the injury, instead of the State Department, which has its own Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs- an agency tasked with engaging foreign governments on transboundary water management through its Office of Conservation and Water- the U.S. Treasury was entrusted to oversee the talks between the three countries. This was later proved that the Treasury had gone beyond its mandate as an observer/facilitator and followed a partisan approach which influenced Ethiopia to withdraw from the negotiation.
Second, aiming to internationalize and politicize the dam issue, Egypt took the case to the United Nations Security Council where again its case failed to succeed. Since the dam is registered as one of the flagship projects of the AU, any intervention by the UN Security Council in such a development project is not only out of the mandate of the Council, but it would have also opened a Pandora box had the Council opted to entertain the case. Thus, for the sake of ensuring the tenet of multilateralism, a principle that our country is known for
upholding since the time of Emperor Hailesielase and can be counted as a continuity of our foreign policy till today, the Council recognized the legitimate appeal of our country and the case was directed back to the African Union (AU).
Third, as it is evidenced by their Hala’ib Triangle dispute with Sudan, it is very customary for Egypt to run away from the slogan of “African solution to African problems”. While its call for mediation as well as seeking a political solution was short of the desired result, Egypt vainly stretched its hand to Russia for the second time, although the latter stood firm on the viability of the AU-led process. Moscow had already announced its readiness to provide technical support for the negotiation on the margins of the Russia-Africa Summit although Egypt opted to refer the matter to the USA.
Given the above-stated final lap strategies of Egypt, it is clear that the intention of Egypt for calling for mediation and seeking a political solution for the dam negotiation from the very beginning was not to reach a win-win solution for all the parties.
Especially, Egypt’s invitation of the USA as a mediator was not aimed to solve the disagreement in good faith; instead, it was to ambush Ethiopia with an unfair helping hand from the US. However, the attempt to ambush Ethiopia as well to internationalize the case at UNSC failed and Egypt turned her face to Russia where she received the well-deserved rebuke. In fact, from day one the intention of Egypt has been evident, but now it has become crystal clear to all to see. Thus, since it cannot forever hide the truth about their intention from themselves, Egypt should accept that its deceptive strategies have failed and surrender itself to scientifically proven facts over the GERD for a win-win outcome.
BY BIRHANTEKA MOREDA
The Ethiopian Herald May 4/2021
