Tensions and disputes over the Nile River’s water have been ongoing for decades due to colonial ambitions. The relationships among the Nile Basin’s countries are governed by a set of colonial treaties signed in 1902, 1929, and 1959. They insist that the upstream riparian states have to respect the rights of Egypt and Sudan regarding the Nile’s water.
Moreover, they are prohibited from building dams or launching construction projects on the river larger tribute without the approval of Egypt. Not only have these treaties guaranteed Egypt’s share of the Nile water over the past century and enabled it to achieve its developmental and agricultural plans, particularly after building the Aswan High Dam in the early 1960s but they also gave Cairo and Khartoum a veto power over any construction plans or projects.
These agreements were always contested and challenged by the upstream riparian states. While Egypt and Sudan insist that their share of water should be respected and honored, the upstream riparian states believe that these agreements are unfair and impede their agriculture and development plans. They reason that they are not bound by these agreements as they were signed by colonial powers and their governments were not part of such accords. As the populations of the Nile River Basin countries have been growing rapidly during the past decades, their developmental needs have increased, adding tensions and disagreements among them.
However, Ethiopia relies heavily on the GERD to enhance its economy and improve its people’s lives. Ethiopia has an acute shortage of electricity; in fact, 85 percent of its population is not connected to the grid. Moreover, Ethiopia is fed up with unfair treatment. Since Emperor Haile Selassie failed in getting the League of Nations to unanimously agree to impose sanctions against the Italian Invader, which later labeled the organization as a “toothless lion.” and leads to its deformation.
However, in its letter, Egypt has asked the Security Council to “intervene to affirm the importance of the three countries resuming the negotiations with goodwill to reach a fair and balanced solution” over the GERD. On the other hand, if the Security Council tries to intervene on this specific matter it leads to unexpected structural crises, which is against the organization standards of harmonization and cooperation.
Egyptians have said that Ethiopia is going ahead with the filling of the GERD without an agreement “would represent an alarming attempt by Ethiopia to establish and exercise unfettered control over the Tran Boundary River.” Besides their unjust stance, they are trying to label the Nations’ stance as a threat to their existence and misguiding the world.
Ethiopians believe that the theme for the last subsequent meetings was to create a climate for cooperation and mutual understandings. However, the obstacles to creating a conducive climate are due to Ethiopians demand to use their natural resource and Egypt’s denial of the use. The Egyptian politicians are adamant in their way of negotiation without considering their counterpart’s reality on the ground.
Ethiopians position towards Egypt and the international community is candid. Of course, they had already dealt with the issue of Second filling in their meetings with Egypt and Sudan and other overt meetings, so both governments were well aware of Ethiopians’ position of not harming other riparian states. Besides the negotiation now, Egyptians are calling the international community; especially the Arab countries in supporting them with their colonial ambition.
It seems they are not aware of the current Socio-Political dynamics of the world, that’s why they are trying to arrange some affiliations with other Arab states like the old-fashioned way. However, we are not in the late 1960s to be a warmonger based on some labels. Furthermore, Sudan has publicly embraced the dam in its genesis and signed deals with Ethiopia to benefit from its new hydroelectric capacity.
Now they changed their mind and showed the world they are not in a position based on principles rather they are time servers. The Egyptian government’s support to the Sudanese government in its unjust border dispute is a quid pro quo for their help in the proxy war. It’s better to resolve conflict in the Halayeb Triangle, a 20,000 square kilometer area of land on the Egypt-Sudan border that is claimed by both countries.
However, Egypt currently occupies the area, considered strategically important because of its proximity to Red Sea access, and has consistently refused Sudanese attempts to submit the matter for international arbitration, besides their paradox and double standard nature they are trying to appeal to the GERD issue without any moral values.
It’s known that since its foundation, Ethiopia has strongly supported a fair and equitable share of the Nile water. Ethiopia never demanded control of water to itself but committed to an inclusive share of the Nile. Ethiopia proclaimed that the Nile belongs to all riparian states.
BY ABENEZER DAWIT LENCHA
The Ethiopian Herald May 19/2021
