By Colin McGinness
Surrounded by largely inhospitable desert, the Nile has sustained countless empires and nation-states since the very first trappings of civilisation began to emerge within human populations. A river so ancient and steeped in legend has been the focus of numerous conflicts throughout recorded history, and the modern era is no different. Currently more than 300 million people, citizens of eleven different countries, rely in some way on the freshwater of the Nile for both agriculture and general water supply.
As these countries seek to use the Nile to improve the lot of their citizens, other nations worry that their relative share of this precious water source will be lessened. As studies have shown, the link between climate change and water scarcity means that in the coming years, an increasing number of people will find themselves without secure access to freshwater. With this in mind, the proposed Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD) on the Blue Nile has recently come under new scrutiny as it enters a critical stage in its development.
While You’re Here…
Why not take a moment to subscribe to The International’s free monthly newsletter? It takes seconds to sign up, and you’ll stay up to date with the stories shaping our world at a pace that won’t overwhelm.
The dam has been a point of contention since its construction began in 2011. Attempts at negotiation from then onwards have largely floundered, as the Ethiopian government continued with construction until it was largely completed. Renewed interest in the project has been caused by the commencement of the first phase of filling the dam’s reservoir. The resistance to its completion has largely been led by Egypt, who accuse Ethiopia of violating international law and various treaties that were signed in the mid-20th century regarding the ownership rights of the Nile river and its tributaries. However, the most salient agreement that the Egyptian government references is the treaty signed with the then dissolving British Empire which effectively gave all of the rights to the Nile and it’s water resources to Egypt and Sudan.
This agreement also gave Egypt the right to veto proposed projects on the river. The other upstream riparian states, including Ethiopia, were allotted no portion of the Nile River waters and have since cried foul as most of the sources of the river system are located within the borders of the upstream states. As tensions rose surrounding the proposed filling of the reservoir; Ethiopia, Egypt and Sudan have sporadically resumed talks in an attempt to reach an agreement on acceptable water usage upstream which have been moderated by various organisations including the UN, World Bank and the African Union.
However, these various high-level meetings and negotiations have yet to result in any signed agreement. Most recently, the Prime Minister of Ethiopia, Abiy Ahmed made a state visit to Khartoum where he and his Sudanese counterpart, Abdalla Hamdok released a joint statement expressing their desire to reach a settlement. While the international community urges both sides to compromise on the issue, reaching an agreement that is amenable to both the Egyptian and Ethiopian governments continues to be a difficult task.
Egypt has expressed its concern regarding the future of the GERD in fairly stark terms. With a population of over 100 million that rely on the Nile for freshwater and irrigation, the government considers any attempts at diverting the river’s waters to be an ‘existential threat’. The Egyptian government claims that the dam, if managed without formal international agreement, could wreak havoc on its economy and the sustainability of the Nile itself. It continues to cite past treaties and agreements and has even threatened to bring a case against the Ethiopian government to the International Court of Justice.
This past month, after the initial tripartite talks with Sudan and Ethiopia failed to end in an agreement, Egypt officially requested the UN Security Council to intervene in negotiations. With the centrality of the Nile to Egypt’s economy and the livelihood of most of its citizens, it is understandable that the country’s leaders are hesitant at best to agree to projects upstream. While Egypt does technically retain its veto power and water rights as established by its 1960 treaty with Britain and Sudan, the validity of this agreement is arguable given the exclusion of any of the other nine riparian states. And the country risks alienating potential allies in the region if it cannot come to a new framework or agreement that is more equitable with the Nile’s resources.
Ethiopia views the GERD project as crucial to its goal of lifting millions of its people out of poverty and creating sustainable growth for its economy. Through the issuing of government bonds purchased by citizens or members of Ethiopia’s extensive diaspora, the nearly $5 billion project has been largely self-funded. The only exception being a line of credit for the purchasing of hydro-electric equipment from the Chinese government. Once the hydro-electric generators in the dam complex are fully operational, the Ethiopian government plans to use the GERD as the backbone of the country’s national grid. With the construction of additional infrastructure, any excess power could also be sold to neighbouring countries to help offset the running cost and maintenance of the project.
Another goal of the GERD is to better control the seasonal flooding that has impacted Ethiopia’s ability to provide a stable water supply for its precarious agriculture sector. The flooding season has long dictated the fertility of the land in Nile river basin and by collecting excess water in reservoirs created by the GERD, the Ethiopian government hopes to mitigate any potential flooding or lack thereof depending on the season. But this is also what the Egyptian government considers to be potentially the most dangerous aspect of the project. Being downstream, the concern is that during dry years, too much water will be held in reservoirs and will limit the flow downriver. Thus potentially impacting Egyptian access to fresh water.
As the first reservoir is set to be filled by the end of next year, the window for reaching an accord between the states impacted is slowly but surely closing. While negotiations over damming rights of rivers between irrigation ministers might not be the most exciting or gripping issue, it is worth noting that the potential fallout from the situation on the Nile could have consequences the world over. As climate change continues to impact access to freshwater, the risk of ‘water conflict’ is likely to increase, and international cooperation will be required to avert the sort of friction that we currently see being played out in real time between the Nile riparian states. Whether a compromise is found or not, the outcome of this dispute is sure to send ripples far beyond the banks of the Nile.
Colin McGinness is The International’s foreign affairs editor