A new agreement among East African countries may spell the end of Egyptian control over the Nile .

River of Strife

After decades of debate among the 10 countries that form the Nile basin, it appears that Egypt’s access to its primary water source may be set to change. In May, Ethiopia, Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania and Uganda signed an agreement that directly challenges Egypt and Sudan’s historic claims on the majority of the river’s water.

And while the two northern Nile nations dismissed the latest developments as illegitimate, the fact is that a concentrated effort on the part of the Nile’s upstream countries could dramatically alter the industries, politics and lives of those downstream.

“The surplus of water Egyptians are imagining we have is an illusion,” says Nabil Abd El Fattah, head of the Ahram Center for Social Studies.

Annual rainfall here is 100-200 mm along the Mediterranean coast and just 25-50 mm over the rest of the country, significantly less than any other Nile basin country.

Ethiopia, which has been leading a charge to modify Nile quotas, receives 1,000 mm of rain annually in its highlands and up to 2,000 mm in its lush western regions.

That lack of domestic alternative water sources was the basis upon which the 1929 Nile water treaty was established when it allotted the vast majority of the Nile’s flow to Egypt and Sudan. With the construction of the High Dam in 1959, quotas that directly benefitted Egypt and Sudan were introduced and remain in place today. Egypt was awarded 55.5 billion cubic meters of water and Sudan 18.5 billion cubic meters annually — roughly 85% of the river’s annual output.

But little has changed over 50 years in terms of upstream countries’ abilities to diversify water collection.

Now, even the lion’s share of the Nile is beginning to fall short of demand as both industry and population expand at unprecedented rates. Since the original treaty was signed, Egypt’s population has surged from 12 million to more than 80 million.
Today, Egyptians consume approximately 13 billion cubic meters of water for domestic use and an additional 52 billion cubic meters for agriculture, according to Nahla Abou El Fotouh, director of Cairo’s Water Research Institute.

That’s 10 billion cubic meters more than the country’s annual quota. Unless growth trends change drastically, Abou El Fotouh estimates that the country will require twice that by 2050.

In order to maximize resources, recent decades have seen Egypt and Sudan hold firm to the original Nile agreements, claiming that any modification without their consent would be a direct violation of international law. But if the new agreement signed between upstream countries on May 15 were to be implemented, the two northern countries would face a distinct challenge to their water quotas for the first time.

“Based on principles of fairness, Egypt should have more quota due to lack of alternatives for water supply. Countries like Uganda, Congo and Southern Sudan, they have other sources of water,” explains Hamid Ali, assistant professor of public policy at the American University in Cairo (AUC).

81 Years Back

The distribution of Nile waters is largely seen as a relic of the colonial era. At the time of the original agreement, Britain had established colonies within the majority of Nile basin countries. Egypt, Sudan, Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania were all under British control, and upstream governments have consistently argued that the arrangement failed to sufficiently reflect their sovereign interests.

“The other countries were never parties to this treaty, which was signed when many of them were colonies of one power or another,” argues Jennifer Bremer, professor of global affairs and director of the public policy department at AUC.

While upstream countries have rallied behind the imbalanced origins of the Nile agreement, Egypt and Sudan have taken steps to ensure that it remains unchanged. For years, that has meant refusing to enter negotiations concerning quotas.

Until now, that strategy has worked. But the fact remains that the two are not the only Nile nations attempting to cope with populations that are quickly outgrowing their resources, and the international community is beginning to notice.

“All of the countries are experiencing rapid urbanization, which increases demand for water,” says Bremer.

As industry increases in East Africa, countries are looking to build dams that could provide energy to fuel development and attract foreign investment. For some of the downstream nations, the struggle for Nile water has become a political necessity.

“The population growth and need to secure food in countries like Ethiopia and Kenya is very compelling and there are pressures on the political leaders in those countries to take action,” says Ali. “Ethiopia is in dire need for food and it is only a matter of time until they erect a dam. The threat should be taken seriously.

Empty Threats
In the past, Egypt has equated any project that would affect its water quota to an act of war. But mobilizing the continent’s largest army to defend Nile water may not be the country’s best strategy.

It could even backfire, making matters worse by increasing international sympathy for Egypt’s southern neighbors.

“This is jumping to non-material results that increase the complexity of the current situation,” says Ayman Abd El-Wahab, an analyst at Al-Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies.

“The action required now is to pressure the donor countries because without them the upstream countries will not be able to implement those projects.”

The growing consensus is that Egypt and Sudan can no longer afford to ignore calls for negotiations from upstream countries and that a diplomatic solution is needed.

To that end, Prime Minister Ahmed Nazif has formed a committee to seek peaceful solutions for what has become a volatile issue.

The implications of the latest challenge to Nile resources indicate a shifting perception among southern countries.

In the past, the threat of war and the shelter of international law may have been enough to protect Egypt’s quota, but today, a combination of desperation and discontent have changed upstream countries’ fundamental perspectives.

“The issues all revolve around political dimensions related to the concept of sovereignty to those countries and their perceived relationship with Egypt,” says Abd El-Wahab.

Making Do
The solution to the Nile dilemma may not require the drastic change that some analysts have predicted.

According to Fouad El-Shibini, senior advisor at the National Water Research Center, when the High Dam was constructed in 1959, it managed to save approximately 24 billion cubic meters of water that were wasted in the Mediterranean.

“I believe there is a possibility to find a political solution based on a network of integrated development projects between the countries in addition to creative ideas to increase the amounts of water for everyone,” says Abd El Fattah.

A series of concessions and initiatives on the part of Egypt and Sudan could go a long way toward finding an amenable solution.

Access to Egyptian ports, investments and increased trade could provide enough leverage to buy downstream countries time to consider alternative solutions.

According to Bremer, projects that target conservation and increasing efficiency could strengthen Egypt’s political position in the region and allow them to direct donor country investments along the river. But in order to achieve progress, the current stalemate must be broken.

The World Bank has agreed to finance 22 projects that aim to decrease wasted water in the Nile.

However, none of those projects will be granted funds without Egypt and Sudan’s consent.
“The World Bank will not ignite conflict among member states,” says Ali. But the projects may be reason enough to seek an agreement among the 10 countries, and have the potential to increase access for everyone.

While Egypt and Sudan have thus far carried out a strict approach of non-negotiation, at this point it seems that coming to the table may not only be the last resort, but also the best. bt