In 2011, Ethiopia launched construction of the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD) along the Blue Nile to secure its water resources and generate hydropower, but the project has been highly controversial, with Egypt, located downriver, objecting strongly to it.
Unless the two countries can reach a negotiated settlement, the entire region could be plunged into conflict.
For Ethiopia, the GERD could ease a chronic energy shortage that has left more than 55 percent of the country’s population without access to electricity.
The dam also has emotional significance, promising to fulfill a dream long etched in the public’s imagination.
However, the Nile River is strategically significant for every country it touches.
Egypt’s agricultural sector depends heavily on its waters. Dam building raises serious concerns for everyone downstream.
That shared dependence on the Nile is why, in 1999, 10 countries created the Nile Basin Initiative as a forum to discuss the sustainable management and development of the river’s resources.
The initiative then began developing a Cooperative Framework Agreement (CFA), which outlined countries’ principles, rights and obligations and sought to establish a permanent Nile River Basin Commission to facilitate the CFA’s implementation.
However, in 2010, Egypt and Sudan rejected the CFA. A year later, Ethiopia began building the GERD, choosing to self-finance the US$4.8 billion project.
The first filling of the reservoir was completed last month, and the remaining 25 percent of the project is scheduled be finished when the dry season arrives.
Meanwhile, tripartite talks, mediated by the African Union, have continued, but have yielded no progress, owing to two sticking points.
The first is drought mitigation: Egypt wants to secure a much higher flow of water during dry years than Ethiopia is willing to concede.
The second is dispute resolution: Should a binding arbitration clause be included in a treaty?
Mistrust between the parties has reinforced the impasse, fueling tensions that could lead to violence. Yet experience elsewhere shows that a better outcome is possible.
In the 1970s, Brazil and Paraguay initiated a binational effort to construct a massive hydroelectric dam on the Parana River, located on their shared border.
The Itaipu Dam — completed in 1984 — today generates about 88 percent of Paraguay’s electricity and more than 11 percent of Brazil’s supply, making it a world leader in renewable-energy production capacity.
However, the Itaipu Dam project faced considerable resistance from Argentina, a downstream country that, like Egypt today, worried about its water supply.
Owing to its objections, international financial institutions initially refused to finance the dam’s construction. The problem was resolved with the conclusion of the Acuerdo Tripartito between Argentina, Brazil and Paraguay, which the three signed in 1979.
The agreement established acceptable changes in water levels, as well as environmental protections and water-quality standards.
To monitor compliance, the agreement established a mechanism for the three countries to exchange information on hydrological conditions.
Moreover, an institutional framework for cooperation and transboundary water management was created for the Parana Basin.
The instruments and institutions established at the Itaipu Dam’s inception continue to support dispute resolution.
Today, extreme drought has severely reduced the Parana River’s water flow, reducing Argentina’s water supply and making it difficult in landlocked Paraguay to navigate the river, which is essential for its agricultural export industry.
While no independent arbitration body is in place to manage this crisis, the affected countries have negotiated an amicable solution, based on the 1970s treaties and international law.
The binational council managing the dam agreed to release just enough water from the reservoir to ease the drought’s effects for downstream countries, without compromising energy production.
The work of technical commissions and exchange of data on hydrological conditions among institutions in all affected countries were critical to the negotiations’ success.
This experience offers valuable lessons for Egypt and Ethiopia, including the value of treaties and international law for long-term dispute resolution.
More broadly, it shows how institutionalization and cooperation can help to build trust — and bring shared benefits.
The Itaipu project has contributed to regional economic integration, by providing the resources to finance infrastructure, such as international bridges, airports and highways, as well as social and environmental development projects.
Likewise, once the GERD reaches full capacity, it can contribute to creating a regional energy market.
As the effects of climate change become increasingly apparent, so does the imperative of using natural resources more efficiently and equitably, and shifting to renewable energy sources.
By following in the footsteps of Argentina, Brazil and Paraguay, the Nile countries can make important progress toward those goals — and set a powerful global precedent for the use of transboundary resources to foster sustainable development.
Biniam Bedasso is a researcher and public-finance specialist at the Collaborative Africa Budget Reform Initiative. Maria Gwynn is on leave from the Institute for Public International Law at the University of Bonn to serve as Governing Council member of the Binational Entity Itaipu.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
In a statement that came as a shock to many, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on Saturday announced the immediate annulment of all “self-imposed” guidelines on US executive relations with Taiwan, which he said Washington took “unilaterally, in an attempt to appease the Communist regime in Beijing.” It could be the most sweeping advancement in Taiwan-US ties in decades. No longer would officials need to meet in “private meeting rooms or restaurants,” or avoid references to a Taiwanese country or government. High-level personnel could attend official events, including Double Ten National Day celebrations. Coverage of the decision has been predictably alarmist,
Lately I have been mulling over the checkered career of Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), former Mayor of Taipei and President of Taiwan, who subsequently spent 6+ years in jail after being convicted of corruption. I was a witness to some of this, and have studied President Chen’s career over the years. While recognizing that I am treading on sensitive political ground, I will attempt here to parse out the key phases, in an attempt to make sense of this controversial political figure’s career. I first met Chen (CSB, as many of us colloquially referred to him) in 1998, when he was Mayor
US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s announcement on Saturday that the US was to drop self-imposed restrictions on meetings between senior Taiwanese and US officials had immediate real-world effects. On Monday, US Ambassador to the Netherlands Pete Hoekstra met Representative to the Netherlands Chen Hsing-hsing (陳欣新) at the US embassy in The Hague, with both noting on social media the historic nature of this seemingly modest event. Modest perhaps, but their meeting would have been impossible before Pompeo’s announcement. Some have welcomed this move, thinking that it is long-overdue and a step in the right direction to normalizing relations between
The US’ relationships with its core democratic partners are set to rebound dramatically after US president-elect Joe Biden takes office. Allies in Europe and Asia relish the prospect of a US president committed to adhering to democratic traditions at home, honor strategic commitments abroad, and be a team player. Solidarity among the world’s democracies is especially important when it comes to standing up to China. The EU’s decision last week to sign an investment accord with that country underscores the potential for serious discord. Even though the Biden camp cautioned the EU against moving ahead with the agreement, it nonetheless sealed the