Egypt vs. Ethiopia: will they ever reach an agreement?

The origins of the GERD, power dynamics in the region and how a resolution can be reached.

In April 2011, Ethiopia announced the launch of a $4.8 billion mega-project called the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD). This dam was to become the African continent’s largest hydroelectric power station. With its construction, Ethiopia hoped to not only supply its people with electricity, but also to generate a surplus that it would export to its neighbors. However, since the announcement of the project, it has been a source of concern for downstream countries, namely Egypt and Sudan. They fear the new dam would lead to shortages in their water supply. This is because around 70% of the Nile River’s water originates from the Blue Nile on which Ethiopia is building the GERD. While its construction will not have a significant negative impact on Sudan, for Egypt, as president El Sisi once said, it is “a matter of life and death”. This is because over 96% of Egypt’s freshwater resources are supplied by the Nile. So naturally, anything that could potentially threaten Egypt’s share of the Nile is a top priority matter for the Egyptian government. Ethiopia and its Egyptian counterpart have unfortunately failed to reach an agreement that secures Egypt’s share of the Nile while simultaneously not standing in the way of Ethiopia’s development. Negotiations between the two have continuously ended in deadlock. Now with the dam nearing completion, there is a sense of extreme urgency that the stalemate is broken. Otherwise, the repercussions for Egypt could be catastrophic. Only by overcoming the trust barrier that exists between Ethiopia and Egypt, a willingness to compromise by both and Egypt’s reform of its unsustainable water management techniques, can a solution be reached. This article will explore both sides of the argument and analyze the steps required for a successful resolution.

In its determination to boost its economy and the well-being of its people, Ethiopia has taken several bold decisions to ensure that nothing will hinder the construction of the dam. The first decision would be the fact that it decided to commence construction in April 2011 when regional hegemon Egypt was at its most vulnerable; still preoccupied with the aftermath of the Egyptian revolution. Another step was its insistence to fund the project on its own, with no international assistance. To make certain that the project will not be faced with any delays, the Ethiopian government was successful in self-financing the GERD. Civil servants were dedicating a month’s salary to fund the dam and the government was also acquiring funding from local banks to make bond purchases. The highlands and the Blue Nile make Ethiopia a country with huge hydropower potential, and it was finally starting to make use of it. Water lies at the heart of Ethiopian development because it’s an essential resource for energy production, food production, and the eradication of poverty that has long plagued the country. And so, Ethiopia needed to begin utilizing its resources and make itself more attractive for investment. Thus, the GERD was a project that was welcomed by the Ethiopian people and became a huge source of national pride, to the extent that when project manager Semegnew Bekele was mysteriously murdered, a state funeral was held for him and thousands went out to mourn him. Aside from being a symbol of economic development and Ethiopian nationalism, the decision to build the dam was also a political statement. Ethiopia had long criticized its northern neighbors for excluding it from any agreements regarding the Nile water. Together known as the Nile Water Agreements, the two important agreements that were made during the colonial era are the 1929 Anglo-Egyptian Treaty which asserted both countries’ historical right to the Nile and that they were to be consulted by upstream countries for any projects concerning it. And the 1959 bilateral agreement between Egypt and Sudan that allocated 55.5bn and 18.5bn cubic meters of water to each country respectively, while again ostracizing upstream countries. With the dam, Ethiopia was for the first time combining its physical power as an upstream country that has control over the flow of the Nile river, with its economic capacity to construct such as massive project as the GERD in order to gain some leverage in the region. Ethiopia is slowly but surely trying to narrow the socio-economic gap that has endured between itself and Egypt thus shifting the balance of geopolitical power in the region and effectively challenging Egypt’s longstanding hegemonic position.

As for Egypt, just by looking at a map, it is impossible not to notice the country’s heavy reliance on the Nile. Along the banks of the Nile are Egypt’s only fertile lands. 95% of water supply comes from the Nile as it is used for multiple purposes such as farming, industry, and household use. That is because Egypt is already a water-scarce nation and so the Nile is its main source of water. The United Nations Food and Agricultural Program (FAO) states that in 2014, Egypt had 637 cubic meters of water per capita, while the United States had 9,538 cubic meters. That is 15 times as much. And Egypt’s fast-growing population is certainly not helping. The United Nations projects that by 2030, the Egyptian population will increase by 20 million people moving it closer to reaching the “absolute water scarcity” threshold. That is excluding the effects of the dam. The UN predicts that Egypt will start facing water shortages as of 2025. Egyptian minister of water resources and irrigation says that if the water Egypt consumes is reduced by even a mere 2%, 200,000 acres of land will be lost leaving about one million people jobless. Combined, these effects could potentially devastate Egypt, a country still recovering from a revolution. In addition to being necessary for the survival of the Egyptian people, the Nile River has symbolic importance for Egyptians. Since pharaonic times, it has been a vital resource for Egyptian development and so it is very special to Egyptians. Countless songs, movies, and poetry have been dedicated to the Nile throughout history. It is also quite expensive to live somewhere that overlooks the Nile. Those who do are considered very lucky. Therefore, unsurprisingly, if anything threatens the Nile, it becomes an aspect of emotion for Egyptians. These reasons are precisely why Egypt is still insisting on its historical right to the Nile water that is enshrined in the colonial-era agreements. It is also why its immediate concern is to reach an agreement on the period in which the reservoir will be filled. If filled too fast, it will significantly reduce Egypt’s supply of water leading to unthinkable consequences on its massive population. Not only that, but it will also affect Egypt’s very own Aswan High Dam as a fall in water supply will impede its electricity-generating capacity. That is why this has been the primary topic of discussion in the most recent negotiation efforts.

So far, it is quite clear which country has the upper hand in this situation. Ethiopia has so much to gain from the GERD, and Egypt stands to lose so much. The expected shortage of water supply for Egypt during the filling period will affect agricultural production and food availability. Increasing food prices was one of the key drivers of the Arab Spring to the extent that it was included in the most popular chants during the Egyptian revolution, which translates to “bread, freedom and social justice”. Even though one could argue (though not very strongly) that the political circumstances in Egypt are not the same as during pre-revolution times, the economic situation is extremely difficult and reverberates through most classes. Hence, it is plausible to deduce that any added economic pressure due to the GERD could lead to another uprising followed by instability. It is safe to say that despite various reforms to alleviate water scarcity, the Egyptian government is still far from prepared to take on the challenges that the Ethiopian dam presents. In addition to population growth and environmental pollution, climate change further exacerbates the risk of augmented water scarcity for Egypt. This is especially evident in the Nile delta. There, Egypt is faced with the problem of saltwater intrusion. Already elevating temperature together with the rise in evaporation losses by the GERD (predicted 5.9%), both the quantity and the quality of the water there will be affected as the salinity of the water rises leading to the infertility of the land. A fall in water level also affects other areas of Egypt’s economy such as tourism and water transport. Initially, Sudan also shared Egypt’s concerns about the dam, however, it has come to change its position. It decided to side with Ethiopia as soon as the prospect of electricity generation was on the table. Egypt barely had any leverage to begin with, so the fact that Sudan switched sides weakened the North African country’s position even more. Ethiopia is the country with all the leverage in this situation. The development that comes with the GERD has definitely outweighed any Egyptian attempts to halt its construction, even when there was talk of military intervention by Egypt during ousted president Mohamed Morsi’s regime. Accordingly, Egypt is in a clearly much weaker position compared to Ethiopia for which the dam represents an enormous source of prosperity.

When president El Sisi came to power, he adopted a more conciliatory approach compared to his predecessor. He ruled out the possibility of military intervention and engaged in full dialogue with Ethiopia. It is true that since then talks have been constantly collapsing, but there is at least some progress. Perhaps now that the dam nearing operation, both countries will recognize the urgency of resolving the dispute, particularly Egypt. There is no time for stalemates anymore. The first issue that they need to tackle is the issue of mistrusting one another. There is a deep sense of mistrust of Ethiopia on the Egyptian side, which is quite understandable since what is at stake is an essential resource like water. Egypt fears that Ethiopia will use the dam for other purposes in the future, such as irrigation, which might further reduce Egypt’s water supply. Despite frequent reassurances by the Ethiopian government, Egypt is still not convinced. Nevertheless, Ethiopia continues to insist that no harm shall be done to Egypt and that is seen in Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed’s visit to Cairo. He swore at El Sisi’s request that Egypt’s share of the Nile will be preserved. The Ethiopian government must however provide additional guarantees to get the Egyptian government to sign an agreement and ensure that Egypt avoids any type of instability at the hands of the GERD that could subsequently destabilize the entire region. This can be done by using a combination of nationalism with the concept of hydro-solidarity. Hydro-solidarity is a concept that is based on the ethics of avoiding the endangerment of the water supply of downstream countries; equitable access to water for all. It is also attached to the principle of good faith. Egyptian and Ethiopian nationalism and both countries’ interest in reaching economic prosperity can be used as a starting point as to how both countries can achieve their economic goals by making the most of the Nile’s water. This should be combined with the notion of hydro-solidarity in the sense that water is a multinational resource and should be taken full advantage of to maximize benefits for all. If this vision is clear, then it will be much easier to reach an agreement as both sides realize that cooperation is key to growth. As for the Ethiopians’ trust of Egyptians, Abiy Ahmed told El Sisi that the past is in the past and that a new era of cooperation shall begin.

Yet, this cooperation will not be possible unless the highly contested issue of the reservoir fill time is settled. Technically speaking, the reservoir can fill in a period as short as three years. However, if Ethiopia decides to do that, it will be putting millions of Egyptians at risk as that would lead to substantial shortages in Egypt’s water supply. That is why Egypt is lobbying for a longer fill time. There is no escape from water shortages though. No matter how long the fill time is, Egypt will suffer from a fall in the Nile water. Still, if the period is extended, the drop will not be as significant. The Egyptian government is trying to get the Ethiopians to settle for a period of 6–7 years. The delays on the dam due to many issues such as the corruption of the contractor charged with the project and the death of one of the head engineers of the dam are giving Egypt more time to stall and make its case to persuade the Ethiopians. Yet, it is highly unlikely that Ethiopia will elongate the period this much as it is faced with pressure to make quick returns on investment. In such a case that the Ethiopian government tries to fill the reservoir as fast as possible, it must make sure that its northern neighbor receives the help necessary to mitigate the repercussions of this move. This can be done by bringing in international assistance to help Egypt rapidly make short-term reforms that will prepare it to handle the problem. That is also something that Egypt needs to do on its own. In its efforts to attain food security and development through agriculture, the post-revolutionary country has done a terrible job of managing its water. The unsustainable use of the Nile water and the immense amount of pollution it is suffering from has been ongoing for far too long. Quite frankly, it is long overdue that Egypt starts managing the Nile in a better, more sustainable manner to be able to not only maximize its benefit from the water, but also to be able to withstand threats like the ones the GERD presents. Another way to prepare Egypt to deal with the GERD’s challenges is an agreed-upon system of information-sharing coordinated among the two countries and Sudan. It would be set up to monitor things like changes in water levels and the detection of any technical or maintenance issues that may lead to adverse effects. Contingency protocols should be put into place as well in order to deal with any unforeseen effects and emergencies that may arise. A final measure that can be used to facilitate the negotiation process is acquiring a mediator. At some point during the talks, Egypt suggested that the World Bank would be a suitable mediator in this dispute. But the mediator has to be approved by both sides. The mediator must also be able to understand the very compelling cases that both sides make. Egypt for instance has long claimed the “lion’s share” of the river Nile as opposed to its neighbors that have more than one river or freshwater resource. Egypt is the driest in the region and the Nile is its only river. On the other hand, Ethiopia has historically been excluded from agreements regarding the Nile’s flow. Its right to development, to which the GERD is an absolute necessity is also an important point to consider. The country is resolute on alleviating poverty and becoming an energy hub in the region while also gaining some political power in the process. This makes for a very tough situation. Thus, picking a mediator may be a difficult task.

In the long run, the effects the GERD will have on downstream countries are positive, but in the short-term, they may be devastating. These positive effects will take years to materialize. So, in the meantime, the three countries, specifically Egypt and Ethiopia, must work together to offset the short-term consequences of the dam. If this is done, the economic future of the region will look very promising. The development of a sense of trust and continued cooperation between all parties will strengthen them and make them powerful global competitors. Though it is imperative that an agreement is reached as soon as possible, a hastily prepared last-minute agreement could be poorly structured and difficult to implement thus possibly making the impact of the dam on downstream countries even worse than predicted. Therefore, a carefully articulated cooperation-based agreement is necessary to satisfy the needs of all parties.