Introduction
The Nile River is the longest river in the world. From its major source,
Lake Victoria in east central Africa, the White Nile flows generally north
through Uganda and into Sudan where it meets the Blue Nile in Khartoum,
which rises in the Ethiopian highlands. The Nile traverses almost 6,700
kilometers (4,169 miles) from its farthest sources of the headwaters of
the Kagera River in Burundi and Rwanda to its delta in Egypt on the
Mediterranean Sea.(1)
The Nile is shared by ten countries - Burundi, Democratic Republic of
Congo, Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Rwanda, Sudan, Tanzania and Uganda�with
a combined population of about 300 million, about 160 million of whom live
within the boundaries of the Nile Basin. The ten countries that share the
Nile waters include some of the world's poorest, with annual per capital
income of less than $250.(2)
In recent months, tensions have been rising over the waters of the Nile.
In preparation for the African summit meeting of African heads of state to
be held in Libya next week, the ministers of water representing the
riparian countries have decided to put the subject of the 1929 Nile Water
Agreement on the summit's agenda.
President Hosni Mubarak chaired a cabinet meeting in Cairo to discuss the
issues. The communiqu� issued after the meeting did not say what Egypt
would do in the face of a persistent demand for reallocating the Nile
waters, and whether Mubarak himself would attend the summit meeting. It
vaguely referred to Egypt's readiness to provide training, technical
assistance, "and help in procuring funding for projects that benefit
all the countries of the Basin," in the framework of respecting the
shares established by the existing agreement.(3) A couple of days earlier,
the Egyptian government daily Al-Gomhouriya wrote that the demands by some
of the Nile Basin countries for reallocating water shares is a matter of
concern to Egypt which requires quick intervention to kill any initiative
that would reduce the water supply to Egypt.(4)
The following is an overview of tensions regarding the Nile River:
The Nile Water Agreement of 1929
The Nile Waters Agreement (NWA) over the allocation of its waters between
Egypt and Great Britain (which represented Uganda, Kenya, Tanganyika [now
Tanzania] and the Sudan) was concluded on November 7, 1929 in Cairo by an
exchange of letters between the Egyptian Prime Minister and the British
High Commissioner in Egypt. The agreement allocated 48 billion cubic
meters per year to Egypt as its acquired right and 4 billion cubic meters
per year to the Sudan. These allocations were later increased to 55.5
billion cu. meters and 18 billion cu., respectively, under a 1959
bilateral agreement between these two countries that allowed for the
construction of the Aswan Dam. Apart from Ethiopia, which had a government
in place, the NWA was made before the other Nile Basin countries gained
their independence.
The agreement stated that no works would be undertaken on the Nile, its
tributaries, and the Lake Basin that would reduce the volume of the water
reaching Egypt. It also gave Egypt the right to "inspect and
investigate" the whole length of the Nile to the remote sources of
its tributaries in the Basin.
This right "to inspect and investigate," which was tantamount to
a veto power over any water or power project, has in recent years become
moot, as all the former colonies on the Nile Basin have become independent
nations and are not likely to readily agree to such encroachment on their
sovereignty by Egypt. Indeed, some of them have begun to nibble on the NWA
by initiating water projects that threaten to reduce the volume of water
available to Egypt. Egypt considers any change in the agreement as a
strategic threat and has repeatedly threatened to use all means at its
disposal to prevent the violations of the agreement. The other Nile Basin
African countries consider the agreement as a relic of a colonial era
which no longer reflects their needs and aspirations and hence it should
be annulled. Countering this argument, Sherif Al-Mousa, head of the Middle
East Program at the American University in Cairo, argues that the Nile
water agreement should be treated the same way as the boundaries of most
Nile Basin countries which were established by colonial powers, and are
recognized under international law.(5)
The Pressures for Change
Population pressures, frequent draughts, and increasing soil salinity have
intensified the demands by the Nile Basin countries to renegotiate the
1929 agreement. Not deterred by Egyptian reluctance to negotiate the 1929
agreement, or even Egyptian threats, and constrained by financial
hardships, some Nile Basin countries are determined to implement projects
that would tap into the sources of the Nile.
The 1959 agreement between Egypt and Sudan, which increased the water
allocations to themselves while completely ignoring the interests of the
other riparian countries such as Tanzania, Kenya and Ethiopia has, in
retrospect, weakened the Egyptian argument about inviolability of the NWA.
The Nile Basin Initiative
To reduce the potential for conflict, and with the help of the World Bank,
the Nile Basin Initiative was launched in 1999 as a transitional
arrangement until a permanent framework is in place. It is guided by a
shared vision "to achieve sustainable socio-economic development
through the equitable utilization of, and benefit from, the common Nile
Basin water resources."
The Nile Basin Initiative notwithstanding, member countries are forging
ahead with their own projects and challenges. Droughts are difficult to
forecast, even in the beginning of the crop season. Building dams to store
water is not unlike a bank savings account, to be used at a time of need.
While Egypt has secured its agriculture with the building of the Aswan
Dam, it has been reluctant, if not belligerent, when other countries on
the Nile Basin sought similar solutions.
Ethiopia Asserts Rights to the Blue Nile
The Ethiopian Minister of Water Resources announced his country's
intentions to develop close to 200,000 hectares (ha.) of land though
irrigation projects and construction of two dams in the Blue Nile
Sub-basin. He further stated that these projects would be the first phase
of forty-six projects which Ethiopia proposed to execute along with ten
joint projects which Egypt and Sudan proposed. The Egyptian Ambassador to
Ethiopia confirmed.
Egypt's commitment is to the utilization of the Nile waters for the
benefit of all riparian countries. However, the Egyptian commitment was
conditional. All projects must benefit both upstream and downstream
countries, provided these projects do not lead to a reduction of the
waters reaching Egypt.
The Ethiopian Minister of Water Resources retorted that the agreement to
participate in the Nile Basin Initiative reserves Ethiopia's right to
implement any project in the Blue Nile Sub-basin unilaterally, at any
given time. He charged that the 1959 agreement between Egypt and Sudan
impedes sustainable development in the basin and called for its
nullification.(6)
From the Egyptian perspective, any change in the volume of its water could
have devastating effects on Egypt. The vast majority of Egyptians live in
a valley which is about 4 percent of the Egyptian territory, and 95
percent of Egypt's water resources are derived from the Nile.
Tanzania Challenges Egypt
In early February 2004, Tanzania launched a project to draw water from
Lake Victoria to supply the Shinyanga region. The project calls for the
construction of about a 100 mile long inland pipeline at an initial cost
of $27.6 million, to be constructed by a Chinese engineering company. To
mitigate the anticipated Egyptian reaction, Tanzania announced that the
pipleline was designed to provide drinking water to its thirsty population
rather than irrigate agricultural land. Tanzania's population of 35
million has suffered from frequent droughts, desertification, and soil
erosion. In fact, Tanzania was the first riparian country which, upon its
independence in 1961, declared the 1929 agreement invalid.(7)
Nevertheless, Egypt expressed its irritation with the Tanzanian project,
arguing that under the 1929 agreement it has the right to veto any project
- agricultural, industrial, or power - that could threaten its vital
interests in guaranteeing its annual share of the river waters. While
Egypt is handling the issue diplomatically, Egyptian officials stressed
that "the diplomatic dialogue does not mean that Cairo does not
consider any number of other options, if necessary."(8) In diplomatic
parlance, "other options" do not exclude the use of force.
Tanzania has not budged. The Deputy Permanent Secretary in the Tanzanian
Ministry of Water and Livestock Development, Dr. C. Nyamurunda, said that
Tanzania's sentiments about the legality of the water agreement are well
known. He emphasized that "other countries also believe that the
treaties [NWA] were illegal but they are to cooperate in negotiations,
although they are not restricted from using the waters of the
Nile."(9)
Another Challenge from Kenya
Similarly, in response to a threat from Kenya that it was considering
withdrawing from the 1929 agreement, the Egyptian Minister of Irrigation
and Water Resources Mahmoud Abu Zeid said: "Egypt considers the
withdrawal of Kenya from this agreement as tantamount to official
declaration of war [emphasis added] and a threat to its vital interests
and national security." A Kenyan weekly quoted the Egyptian minister
declaring in Addis Ababa that Kenya could be subject to sanctions by Egypt
and the other eight members of the Nile River Basin Agreement. He said
Kenya's position violates international law and customs "and we will
not agree to it."(10)
The Kenyan deputy foreign minister M. Watangola repeated his country's
demand for a revision of this historic agreement because Kenya was not
consulted prior to its being signed. He said eight Kenyan rivers flow into
Lake Victoria, which is the main source of the Nile waters.(11)
Water for Oil
A senior Kenyan parliamentarian suggested that the Nile water should be
sold to Egypt and Sudan for oil. He said that the time has come to replace
the Nile agreement with a new agreement to allow the members to benefit
from the Nile's waters. He added: "We have presented our natural
resources to Egypt and Sudan free without them doing anything in return.
We need to sell to them as they sell to us." The Egyptian treated the
idea as "stupid" because the two countries have vested rights,
rather than customers who would buy the water.(12)
Egypt Accuses Hidden Fingers
In addition to Tanzania and Kenya, Ethiopia and Uganda are also demanding
the abrogation of the 1929 agreement and a bigger share of the Nile
waters. Egypt accuses "hidden fingers known to the Egyptian side
[which] are openly inciting the traditional allies of Egypt in the Nile
Basin to annul the agreement, arguing that it is incompatible with the
population and political developments that have transpired in the last 75
years."(13) The anonymous senior Egyptian official who has made the
allegation about the "hidden fingers" stressed that any change
in the agreement was inconceivable and warned that "any infringement
of the agreement would suggest that the African countries do not respect
regional obligations."(14)
Egypt's Alternatives
To deal with the threat to its vital oil supply Egypt has four
alternatives. Some are not mutually exclusive:
* Reduce waste through improved irrigation system.
* Price water at market rates.
* Maintain the status quo as long as feasible.
* Resort to the use of force.
Reduce Waste Through Improved Irrigation System
According to a study by the World Bank, 96.44 per cent of the economically
active population in Egypt is engaged in agriculture. It is the highest
percentage in the Middle East, with Morocco in second place with 92.61
percent of active population in agriculture. By contrast, the
corresponding ratios for Tunisia and Lebanon are 60.87 and 10.35 percent,
respectively. As a result, much of the water is used in agriculture, which
contributes proportionately a small percentage to GDP. In Egypt, 88% of
the water is consumed in agriculture which, as a sector, contributes only
14 percent to GDP, while 8 percent of water used in industry contributes
34 per cent of GDP. The report suggests that "from a narrow
macroeconomic perspective, rationale of justifying the allocation of water
to agriculture over industrial and other sectors is weak."(15)
Price Water at Market Rates
While the region remains one of the most water-scarce regions in the
world, the cost of water for irrigation is set at below cost recovery
levels. Egyptian agriculture is entirely dependent on irrigated land. The
government provides irrigation water free, except of cost recovery of
on-farm investment projects. Annual irrigation subsidies are estimated at
$5 billion. In Egypt, irrigation subsidies are often rationalized as a
means of offsetting low farm prices controlled to keep down urban food
prices.(16) Water pricing and subsidies are such that they lead to waste
in agriculture and provide little incentive for conservation techniques.
Maintain the Status Quo
Egypt's third option is to seek a status quo while tolerating some changes
on the margin. To do so, Egypt must continue to maintain a pro-American
and pro-Western orientation to discourage them and organizations
controlled by them, such as the World Bank, from financing costly water
projects such as dams or power projects in any of the riparian countries,
which they themselves cannot finance through internally-generated
resources.
Resort to the Use of Force
The last and least likely alternative is to resort to the use of force to
uphold Egypt's right to exercise the veto power on activities that it
deems dangerous to its national interests. Egypt's saber rattling cannot
be taken too seriously, certainly not by the African countries themselves.
Indeed, as one Egypt daily pointed out, "the harsh language adopted
by Abou Zeid ... might not be working..."(17) Not only does Egypt
lack the military capacity to strike at countries two thousand miles
outside its borders, but it will be hard pressed to justify a military
action to enforce the provision of a 75-year old agreement concluded to
satisfy colonialist considerations and priorities but dissatisfy the needs
of the countries upstream. A Kenyan father of two, who owns eight ponds
for fish farming, was quoted as saying: "If the Egyptians try to
invade Kenya for the sake of its water we are ready to die for our rights.
Kenya must forget the Nile agreement and return to the commercial
consumption of the Lake Victoria Lake."(18)
* Nimrod Raphaeli is a Senior Analyst at MEMRI
|