Egypt is a desert country that depends entirely on the Nile River for its freshwater needs. The per capita share of freshwater per year will reach less than five hundred cubic meters by 2025. However, the per capita share in Ethiopia currently reaches 8, 100 cubic meters per year, which is eight times the world average.
Cairo firmly believes that a legally binding agreement regarding the filling and operation of the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam is the only solution for the country’s advancement and the maintenance of international peace and security.
The absence of an Ethiopian binding agreement on the rules for filling and operating the dam affects the lives of Egyptians due to the serious economic and environmental repercussions. In addition, the loss of Egyptian livelihoods constitutes a serious violation of international law, including the violation of the Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes (Water Convention).
The principles of international law regarding the riparian states from the common international waters for the rights of the people of Egypt triumphed against the obstinacy of Ethiopia concerning their response to the dam.
The United Nations reached the 1997 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Non-Navigational Uses of International Watercourses Treaty, and among the most important treaties are: the 1923 Geneva Convention which included: 1) not to damage the rights of other countries concerning international rivers; 2) Each country enjoys, within the limits of the provisions of international law, the generation of electric energy; 3)
The necessity of negotiations regarding the regulation of the exploitation of international waters and4) The necessity of an organization to monitor and supervise public security in the international rivers basins.
The 1933 Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States Treaty included several key principles: 1) recognizing the right of states to exploit their sovereignty over the waters of international rivers, in industrial and agricultural fields; 2) no country has the right to change the course of the international river without the approval of other riverine countries; 3) states should notify the involved countries of any actions related to international waters and 4) In case of disagreement, diplomatic methods and mediation must be implemented.
The following are the most important principles arising from treaties and agreements in the use of international waters: 1) the river basin countries are prohibited from carrying out engineering constructions on the waterway that harm the water portions of the other riparian countries; 2) respect the rights of each country concerning the waters of international rivers; 3) the importance of consultation and agreement between the river basin countries to consider the rights of all countries and 4) prohibiting inpidual rights and preventing abuse of rights.
The following are the most important models for piding international waters in international agreements: the Treaty of the Hague (1795) in relation to the Banana and Saco rivers, which stipulated that river courses are considered joint ownership and, therefore, cannot be assigned to all countries that irrigate these two rivers; the Franco-Swiss Treaty (1824), which included equal distribution of water and freedom to use river courses for irrigation and industrial usage; the U.S.-Mexican Treaty (1906) regulated the run-off of the upper Rio Grande River basin according to a specific timetable between the two countries; the American-Canadian Treaty (1909) included the mutual use of the border rivers on the basis of the following principles: 1) all parties must consent to the construction of the dams and 2) Every country has the right to a fair share of all waters for irrigation purposes, for example, the U.S.-Mexican Water Treaty (1943), which regulated the exploitation of shared rivers’ waters.
In addition, the multilateral treaties related to the uses of international rivers, such as the Treaty of Vienna (1851), the Barcelona Convention and Statute on the Regime of Navigable Waterways of International Concern (1921) and the Geneva Convention (1923), all mark the beginning of the establishment of an international legal rule related to international rivers.
The customary rules established key principles based on non-arbitrariness in the use of implementing fairness in piding water while ensuring the acquired rights of all countries. The equitable share is determined according to the needs of the water basin countries.
The following are the most important recommendations of international laws: state governments are prohibited from using water as a political weapon; the riparian states should pide the water fairly based on scientific and objective criteria set by international laws; taking into consideration the riparian countries affected by climate change andthe prevention of future water projects in shared international water sources without notification and consultation with other riparian countries.
Egypt has not stopped since the Ethiopian refusal to sign the Washington agreement, “on the rules for filling and operating the Renaissance Dam,” which Cairo has signed. In addition, we participated in all regional and international forums, including the African Union to the UN Security Council, to confirm its seriousness and the availability of political will to agree. We knocked on all doors, including regional and international organizations and countries of various sizes, to convince everyone that Egyptwants peaceful solutions to the dam crisis.
Out of its keenness to safeguard its water interests, Egypt sought to move effectively to mobilize international support for the Egyptian position to attract the attention of the international community to the risks associated with Ethiopia taking unilateral measures in its dealings with the dam, and communicated with parliamentarians, legislators, think tanks, research centers, academics, experts and scientists to create an international opinion supported by truth and supports Egypt on this central issue.
Egypt referred the file to the United Nations Security Council, which held a historic session on June 29, 2020to discuss this issue setting a precedent, the first of its kind, for the council to discuss the political and security implications of a water project on an international river, in addition to recognizing its danger to security and stability in the entire region.
|
The Nile River file is a concern to Egyptian citizens at all levels and eagerly pursuing the negotiation processis critical on the Egyptian foreign policy agendato secure Egypt’s water interests and safeguard its rights.
For every billion cubic meters that Ethiopia seizes because of its intransigence and unilateral measures, Egypt will lose 130, 000 hectares of fertile agricultural land, and about a deficit of 430 million U.S. dollars from the proceeds of selling Egyptian agricultural products, in addition to the loss of290, 000 jobs related to agriculture.
The Egyptian economy as a whole will be affected, and it is expected that the budget will lose about one billion and eight hundred million U.S. dollars every year in all economic sectors. The Egyptians will lose about one million jobs. This will also lead to internal migration of cities at the expense of the countryside.
There are major repercussions for the Middle East as a whole, and Europe in particular, as a result of immigration.
The issue of thedam is related to and affects the future and fate of more than two hundred and fifty million citizens in Egypt, Sudan and Ethiopia. Egypt believes that the Nile River does not belong to anyone, will not overstate its water rights and will not tolerate any harm that affects its interests or affects the capabilities of its people, whose existence and life are linked to the river and its bounties.
The Egyptian state has been working diligently and sincerely to protect the capabilities of the Egyptian people and protect the only source of life for millions of Egyptians since the dawn of history. The Egyptian Constitution recognizes the protection of the Nile River and the preservation of Egypt’s historical rights related to it.
Since the Security Council session in June 2020, Egypt has embarked on ongoing negotiations under the auspices of the African Union. However, Cairo’s participation in these negotiations is to reach the desired agreement.
It became clear that Ethiopia is an unreliable partner in negotiations, and despite ten years of extended negotiations, Addis Ababa prohibited any honest party to attend the talks, even as an observer, and abandoned an agreement sponsored by Washington in February 2020.
There are clear examples of what Ethiopia did to Lake Turkana through the misuse of the course of the Omo River.
This illustrates the impact of dam construction on life in Kenya because Ababa took a unilateral and illegal route. This is what led the International Rivers Organization to inform the great economic and security risks that occurred as a result of these unilateral actions by Ababa. This also happened in the Juba River basins when the region of Shabelle did not consult with Somalia. This negatively affected security in Somalia and caused a devastating drought for many arable lands.
Cairo seeks, through the extended negotiations on the dam, to reach a fair and balanced agreement that fulfills the interests of the three Blue Nile countries, allowing Ethiopia to achieve its development goals, protect the people of Egypt and Sudan from dangers and preserve their rights approved by international conventions and norms.
It seems that Ethiopia does not respect its pledges, and this was evident in their behavior by their reservation of the Washington agreement, its rejection of the “agreement” and boycotting the path of negotiations. It even started filling the reservoir of the dam unilaterally without agreement on the rules of filling and operation and intends to start the second phase of filling the dam in July 2021.
Ethiopia has not submitted any studies on the social, economic and environmental impacts of the dam on the downstream countries as stipulated by international law, and it has prohibited any attempt to conduct such studies, either through an impartial party or through international partners.
The majority of Egyptians believe that the solution is in the hands of Washington, the European Union and the countries that support Ababa, such as Japan and Canada, as these countries can pressure Ethiopia because Ethiopia receives annual non-refundable aid and grants estimated at three billion dollars annually.
Egyptians assert that Washington’s reduction in aid of one hundred million dollars during the Trump administration was not sufficient to stop the series of Ethiopian intransigence, and Washington could be a major player in forcing Ethiopia to sign a binding agreement on the filling and operating rules of the dam during President Joe Biden’s administration handling of U.S. affairs.
There is no doubt that the impact of the dam is disastrous for the Egyptian people, and it could push the majority of young people to immigrate to Europe, as Upper Egypt will be completely affected. The electricity of the high dam in Aswan will be reduced after the water level in front of Lake Nasser has decreased.The fish wealth will also decrease in the river by 50%. Nile tourism between Luxor and Aswan will also be affected, and the decrease in the amount of water will cause three million acres to irrigate, which provides about five million job opportunities for Egyptian citizens.
The Egyptian population is about one hundred million people, and the per capita share is less than five hundred and sixty cubic meters per year. Egypt suffers from extreme water poverty, and 95% of its water resources are dependent on the Nile River. The Egyptian government acted immediately to confront water poverty by switching from irrigation by roads to traditional modern irrigation.
Legislations have been developed to reduce the cultivation of water-intensive crops, the use of varieties of crops that consume less water, the expansion of greenhouse projects that save about 80% of water consumption in open lands and the recycling of wastewater. Although Egypt reuses water efficiently, this does not address the severe water poverty that the country suffers from.
The African Union called for a binding agreement on the dam, and Ethiopia announced that it did not seek a binding agreement, but rather sought to have recommendations that could be amended at any time at Ababa’s discretion.
In the end, the international community must realize the dangers of Ethiopia’s failure to comply with the signing of a binding agreement regarding the filling and operation of the dam on international peace and security, the threat to the lives of more than one hundred million Egyptian citizensand the impact of this on the increase in immigration to Europe.
Washington should realize that a fair and binding agreement on the operation is critical to establish peace in the region and to international peace and security.
Egypt calls on the American leadership to play a greater role to solve this issue to reach a fair solution so that the harmful effects of the dam on life in downstream countries are reduced.
Follow the latest news on Google News
