Nile Imperatives

                        CHAPTER ONE                                                  Back

SOME PARADOXES IN THE NILE STATUS QUO

One fact is indisputable: the region is running out of water.  And the people who have built their lives and livelihoods on a reliable source of fresh water are seeing the shortage of this vital resource impinge on all aspects of the tenuous relations that have developed over the years between economic sectors, and between individuals and their environ­ment. 

Aaron T. Wolf, University of Alabama, U.S.A.^1a

HYDRO POLITICS OF EGYPT 

Egypt has made greater use of the Nile waters than all the other riparian countries combined. This is due to the geographical, historical and economic circumstances obtaining in Egypt. Except the small Mediterranean strip and the narrow Nile Valley the rest of Egypt is a vast desert.   

Besides, as the vast majority of the Egyptian population are farmers, they depend on the Nile waters for irrigation. In fact, 98 per cent of the population lives in the valley of the Nile where more than 86 per cent of the Nile waters is provided by Ethiopia.   

Not surprisingly, therefore, Egypt attaches great importance to her bilateral relation with Ethiopia though this relation has not always been constructive. Equally impor­tantly Ethiopia accords significance to her relation with Egypt because of its desire to reach an agreement on the Nile which it hopes will lead to a cooperation and a win-win situation. 

Despite the desire of Ethiopia and Egypt to improve relations, though on different terms, however the lopsided and uneven relationship and distributional imbalance of the waters of the Nile still persists. Nevertheless, one should recognize that is not entirely of the makings of Egyptian government. 

Egypt is not only dependent on the water of the Nile, but also on the fertile soil which the various tributaries that feed the Nile carry with the annual floods from the Ethiopian highlands. The Egyptian leader Khedive Ismael has immortal­ized the essence of this lopsided relation between the two countries in an oft-quoted statement which he made in response to a question put to him. Asked whether he intended to annex Ethiopia, he is reported as having replied “nature was already sending him down the best part of Ethiopia with each flood of the Nile, so that he had no desire for the residue.”^1b

After colonizing Egypt in 1882 and Sudan, Kenya and Uganda in the last decade of the 19th century, Britain through political and legal maneuvers tried to ensure the unobstructed and continuous flow of the Nile River to Egypt. Interestingly and paradoxi-cally enough, it had also signed agreement on behalf of its other colonies pledging not to construct dams on the Nile River.   

Further, it had signed agreements with Ethiopia, the Italian colony of Eritrea and King Leopold II’s colony of the Congo prohibiting them from using the Nile waters without the prior consent of the British Government.  It is also instructive to note that the 1929 Nile waters apportionment agreement between Britain and Egypt banned irrigation, power generation and other uses of the Nile waters by Sudan and other British colonies without the prior agreement of the Egyptian government in order to ensure a constant flow of water to Egypt.   

The British stance, in more senses than one, represents the early embryo of unilateralism which still bedevils the relationship among the Nile riparians in general and that of Ethiopia and Egypt in particular.  Britain signed this agreement, which failed to uphold customary law as well as common sense, to soothe the anti-British nationalist anger in Egypt which followed the end of World War I, but it also resulted in the lingering feelings of resentment against Britain and Egypt by upper riparians.  

Paradoxically, while the other riparians were prevented from building dams Egypt has constructed barrages and dams without consult­ing upstream riparians.  During the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, the desire of the Egyptian Govern­ment was to control the Nile waters in such a way that the floods would remain within the banks.  This was to ensure the availability of water throughout the year for permanent irrigation and for expanding the land under irrigation. Regrettably, how­ever, the needs of upstream riparians was not taken into account by the Egyptian Government.  

In 1959, Egypt and Sudan signed an agreement for full utilization of the Nile waters without including other riparian in the agreement. By this agreement Sudan was allocated 18.5 BCM of water of the Nile and Egypt 55.5 BCM.  After this agreement was reached the construction of the Great Aswan Dam went ahead in 1960.

The Aswan High Dam is the first largest man-made lake with a reservoir of 591 Kms long which is capable of releasing 1500 tons of water every second for irrigation during times of drought. The Dam was estimated to expand cultivated land by 1.3 million acres and result in the application of permanent irrigation on 700,000 acres using the basin system. Its ultimate aim is to ensure the water security of Egypt by minimizing the risk of fluctuation of the Nile waters.  Moreover, the dam was intended to provide considerable hydro-electric power as well as improved navigation possibilities below the dam. While constructing such an immense dam, Egypt did not open dialogue with any of the upstream Nile countries except the Sudan.  Indeed the needs of the upper riparians were simply ignored.² 

Regrettably the same is true said about the recently inaugurated Sinai and Kharga (Dkhala) water diversion projects which were constructed without prior consultation with upstream riparians.  For instance, it should be noted that El Salam project requires 4.45 BCM of water which is to be pumped to the Sinai from the Nile.   

The same is also true of the new artificial lake in the valley of Khargo and Dkhala which began in 1981. A canal  links the Nile and Lake Nasser to the new artificial lake with a reservoir of 600 sq. km and a capacity of 120 BCM.  This was also planned to bring 200,000 hectares of land under irrigation.  Such unilateral actions on the part of Egypt has encouraged other upper riparian to act unilaterally in their utilizing the waters of the Nile.³ 

é UP

THE HYDRO POLITICS OF ETHIOPIA 

Ethiopia is the main source of the Nile waters. More than 86 per cent of the water of the Nile originates from Ethiopia.  However, it is a country that has made the least use of the Nile waters.  During the colonial era, Ethiopia was engaged in struggles to maintain its territorial integrity and political independence against the colonial powers.  This meant that it had neither the time nor the resources to harness the Nile waters.  

Yet, Ethiopia had the interest to utilize the Nile waters.  A clear embodiment of Ethiopia’s interest of exploring the possibility of using the Nile for its development was that King Tefari Mekonnen sent a special envoy, Dr Workneh Martin, to the Untied States in 1927, on diplomatic mission to discuss and recruit American engineers for the Lake Tana development project.  As a result of that effort, J.G. White Engineering Company was sent by the US Government, to undertake the study. 

The Ethio-US cooperation led to the commencement of the physical survey of the Blue Nile in 1930 at an estimated total cost of $8,878,000. The work included Lake Tana outlet work and the construction of a highway from Addis Ababa to Lake Tana.  However, the project failed to materialize due to opposition on the part of Britain and the impending Italian invasion of Ethiopia.⁴ 

In the 1950s, Ethiopia contracted a US Engineering firm, Balton Hannessey and partners, to conduct a comprehensive study of the Abay (Blue Nile) River.  The survey was implemented in 1957-1962.  It involved studies of stream flow, soils, hydroelectric power potential, land use, marketing, communica­tions, dams and irrigation potentials, which still constitute a fertile and lucrative area of action and cooperation.  

Sadly enough again, while Ethiopia was conducting the study, Egypt and Sudan were engaged in negotiation regarding the full utilization of the Nile waters in which Ethiopia was not included.  It was, in fact, in this context that the Ethiopian Government protested asserting Ethiopia’s right to utilize the water resources within its borders.  

This was motivated by three factors. One is that the Abay (Blue Nile) River basin has considerable irrigable land.  A second factor is that Ethiopia faced droughts afflicted it repeatedly, which made it necessary for it to utilize the waters of the Blue Nile for irrigation.   As a result, by the 1970s Ethiopia had mapped out plans for developing irrigated agriculture in the Blue Nile Basin.  According to Arsano:-  

Regarding the irrigation of the Ethiopian Nile Basin, 1,600,000 hectares of land, including, 115,000 hectares around Tekeze (Atbara), Angereb and Guang Rivers, 1,000,000 hectares around Baro (Sobat) River and 400,000 hectares of land around Abay (Blue Nile) was planned to come under irrigation.⁵ 

A third factor motivating Ethiopia’s assertion of its right to utilize the Nile waters is that most of the rivers in Ethiopia, including the Blue Nile are suitable for the generation of hydro-electric power.  The rivers of Ethiopia also have the potential to produce 56,000 million KWh of hydro-electric power. It thus behooves Ethiopia to harness its hydro-power potential to conserve the limited foreign exchange which it spends on importing oil.  Hence, as Arsano rightly observes:  

In any genuine attempt to tackle the problem of food and energy, Ethiopia has no option but effectively use her Nile waters for consumptive and non-consump­tive purposes. There is no legal or institutional obligation which de­tracts Ethiopian policy makers as well as planners from fulfilling this duty in the best interest of their people. ⁶ 

Nevertheless, while the right of Ethiopia to utilize its water resources remains valid, its desire to reach an agreement on allocation has persisted for the simple reasons that it is firmly committed to peace and a win-win situation which can be derived from cooperation.

CHAPTER TWO 

CURRENT IMPERATIVES TO ANILE BASIN

In Africa, water is unevenly distributed by nature and unevenly allocated by humans. The poor spend too much of their limited income, calories and time to get inadequate amounts of water," are most at risk from the lack of water availability, and are likely to pay the highest price for this scarcity".

Margaret A. Novicki ⁷ 

THE FOOD SECURITY IMPERATIVE 

The food security imperatives of Egypt and the need to prepare for the winter of the future is compelling. Egypt, like Ethiopia, is currently trying to meet this challenge of the future through a massive Nile water diversion to the Sinai Desert on an unprecedented scale as noted in the excerpt below:  

The Egyptian government has broken ground on what will become the world's largest water pumping station, able to move 22,712 cubic meters (6 billion gallons) of Nile River water per day. The pumping station is the first step in a grand irrigation scheme for Egypt's desolate Western Desert, using the station and a giant canal to irrigate hundreds of thousands of acres in one of the world's driest climate.⁸ 

Egypt’s preoccupation with its future food security is fully appreciated in view of its growing population and the size of the arable land under cultivation which is entirely dependent on the Nile.  This also explains why the planned Sinai project is of the scale it is: 

The project is essential, the President said, because the country is quickly running short of both water and living space. Today, nearly 90 percent of Egypt's 62 million people live on and work the land in the Nile River Delta, which totals only four percent of Egypt's entire area. Farmers have managed to maximize arable land by irrigating desert along the Nile's edge and around Lake Nasser, the mammoth reservoir created by the Aswan High Dam. But with a projected population of 85 million by 2015, the government contends that new areas for cultivation must be developed.9 

Indeed, the importance of the project is also underlined by the magnitude of the investment and its technical complexity:  

The project's cost is to be more than US$2 billion. The massive pumping station, which will lift water 55 meters from Lake Nasser, will cost $810 million. The rest of the money will provide for construction of a three-mile tunnel and a canal, which may become the world's longest, at 150 miles (240 kilometers). This channel will provide irrigation for over 500,000 acres and link the oases of El Kharga and Farafra. Nearly 10 percent of all the water collected each year in Lake Nasser would be pumped along this ditch into the Western Desert.¹⁰ 

THE IMPERATIVES OF CON-SENSES AND INNOVATIONAL SECURITY CONCERN 

While the Egyptian national concern is valid, it runs against a serious hurdle because it does not seem to take stock of the national security concerns of its immediate Nile partners.  Aaron Gladman has captured the essence of this contentious issue which Egypt has to grapple with sooner than later: 

Legal agreements with Sudan and Ethiopia, who control the headwaters of the Nile, entitle Egypt to 55.5 billion cubic meters of water each year. Currently, the country uses every drop and more (recycling programs produce an extra 7.5 billion cubic meters per year). This leaves a paltry 300 million cubic meters to flow into the Mediterra­nean Sea annually - a fraction of the river's natural flow. Hydrologists familiar with the area have raised many concerns about the project.¹¹

Clearly, international public opinion is also likely to see it as an unjust and inconsiderate measure.  Professor Tony Alan, a leading scholar and scientists on the water issue in general and the Nile in particular, does not, for instance, mince his words in pointing out the injustice in the Egyptian position. The Professor of the University of London's School of Oriental and African Studies, calls the plan "preposterous, a national fantasy." He points out that both Sudan and Ethiopia are planning to build more impoundments on the upper Nile, and thus Egypt "is going to have less water [in the future], not more". 

But, Professor Alan is not alone in expressing doubts about the Sinai project.  Some scientists including Egyptian ones have expressed con­cerns for technical reasons.  Farouk El-Baz, an Egyptian hydrolo­gist who teaches at Boston University in the US, also says the canal is not justified. He points out that the open channel will suffer enormous evaporative losses, and could easily be filled with sand blowing from the area's large dunes. El-Baz has also warned that the new scheme is likely cause problems with poor drainage and waterlogged fields. As most of the valleys along the canal are in depressions, El-Baz further cautions that, "fields would become waterlogged and pools would become breeding grounds for mosquitoes."¹²

Of course, there are better ways of addressing the water issue.  One way is to improve the efficiency and a second way is to do research and coordinate with other riparians on more rational water utilization.  This is a view shared by many as observed below:  

Opponents of the project, both local and international, say that Egypt would be better advised to research more efficient use of water in existing irrigated areas in the Nile delta, to prudently use available ground water, and to expand sewage-water recycling programs.¹³ 

UNILATERALISM AND THE IMPERATIVE OF COMMON GOOD 

The sad story about the diversion of the Nile water to the Sinai Desert is not only that it is a unilateral action which does not take stock of the needs of the other riparianians, but also that it is not being harnessed to generate wealth for the common good of all. Very important lessons can be drawn from the American experience of water exploitation for the well-being of all. As one US story has it the City Superintendent of Los Angeles is said to have told the residents of LA: “There it is.  Take it,” as the residents stood by in 1913 with tin cups in hand, waiting to taste the first water sluicing through the 223-mile aqueduct from the Owens Valley. This story was later popularized by the water grab movie of Roman Polanski, called Chinatown. The interesting story is that a powerful group of L.A. businessmen “stole water from the fruit growers and cattle ranchers of the Owens Valley and made a fortune building subdivisions of the most productive croplands in the world on the newly irrigated land.” The message of this is that water can be diverted to benefit not only entrepreneurs but also large populations that deserve to benefit from it without inflicting harm on others and to the benefit of all. 

The American Saga underscores the significance of Water as a source of life, wellbeing and wealth to all.  Its value as the basis of the wealth of Los Angeles is further highlighted in the excerpt below: 

Mulholland’s bounteous gesture pretty much sums up how we’ve felt about water from the start.  Like the wealthy L.A. Syndicate, we’ve taken it almost for free.  We’ve used the gift of fresh water to irrigate our fields, producing a windfall harvest on thousands of acres of land where it would never have been possible on rainwater alone.  In the northern hemisphere, we’ve harnessed and tamed three-quarters of the flow from the world’s major rivers to quench our thirst and generate power for our cities.14

THE IMPERATIVE OF WATER SCARCITY 

This important source of lesson for Nile countries is also underscored by the current projections about water scarcity in the future which is alarming. It is expected to affect many parts of the world. According to Elaine Robbins:  

“A number of areas could enter a period of chronic shortages during this decade, including much of Africa, northern China, pockets of India, Mexico, the Middle East and parts of western North America,” according to Sandra Postel, director of the Global Water Policy Project in Amherst, Massachusetts.  Some 26 countries are now considered to be “water scarce” - with fewer than 1,000 cubic meters of water available to each person per year.  The number of water-scarce countries is expected to rise to 35 by the year 2020.15 

Robbins further asserts that signs of scarcity the world over has begun to raise serious concerns.  She observes that it is not a localized affair, but a phenomenon which has begun to hit a large parts of continents, countries and major cities.  In megacities like Mexico and Bangladesh there is also an alarm about sinking cities as underground water continues to be overexploited. Robbins quotes Postel: 

Signs of water scarcity are showing up in many parts of the world.  According to the World-Watch Institute, groundwater over-pumping and aquifer deple­tion are now a serious problem in the world’s most intensive agricultural areas, including the western United States, India and northern China.  And in heavily populated cities like Mexico City, Bangkok and Jakarta, land is sinking as more groundwater is withdrawn to serve the water needs of growing populations than can’t be replenished by rainfall.  “The Nile in Egypt, the Ganges in South Asia, the Yellow River in China and the Colorado River in America are among the major rivers that are so dammed, diverted or over-tapped that little or no fresh water reaches its final destination for significant stretches of time,” writes Postel.¹⁶ 

THE IMPERATIVE OF BALANUNG DEMAND AND SUPPLY 

What is more, maintaining balance between the demand for water and its supply is beginning to cause a serious disequilibrium.  In fact, the demand for water has grown twice as much as that of population partly because of the Green Revolution.  This has also led to higher levels of consumption due to improvement in the material quality of life of people in many parts of the world. As a result:  

In the century that’s now drawing to a close, demand for fresh water has grown twice as fast as population growth – due in large part to the Green Revolution in agriculture and a rising standard of living for many of the world’s people. Growing demand(coupled with centuries of poor water management and water pollution, which renders available resources unusable(has created local shortage of this renewable but finite resource.  Ideas like towing icebergs to the Middle East and piping Alaska river water under the ocean to thirsty California aside, most cost-effective sources of new water “development” have already been tapped.  Competition is heating up between countries, between different users within an area, and between man and nature.  Will we pursue available solutions through conserva­tion and equitable reallocation? Or will Mark Twain be proved right when he said, “Whiskey’s for drinking.” ¹⁷ 

However, while there is no denying the fact that the water problem will probably get worse, some optimism is provided by countries like Israel where ingenuity and wisdom are being used to cope with the challenge of water scarcity to turn some of the arid parts of the world into a green areas. This point is emphasized below: 

A drive through Israel and the West Bank reveals two very different scenarios of our relationship with water in the coming half century.  In Israel, you can see evidence of man’s ingenuity with living in a brutally parched landscape.  Rows of orange trees and vegetable plants are irrigated with recycled wastewater from the cities.  Seawater irrigates varieties of cotton and tomato plants that thrive on salty water.  Most impressive, Israeli officials, while proud of their country’s success at realizing the Zionist dream of making the desert bloom, recognize that it’s unsustainable in the long run.  They reportedly plan to transfer more than a third of agriculture’s fresh water to cities, using income from the growing industrial sector to import more of the nation’s food.¹⁸ 

The contrast between development in Israel and Palestine, which of course has its own historical reasons, is for instance noteworthy as Robbins Elaine further explains:  

Fifty miles away in the West Bank, a different picture emerges. Many Palestinians lack running water, so they have to buy their water from trucks or capture in cisterns the little rainwater that falls.  Although they are sitting on top of the West Bank aquifer, which supplies 25 percent of Israel’s water, they are forbidden by Israeli authorities to drill wells to tap the aquifer.  Policymakers are