Get real time updates directly on you device, subscribe now.
Win-win GERD filling sure to break Nile impasse
FekaduW.
The NBI Ministerial Committee had held talks on March 17, 2017, in Khartoum, Sudan, among the water ministers of Egypt, Sudan, Uganda and Rwanda, in addition to representatives from Kenya and Ethiopia. The talk had focused on the possibility of Egypt reactivating its NBI membership which shuns membership since 2010, in protest of the Entebbe Agreement, which rearranged Nile water allotments.
Furthering cooperation and reaching an agreement on the GERD was the main recommendation of the meeting. It stressed on the importance of continuous negotiations between Egypt, Sudan and Ethiopia; these countries must strive to find common ground to utilize Nile water for the common benefit of all riparian countries; Nile countries should work as a single entity for the development of Nile Basin by implementing development projects that enhance mutual benefit.
Currently, Egypt seems interested to see progress in settling Nile issues, though some are suspicious of the quicksilver and a self righteous stand of Egypt and its mucking around negotiations regarding the Nile; blowing hot and cold and flogging a dead horse to shore up colonial treaties (currently, however, real time has come for Egypt to step up to the table and continue discussion about CFA and GERD).
It is worth reckoning that Ethiopia, Sudan and Egypt had signed a declaration on 23rd March, 2015 signifying a new era of official cooperation over the Nile River waters, beyond the Faustian Nile Treaty of colonial times; in-comprehensive agreement that becomes a boon for Egypt and bane for Ethiopia and other upstream countries.
The declaration has helped to minimize back door stabbing, defuse intense feuding and stalemate that has been blighting the region for so many years, at least in principle. Following the remarkable declaration, media coverage is currently showing better interest to enhance cooperation, bridge the fissure and heal the wounds of upstream countries that were hurt by colonial treaties.
Similarly, the Cooperative Framework Agreement (CFA) was drafted in 2010 to replace the NBI, and so far it has been signed by Burundi, Ethiopia, Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania, and Uganda. Opposition from Sudan and Egypt, however, has prevented the CFA from becoming fully operational: the two downstream countries claim that the text overlooks their own water supply needs.
This attitudinal shift has come at the time of increased complexity to manage the Nile River water resources, due to pressures from population increase, land-use changes, regional conflict, and climate change, among others. The cooperation between Ethiopia, Sudan and Egypt is becoming encouraging with time considering these pressures and highlights the importance of negotiations that trans-boundary water resources necessitate.
Besides, the construction of the GERD, the largest hydropower Dam on the Blue Nile has been urging countries, particularly, Ethiopia, Sudan and Egypt, to continuously meet and discuss on various issues about the GERD. The points of discussion include how to fill the Dam and assessing potential impacts of it.
The project has become a source of national pride for many Ethiopians (and some say a source of concern and disagreement for many Egyptians). However, scholars and hydrologists say faltering negotiations stem from lack of understanding of the extent of the risks, and how these can be mitigated.
In line with this, research conducted by a joint partnership of Oxford and Khartoum Universities had earlier revealed that practical reservoir filling strategies should be applied to minimize potential negative downstream impacts via trans-boundary coordination; similar to the stand of Ethiopia that strives to workable rational and avoid any significant impact on Nile downstream countries.
The goal of Ethiopia is to harness its hydrological potential to lift its people out of cursed indigence. Similarly, insatiable need to massive electrification, triggered by the current development, has been exerting high pressure on Ethiopia to harness natural resources like Blue Nile (in addition to coping up with the risk of prolonged drought and alleviating poverty).
Following the construction of GERD, however, foreign ‘’politicians, scholarsand bloggers’’had and has been publicizing trumped up studies and “research findings“ that suit their biased purpose. No need to produce hard-earned evidence. Anyone whoGoogles the GERD may be surprised by the popping up of countless publications that bear unrealistic recommendation, hatred and fabricated stories.
Fortunately, few publications try to be neutral while the rest are typical instances of after me the deluge sentiment. The effort and ultimate goal of so called bloggers and websites is to safeguard colonial treaties of Egypt that unfairly grant the right of using most of the water of Nile to Egypt; neglecting close to 10 Nile Riparian countries most of whom are shackled by poverty.
But it does not mean that Ethiopians publish and post materials about the GERD and CFA. They all do write and post many things about Nile, except ones that incite conflict. The materials being posted by most Ethiopian writers are related to Nile cooperation, insignificant impact and mutual benefit which by any means outweigh unrealistic and dishonest proposals and recommendations being publicized by afore mentioned bloggers.
Most importantly, the publications of Ethiopian writers and scholars are meticulously and purposefully geared towards the benefits cooperation, and the principle of insignificant impact while utilizing Nile. Equally important, publications on the Ethiopian side are based on the recommendations of International Panel of Experts (IPEs) and the Helsinki rule of trans-boundary rivers.
When will these all media houses and websites issue publications about trust, cooperation, mutual benefit, management and environmental protection for sustainable use of the Nile? It may not be answered soon. But the answer would be found definitely, soon after the triumph of Nile cooperation and GERD commencing operation.
Contrary to biased researches, Journal of Water International published in 2016 stated that GERD will indeed provide a substantial amount of hydropower once the turbines are installed and the reservoir begins to be filled. The hydrologic conditions and non-increasing demands during the filling period, the “risks“ to downstream users and hydropower generation can be managed with the combination of an agreed annual release from the GERD, proactive reoperation of the Sudanese reservoirs and implementation of a drought management policy. Assured protection of Egypt’s needs across all hydrologic conditions is only feasible with cooperative management of the upstream infrastructure in Ethiopia and Sudan.
The journal strengthens the stand of Ethiopia to maintain reliable water supplies to the large irrigated agricultural areas of Sudan and Egypt. With effective communication and coordination between Ethiopia, Sudan and Egypt, the supplies to large diversions can be assured throughout the filling period. However, the journal corroborates, without agreed annual GERD releases and proper reoperation of Sudanese reservoirs, losses to energy generation in Sudan may be up to 28%. Similarly, once filling is complete, it increases energy generation of Sudanese dams up to 21%, thanks to GERD making flows available during the non-flood period and reduction of spills during the flooding season.
Ethiopia is interested to continue negotiations and discussions with all Nile Basin countries, particularly Egypt and Sudan on ways as to how fill the GERD in a reasonable manner that avoids significant impact on their development activities. Nation is also keen on reaffirming its unwavering stand that its main interest of building the GERD is only to overcome poverty through power generation; by storing water in a rational time span that does not cause significant impact on downstream countries.
The length of time through which the GERD should hold water is something that nation is discussing with downstream countries. Although Ethiopia has not reached at a final agreement until now, it has continued discussion to help decide up on the time span to fill the Dam. As far as breaking Nile impasse through reasonable GERD filling is concerned, the most significant issue is perhaps arriving at comprehensive agreement on reasonable timeframe to fill the Dam.
The Nation believes the volume of water required to activate all 16 turbines is quite enormous and it needs rationalized timeframe and wise decision. Hence, there will be an agreed timeframe to fill the whole Dam, possibly supported by recommendation of professionals of the two selected consulting firms, which are expected to resume their work soon.
So far, various chroniclers had been publishing their speculations about the length of time planned to fill the GERD. Some projected seven years time while others boldly state twenty years of time. However, this all projections are mere speculations to attract readers and the eye of viewers.
The accurate span of time will be disclosed after rigorous discussion and unanimous agreement with the downstream countries; GERD filling time will be set rationally taking in to account mutual benefit, furthering regional cooperation and avoiding significant impact which Sudan and Egypt are suspicious of and breaking the standoff hovering over Nile for many decades; once and for ruling out bones of contention over Nile including acquired rights, historical rights and prior appropriation.
