Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD) Negotiation: Sunk in the Reservoirs or Still Afloat?

Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD) Negotiation: Sunk in the Reservoirs or Still Afloat? “Let us never negotiate out of fear. But let us never fear to negotiate.” J. F. Kennedy
— August 17, 2022

BY LULSEGGED ABEBE

Abstract

GERD the largest hydroelectric power generation project financed by the people of Ethiopia is a contentious dam as the two downstream countries consider it a threat. Though the three countries – Egypt, Ethiopia and Sudan signed the Declaration of Principles (DoP) in 2015, it did not help in sorting out their difference. Egypt labeled the construction of the dam as a security threat and raised it at different forums including the UNSC. AU took the lead to facilitate the negotiation among its three member states but it remained in a deadlock. Despite this, Ethiopia continued the construction of the dam, impounded water three times and have generated electricity. This article is an analysis of how and why the negotiation is in a deadlock.

GERD’s controversy

GERD is the only contentious dam in the world. During the last three or four years, academic journals, both online and print, newspapers, bloggers, and social media were overwhelmed by analysis, criticism and speculations about GERD and its future. GERD is discussed at continental and regional political forums, such as African Union (AU), European Union (EU), League of Arab States, and Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) to mention some. GERD is the only dam which was discussed in the UN Security Council, a platform where global peace and security issues are deliberated and discussed.

On 9 July 2021, the former Ethiopian Minister of Water and Energy Dr. Sileshi Bekele presented his case at the UNSC meeting. An important development input designed to achieve Goal 7 of the SDG was presented – as a security threat which deprives water to the people of Egypt and Sudan. GERD, the source of green energy was painted as an “existential threat” to the people of Egypt. Is GERD really a threat to the people of Egypt and Sudan or a blessing? Did the negotiation sink in the reservoir or is it still afloat?

GERD, the peoples’ dam, financed by resources generated from the people of Ethiopia at home and in the Diaspora, which has pounded water two times, despite another negative media campaign, the reservoir impounded water for the third time and is generating 540 MW of electricity from the two turbines. GERD as a development project is a source of energy and has started lighting households in Ethiopia and neighboring countries. Kenya, Sudan and South Sudan have already signed an agreement with the government of Ethiopia to get power supply from GERD. Despite the contributions of GERD towards regional integration, and source of energy, why a negative campaign?

GERD has become both a political and national issue for politicians in Ethiopia, Egypt, and Sudan; and for some western governments who aspire to control and dominate politics in the Horn of Africa. When the political temperature increases, be it in Egypt or Sudan, politicians will raise the GERD card, label it as a national threat and divert attention. For politicians, especially the Egyptian Minister of Foreign Affairs Sameh Shoukry, GERD is one way of sustaining his political career, as he travels globally, to persuade governments to pressurize Ethiopia by sharing mixed messages of dialogue and threat. During the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos, on 24 May 2022, Minister Sameh Shoukry said, “…Cairo is always ready for dialogue on the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD) issue, describing the file as an existential issue and a matter of national security for Egypt and its people.” GERD has also been presented as an Arab security threat which is difficult to justify as the Nile is an African river, with eleven contributing countries. It is one indication of Egypt’s shift from Pan Africanism to Pan Arabism.

GERD has been and continues to be an important agenda item for Egypt, raised and discussed during bilateral meetings in Arab, African and European political capital cities; “The GERD file has always been on Egypt’s agenda during its contacts with Arab countries.” Egypt has also organized and sponsored meetings to pressurize Ethiopia rather than strategize on resuming the negotiation, and foster regional cooperation; “during US-Arab

talks before US President Joe Biden’s visit to the Middle East, Cairo worked to mobilize pressure on Ethiopia to accept a binding agreement regulating the GERD.” Since the signing of the Declaration of Principles (DoP) in 2015, the narrative of Egypt has remained the same: “legally binding agreement”. This was what President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi also stressed during the recent visit of the US President Joe Biden to Egypt.

Impediments to the negotiation

In any negotiations parties to the conflict would assess the context, the development of the negotiation, and adjust their demands to fit the context. However, in the GERD negotiation, Egypt, the major actor that steers the negotiation, kept the same demand – “legally binding agreement”. All narratives associated with GERD are labeled as a security threat to the people of Egypt, therefore an important agenda item for politicians. Due to this the negotiations followed the political temperature, oscillating to align with the political development.

This is one of the reasons why the negotiation has entered several deadlocks. Though the UNSC has decided that the negotiation should take place under the auspices of the African Union, Egypt continues to accuse and blame Ethiopia, and even the AU has written a number of letters to UNSC, even as recently as 30 July 2022. Due to these challenges, the GERD negotiation for the last ten years has encountered hopes and dismays (disappointments).

For a negotiation to be successful, parties to the conflict must come to the table in good faith, stop using wildcards and end or minimize negative campaigns. Egyptian politicians and the media continue sharing conflicting and negative messages about GERD and about Ethiopia. Recently, a statement issued by the Office of President Abdel Fattah El Sisi after the visit of Somalia’s President Sheik Mohamud, as reported by AL-AWSAT, states that, “Egypt and Somalia have rejected unilateral [filling GERD] actions by Ethiopia involving international river projects,…”

The news which was published as a headline “Egypt, Somalia Condemn Ethiopia’s Approach over Nile Dam Dispute” is a clear indication how the media and politicians collaborate in distributing misinformation about GERD. Such misleading and manipulative statements have the potential to intensify peace and security challenges in the Horn, and even damage the relationship between Egypt and Somalia. In a big turnaround from Somalia, the spokesperson for the President challenged the statement from the Egyptian President’s office and stressed that the government of Somalia takes a neutral position on the issue of GERD; “… Kaar [Presidential Spokesman] … denied that Somalia is siding with Egypt on longstanding Ethiopia’s Grand Renaissance Nile Dam dispute.”

Sending mixed messages and shedding “crocodile tears” seems are common practices among some Egyptian politicians and media houses. On one occasion, it was reported that Arab countries are ready to mediate. “Arab countries had offered several mediation initiatives in the past between Egypt and Sudan on the one hand, and Ethiopia on the other, …” However, on 16 July, 2022, influential members of League of Arab of States and Western Governments met with Egypt issued a statement which is biased and endorses Egypt’s interest and position; Regarding the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD), the leaders reiterated their support for Egypt’s water security [emphasis added] and to forging a diplomatic resolution that would achieve the interests of all parties and contribute to a more peaceful and prosperous region. The leaders reiterated the imperative of concluding an agreement on the filling and operation of the GERD within a reasonable timeframe as stipulated in the Statement of the President of the United Nations Security Council dated September 15, 2021, and consistent with international law.

A group which plans to mediate should not endorse and be a signatory of such partial statements. It is against the basic principles of mediation, and it is unethical. The paradox about GERD negotiation is the inconsistency of information among and between politicians and policy makers, increasing mistrust among themselves, the people and the international community (all stakeholders).

The Egyptian Foreign Ministry during the second filling indicated that the government has a plan to develop systems and structures to manage water security or any stress linked to the filling of GERD reservoir. While, Mohamed Abdel Aty, Egypt’s Minister of Water Resources and Irrigation said filling the dam “is a shock that will reduce the amount of water flowing to Egypt …”Even worse, prior to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs statement, the President issued a threatening statement; “[n]o one is allowed to take away a single drop of water from Egypt; no one can even imagine the instability that will ensue in the region if such a thing were to happen. No one should dare question our capabilities. But if they want to put us to the test, then so be it.”

The third filling

Despite statements of threat, Ethiopia filled the reservoir for the third time as there was not significant harm to the two downstream countries following the two fillings of 2020 and 2021. Experts, policy makers and politicians in Egypt confirm this, Egyptian Minister of Irrigation and Water Resources Dr. Mohamed Abdel Ati said “Ennahda dam will turn into an armed conflict, but these fears have proved to be largely exaggerated, …”And the Standing Committee for the Regulation of Nile Revenue indicated that the rainfall at the source is high, thus filling of GERD should not be a source of conflict “… in a move expected to raise further tensions with the downstream states (Egypt and Sudan), despite expectations of “limited” damage during the current phase, due to increased rainfall rates in upstream countries.”

Dr. Abbas Sharaqi, Professor of Water Resources at Cairo University, and one of the leading experts on the Ethiopian dam said, “…the impact of the third filling of the dam will be “technically limited” on Egypt and Sudan at this stage,…” If GERD is not a threat to the people and the economy of the two downstream countries, what is the rationale for another diplomatic row including a letter to the UNSC? Unlike the statement issued by the Egyptian Foreign Ministry during the second filling, the content of 29 July 2022 letter is full of threats which will not encourage Ethiopia to go back to the negotiation table, but leave the negotiation in a deadlock; “Egypt also reserves its legitimate right guaranteed in the Charter of the United Nations to take all necessary measures to ensure and protect its national security, including against any risks that Ethiopia’s unilateral measures may cause in the future.” Is it about geopolitics, to get the upper hand in the regional peace and security, and sustain the out of date 1992 agreement which provided Egypt with Hydro-Political Hegemony, a veto power on any upstream projects?

Of course, this concurs with what Dr. Abbas Sharaqi, Professor of Water Resources at Cairo University indicated “… its [GERD filling] impact is “politically significant” as it confirms Ethiopia’s “continuation of the policy of imposing fait accompli.” It is also rooted in the history of Egypt and Ethiopia.

The relationship between the two countries is complicated and multifaceted, political, and religious “… relations between Ethiopia and Egypt do not appear to be in good shape, especially as their differences have branched out into other areas since the Tigray War, the most serious of which is now the worsening dispute over the jurisdiction of Deir al-Sultan in Jerusalem between representatives of the Coptic and Ethiopian churches.”

Conclusion Experts from the three countries who reviewed the design of GERD and had a chance to visit the construction site have confirmed that the technology used to build the dam is not a threat to the two downstream countries. This was confirmed during the two fillings. Any threat on Ethiopia including the use of power will keep the negotiation effort at the bottom of the reservoir rather than leaving it afloat.

The negotiation can come out of stalemate and succeed if, and only if the two downstream countries, especially Egypt avoid negative diplomacy, misinformation, stop issuing statements that threaten Ethiopia and abstain from exploiting the current internal peace and security challenges. Egypt, Ethiopia, and Sudan should respect, and recognize the political muscle and authority of the African Union and adhere to the principle of “African solutions to African problems”.

Above all, Nile (Abbay) has enough water for the eleven basin countries including Egypt: a quota system based on an outdated agreement between Egypt and Great Britain signed in 1929 and Egypt and Sudan in 1959 that did not include all the basin countries is not valid. For future water management and allocation, the Nile Basin Initiative (NBI) is the right platform, Egypt and Sudan have to sign Cooperative Framework Agreement (CFA) and join NBI. As a country, the revised strategy of Egypt seeking alternative means of harvesting such as desalination, recycling and deep wells is ideal for meeting the growing need of the Egyptian people. This can lead to a win-win situation. It can also contribute to stabilizing the region and enhance peace and stability in the Horn of Africa.

Editor’s Note: Lulsegged Abebe (PhD) is an independent researcher, consultant. A peace and security expert with over 30 years of experience working in and on Africa with governments, CSOs, AU, UN, and EU on development, humanitarian assistance, reconciliation, and good governance. He can be reached at: lulseggedabebe@gmail.com

Editor’s Note: The views entertained in this article do not necessarily reflect the stance of The Ethiopian Herald

The Ethiopian Herald August 17/2022

Recommended For You

Economic self-sufficiency is the only alternative to withstand western multiple pressures on Ethiopia

Ethiopia can revitalize its geopolitically strategic advantageous position

It is My Dam! The “Harlem Renaissance”

Strategy of tension by terrorists
ABOUT THIS SITE
This may be a good place to introduce yourself and your site or include some credits.

SEARCH
Search for: Search