Can entrance of EU help break stalemate on R. Nile sharing?

The European Union early this month approved a Euros10m (Shs41b) credit line for trans-boundary water management for the River Nile Basin and to support the Nile Basin Initiative (NBI), the only existing institutional framework reinforcing cooperation on sharing of the river.

The money approved through the German Cooperation Agency, GIZ, according to the EU, is for the water trans-boundary programme to benefit all the 10 riparian countries sharing the Nile “whether or not an active member of the NBI” to meet the needs, the rights and the responsibilities of all.

The EU providing funding may not be news, but it is good enough given the circumstances that preceded the August 8 announcement and which perhaps also best explains the abovementioned wording.
Egypt, diplomatic sources familiar with the matter intimated to this newspaper, had frantically schemed to suppress the funding during negotiations in Brussels, headquarters of the EU. Cairo, sources said, indicated that NBI activities are prejudiced and especially in light of the status quo.

The Egyptian embassy in Kampala declined to comment on the matter.
“The EU impartially supports the ongoing political discussions and expects that the Programme for Transboundary Water Management in the Nile River basin contributes to deliver further incentives for agreement and collaboration and to be a first step in a confidence-building process,” the announcement read.
However, the revelation offers more insights into the stalemate over sharing the Nile between Egypt, which uses 90 per cent of the river waters, and Ethiopia, in whose backyard about 86 per cent of the total Nile waters stems from but uses only 1 per cent.

The long standing complicated politics between the two, especially over sharing the river, has put other countries sharing the river’s catchment area – Burundi, Tanzania, Kenya, Rwanda, South Sudan, DR Congo, Sudan and Uganda – in an awkward position.
In the middle of all this is NBI, the body bringing together the 10 countries formed 17 years ago after decades of trying to foster relations among Nile countries, but has to tread a careful path to avoid hostility as such emitted by Egypt and because relies on goodwill of members to exist.

NBI, headquartered in Uganda, currently operates as a secretariat but once the Cooperative Framework Agreement (CFA), the charter drawn in 2010 to bring Nile relations up-to-date and guide new course of operation, is ratified all countries will upgrade into a commission.

The commission established under article 15 of the CFA will be based in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, and have representation from all the Nile Riparian countries. This will have more powers than the current NBI and is expected to be charged with developing procedural matters on the river.
Egypt and Sudan declined to sign the CFA specifically over Article 14(b) which requires members “not to significantly affect the water security of any other Nile Basin States.”

Only Rwanda, Tanzania and Ethiopia have ratified CFA while Kenya, DR Congo, Burundi, South Sudan and Uganda signed but are yet to ratify it. However with a total of six instruments of ratification, with or without Egypt and Sudan, it can come into force. This is Egypt’s biggest nightmare.

Egyptian president Abdel-Fattah El-Sisi, as a result and in light of the ensuing discussions, has since last year been making round trips to the countries involved which observers believe and sources say is a charm offensive to rally behind Cairo’s position.

Last week he was in Tanzania and Rwanda and is expected to continue ahead of the second round discussions under the chairmanship of Burundi. Prior to the botched June talks, he met President Museveni, Kenya’s Uhuru Kenyatta, South Sudan’s Salva Kiir and DR Congo’s Joseph Kabila.

As chairman of the Nile Basin heads of state, President Museveni had hoped to broker a middle ground between Egypt and Ethiopia when he called the extraordinary summit on June 22 during which the chair was passed on to Burundi.
The technical advisory committee, a 20-member team from River Nile sharing states, is expected to convene next month for discussions on talking points for the Nile Council of Ministers (Nile-Com), the highest decision making body of the NBI, which ideally should advise the head of state, but given the complicated nature of politics it has been impossible.

For example, prior to the June meeting the responsibility for technical discussions that were to ideally guide the Nile-Com, was appropriated to ministry to Foreign Affairs with NBI in the observer role. The discussions collapsed after Egypt proposed that the entire CFA be reopened for renegotiation, which was not only opposed by Uganda and all states.

NBI’s executive director, Innocent Ntabana, told Sunday Monitor that the heads of state meeting had aimed at “engaging Egypt for its return to NBI activities” and it was expected that they would discuss the Egypt response but this was not the case as heads of state preferred to make the summit more strategic and not to go into detailed issues.
“The next Nile Council of Ministers will discuss the issue and recommend a way forward,” Mr Ntabana said.

June talks
During the closed door talks, sources who attended the meeting say, Egypt demanded to be given the chair but Ethiopia, in opposition, argued that the order of passing around the chair “should be respected”.
With Burundi in charge of both the Nile-Com and heads of state club, a senior government official said all eyes should be on Egypt “whatever they were calculating”.

Egypt has for centuries survived and exploited most of the river’s flow. The size of its population, as well as its almost total dependence on the Nile makes it a highly sensitive one; and especially if any attempt is perceived to undermine her authority over the river.
That is what makes the situation complicated, whether it will take a political or technical solution to strike a middle ground.

Some commentators have suggested redrawing the water quotas for each country based on current demands but in sync with international water laws to resolve grievances from all fronts, a proposal which in itself is complicated.
The Nile’s annual flow volume was/is estimated at 85 billion cubic metres at the Aswan High Dam by the colonial agreements which granted Egypt a 75 per cent share (55.5 billion cubic metres) and 25 per cent (18.5 billion cubic metres) to Sudan with the assumption that the other countries can get water through other sources like rain or even fresh water lakes.
Egyptian authorities say they are in any way not opposed to the CFA but as the most dependent country on the Nile want their concerns taken into consideration.