Apr 132021
 

In 1999, the Nile rim states, with the exception of Eritrea, signed the Nile Basin Initiative (NIL) to improve cooperation in the development of “common water resources in the Nile Basin.” Under the aegis of the NBI, the neighbouring countries have begun to develop what they see as a permanent legal and institutional framework for the management of the Nile basin. The Framework Cooperation Agreement (CFA), as the agreement is known, officially introduced the concept of equitable water allocation into discussions on Nile governance, as well as a complex concept called “water security.” The CFA was ready to be signed as of May 10, 2010; Burundi, Ethiopia, Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania and Uganda have signed the agreement; Ethiopian parliament has ratified it. However, in arguing that their “acquired rights” in the waters of the Nile would not be protected, Egypt and Sudan immediately announced their intention not to sign the agreement because they opposed the text of Article 14, point b): “The States of the Nile Basin therefore accept, in a spirit of cooperation: … b) not to significantly affect the water safety of another Nile Basin state.” They then proposed an alternative formulation to Article 14, point b): “The States of the Nile Basin therefore accept, in a spirit of cooperation: . . . . . (b) not to significantly harm the safety of water and the current uses and rights of another Nile Basin state,” this formulation was rejected by the upstream riparian states, which assert that “current rights and rights” would anchor the concept of prerogatives, including those created by the Nile water agreements , and have effectively maintained the injustice and injustice that have characterized the allocation and use of water in the Nile basin since the 1920s.

In 1959, Egypt and an independent Sudan signed a bilateral agreement that effectively strengthened the provisions of the 1929 Anglo-Egyptian Treaty. The 1959 agreement increased water allocations for both Egypt and Sudan – Egypt`s water allocation increased from 48 billion cubic meters to 55.5 billion cubic meters and Sudan`s from 4 billion cubic meters to 18.5 billion cubic meters, bringing 10 billion cubic meters to infiltration and evaporation. Finally, the agreement provided that if the average water yield increased, the increase in yields would be evenly distributed between the two downstream riparian countries (for example). Egypt and Sudan). The 1959 agreement, like the Anglo-Egyptian Treaty of 1929, does not take into account the water needs of other riparian countries, including Ethiopia, whose highlands provide more than 80 per cent of the water flowing into the Nile. The threat of violence continued. But a security mentality will not guarantee Egypt its past share of the waters. The first agreement was reached between Great Britain as a colonial power in East Africa and Egypt.

Cairo has been favoured over other riparian countries as an important agricultural asset.

 Posted by at 6:05 am

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.