Reem Leila reports on the increasingly heated discussions surrounding access to Nile water The failure of last month's talks in Kinshasa between Egypt and other Nile Basin countries to reach agreement over the Nile Basin Initiative Framework Convention places greater onus on negotiators to conclude a settlement when they reconvene in Alexandria on 27 July for a two-day conference. Talks in Kinshasa ended with Cairo refusing to sign the convention without an explicit approval by other signatories of Egypt's historic right to 55.5 billion cubic metres of Nile Water and without Cairo effectively being given a veto over any projects implemented upstream. The Ministry of Irrigation and Water Resources has already pre-empted discussions, announcing ahead of the conference that attempts to form a Nile commission without the participation of both Egypt and Sudan would carry no economic, social or security benefit. Ahmed Abul-Wafa, professor of international law, argues that access to Nile water is based upon several clear principles, among them that the share of any country be commensurate with its population size and the extent of its agricultural lands. Nor should any of the Nile Basin countries act unilaterally, in a manner that harms its neighbours. Yet how such principles are to be enforced remains unclear. "Should political and diplomatic negotiations and international arbitration fail, a situation could arise in which the only remaining option will be the use of military force," said Abul-Wafa, echoing an earlier statement by former secretary-general of the UN Boutros Boutros-Ghali, who once predicted that "the next war in our region will be over the waters of the Nile, not politics." Ibrahim Nasreddin, of Cairo University's Institute for African Studies, views such predictions as unnecessarily alarmist. "The Nile can provide water for all of the countries that depend on it. The rhetoric surrounding the issues has been manufactured by other countries to achieve political goals. They want Egypt to step away from the conflict taking place between Somalia and Eritrea, and to pressure Cairo into withholding support for any southern Sudanese groups," says Nasreddin. In the past only Egypt and Sudan had a fixed share of Nile water. Other Nile Basin countries received enough rainfall each year to cover their agricultural needs. Egypt's share of Nile water is confirmed by several international agreements signed between Egypt and both Britain and Italy on behalf of their former colonies. The last agreement was signed in 1959 between Egypt and Sudan. Until 1959 Egypt received 48 billion cubic metres of water. After the 1959 agreement Egypt's share was increased to 55.5 billion cubic metres. Sudan receives 14.5 billion cubic metres. Egypt and Sudan's combined share comprises just six to eight per cent of total rainfall over the Nile Basin. Much of the rest of the water is lost, some through evapotranspiration, yet more by seeping into the ground creating ground water. "What we use, then, is very little when compared to the potential. Yet to tap this potential there must be far better management of the water, particularly around the equatorial lakes where water losses are huge. Weeds consume more than is lost through natural evaporation," says Abul-Wafa. Projects such as the Gongli Canal were designed to combat such water loss. Yet though there is a general consensus over the importance of managing water resources, political problems have hampered the process. "Egypt and Sudan agreed to construct the Gongli Canal to circumvent swamps in the southern part of the White Nile. The first phase of the project would have produced an extra two billion cubic metres for each country. Unfortunately, because of the war in southern Sudan, work is at a standstill," adds Abul- Wafa. Water experts point out that source countries can do little to reduce Egypt's share of Nile waters. "If they could they would have done it a long time ago," says Nasreddin. "The River Nile flows towards the north. The depth of the Nile's route in source countries, especially in Ethiopia, is 500 metres. It would be impossible to build anything similar to the High Dam in only 10 months, yet that is what would have to happen if the construction is not to be washed away by the annual flood." "The Nile Basin countries are developing, and of course they want to irrigate their lands. But decisions over what to be done cannot be made by one country. From now on there must be consultation and mutual agreement," stresses Nasreddin. He also points out that Egypt will eventually need to increase its quota. "A burgeoning population has seen Egypt's per capita share of potable water fall to 760 cubic metres, compared to 2000 in the Nile's source countries. Officials must start talking, and the details will come later. They should focus on joint projects similar to Gongli. The most important principal, though, is that the Nile is for all countries." Nasreddin, along with other experts, worries that international pressure on source countries to consider water an asset that like oil can be bought and sold, will skew the current equation. There have, he says, been suggestions that Egypt should buy its annual share for LE27 billion, and Sudan for LE14 billion. "Cairo has refused such demands but could be pressured by the World Bank reducing its donations to Egypt," says Nasreddin. Within such a context, he argues that it is essential to put an end to any local requests demanding the government charge farmers for the water they use. "To implement any such scheme would give a green light to those countries seeking to charge Egypt for Nile water," he argues.
