THE news of changing the course of the Blue Nile river as a starting procedure for building the Grand Renaissance Dam of Ethiopia shocked Egyptian citizens and heightened their concern over the deteriorating conditions their country has suffered since the unseating of Mubarak on February 11, 2011. The Egyptians were not living such a prosperous life under the rule of the totalitarian regime of Mubarak as to come today to regret toppling him. However, they were much less aware of the crises their country has been facing in respect of the deterioration of different public utilities with shortages in water, electricity and oil and natural gas products. For example, Mubarak's regime fooled the people by referring to a great reserve of natural gas, thus excusing exporting such precious national wealth to Israel at a trivial price and via a long-term contract. At the same time, his government refrained from extending natural gas to all governorates of Egypt to end the public dependence on butane gas cylinders being imported from other countries at cost much higher than the returns from exporting natural gas! Now Egypt has to import natural gas to cope with the local need for generating electricity for homes and factories. What has been said about the energy crisis also applies to other problems such as traffic, garbage, unemployment and water crises. For long, we have heard about the intention of Ethiopia to create a giant dam on the river that coincided with the so-called Entebbi accord between the five countries of the Nile Basin on fair distribution of the river resources. However, Egyptians were still sure that the authorities would take the needed steps to prevent the creation of such a project that threatens the life of the Nile-dependent Egypt. After the revolution, a popular delegation led by the son of the late Gamal Abdel-Nasser visited Ethiopia with the aim of restoring good friendly ties between the two countries after long decades of cold relations under rule of Mubarak. The warm welcome the Ethiopian officials and people gave to the delegation assured Egyptians over settling the crisis in a way to serve the two countries' interests. However, the recent move by Addis Ababa in announcing that the course of the river had been diverted, the day following President Mohamed Morsi's visit to the country, suggests a clear message of disregarding Egypt's interests. Ethiopia has proved to be very persistent in creating the dam, regardless of the opinion of the downstream countries of Sudan and Egypt with whom the late Ethiopian premier Meles Zenawi had approved forming a tripartite committee to study the effects of the project on these two countries. Now the committee, which also includes some four foreign experts, has presented its report, stating the threat of the project to Egypt's quota of the river especially during the years of filling the lake behind the dam. So what is to be done? Is it enough to continue blaming the former regime for neglecting Africa and allowing the expansion of foreign powers on the continent at the cost of Egypt? Can we relay on mere verbal promises of Egyptian interests not being harmed? Apparently, the answer is a big ‘no'. It is a life or death issue for Egypt to ensure a steady flow of the river and having its quota preserved, which has become even less than its actual needs of the water resources. The greatest error that the ruling regime or the opposition parties could commit today is to use the Nile crisis to serve some narrow political interests. On one hand the MB regime is threatened by the Rebel! campaign, which calls for an early presidential election and is organising, in co-operation with different political powers a protest on June 30 to unseat President Morsi. Therefore, such a crisis could be used to convince the people of the necessity of delaying any political differences and become united behind their leadership. The opposition parties, on the other hand, might use the file as fresh proof of the regime's failure to solve any of the crises the country faces. Accordingly, they might refrain from extending a hand to solve the problem. The two sides would be forgetting then that the Egyptians would turn their back on them all when becoming aware of this cheap trading with their sufferings to get some political gains. Therefore, all parties, the government as well as the opposition should accelerate in drawing up a unified policy for confronting the problem on different axles. First, we have to put pressure on Ethiopia to hold serious negotiations to reach a compromise enabling it build the dam without harming Egypt's quota of the river water. The second step is to go to the international community and organisations, especially given that the international pacts are on the side of Egypt and any downstream country to oppose giant dams on the upstream branches of rivers so as to ensure Nile water reaching their lands. Egypt also has the full right to resort to the military option if Ethiopia persist in harming Egypt's national security. Apparently, causing some 90 million Egyptians to go thirsty by preventing the river from reaching their land could not be seen other than as a crime against humanity, especially when Ethiopia could fulfil its aim of generating electricity from this dam on a more moderate scale. Herein, no one would have the right to accuse Egypt of practising political bullying if it decided to launch an offensive strike on the dam if negotiations ended in stalemate. One should remember here that the international community did not criticise Israel when it attacked the Iraqi nuclear reactor, the Syrian chemical project or the Sudanese army convoy. These actions were carried out on the basis of Israel's right of protecting its national security, despite the fact that these countries created their projects in response to the Israeli nuclear project and for resisting occupation of the Arab territories. So could one come today and accuse Egypt if it forcibly prevented the creation of a dam on the river? Of course no one in Egypt wishes to get into war with a sister African country or any other state. But still Egyptians cannot allow anyone to cut the water flowing into their land, threatening their life and that of the coming generations. Some believe that the aim of this project is to break the Egyptian pride and exploit its present economic and political unrest to force it into submission and impose certain policies on the ruling regime. Therefore, the answer should not be mere confrontation to the building of the dam but in proving the Egyptians' ability to overcome any hardship and even turn it to a blessing. Many scientific studies have proved Egypt's richness with ground water reserve in many locations, especially in the Western Desert, which made noted scientist Farouq el-Baz suggest creating a development corridor west of the Nile extending from the northern Mediterranean sea coast to the southern borders with Sudan. The revolution was supposed to be the starting stage for creating such a giant project and many other development ventures, enabling Egypt to rebuild its economy and best utilise its natural resources. Creating such projects would be the ideal answer to those intending to bring Egypt down and would demonstrate the strong will of the Egyptians to build their country.
