Land-Water-Security Nexus: Changing Geopolitics in the Nile Basin Cooperative Framework Agreement (original) (raw)
Related papers
Security as a threat to development: the geopolitics of water scarcity in the Nile River basin
Focus Paper - Royal Higher Institute for Defence, 2009
The aim of this paper is to take a closer look at the reasons which lay behind the sensitive geopolitical context of the water of the Nile. It will situate the discourse on ‘water wars’ within the framework of securitisation of water resources. This is further illustrated by the case of the Nile basin. Then the author will explore the possibilities/necessity for de-securitisation of water resources, with some conclusions for policies aimed at turning water into a resource for broader cooperation and integration.
The historical inter-state dispute over the allocation and utilisation of the Nile River waters has endured ever-evolving patterns of intra-basin re-lationships, multi-level dynamics of water policy making and fluctuating intensity in conflictive and cooperative interactions. The transboundary na-ture of the Nile waters reveals the interconnectedness of the Nile states, which rely upon the Nile ecosystem not only for the satisfaction of econom-ic, social and cultural needs, but also for the maintenance of peace and security in the region. The absence of an effective integrated mechanism for the man-agement of the Nile flows has resulted in the persistence of asymmetries among the riparian countries over the control and use of an essential re-source: thus, whether the conflict potential of the Nile waters could turn into a driver for potential cooperation represents the core issue of the pre-sent research. This study explores the processes that have led to the current status quo of the Nile hydropolitics, in the search for alternative in-terpretations to the mainstream perspectives emerging from the existing Literature. The case-study methodological approach aims at unveiling new empirical insights over the dynamics of transboundary water management in the Nile Basin, through the application of an original theoretical frame-work, which is built upon a multi-disciplinary focus that combines theories of International Relations and Environmental Studies. In particular, the crit-ical assessment over inter-state power asymmetries uncovers the relational process of compliance and contestation to the consolidated hy-dro-hegemonic regime in the Nile Basin, providing an original analysis over material and discursive structures that constitute both hegemonic and counter-hegemonic mechanisms of water control. In so doing, the investi-gative process formulates assumptions over the complex dynamics that shape the current Nile hydropolitics, while at the same time tracing histori-cal processes of intra-basin negotiations over the management of transboundary water resources, as well as exploring possible future sce-narios in terms of both geophysical projections and policy recommendations towards an effective integrated management of the Nile flows. Finally, providing new elements for the analysis of conflict, coop-eration and governance in international river basins, this study also contributes to the theoretical development of the emerging field of critical hydropolitics.
Contexts Matter: A Hydropolitical Analysis of Blue Nile and Yarmouk River Basins
Transboundary surface water is of strategic importance in the Arab world as it accounts for over two thirds of the renewable water in the region. Despite most shared waters have their source outside the Arab countries, no basin-wide agreements exist over the use, allocation and management of the main transboundary rivers in the region: the Nile, the Jordan, and the Tigris and Euphrates. This paper investigates the intra-basin hydro-political relations in the dynamic contexts of Yarmouk and Blue Nile rivers. In both cases, the lack of a shared vision on the management of transboundary waters has resulted in unilateral initiatives rather than comprehensive and agreed legal frameworks. Adopting a broader problem-shed approach rather than a narrow watershed one, this paper captures the interests and reasons of such dynamic contexts, and analyses how recent changes impact on the transboundary water management of shared basins. In particular, the relevance of including power analysis into the assessment of water-related negotiations will shed light over competing interests and political asymmetries, which ultimately affect the processes of water allocation and use. The insights provided by evidence-based assumptions over the dynamic and often conflictive process of water governance formation in the two cases considered will disclose alternative perspectives to the (mainstream) analyses of water management, in the attempt to situate specific hydro-political dynamics in the regional evolving contexts of the
The Geopolitics of Water Negotiations succeeding the GERD Project in the Nile River Basin
Water politics has come to be one of the central themes of debate and concern among different academic, political and economic domains in the globalized world. Thus, water geopolitics has sought to understand and analyze how water politics is imagined spatially. Though the Nile River runs through ten African countries, the main conflict over its waters is between Egypt, Sudan, and Ethiopia. Since Egypt depends on the Nile for its entire water supply, securing the downstream parts of the river has always been one of Egypt’s national priorities. The dispute between the two states, Egypt and Ethiopia, is rooted in the legacy of British imperialism in North, Northeast and Central Africa during the 20th century. As Cascão (2009) discussed a declaration from 1929 by London granted the bulk of the water of this area of the Nile to Egypt and Sudan. However, it has been less than a decade whereby Ethiopia’s bargaining power has become much greater than normally acknowledged. To be sure, it is shored up by Ethiopia’s geographic advantage as upstream riparian and provider of 85% of the Nile flows. Moreover, it is not until the last two years, where the discourse of water geopolitics moved away from being dominated by ideas like national security and power. Therefore, the paper focuses on the role of power and hegemony in particular, as a complement to the wide range of issues covered in negotiations. By doing so, the article analyzes the Egypt’s position as the hegemonic power in the horn of Africa contested by Ethiopia. In order to simplify my argument and analysis, I focused on Ethiopia, Sudan, and Egypt to explicate the extent of water crisis in the North Eastern part of Africa. To accomplish these tasks, a critical geopolitical approach, practical discourse, has been used to analyze the geopolitical implications of speeches of politicians and leaders. Application of critical hydro-politics is thus useful for interpretation of the power plays that grease or block the cogs of the decision-making machinery. Since practical geopolitics describes the actual practice of geopolitical strategy (i.e. foreign policy), the paper look into the country’s foreign policy in relation to the changing power relations in the Nile Basin, especially from the onset of the GERD project which witnesses tension among the three countries. Principally, the study attempts to analyze the geopolitical implications of the newly Egyptian president, Abdel Fattah el-Sisi on regional water politics and speculated on whether it has reinforced or undermined the regional power of Egypt.
Changing Hydropolitical Relations in the Nile Basin: A Protracted Transition
The International Spectator, 2016
A new hydro-political order is emerging in the Nile Basin. Upstream riparian states have improved their bargaining power vis-à-vis downstream countries by adopting a common position in the negotiations over a new framework agreement to govern the utilisation of the Nile waters. Some upstream riparians have unilaterally constructed hydraulic projects that threaten Egypt's hegemonic position in the basin, the most notable of which is the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD). Whether these developments will lead to a more equitable utilisation of water resources and a more cooperative order will depend on the policies of the riparian states, especially in the Eastern Nile. Respect of the Declaration of Principles on the GERD signed between Egypt, Ethiopia and Sudan could help build trust between the three countries after years of tensions around the project. Beyond that, a basin-wide plan for the utilisation of water resources would not only maximise the benefits from the river and address the common challenges facing the basin, but also reduce the political costs of tensions on future projects.
Changing power relations in the Nile river basin: Unilateralism vs. cooperation
Water Alternatives, 2009
The aim of this article is to identify where and how power relations in the Nile river basin have changed over the past decade, and to analyse how these dynamics have influenced not only the political relations between upstream and downstream riparians but also the management and allocation of the shared Nile water resources. The article sheds light on the ongoing political and economic changes in the upstream countries (as well as in Sudan) and on how these dynamics might affect and challenge both the regional balance of power and the ongoing regional cooperation process. A critical analysis of the relationship between power shifts and the evolution of the Nile Basin Initiative (NBI) is then provided. Finally, the article questions how unilateralist and multilateralist hydropolitical trends have co-existed in the Nile basin, and identifies possible future scenarios.
Contemporary Water Diplomacy on the Nile Basin
The Nile Basin has been experiencing process of dramatic changes since the middle of the 1990s which opens a new chapter in the hydropolitics of the Nile. Two most important features the signing and ratification of the CFA andEthiopiàs ongoing construction of the GERD characterize the hydropolitics of the Nile Basin. These contemporary developments in the Basin are signals that the old game is waning and a new Nile basin that will benefit all its riparian states and their peoples equitably and reasonably is emerging. Firstly, this process of change is a result of years of water diplomacy which involves the negotiation of the riparian states to create a permanent Nile River basin organization based on a multilateral and basin wide binding Nile water treaty that could regulate the utilization and management of the Nile waters in the Basin. Secondly such a transition is also a result of the political decision which involves by a few upstream riparian states such as Ethiopia in undertaking mega hydraulic infrastructures on the Nile which was unthinkable a few years back. EspeciallyEthiopiàs mega dam GERD has an all-encompassing hydropolitical implication to the Nile Basin and is shaping the current and future hydropolitics of the Nile Basin despite not welcomed by Egypt. How is the different implications manifested on the Basin? These are the core questions that the article attempted to answer in order to understand contemporary issues pertaining to the GERD Project of Ethiopia on the Nile Basin and its implication to the future interactions between the riparian states and argued that the Dam is a benchmark in shaping the future of the Nile Basin in a way that benefits all the riparian states of the Nile.
European Journal of International Law, 2010
The restive Nile basin which has long been identified as a flashpoint prone to conflict embarked on a new path of cooperation with the launching of the Nile Basin Initiative (NBI). Anchored in a Shared Vision 'to achieve sustainable socio-economic development through the equitable utilization of, and benefits from, the common Nile Basin water resources', the NBI has provided a convenient forum for the negotiation of a Cooperative Framework Agreement (CFA) to set up a permanent, inclusive legal and institutional framework. Negotiation of the CFA has, however, faced a serious impasse as a result of the introduction of the concept of 'water security'. The introduction of this non-legal, indeterminate, and potentially disruptive concept is, indeed, a regrettable detour to a virtual blind-alley. The justifications for this fateful decision are totally unfounded and specious. The decision rather makes sense as an unwarranted move pushing into further obscurity the already intractable Nile waters question, at best, and a logical cul-de-sac in the decade-long negotiations which have arguably fallen prey to the hegemonic compliance-producing mechanism of 'securitization' sneaked in under the veil of 'water security', at worst. Resolution of the Nile waters question should thus first be extricated from the morass of 'water security' and then be sought nowhere but within the framework of international water law.
The Nile Basin Initiative: Balancing historical rights, national needs and regional interests 1
ECDPM Briefing Note, 2017
This paper sets out to better inform stakeholders about why the Nile Basin Initiative (NBI) and national level stakeholders operate as they do around their joint agenda. It concludes with implications for support. 2 Political traction, member states interests and potential Nile water rights have long been the subject of tensions among its riparian states. These have increased with the expansion of upstream hydroelectric developments, particularly in Ethiopia, and downstream reluctance to revisit colonial-era agreements that gave Egypt and then Sudan priority water rights. These factors point to the need for a river basin organisation to coordinate the use of this shared resource.