Can you believe that the future war(s) will be fought not on oil, territory but on water? If the supposition carries some weight do you imagine where will be the battleground? I think it will be Africa and main players will be Ethiopia, Sudan and Egypt.
The water of the Nile is not as calm as it appears from surface. Beneath its sober surface lie so many sombre tensions .These tensions are now simmering and may snowball into a protracted armed conflict if not a full-fledged war. The bone of contention will be the Nile and its water involving 10 African states, commonly called Nile Basin states.
Is it really going to happen? We will try to discuss and share some political disputes among Nile Basin countries on the distribution, usage and on controlling the rights of world's longest but most controversial Nile River.
Nile is undisputedly world's longest river but its water is not free from disputes and debates. Nile helixes from the highlands of Burundi and is called White Nile. Two other tributaries Blue Nile and Arbara sprout from Ethiopia and hence Ethiopia contributes some 85% into the greater Nile (VOA&BBC 2010). Cascading into Uganda, Sudan, and Egypt it drains out into Mediterranean Sea finally. But who gets how much? Egypt and Sudan have monopolised the river's water and have constructed dams and canals. Whereas the rest seven countries of the Nile Basin are just spectators and negotiators for share. Perhaps this share may not materialise and continuously be treated as a wishful thinking of Ethiopia, Kenya, Tanzania, DR Congo, Uganda, Rwanda, Eritrea and Burundi. Apparently Egypt does not seem motivated. Historically it has remained too possessive of Nile.
In 1979 while signing the peace deal with Israel, Anwar Sadat, the then president of Egypt, said "the only matter that would take Egypt to war again is water" (Howe 2010). Another warning also came from Egypt when former UN Secretary General and Egyptian Foreign Minister said in 1985 "the next war among countries will not be for oil or territorial borders, but only for the problem of water" (UPI 2010). Ten years later the World Bank water expert Mr Ismail Serageldin also warned "if the wars of this century were fought over oil, the wars of the next century will be fought over water-unless we change our approach to managing this precious and vital resource"(Nicol 2003). A BBC documentary released in 1999 also had similar message " the main conflicts in Africa during the next twenty-five years could be over that most precious of commodities - water, as countries fight for access to scarce resources...the possible flashpoints are Nile, Niger, Volta, and Zambezi basins"(Nicol 2003).
For Egypt Nile is not only a river that carries water but with it is associated a thousand years long history. Nile caters for Egypt's 95% of water needs in domestic, industrial and agricultural sectors. Nile and Egypt are indissoluble at least to the extent of historical stories. Historians have been calling Egypt as the Gift of Nile (Parsons 2001). Professor John Baines is said to have that "without the Nile, Egypt may not have become one of the most extraordinary civilisations in history". Nile as a river is perhaps the only example of water sharing where a few benefit and the rest wait for a drop of water. Those in the waiting may actually be the owners if it is extended to the de jure owners of Ethiopia and Burundi.
The two countries - Egypt and Sudan - who have monopolised its water and channels actually do not own the sources of Nile. The sources of Nile are in Burundi and Ethiopia but practically they cannot use a basket of Nile waters no to speak of other six Nile Basin countries.
In 1929 during British rule over Sudan and Egypt, the British government ensured 100% rights of Nile water for Egypt and Sudan depriving even the countries from Nile springs -Ethiopia and Burundi. The 1929 agreement signed between British government and its colony Egypt forbade upstream nation from reducing the water of Nile flowing into Egypt.
The treaty stated "without the consent of Egyptian government, no irrigation or hydroelectric work can be established on the tributaries of Nile or their lakes, if such work can cause a drop in water level harmful to Egypt" (Howe 2009 and Cocks 2004). In 1959 when Egypt got independence it signed another agreement with Sudan. The Nile Water Treaty not only maintained their 100% rights over usage but also inserted their veto powers over any development in the Nile by the upstream countries.
It was estimated that the actual discharge of Nile water was 84 billion cubic meters annually and the share of Egypt was agreed at 55 billion cubic meters, 19 billion cubic meters for Sudan while 10 billion cubic meters were accounted for evaporation losses. The 1959 treaty practically maintained not only 100 percent waters rights on Nile for these two countries but also gave veto powers to Egypt over any possible projects launched by the upstream nations (Howe 2009).
Having the position of a low riparian state, why Pakistan could not gain the parallel privilege in 1960 when it signed Indus Basin Treaty with India over its rivers? One of the explanations may be lack of technical expertise by the head of Pakistan's team G Moinudin Ahmed, an eminent ICS but not necessarily a water expert.
The actual discharge of Nile has been fluctuating and in many cases measured less than 84 billion cubic meters. This treaty does not allow any other Nile Basin states to use Nile waters and in case of any project development, Egypt's prior approval is mandatory. This bilateral agreement has really strained relations of Egypt with other Nile Basin states, which consider it a colonial relic. As a matter of fact none of the other country is a signatory to it. Emboldened by the two agreements which assign Egypt unbridled powers over Nile, it has even exceeded its limit of water usage during 1977-1985. Egypt is Africa's second biggest economy after South Africa (Economist December 2010). It is militarily and economically far full-bodied from other contending porters.
Except Kenya and Egypt, the rest 8 Nile Basin states are world's top poorest countries (Kameri-Mbote, 2007). Egypt has exploited their impoverished position very well for the last so many decades but this may not happen in future. The civil wars in Ethiopia and Sudan also gave Egypt a bit bolsters. Persistent droughts, famines and shortages of drinking water for the very rapidly increasing population in Ethiopia, Tanzania, Uganda and Kenya coerce them to break Egyptian status quo on Nile, giving a good bye to Egypt's hegemony for good. Can this happen normally? I think probably not.
Ethiopia and Tanzania have already started a series of water projects on the Nile and Egypt has declared it an act of war. Uganda and Kenya are also ambitious to use the Nile water for drinking and agricultural needs. About 300 million Africans depend on the waters of Nile. The upstream especially head source of Nile nations believe that their economic development has been hamstrung by the Egypt's colonial lock on the river (Rotberg 2010).
The USAIDS, CIDA, French government, ADB, AfDB are major external stakeholders who are for years trying to hammer out some agreeable solution of Nile water. NBI (Nile Basin Initiative) was launched in 1999 to create a peaceful environment in the region. Today except Eritrea which is still observer, all other nine states are its members. It was initiated by the water ministers of Nile Basin states and sought to "develop the river in a co-operative manner, share substantial socio economic benefits, and promote regional peace and security" (Howe 2009).
The 10th anniversary of NBI was celebrated in the first week of December 2009. The Vice President of Tanzania Dr Ali Mohamed Shein made a very optimistic note saying that "ten years ago there was an atmosphere of mistrust, suspicion, and doubts. Today Nile Basin countries are open to each other, ready and willing to interact and exchange information. This is an achievement to be cherished, nourished and nurtured by all". It is true that they are willing to exchange information but not willing to address the core issue of water sharing - in the same fashion dialogues between India and Pakistan cover everything except the core issue-Kashmir. In addition to that they have to agree on improvement of system management, agricultural productivity, water use efficiency, and a reduction of water evaporative losses. These goals are highly ambitious but may not be promising. NBI has not gone beyond the lip service. It has only helped in data sharing, training of officials and warnings related to the floods.
In may 2010 upstream nations - Ethiopia, Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda and Rwanda - signed an agreement (Co-operative Framework Agreement) in a bid to get more control on Nile water and giving an end to Egypt's veto power, held by it by more than fifty years. Burundi and DR Congo are also expected to join the alliance. Egypt and Sudan have not accepted it and they were anticipated already. Egypt has threatened of the legal action against the group and declared it a strong jolt to the efforts of NBI (McConnell 2010). This move was led by Ethiopia which has gone to the extent "had the necessary resources to build whatever infrastructure and dams it wants on the Nile water. The way forward is not Egypt to try and stop the unstoppable" (ibid).
Water expert Arun Elhance is of the view that water management is only possible if the actors are tamed into co-operation. Among actors, Egypt matters most which seems unwilling to relinquish its monopoly on the use, control and development of Nile water. The continued refusal to some acceptable settlement may lead to economic collapse, widespread conflict, famine and diseases. Africa is although not new to these ills, this time these may be grimmer. The Author of Water: The Epic Struggle for Wealth, Power and Civilisation has observed recently "conflict over water is becoming a huge issue globally". Actually there is a huge perception gap between Egypt and Ethiopia. For former Egypt is the gift of Nile and for latter Nile is the gift of Ethiopia. Comprise demands a middle way otherwise collision will be the sole option. Currently, Egypt is passing through an unprecedented uprising which has made decision making in Cairo a standstill. Once normalcy prevails, the attitude of the future leadership on Nile will be really crucial. Will it draw Egypt and Sudan to battle lines with upstream nations over access to Nile's waters and its waves? After a pause in the long and protracted civil wars, is Africa again in the danger of breaking into bickering? It all depends who succeeds Mubarak and how he manages Egypt. However one point plain, Ethiopia and its allies are no longer contended with Egypt's agreements with Sudan on Nile!
(The writer is a member of the Civil Service of Pakistan and currently is working as a researcher with the Potsdam Centre for Policy and Management of the University of Potsdam, Germany) mzafarhaider195@gmail.com