(3) Deal of the Century? Washington's Intervention in the GERD Dispute

GERD reshapes power dynamics amongst nations in the Nile Basin. GERD symbolises self-resilience and a struggle against colonisation for Ethiopians, finally being able to break free of the colonial treaties that consolidated Egypt’s hydro-hegemony in the Nile. Unfortunately, I believe that GERD’s full potential to empower Ethiopia is limited by Western third parties trying to take advantage of the situation.

 

Figure 1: Representatives from Egypt, Ethiopia and Sudan in the White House discussing the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam with US president Trump.

 

In last week’s post, I outlined the disagreement between Egypt and Ethiopia regarding GERD. To mediate the conflict, the United States (US) drafted an agreement on the speed of reservoir filling and subjected Ethiopia to allocate water for downstream nations in times of drought. While Egypt endorsed the US agreement, Ethiopia disagreed and accused the US of favouring Egypt. The US as a ‘self-appointed mediator’ was working to win Egypt’s support to secure then President Trump’s ‘Deal of the Century’ on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. Though merely an observer, the US tried pressuring Ethiopia into signing the GERD deal by pausing $100 million of aid to the country. Mediators often bring their own national and personal interests to the negotiation tables. Therefore it is important to be critical of whose interests are represented once external parties are involved. 

 

Moreover, Western interventions contradict the African Union’s vision: 

“The Vision of the African Union is to become an integrated, prosperous and peaceful Africa, driven by its own citizens and representing a dynamic force in the global arena.” (Agenda 2063: The Africa We Want)

 

The notion of the ‘African solutions for African problems’ affirms that African states will solve their own problems. This is highly relevant as African nations are currently facing renewed neo-colonial pressures and arrangements. External mediators should not be relied on to achieve the desired result of equitable sharing of the Nile. As discussed in my previous blog post, former agreements on the Nile drafted by colonial actors completely ignored Ethiopia’s rights, the source of 86% of the waters. I could only imagine how neo-colonial agreements would be similarly used to manipulate and coerce co-riparian states into serving Western interests. Foreign parties also lack a holistic understanding of the issue as African locals do - Trump misunderstood that GERD will block all water flowing to other countries. The wrong and inadequate information lead to biased judgements made by the mediators. 

 

As a key contributing factor to the region's long-term stability, a negotiated agreement on GERD eases regional tensions, fosters the socio-economic development of the Nile basin, and provides a valuable learning experience for achieving diplomatic success within the African Union. At present to restart the stalled negotiation, I believe that nations should adopt confidence-building measures such as establishing technical terms of reference and facilitating scientific exchange. I am optimistic that African nations will soon re-engage in good-faith negotiations, reaching a mutually agreed solution based on equitable use of the Nile.

 

Figure 2: Great Ethiopian Renaissance Dam