TOO MANY COOKS, TOO LITTLE BROTH

 

(Matt Rota, 2020)

Previously, I analysed water, both in its real and virtual forms, to quantify the water-food nexus, shedding light on how to implement more efficient and suitable policies. In this blog I will dive deeper into the different powers involved with GERD, living under the shadow of colonisation and how a unique player might disrupt that.

The importance of the Nile is captured perfectly in A Hymn to the Nile, recorded in Papyrus Sallier II:

Is History….

As always it is crucial to take note of the post-colonial legacies of Europe across Africa, and its impact of the ownership of the Nile. Following its colonisation in 1882, Egypt become a prized possession for the English, which was further by the 1869 Suez Canal. Since the success of Egypt heavily relied upon the Nile, it become the French’s aim to control of the Nile Basin. Similar to GERD, the French plotted the building a dam on the White Nile, hoping to undermine British influence further downriver and establish east-west control of the continent. 

Following its independence in 1992, Egypt orchestrated the Nile Waters Agreement of 1929 with the East African British colonies, giving Egypt and Sudan monopoly over water rights, and the ability to veto development projects in the source countries. However, The Ethiopian monarch was not consulted. Following the 1980s Ethiopian highlands drought over 1 million Ethiopians died due to famine, all while Egypt began plans on the Toshka Canal, increasing their water demand by 10% regardless of if they maintained their 1959 treaty share of 55 billion cubic meters.

….and so plans for GERD began.

The Nile Basin Initiative was signed in 1999 which increased cooperation between the many new states in the Nile Basin created by the “scramble for Africa.”, which was once only signed by upstream riparian (Swain, 2002, Carlson, 2013).

…Repeating itsself

In line with guidance from President Trump, the US State Department has suspended over $130 million of financial aid to Ethiopia used to feed a population of more than 8 million starving people, following its unilateral decision to start filling GERD; A dam which would end the shadow of British colonialism that favoured Egypt. Activists have labelled the treaty ‘neo-colonial’, with allies using social media to voice their concerns. Ethiopia’s Trump card? China.

Enter the Dragon

China financed over a quarter of the overall cost, equating to $1.2 billion and Ethiopia may try to leverage China and the US for assistance. China is the largest source of foreign direct investment for Ethiopia, according to the UN, accounting for around 60% of all new, foreign-funded projects in the country in 2019. Beijing has major investments in Ethiopia, Egypt and Sudan, giving it potentially powerful leverage in the dispute (Glans, 2014).

From a Sino-pragmatism perspective, China’s increased involvement in GERD may be neocolonial, if not in retrospect, since the vested interest is identical regardless if those in the driving seat are Europeans, Americans, or Chinese (Adem, 2012).

To Conclude…

The collective financing mechanism of has not only stripped individual Ethiopians connection to the dam, but also resurfaced anti-colonial resistance narratives, started a geo-political “cold war” and increased Ethiopia’s debt distress to 59%. It is empirical we historicize inequality, especially the role of colonialism, imperialism, and racism in structuring power and natural landscapes, as these the colonial legacy seldom reflect hydrological management, and thus food security.