The following case study discusses the conflict of countries among the development of

grand Ethiopian renaissance dam on Egypt. This discusses the stance of different
countries on the matter in concern. Furthermore, this recommends at a certain
potential where the conflicts can be met.

The havoc between Egypt, Sudan and Ethiopia has exasperated immensely over the
Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD) on the river Nile. Ethiopia is on the stance
of an announcement to start filling the reservoir of the GERD dam. This action is cliché
to the Egypt’s stance of not filling the dam until a legal agreement isn’t signed that
demonstrates an equal distribution of the water in Nile’s river. Egypt has proposed an
involvement of the international bodies to intervene in the matter and US has already
threatened that it would its development aid to Ethiopia if they don’t agree on a
common ground to resolve the matter.

This GERD issue is the part of a long-term dispute between Egypt and Sudan with
Ethiopia and other upstream areas over the accessibility of Nile’s water for as it is a
significant source of hydration and other mundane life chores for people of Sudan and
Egypt. Despite the growing tensions, Ethiopia is showing great rigidity with the
continuation of the dam for as they believe that the hydroelectric project would
develop the infrastructure and the likelihood of many in the region.

Since, Ethiopia believes that its highland geographical location provides around 85%
of the water the Nile river, it has all the power to use its resources to make
developments in the country possible through hydroelectric GERD. Egypt, through its
diplomatic relations was able to stop the construction of dam in prior years but over
the course of years, Ethiopian government was able to raise significant funds to
initiate the constructions.

Egypt has been arguing that the 1959 agreement between Sudan and Egypt is the
right legal structure to decide on the allocation of Nile’s water situation, both Ethiopia
and other regions reject any such legal structure. The 1959 agreement gave all the
right to Egypt and over the Nile water and Ethiopia had never been benefitted with the
water resources.

Egypt consider GERD a threat to its access to Nile’s water since the filling of the dam
would undermine the country’s water supplies. Though GERD is on its stages of
completion thus Egypt is trying to secure a political stance over the filling of the
reservoirs and how would GERD be managed during the drought season.
Sudan has been caught up between the Egyptian and Ethiopian stances. At start,
Khastoum was against the construction of GERD, but over the time, it has adjusted
with it now, for as it sees that the GERD has a lot of future stability to bring about vast
domestic development and infrastructure betterment. Despite this, Khartoum still has
fear that the execution of GERD can strongly impact the safety and stability of the
existing dams of Sudan and may make it difficult for the Sudan’s government to
manage their ongoing development projects in the country.

The three countries have however agreed on a thing that when the nile water flow
drops down less than 35-40 b.c.m annually, this means that the drought may hit soon.
Therefore, Egypt, Sudan and Ethiopia have to release the water floe in to the dam’s
reservoir in order to thrive well during the drought season.

Recommendations

Although, the conflict among Egypt, Ethiopia, and Sudan over the GERD situation
might be a significant one in the area, what matters the most now is to bring about an
agreement that shows a compromise between the three states and bring harmony for
them. The other riparian states can later be included either through the Nile Basin
Initiative (NBI) or some other litigation that would ensure that all the states are under a
legal framework and are abiding with it. This can however bring rejection from Egypt
and Sudan to bring any other riparian in the matter but they must understand that the
Nile River is a regional water source thus should be dealt with a regional mindset.

Egypt should stop nagging on to its authority over the Nile river due to its historical
standing that includes the water rights given to Egypt in 1929 under the Anglo-
Egyptian Treaty and the 1959 Agreement between Egypt and Sudan. If the Egyptian
bodies leave behind the old outdated agreements and work towards a way forward
approach, they would be able to benefit greatly not only them but Sudan and all other
regions with conflicts can also be subsided along way too. This means that their
settlement can help to bring a greater benefit to them as a state and to all other
regions will be at rest too knowing that development and betterment will come their
way too.

The Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam has an ability to bring about potential
challenges for Egypt, Ethiopia and Sudan. Such issues have also been a part of other
states all around the globe and might persist considering the severe climatic changes
all around. The resources are getting scarce especially those that are shared just like
the Nile river, thus states should work together to bring viable solution to sustain in the
times of severe climatic conditions. The conflict over GERD and the failure to resolve
it or ignorance of the water allocation issue can both have a worsen impact on the
three states. Through a mutual agreement and compromise that gives an equal share
of authority to the states over GERD, this time letting Ethiopia to control the GERD
matter, Egypt, Sudan and Ethiopia can have a better mutual stance to work together
nad ensure a sustainable future involving a likely drought and will create a bench mark
for other states that may face the similar issue.