Egypt and the Nile Basin

Aquat. Sci. 67 (2005) 42 – 50 1015-1621/05/010042-09 DOI 10.1007/s00027-004-0765-y © EAWAG, Dübendorf, 2005 Aquatic Sciences Special Feature Article Egypt and the Nile Basin Magdy Hefny 1, * and Salah El-Din Amer 2 1 2 Director, Regional Center for Studies and Research on Water Ethics (former position: Egyptian Ambassador to Ethiopia 1991–1995), Ministry of Water Resources and Irrigation, Fum Ismaillia Canal P.O. Box 74, Shubra El Kheima, 13411 Egypt University of Cairo, Faculty of Law, 6 Tahrir Street, Dokki, Giza, Cairo, Egypt Received: 11 June 2004; revised manuscript accepted: 11 November 2004 Abstract. The following paper examines the Nile question from an Egyptian perspective. The Nile is Egypt’s main source of water, and 96% of this water originates from outside of its territory. This explains why water is a key security issue for Egypt, and why, from Egypt’s point of view, cooperation with the upstream Nile countries is the only way forward. Egypt’s water policy focuses on demand management, environmental protection and international joint projects to increase the water supply (e.g. Jonglei canal). Key words. Water availability; withdrawal and security; vulnerable downstream position; water policy; cooperation; confidence building measures; Nile Basin Initiative. Introduction In the long course of human history, great rivers have nurtured civilizations. Many countries owe both the continuity and livelihood of their peoples to rivers. A river may, therefore, be viewed as a physical and hydrological unit that creates socio-economic realities. The Nile River is one of the world’s great international rivers. Since ancient times, Egypt has depended on the Nile. The Greek historian Herodotus wrote: “Egypt is the gift of Nile”. Indeed, had it not been for the Nile, Egypt would have remained a vast desert with no vegetation, similar to Libya on Egypt’s west flank and Saudi Arabia to the east. These three countries are positioned at the same latitude and receive almost no rainfall, but the Nile has made all the difference for Egypt. Egypt has long tried to maintain good relations with the other Nile riparian countries, especially with those of the Eastern Nile, as evidenced by the 1959 agreement with Sudan and the 1993 agreement establish* Corresponding author phone: ++202 261 22 85; e-mail: mhefny14@hotmail.com or magdyhefny@menanet.net Published on Web: March 2, 2005 ing a framework for political cooperation with Ethiopia. With the change of power in Ethiopia in May 1991, a new era of dialogue was initiated. The leaders of Egypt, Ethiopia and Sudan have mutually concurred in their vision that the Nile must be used in the interest of all the peoples in the region. Cooperation has been endorsed to ensure sustainable development. This paper summarizes various aspects of Egyptian interests and concerns with regard to the Nile River and its development. Egypt’s relationship with other Nile countries is also discussed, especially with Sudan and Ethiopia. Water: Egypt’s vulnerable situation Because it is the source of 96 % of the country’s renewable freshwater, the Nile is an essential element of Egypt’s sustainability. Demands for water and land are rapidly increasing in response to a growing population, industrialization, food production, and employment generation. Available land and water resources are limited, so a concerted effort to better manage the country’s limited water resources has become a national priority. Aquat. Sci. Vol. 67, 2005 The unrestricted use of water, to which users have been accustomed for many centuries, is no longer possible. There are some prospects for increasing the supply, but only at an increased cost and with a demand that is destined to rise. The per capita availability of water is currently just under 1,000 m3/year, a figure that, according to international standards, is equal to chronic water scarcity (Falkenmark and Widstrand, 1992). With Egypt’s projected population growth, the per capita water availability might drop to 500 m3/year (absolute scarcity) by the year 2025. Water quality and water quantity are closely interrelated. If water supplies remain constant or decrease, the water quality will deteriorate. Devising mitigating actions requires reliable knowledge of the current situation, of potential improvements and readily available technologies combined with enforcement of extant laws. Current assessment indicates that the Nile water quality is generally acceptable, except at some industrial effluents and disposal sites. Drainage water quality is less acceptable due to the excessive use of agricultural chemicals. Sewage and industrial waste are disposed via drains, thereby threatening the possibility of reuse and presenting a health hazard to farmers. The state of Egypt’s water and its vulnerability demands that the following issues need to be investigated: (a) water availability (b) the variability in water availability, (c) consumptive water use, (d) annual water withdrawal, and (e) how water balance is achieved. Water availability and variability The main water resources in Egypt originate outside its borders. The upper Nile catchments that contribute to the Nile and discharge at Aswan include the White Nile, the Blue Nile and the Atbara River. For the period 1871/1872 to 1998/1999, the average natural volume flowing at Aswan was estimated to be 88.350 km3 per year (MWRI, 2000). The maximum volume is about 142.378 km3/year, as measured in 1878–1879; the minimum volume is about 45.879 km3/year, measured in the year 1913–1914. The variability in water availability at Aswan is represented by the standard deviation for the same period as above and is estimated to be 15.705 km3/year (MWRI, 2000). Consumptive water use The crop consumptive use is the amount of water that is consumed by crops through evapotranspiration. This amount varies from one crop to another and is also affected by meteorological conditions. The total amount of annual crop consumptive use is estimated to be about 48.820 km3/year. The municipal water consumption is the amount of water that does not return to the system. It is lost through human activities like transpiration and is es- Special Feature Article 43 timated to be about 0.920 km3/year. For industrial activities, a small part of the water used is lost through evaporation and is estimated to be about 0.450 km3/year (MWRI, 2000). Annual water withdrawal The total amount of water diverted for agricultural use includes the amount of water required for evapotranspiration, conveyance, and application losses in both the irrigation network and at the farm level. The total amount of water diverted annually for agriculture in Egypt is estimated to be about 54 km3. This amount does not come solely from the Nile, however, but also from groundwater extraction and drainage reuse. Municipal water withdrawal includes water supplies for both urban areas and rural villages. Some of that water comes from the Nile system, either through canals or direct intake from the river; the balance originates from groundwater sources. The total annual municipal water use is estimated to be about 4.54 km3. Water withdrawal for the industrial sector is estimated to be about 7.5 km3/year. About 6 % of this amount is consumed; the balance returns to the system, creating major environmental problems (MWRI, 2000). The Nile’s main stem and part of the irrigation network are used both for tourist cruises between Aswan and Luxor and for the transportation of commodities between upper and lower Egypt. During the winter closure period (about 3 weeks), a minimum release from the Aswan High Dam must be made in order to maintain sufficient water levels for navigation. This amount of water is estimated to be about 0.26 km3/year (MWRI, 2000). Annual water balance Within Egypt the Nile basin is a closed system in which water volume inputs and outputs must be balanced. If one excludes the small amounts of rainfall on the northern coast and deep groundwater reservoirs, release of water from the High Aswan Dam is the only input to the system. According to the Nile Water Agreement with Sudan (Agreement, 1959), Egypt’s share of water is relatively high because of the recycling of water along the system. From the total amount of water used through the system, about 12.97 km3/year comes from reused agriculture drainage, 4.8 km3/year from groundwater extracted from renewable aquifers in the valley and delta, and 0.7 km3/ year from the reuse of treated sewage water. The key aspect of the 1959 Agreement with Sudan is that the principle of acquired rights was accepted and that water was shared on the basis of a ratio (depending on the average flow) and not on a fixed amount 1. 44 M. Hefny and S. El-Din Amer Water resources in Egypt: a prime security concern Egypt depends on the Nile for its water, but its source lies outside of Egypt’s borders. The Egyptian concerns with regard to the Nile are, therefore, both a matter of national security and a life or death issue. In a recently published interview with Dr. Mahmoud Abu Zeid, the Minister of Water Resources of Egypt, he stated that “a drop of water is becoming more precious than a drop of blood” (Alahram Newspaper, 1998) clearly referring to the scarcity of water that Egypt will face in the coming years. The minister added: “The Nile River is shared by ten countries, Egypt being the most downstream. And those downstream get what is left after everyone else extracts what they want” (Alahram Newspaper, 1998). The recently published “Water Policy Paper” highlights the challenges ahead: “Water resources in Egypt are deemed to be limited when compared with the rapid growth of population that is increasing continuously. The Egyptian share of the Nile waters is 55.5 km3/year, as agreed upon between Egypt and Sudan in their 1959 Agreement. The share per person for all water uses in Egypt is estimated at 2.5 m3/day; according to international standards this is considered close to the poverty line.” (MWRI, 2000). Measures have been designed in the “Water Policy Paper” to face this critical situation by improving water resources and demand management that will achieve the desired sustainable development plans by the year 2017. Water policy until 2017 In view of the grim situation with respect to the quantity and quality of Egypt’s water resources, the formulated water policy describes how Egypt will safeguard its resources in the future and how it will best use these resources. The overall policy objective is to utilize available conventional and non-conventional water resources to meet the socio-economic and environmental needs of the country. The policy focuses principally on three major 1 “The net benefit from the Sudd el Aali Reservoir mentioned in the previous item, shall be divided between the two Republics at the ratio of 14–1/2 for the Sudan and 7–1/2 for the United Arab Republic so long as the average river yield remains in future within the limits of the average yield referred to in the previous paragraph. This means that, if the average yield remains the same as the average of the previous years of this century, which is estimated at 84 Milliards, and if the losses of over-year storage remain equal to the present estimate of 10 Milliards, the net benefit of the Sudd el Aali Reservoir shall be 22 Milliards, of which the share of the Republic of the Sudan shall be 14–1/2 Milliards and the share of the United Arab Republic shall be 7–1/2 Milliards. By adding these shares to their acquired rights, the total share from the net yield of the Nile after the full operation of the Sudd el Aali Reservoir shall be 18–1/2 Milliards for the Republic of the Sudan and 55–1/2 Milliards for the United Arab Republic.” (Agreement, 1959, Second Art. 4). Egypt and the Nile Basin aspects: demand management, resource development, and environmental protection (MWRI, 2000). Formulating a water policy for the 21st Century has required a major shift from the classical paradigm used in water resource planning and management to a new paradigm. The dynamic interrelationships that exist among the components of water resource systems necessitate that an integrated approach be implemented by the policymakers. Using ecological, social and economic systems as boundary conditions for the water resources system is a necessary assumption. A multidisciplinary dialogue has been adopted in the policy formulation process. Emphasis is placed on: (a) increasing environmental awareness, (b) replacing water quantity management by water quantity and quality management, (c) enhanced public and stakeholder participation, (d) privatization and a more progressive role for non-governmental organizations, and (e) transparency of the policy formulation process and general public approval (MWRI, 2000). The water demand management policies used are based on taking action with regard to: (a) optimal use of available resources, (b) minimizing water losses, (c) irrigation improvement, (d) cost sharing, (e) cropping pattern shifts, (f) optimum use of groundwater, (g) reuse of agricultural drainage water, and (h) reuse of treated wastewater (MWRI, 2000). On the water resources development side, the strategies are more focused on enhancing cooperation among the Nile Basin countries in order to implement joint projects that could increase the country’s water budget (i.e. inflow versus outflow of water) from the Nile. Examples are projects to reduce water losses in swamp areas in the south of Sudan, such as the Gabal and Zaraf Lakes (Jonglei 1 and 2), and the Machar Marshes projects. If these projects are implemented, they could increase the water share for each country by 9 km3/year. The realization of these projects, however, has been brought to a halt since November 1983 because of civil war in the south of Sudan where the Jonglei 1 project was about to be completed. Water quality management is increasingly becoming another important dimension of the solution. Since 1976 there has been a “Water Quality Monitoring Program” to identify locations and sources of pollution. This program has recently been expanded to include drainage water and ground water. Cooperation among Nile Basin States A number of Nile basin countries have collaborated on technical issues since 1967, when the first regional Nile River Basin project, Hydromet, was initiated with UNDP funding. When this project came to an end in 1982, the participating countries continued the activities through 1992 with their own funding. In 1992 the ministers of Aquat. Sci. Vol. 67, 2005 Water Affairs for six of the Nile basin countries established the Technical Cooperation Committee for the Promotion of the Development and Environmental Protection of the Nile Basin (TECCONILE) 2. In 1993 the Nile 2002 Conference Series was started in Aswan and has continued through 2002 to be held each year in one of the ten Nile Basin countries. At the February 1995 meeting of the Council of Ministers held in Arusha (Tanzania), the Council Ministers prepared the Nile River Basin Action Plan (NRBAP), which initiated a number of technical assistance projects. The one project which received endorsement by all the members in the Council of Ministers was a project entitled: “Nile River Basin Cooperative Framework” 3. In 1997 and 1998 special review and consultation meetings took place in Kigali, Rwanda and in Cairo, Egypt, in cooperation with the World Bank, Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) and UNDP. In these meetings progress accounts were given and reports made on the remaining challenges. As a result, it was possible to launch the Nile Basin Initiative (NBI) in 1999 with its different layers of strategic goals and guiding principles for a revised action program. The Nile Basin Initiative The Nile Basin riparian countries have taken an historic step towards cooperation in the establishment of the Nile Basin Initiative (NBI). Formally launched in February of 1999, the initiative is a transitional institutional mechanism that includes all of the Nile riparian countries and provides a basin-wide framework to fight poverty and promote regional economic development. The NBI is guided by a shared vision “to achieve sustainable socioeconomic development through the equitable utilization of, and benefit from, the common Nile Basin Water resources.” (NBI, 2001). This plan will be legally and institutionally underpinned by a Cooperative Framework, which defines the equitable utilization of Nile waters, as well as the responsibility to cooperate in the development and protection of the resources (Grey and Dombrowsky, 1998). The NBI is comprised of the Council of Ministers of Water Affairs of the Nile Basin States (Nile-COM). A Technical Advisory Committee (Nile-TAC) and a Secretariat (Nile-SEC) located in Entebbe, Uganda, support the Nile-COM. 2 TECCONILE members were Egypt, Kenya, Rwanda, Sudan, Tanzania, Uganda, and Zaire. Burundi, Ethiopia and Kenya participated as observers. 3 The Nile River Basin Cooperative Framework Project was undertaken by Burundi, D.R. Congo, Egypt, Ethiopia, Kenya, Rwanda, Sudan, Tanzania, and Uganda. Special Feature Article 45 Objectives The major objectives of the NBI are to: – Develop the water resources of the Nile Basin in a sustainable and equitable way in order to ensure prosperity, security and peace for all its peoples; – Ensure efficient water management and the optimal use of the resources; – Ensure cooperation and joint action among the riparian countries and seek win-win gains; – Eradicate poverty and promote economic integration; and – Ensure that the program moves from planning to action. Strategic Action Program The (NBI) has initiated a Strategic Action Program to translate the shared vision into action. This includes two complementary components: A Basin-Wide Shared Vision Program (SVP) and the Subsidiary Action Program (SAP). A Basin-Wide Shared Vision Program (SVP). The “Shared Vision Program” comprises the following themes: – Cooperative Framework (Project D3, ongoing) – Confidence building and stakeholder involvement – Socio-economic, environmental and sector analysis – Development and investment planning, and applied training Subsidiary Action Program (SAP). Within the basin-wide framework, subsidiary action programs will be comprised of development projects at a sub-basin level, involving two or more countries. While national governments will address what needs to be done at the local and national levels, the challenge of regional cooperation is to address development opportunities with transboundary implications. A major focus of the Eastern Nile Subsidiary Action Program (ENSAP) is to identify and develop cooperative projects of a ‘win-win’ nature that provide visible results and shared benefits. Towards this end, the ENSAP countries (Egypt, Ethiopia and Sudan) have developed a number of proposals for consideration in the first ENSAP project that are of a sectoral nature, focusing on the development of hydroelectric power, trade, agriculture and irrigation, watershed protection and management, and water conservation. The size, complexity, and diversity of technical and socio-economic concerns in the region also dictate the need for methodologies and analytical tools, such as models to assist in identifying alternative development paths, quantifying the potential benefits and impacts of proposed projects, evaluating tradeoffs, and providing 46 M. Hefny and S. El-Din Amer overall guidance in investment planning. The Eastern Nile countries now acknowledge that a planning model, particularly a jointly developed one, can serve to facilitate the development of a regional, integrated, multi-purpose development program. An Eastern Nile planning model, coupled with a strengthening of institutional and human capacity, can provide a sound basis for decisionmaking on a regional basis. The Nile 2002 Conference series: its contribution to confidence and consensus building The Nile 2002 Conferences, which have been held since the early 1990s, have managed to create a better environment for learning and confidence and trust building among the participants of the Nile riparian states. This is due to the continued process of dialogue and reflective conversation, which has undoubtedly contributed greatly to consensus-building (Hefny, 2001). The conferences have adopted a systematic approach, meaning that each meeting is connected to the others by a series of themes focused to bring about a specific outcome using the process of consensus-building. Each topic has its own function within the sequence. This is based on the assumption that each function corresponds to a distinct phase in the riparian policy-making process – whether for collaborative action or for water resource management and sustainable development. The way in which the themes have been defined throughout the procedure results in a process that is goal-oriented, as characterized by the range of sequentially related topics: – Aswan, Egypt (1993) “Getting Started” – Khartoum, The Sudan (1994) “The Vision Ahead” – Arusha, Tanzania (1995) “Taking Off ” – Kampala, Uganda (1996) “An Action Plan” – Addis Ababa, Ethiopia (1997) “Basis for Cooperation” – Kigali, Rwanda (1998) “Benefits for all” – Cairo, Egypt (1999) “A Shared Vision” – Addis Ababa, Ethiopia (2000) “Priorities for the Millennium” – Nairobi, Kenya (2002) “Building a Nile Basin Community” The culmination of this process was perhaps best evidenced in the 1999 conference in Cairo at which “A Shared Vision for the Year 2025” was approved (Africa High Level Consultation, 1999). Are there still open questions? Although much progress has been achieved on the ENSAP level, many voices in the Nile countries are arguing that what they call the “status quo” still only favors the downstream countries, Egypt and Sudan. Based on the Egypt and the Nile Basin NBI process of dialogue and discussion over the past few years, the following issues have been deemed as still open: – Existing agreements questioned by the upper Nile countries – Prior notification and consultation – The natural and historic rights (i.e., Egypt is almost completely dependent on the Nile and is therefore especially vulnerable). – Operation of the principle of equitable utilization – The principle of ‘causing no significant harm’ balanced with ‘equitable utilization’ Without prejudging the end result of ongoing negotiations, it should be noted that there is already a legal framework in place for governing the Nile system. It is based on bilateral agreements concluded among the Nile countries, customary law, and international law. These legal agreements have been in force for many years, although some politicians and academics question their validity: – There exist many bilateral agreements between the Nile Basin countries, including the Eastern Nile group. These agreements should be regarded as having territorial (i.e., real) character (see attached Annex No. 1 “Summary of Agreements between the Nile Basin Countries”). – The International Court of Justice stated in its latest judgment regarding International Waters that: “In its Commentary on the Draft Articles on Succession of States in respect of Treaties, adopted at its twentysixth session, the International Law Commission identified ‘treaties of a territorial character’ as having been both in traditional doctrine and in modern opinion as unaffected by a succession of states.” (official Records of the United Nations Conference on the Succession of States in respect of Treaties, Vol. III. A/CONF 80/16 Add.2. p.27, Para. 2).4 The draft text of Article 12, which reflects this principle, was subsequently unchanged in the 1987 Vienna Convention. 4 See International Court of Justice, Reports, Case Concerning the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary/Slovakia), Judgment of September 25. 1997. The Court considers that Article 12 reflects a rule of customary international law; it notes that neither of the Parties disputed this. Moreover, the Commission indicated that “Treaties concerning water rights or navigational rivers are commonly regarded as candidates for inclusion in the category of territorial treaties” (ibid, p. 33, para. 26). The Court observes that Article 12, in stating only (without reference to the treaty itself) that the rights and obligations of territorial character by a treaty are unaffected by a succession of states, appears to lend support to the position of Hungary rather than of Slovakia. However, the Court concludes that this formulation was devised in order to take into account that, in many cases, treaties which had established boundaries or territorial regimes were no longer in force (ibid, pp. 26–37). Although this remained in effect, it would nonetheless bind a successor. Aquat. Sci. Special Feature Article Vol. 67, 2005 – There exist well-established customary rules in regards to the utilization of International Waters. – In light of international customs, there are some very well-established practices that suggest the existence of regional customary rules between the Eastern Nile countries; these are supported by continuous practices and conduct. Confidence building measures Removing fear and building trust is important in order to sustain communication and productive cooperation among the three countries. This can be promoted through specific confidence building measures that need to be agreed upon. ENTRO (Eastern Nile Technical Regional Office), which was established by a decision of ENCOM, offers an excellent example on how confidence building among the three states can pave the way for enhanced cooperation. Inter-regional trade, socio-economic development and joint water management projects will be of great importance in building more trust and confidence among the Easter Nile countries. Projects initiated with the aim of building trust and confidence are by definition long-term in nature and require special care, talent and experience as well as continuity of the officials involved. Raising awareness among the public through the mass media on the repercussions of new phases of cooperation among riparian countries will be critical. There are two basic ‘rules’ which have gained universal acceptance: – Exchange of data, which should be reciprocal, ample, and in good faith among all the co-riparian states. – Consultation is required before construction of water works that might cause harm to other co-basin states. It is also essential that a major shift in thinking take place. It has now become the shared view that: “There is no freshwater security without a major shift in thinking. (…) It is important to establish situations of interactive learning processes; learning to listen is as essential as self-reflection. A common language has to be achieved through the mutual education of scientists, politicians, and the public.” (Falkenmark, 2000). Lessons learned The riparian countries of the Nile River are beginning the new millennium with great optimism. The progress made during the 1990s is quite remarkable. A new learning environment has been created with openness, mutual respect for one another’s perspectives and a focused implementation of ‘A Strategic Action Program’. Most notable is the ‘Shared Vision’ that places sustainable socio-eco- 47 nomic development at its center. This is an historic step forward, taken on a long road towards facing the challenges and complexities of a new era. The lessons learned thus far are summarized as follows: – The River Nile is the common heritage of all riparian countries. – Water is a human rights issue of high priority. – Access to water is a legitimate right for every individual, community and country. – Continuous dialogue and thinking together are the only tools for achieving understanding, shared visions, and firm commitments for a better future. – Collaborative action among the Nile riparian states under the NBI is the only way to face the challenges and complexities of future water demand. – The Nile is a model case for enhancing confidence building; the propagation by some of ‘water wars’ or a ‘cold war on the Nile’ is just a cliché used for political ends. – Through negotiation of international agreements, it is possible to achieve satisfactory win-win benefits; it is only by peaceful means that water conflicts can be resolved. – International law in the field of water must prevail. – The water data availability principle should be respected by all riparian countries. – Changing behaviors through changing structures or cultures, education and models should bring about a better understanding and appreciation of mutual problems and challenges. – There can be no freshwater security without a major shift in thinking. – Creating a learning environment on the Nile can be achieved by using the Nile as a stimulus for cooperation rather than for conflict. Conclusion Egypt has always been aware of the extreme importance of the Nile waters, both for Egypt as well as for all the countries of the Nile Basin. Due to Egypt’s historical dependence on the Nile, cooperation in the Basin needs to be based on the acceptance of Egypt’s acquired rights, while Egypt needs to accept the needs of the upstream countries to also develop the waters of the Nile. These two approaches are not mutually incompatible, as many options exist that would benefit all countries without harming any of them. To put these opportunities into practice, however, trust is needed. The series of multilateral initiatives and conferences (e. g. Hydromet, TECCONILE, Nile 2002 Conference Series, Nile Basin Initiative) have greatly helped to improve communication and trust. This is especially the case for the Nile Basin Initiative, launched in 1999. The challenge now 48 M. Hefny and S. El-Din Amer facing the Nile Basin countries is to move from trustbuilding activities to tangible projects on the ground, so that people actually realize the benefits of cooperation. Acknowledgments The authors acknowledge support from the Individual Project 7 “Environmental Change and Conflict Transformation” (CSS-ETH/Swisspeace/Ethno-Unizh) of the Swiss National Centre of Competence in Research (NCCR) North–South: Research Partnerships for Mitigating Syndromes of Global Change. The NCCR NorthSouth is co-funded by the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) and the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC). Furthermore, support from the Swiss Federal Institute of Environmental Science and Technology (EAWAG) and the Center for Security Studies (CSS-ETH), a member of the Center for Comparative and International Studies of the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (CIS-ETH Zurich) are also gratefully acknowledged. Egypt and the Nile Basin References Africa High Level Consultation, 1999. Vision for Life, Water, and the Environment, Comprehensive Water Resources Development of the Nile Basin, two volumes, Cairo. Agreement, 1959. Agreement between the Republic of the Sudan and the United Arab Republic for the full utilization of the Nile Waters signed at Cairo Egypt, 8 November 1959. In: FAO Legislative Study – 61, Food and Agriculture Organization, available online at: <http://www.fao.org/docrep/W7414B/ w7414b13.thm> (10.11.2004). Alahram Newspaper, 1998. Interview with the Egyptian Minister of water resources, Mahmoud Abu Zeid, June 8, Cairo. Falkenmark, M. and C. Widstrand, 1992. Population and water resources: a delicate balance. Population Bulletin 47: 1–36. Falkenmark, M., 2000. No freshwater without major shift in thinking, ten-year message from the Stockholm Water Symposia, Stockholm International Water Institute (SIWI), Stockholm. Grey, D. and I. Dombrowsky, 1998. The Nile Basin Initiative – progress and challenges ahead, paper presented at the VI Nile 2002 Conference, February 23–27, Kigali, Rwanda. Hefny, M., 2001. Assessing the Nile 2002 Conference series: consensus-building and lessons learnt, unpublished paper presented at the 2nd Conference of International Water History Association, University of Bergen, August 10–12, Bergen. International Court of Justice, 1997. Case Concerning the Gabcikovo - Nagymaros Project (Hungary/Slovakia), Judgment of September 25, Reports pp. 68–69. MWRI (Ministry of Water Resources and Irrigation), 2000. Main Features of the Water Policy to 2017, Ministry of Water Resources and Irrigation, Cairo. NBI (Nile Basin Initiative), 2001. Strategic Action Program Overview Document, prepared by the NBI and the World Bank for the International Consortium for Cooperation on the Nile (ICCON), available online at: <http://www.nilebasin.org/ iccon_overview.htm> (15.11.2004). United Nations Conference on the Succession of States in respect of Treaties, Vol. III. A/CONF 80/16 Add.2. p.27, Para. 2. Aquat. Sci. Special Feature Article Vol. 67, 2005 49 Annex 1. Summary of agreements between the Nile Basin countries. Date Type Place Countries involved Nile Water Relevant Articles/Statements Other Important subjects 15 April 1891 Protocol Rome Great Britain, Italy The Government of Italy undertakes not to construct on the Atbara River any irrigation or other works that might sensibly modify its flow into the Nile. Delineation of area of governance for both countries in Eastern Africa. 12 May 1894 Agreement Brussels Great Britain, Congo Delineation of area of governance for both countries in Middle Africa. 22 Nov. 1901 Shared statement Rome Great Britain, Congo Delineation of boundaries between Sudan and Eritrea. 15 May 1902 Treaty Addis Ababa Great Britain, Ethiopia His Majesty the Emperor Menelik II King of Kings of Ethiopia engages himself towards the Government of his Britannic Majesty not to construct or allow to be constructed any work across the Blue Nile, Lake Tana or the Sobat, which would obstruct the flow of their waters into the Nile except in agreement with Great Britain and Sudan. 9 May 1906 Agreement London Great Britain, Congo The Government of Congo undertakes not to construct or allow to be constructed any work on or near the Semliki or Isango which would diminish the volume of water entering into Lake Albert except in agreement with the Sudanese Government. Adjustment of areas of government for both countries in Middle Africa as defined in the Agreement took place in Brussels in 1894. 13 Dec. 1906 Agreement London Great Britain, France, Italy Fourth article stated that all countries should co-ordinate to safeguard the British and Egyptian rights in the Nile Basin; in particular the Blue Nile waters and its branches that enter Egypt and the benefits of those countries in which the river passes through should be taken into consideration. Cooperation to maintain the current state in Ethiopia. Dec. 1925 Exchanged letters Rome Great Britain (representing Sudan), Italy Italy should recognize the prior hydraulic rights of Egypt and the Sudan in the waters of the Blue and White Niles and guarantee not to construct any work the headwaters of the Blue Nile, the White Nile and their tributaries that might sensibly modify their flow into the main river. – It is the right of local inhabitants to construct small dams and reservoirs on secondary branches to generate energy and for other localized purposes. – Authorization of construction of a reservoir on Tana Lake Construction of a railway through Ethiopia, from Eritrea to the Italian Somalia. May 1929 Exchanged letters Cairo Egypt, Great Britain (representing Sudan, Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda) No works that would reduce the volume of the Nile water reaching Egypt would be undertaken onthe Nile, its tributaries and lakes in the basin. Egypt has the right to inspect implementation of projects. Agreement on Egypt’s ancient rights of the Nile Waters. Egypt has the right to investigate along the whole length of the Nile all the way to the remote sources of the Nile tributaries in these territories. 50 M. Hefny and S. El-Din Amer Egypt and the Nile Basin Annex 1 (continued) Date Type Place Countries involved Nile Water Relevant Articles/Statements 23 Nov. 1934 Agreement London Great Britain (representing Tanzania), Belgium (representing Rwanda and Burundi) Both sides agreed to return flows withdrawn from the Kagera River for hydroelectric power generation. Half the flows of the Kagera River can be diverted for utilization for industrial demands during minimum flows periods. Countries that wish to use the Kagera River waters for irrigation purposes should inform other countries involved in the Agreement 6 months in advance. Jan. 1953 Exchanged letters Cairo and London Egypt, Great Britain (representing Uganda) Construction of the Own Falls Reservoir at the downstream end of Lake Victoria which serves as a storage and to control water release for irrigation purposes in Egypt and to produce hydroelectric power for Uganda. Operation of the hydroelectric power station should not affect Egypt’s share of water and should not alter the arrival timing of the flows nor reduce their quantities. No change of the flow regime at the outlet of Lake Victoria due to the construction of the Owen Falls Dam. Egyptian Government operates the reservoir by Egyptian Engineers working at the site, while operation and maintenance of the reservoir is the responsibility of the Electricity Council of Uganda. 8 Nov. 1959 Agreement Cairo Egypt, Sudan Interrelated with the Nile Water Agreement of 1929. Present acquired rights 48 km3/year for Egypt and 4 km3/year for Sudan. Full utilization of the Nile Waters and construction of the High Aswan Dam with Egypt’s share of 7.5 km3/year and 14.5 km3/year for Sudan. Also, construction of Roseries reservoir in Sudan. Minimizing water losses projects in the Gabal and Zaraf Lakes, Ghazal Lake and its branches, Sobat River and its branches and the White Nile Basin. Technical cooperation between the two countries and with other Nile Basin countries. Establishment of the Permanent Joint Technical Commission (PJTC) of the Nile Waters. May 1991 Exchanged letters Cairo Egypt, Uganda Compliance with the Agreement in 1953 of the construction of the Owen Falls Dam. Expansion of the hydroelectric power station of Owen Falls Reservoirs. Ugandan can regulate Lake Victoria, when needed, within safe flow margins that will not negatively affect downstream countries. July 1993 Agreement Cairo Egypt, Ethiopia Both countries should not embark in any works on the Nile that could harm and affect other countries’ share and benefits. Importance of safekeeping and protecting the Nile Water. Compliance with international laws. Consultation and cooperation between both countries for utilization of the Nile water to increase water flows and to reduce losses. Other Important subjects Strengthen the relationship between both countries and avoid intervention in internal matters to maintain stability of the region.