From: Berhane Habtemariam (Berhane.Habtemariam@gmx.de)
Date: Mon May 17 2010 - 10:04:11 EDT
Global Insider: The Nile River Basin
Kari Lipschutz | Bio <http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/author.aspx?id=460>
| 17 May 2010
Last month, after negotiations to establish the World Bank-funded Nile Basin
Initiative faltered, seven of the nine countries that share the Nile Basin
<http://> agreed to form a permanent negotiating body to resolve questions
of resource-sharing for the world's longest river. In an e-mail interview,
<http://www.transboundarywaters.orst.edu/about/wolf.html> Aaron Wolf, a
professor at Oregon State University specializing in water resources policy
and conflict resolution, explains the longstanding issues and prospects for
Nile Basin water-use negotiations.
WPR: What is the current status quo of water use in the Nile River basin?
Wolf: The last actual treaty signed on the basin is one between Egypt and
Sudan dating to 1959. Allocations are based on usage at the time, and, given
population and economic growth, and widespread political independence, are
quite dated. Water in the basin is fully allocated, with mostly rain-fed
agriculture in the upper states, and irrigated agriculture in the lower
states. Hydropower demand is growing, as is an awareness of environmental
and instream needs.
WPR: Why have negotiations for the Nile Basin Initiative broken down?
I think I would use the word "stalled" rather than broken down. Considering
how dramatically the tenor and substance of negotiations have changed over
the last 15 years, I'd actually call the current state of affairs quite
remarkable. Recall that in the early 1990's, conflict was the order of the
day, with regular predictions of water wars, and even calls for violence
from politicians in the basin. Most recently, the parties have come
amazingly close to a comprehensive agreement, even to where the differences
are represented by mere paragraphs. What we're seeing are, one hopes, the
last bit of positioning necessary before an agreement is signed.
WPR: What impact will an agreement among the seven upstream countries have
on the ultimate resolution of the issue?
I don't think there will be an agreement without all nine countries signing
on. Whether the agreement is to form a basin commission first, as Egypt
proposes, or to get the details of a framework agreement first, as the upper
basin countries would prefer, the final strategy will need to be unanimous
in order to generate the efficiencies and development funding promised by a
unified approach. Currently, water and energy are managed unilaterally,
country by country, and therefore inefficiently. By coordinating, the
countries could, with international support, generate enough efficiency to
essentially make the current impasse seem quite dated quite quickly.
----[This List to be used for Eritrea Related News Only]----