The Nile in Egyptian-Sudanese Relations

Ayman al-Sayyid Abdel-Wahab

The International Politics Journal (Al-Siyassa Al-Dawliya),

http://www.siyassa.org.eg/ESiyassa/ahram/2001/1/1/STUD4.htm

January, 2001
Issue No :143

 

Differences between Egypt and Sudan over water are a major feature of their bilateral relations, especially in periods of tension between the two countries. This raises questions about the Nile being used as a tool to apply pressure within the framework of these relations, particularly in the light of recent developments in the two countries. While Sudan is currently experiencing a crisis economically, politically and in terms of national integration, Egypt has entered a stage of transition, and must face the accompanying economic, social and political challenges. Moreover, there is now a lack of trust between the Egyptian and Sudanese governments as well as feelings of frustration at the popular level as a result of repeated failed attempts at integration and union.


This report looks at the disagreements that arose as a result of the 1929 and 1959 agreements on the utilization of the River Nile, examines the relationship between the Nile and development and regional cooperation and proposes a number of suggestions to overcome the political difficulties and complications in the Nile Basin region.
The first agreement defining both countries' quotas of Nile water was signed in 1929. This agreement aimed at reconciling between the needs and demands of both parties and set the annual quotas of Egypt and Sudan at 48 billion and four billion cubic meters of water respectively. Consequent developments, however, including the 1952 July Revolution, the independence of Sudan in 1956 and the building of the Aswan High Dam, necessitated the reorganization of water quotas, and a second agreement, which is still valid, was signed in 1959.


While the 1959 agreement did not stipulate any change to Egypt's quota of Nile water, it set a more comprehensive legal framework for the organization of bilateral relations concerned with the distribution of water. It also underscored the historical rights of Egypt to the waters of the Nile. Many Sudanese politicians objected to the agreement, as they had to the previous one. Even now, both agreements remain a focus of criticism for a number of political powers in Sudan, even if the basis for this criticism is more political than legal or technical. This has naturally led to friction and occasional deadlocks in the two countries' bilateral relations.


Both Egypt and Sudan depend on the Nile for development projects. Egypt urgently needs to redraw its agricultural map in order to achieve self-sufficiency and food security especially as many assessments indicate that the real crisis in Egypt lies in the distribution of resources, not in their availability. At the same time, Sudan's demands for development projects exceed its current annual Nile quota of 18.5 billion cubic meters of water, and hence the government needs to rationalize water consumption and set up efficient irrigation networks.


Joint development projects could serve as a starting point for Egyptian-Sudanese cooperation in the field of water utilization. Agreement has already been reached on a number of such projects on the Upper Nile, to be equally funded by both parties, though all but the Jonglei Canal project are still in the planning stages. The Jonglei Canal project began in 1980, although work was halted in 1983 as a result of the Sudanese civil war. This project remains a model for joint initiatives to promote water security in the region, though it also highlights the extent to which political restrictions can affect development.
What is needed now are new plans for the utilization and management of the Nile in order to prevent the eruption of regional disputes, particularly as it is becoming increasingly difficult to apply an Egyptian-Sudanese agreement that is not fully accepted by all the political powers in Sudan. Efforts also need to be exerted to create a region-wide system for development encompassing all the countries of the Nile Basin.
Cooperation between Egypt and Sudan over water could provide the impetus for further strategic bilateral cooperation. This could be achieved through the groupings of which both parties are members - the Joint Permanent Technical Committee -formed according to the 1959 agreement- and the TechoNile grouping -the technical aggregation comprising the countries of the Nile Basin for development and preservation of the Nile environment-. Such cooperation could also pave the way for more comprehensive arrangements with other countries of the Nile Basin.


Cooperation in the Nile Basin needs to be widened to include coordination in areas other than water utilization and thus achieve a balance of interests. Ideally, this should be within the framework of a strategy of collective development and supported by an institutional structure that aims to achieve fair distribution of water on the basis of the actual requirements of each country. This cooperation could take the form of a number of regional projects.


In order for regional cooperation to be a success, there should be a focus on agricultural and infrastructure projects. There is also a need for research in a number of areas, including means of decreasing water wastage in the swamp areas and the feasibility of establishing both a navigational course in the Nile and a free-trade zone. It is essential, however, that political formulas serving single-party interests be avoided.
We can conclude that the absence of a comprehensive strategy for Egyptian-Sudanese relations has resulted in the deferral of a number of difficult issues, including that of defining Nile quotas. With regard to Egyptian-Sudanese relations concerning the Nile, there are a number of points worth noting:


1. Egyptian-Sudanese bilateral relations throughout history have been a series of missed opportunities, as can be seen by looking at the amount of cooperation agreements and projects that have been impeded by tense relations.

2. Politicization of the water issue seems to be a characteristic not only of Egyptian-Sudanese relations, but of the relations between the countries of the Nile Basin as a whole.


3. The weak economic abilities of both countries and their need to increase their water quotas in the short run necessitate the urgent movement of Egyptian diplomacy to coordinate regional cooperation.

4. Sudan and Egypt, of all the countries of the Nile Basin, have the greatest need for water due to their dependence on irrigation from sources other than rain.


In conclusion, in order for the differences over water quotas between Egypt and Sudan to be overcome - as well as differences in the Nile Basin as a whole - three main areas need to be addressed: the shackling of development interests by political restrictions; discrepancies in the balance of power that lead to the interests of certain parties being served at the expense of others; and the institutional vacuum that has occurred as a result of weak coordination.