[ad_1]
November 28, 2020
Sudan is boycotted the latest round of negotiations with Egypt and Ethiopia on 21 November on the controversial Ethiopian dam on the Nile River.
Sudan believes that the talks have failed to produce any results in recent rounds and calls for more dependence on AU experts as part of the effort to bridge the gaps between the three countries.
The African Union has sponsored arduous but fruitless negotiations between the three parties since June 26, in the presence of experts from the United States, the World Bank and the European Union.
In a press release dated November 22, following a emergency meeting of the Supreme Committee of Sudan for the negotiations on the Renaissance dam of Greater Ethiopia, the Sudanese Minister of Irrigation Yasser Abbas said that it is necessary to change the negotiation methodology in order to make a breakthrough that allows for progress in the talks. He added that Sudan continues to adhere to the African Union sponsorship of negotiations, but seeks a different methodology. This apparently has to do with a great reliance on African Union experts.
It was the first time that Sudan had skipped the dam negotiations with Ethiopia and Egypt, which could further hamper the already blocked talks between the three countries; discussions have been going on for a decade now.
The current round of negotiations, which Sudan has boycotted, started on 21 November and was supposed to last 10 days. The latest talks were the result of a virtual meeting on November 19 between the three countries’ foreign and irrigation ministers, chaired by South African Foreign Minister Naledi Pandor, whose country is currently the head of the African Union.
After the November 19 meeting, Egypt and Sudan had different positions, disagreeing on the methodology of the negotiations. Egypt has expressed its willingness to participate in the round which started on 21 November. In a November 19 statement, the Egyptian foreign ministry stressed the importance of resuming talks to reach a legal and binding agreement on the filling and management of the dam so as to preserve the common interests and water rights of the three. countries.
Meanwhile, the Sudanese Ministry of Irrigation and Water Resources considered Pandor’s insistence on holding a new round of negotiations despite the reservations expressed by the Sudanese delegation as a clear procedural violation. In a November 19 statement, the Sudanese ministry accused Egypt and Ethiopia of continuing to hold talks which proved futile and were leading to a dead end.
Ahmed al-Mufti, former member of the Sudanese delegation to the dam negotiations and Sudanese expert on international law, said on his Facebook page on November 21 that Sudan’s move to rely more on African Union experts shows that Sudanese negotiators are confident that the experts will make recommendations in favor of Sudan.
Egyptian experts who spoke to Al-Monitor expressed concern that Ethiopia could take advantage of the dispute between Cairo and Khartoum to buy time and prolong negotiations, especially as Addis Ababa is currently facing unrest at home and teetering on the brink. of a threat of civil war to tear the country apart. The federal government of Ethiopia, led by Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed, was embroiled in a conflict with the Tigray People’s Liberation Front in the north of the country, which resulted in the deaths of hundreds of people. The United Nations has warned that around 200,000 people have been displaced.
On July 21, Ethiopia announced the first phase of filling the dam basin with 4.9 billion cubic meters of water during the rainy season, which raised the ire of both Egypt and Sudan, who demanded that the filling of the dam does not begin until an agreement has been reached. Ethiopia is looking to complete the second phase of the dam filling within the next year.
Cairo fears the potential negative impact of backfilling on its annual Nile water quota, which it depends on to meet more than 95% of its freshwater needs. About 85% of the Nile’s water comes from the Blue Nile, on which the dam is being built for a cost of 4.6 billion dollars. For Addis Ababa, the the dam is vital to develop its economy and combat rampant poverty in the country.
For Sudan, the dam is important for regulating the waters of the Blue Nile and for generating electricity for the country. Khartoum, however, wants guarantees involving dam safety and operations so that other Sudanese dams – mainly the Roseires Dam, the largest in the country – are not adversely affected.
Other technical issues are still pending, including filling the dam during drought years which witness less rainfall, which could mean less water released from Addis Ababa to downstream countries.
Sudan and Egypt are also calling for a legally binding agreement to be reached to resolve any disputes that may arise between the three countries.
Abbas Sharaqi, a professor of geology and water resources at Cairo University, told Al-Monitor that the disagreement between Egypt and Sudan is not fundamental, but rather related to procedural issues in conducting negotiations. He said Sudan would be unlikely to withdraw completely from the negotiations, while explaining that Egypt is reluctant to give African Union experts a bigger role in the talks, using the argument that U.S., World Bank observers and the EU are more experienced in this field.
The three countries failed on 4 November to agree on the role the experts could play in the methodology and timetable for negotiations. Egypt, however, agrees with Sudan on the need to set a time limit for talks, according to Sharaqi.
Hani Raslan, head of the Sudan and Nile Basin Studies Department at the Al-Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies, criticized Sudan’s decision to boycott the talks.
“The Sudanese minister of water and irrigation contradicts himself as he previously refused to sign a Washington-sponsored draft agreement in February, in solidarity with the Ethiopian position,” Raslan told Al-Monitor.
At the request of Egypt, the United States sought to broker the talks last year and earlier this year in Washington with the participation of the World Bank. The four-month negotiations stalled in February when Egypt unilaterally signed a draft agreement on filling and managing the dam. Ethiopia did not participate in the talks on the day of the signing and Sudan refrained from signing.
Raslan questioned the feasibility of giving African Union experts a greater role, saying: “African experts may be biased and may not even be up to the professional and scientific standards required.”
“Sudan’s proposals will only serve Ethiopia’s interests, returning to ground zero in negotiations in terms of proposals, scenarios and formulations. This will allow Ethiopia to serve only its interests, “Raslan said.
.
[ad_2]
Source link
