https://read.amazon.com/kp/embed?asin=B0CJ89VNQ6&preview=newtab&linkCode=kpe&ref_=cm_sw_r_kb_dp_4PPH8SAJNGE2A1VMW9RT&tag=hornaf-20

Read the 1993 Ethio-Egypt Accord | Share your view

Make a firsthand reading of the July 1993 ‘Framework for General Co-operation Between the Arab Republic of Egypt and Ethiopia’ and share your opinion.

The former Egyptian President Hosini Mubarak and Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles Zenawi(then President of the Transitional government) signed an agreement titled ‘Framework for General Co-operation Between the Arab Republic of Egypt and Ethiopia’ on July 1993 in Cairo, Egypt.

The accord has eight articles, of which five deals with Nile water issues.

In my extensive follow-up of the Egyptian media in the last five week, I observed the Egyptians hardly mention this agreement – on the contrary they often cite the 1902 Treaty between Ethiopia and UK(United Kingdom) as a legal basis of the 1929 UK-Egypt and 1959 Egypt-Sudan Treaties.(that will be discussed in a forthcoming post).

Quite to the contrary, Ethiopians are aware of the 1993 accord. However, like much of the issues in our politics, the public has never had the chance to read the document first-hand. Thus, I posted a scanned image containing the full text here.

[Continue reading below]

WHAT DO YOU THINK?

I would rather not comment on the matter at this time. Because, I wish to find out how many types of criticisms are out there first.

For example, a very brief post, titled ‘Meles-Mubarak 1993 Nile Accord Revisited’, by Elias Kifle on Ethiopian-review, on Aug. 2010, goes like this:

To return a favor to Egypt … one of the first things … Meles Zenawi did was to fly to Cairo and sign a secret agreement with Egypt’s President Mubarak.

The July 1993 accord signed in Cairo strips Ethiopia of its right to use the Nile River for development schemes. Article 6 of the accord states:

The two parties agree on the necessity of the conservation and protection of the Nile Waters. In this regard, they undertake to consult and cooperate in projects that are mutually advantageous, such as projects that would enhance the volume of flow and reduce the loss of Nile Waters through comprehensive and integrated development schemes.

In other words, Ethiopia must first get approval from Egypt before undertaking any development projects on Nile.

In December 2009, Meles signed another agreement with Mubarak affirming Egypt’s quota over Nile, as reported by Al Aharam.

The Meles-Mubarak bilateral agreements had angered the other Nile basin countries while boosting Egypt’s position.

Nowadays, desperate for diverting attention from the May 2010 election fiasco and growing domestic problems, the Meles regime is attacking Egypt over Nile River. In the process, Meles is dragging the region into yet another crisis.

[Well, ignore the ‘Dec 2009 agreement thing’, as there is no such agreement. The Al-Ahram ‘report’ it refers must be this one(link) which I found after hours of search – Only to be reminded that the objective of Ethiopian Review is confusion, distraction and disinformation.]

I wonder if Elias Kifle is a lawyer or consulted one. My suspicion is that he overheard there is a flaw in the 1993 Accord but he couldn’t tell which – so he made a bold guess.

Judging by this, it is possible there could be as many criticisms as the words on the Accord.

Thus, I decided to invite you to put forward your opinion in the comment space below. And, I will summarize and address them here or in a new post.

If you made an informative comment(pro or against), I will recognize your effort by sending you a couple of PDF docs in a subject of your choice – from fiction to physics.

************

You may also share your opinion by voting here: 

***************

-0.131836-0.285645

View Comments (4)

  • this agreement do not harm Ethiopians, instead it benefit them. i think this is one of the best thing Meles zenawi ever did to ethiopia. there is no confusion about where the then president of the transitional government stands. he stand by the ethiopians. some people will always think of him like he is working for a foreign government like egypt and U.S, but unfortunately he is not.

  • Daniel and Bazezew
    I thankyou for taking time to present an informative comment.
    I am gonna contact you for the PDF docs by e-mail.
    But, more importantly, you gave me both a reminder and an inspiration to be cautious about what I post in this blog.

    Let's see what else others got to say - either in support or criticism of your idea or the Accord itself..

  • I am not sure why it was important to sign that agreement which the government may regrate another time. May be article 1 is seen as a reward. Article 5 undoubtedly works for the purpose of Egypt. The reason given by Berhanemeskel Nega when abstained in the voting on the "Convention on the Law of Non-navigational Uses of International Water Courses (1997) is good example. He said "his delegation had abstained in the voting because the text of... the Convention was not balanced, particularly with respect to safeguarding the interests of upper riparian States. Article 7 and Part III of the Convention were of particular concern".

    Article 7: Obligation not to cause significant harm

    1. Watercourse States shall, in utilizing an international watercourse in their territories, take all appropriate measures to prevent the causing of significant harm to other watercourse States.

    2. Where significant harm nevertheless is caused to another watercourse State, the States whose use causes such harm shall, in the absence of agreement to such use, take all appropriate measures, having due regard for the provisions of articles 5 and 6, in consultation with the affected State, to eliminate or mitigate such harm and, where appropriate, to discuss the question of compensation.

    The same regim signed it in 1993 and the same regim opposed it in 1997 (why? I do no know. This was supposed to be a matter of national interest not a political party).

    According to this agreement, if Ethiopia wishes to develop its water resources for hydroelectric and agricultural purposes Egypt and Sudan will consider Ethiopia breaching its agreement on the position that this would significantly harm their established uses.

    I think we should not do the same mistake again and again. In my opinion, Ethiopia needs to develope facts on the ground before signing any binding agreement. Time is a big element for us since the geography is in favour of Ethiopia being upstream country. If we are using our own moneyv to develop our water resourses why it is necessary to make a deal with Egypt. Water for the economy and water for the environment are two different things. The time ahead is challenging in terms of food, energy, and water security when population growth and climate change are taken in to consederation. Egypt has got the structure we have got the water. When time goes we will have both and that will enhance our negotiation power. Of course, engagment is fundamental and we need to engage with Egypt but we do not need to concede all the time. Although they are our brothers and sisters, they have to be told that a water resource is a resource like any other resources for a sovereign state.

    Thank you

  • The problem with this agreement is on article 5. It only refers to Ethiopia. the agreement indicates that the two parties should not engage in any activity that would cause appriciable harm to the flow of nile waters. It is obvious that the water doesnt flow upwards, towards Ethiopia. hence there is no chance that Egypt would engage in any kind of activity to harm the flow of the nile waters, evenif it wants to. Hence, though the agreement refers to the two parties....it only actually made Ethiopia to committe itself not to harm the flow in appriciable terms. Moreover, what does appriciable terms mean? is it not subject to interpretation. with growing population pressure, increasing economic activities and dwindling water resources due to climate change, abstructon of a few milion cubic metrs of water fro consumptive use of water by Ethiopia might be percieved as causing appriciable harm to the flow of Nile. hence, MZ did a historic mistake, which even MInilik didnt, in signing commttment to article 5 of the agreement as he was short sighted and in the midst of narrow nationalist thinking and (even hatred towards Ethiopia) at that time.

Related Post
  1. The arrest of Bereket Simon is illegal: Here is why
  2. The great game in the Horn of Africa
  3. Reports of airstrike in west Oromia
Leave a Comment

This website uses cookies.