(Merkeb Negash)
The Ethiopian government had invited the government of Sudan and Egypt to form an international panel of expert (IPoE) to review the design documents of the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD), provide transparent information sharing and to solicit understanding of the benefits and costs accrued to the three countries and impacts, if any, of the GERD on the two downstream countries so that trust and confidence is built among all parties. Accordingly, the International Panel of Experts, composed of ten members from Ethiopia, Sudan, and Egypt; as well as four international experts, had been studying the impact of the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam on the downstream countries.
After successive field trips in Ethiopia and series of meetings in Cairo, Khartoum and Addis Ababa, the IPoE submitted the final report to the respective governments by the end of May 2013. International Panel of Experts (IPoE) released a constructive report concerning the dam. According to the press release from the Ministry of Water and Energy of Ethiopia, the report indicates that the design of the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam is based on international standards and principles. The report also confirmed that the Dam offers high benefit for the entire Eastern Nile Basin and would not cause significant harm on the lower riparian countries. Additionally, the IPoE set out list of recommendations to be implemented by the project owner, Ethiopian Electric Power Corporation (EEPCO) on Ethiopian government behalf.
The main objective of the Tripartite Ministerial Meeting held in Khartoum on November 4, 2013 was to discuss matters regarding the implementation of the recommendations of the International Panel of Experts. The Khartoum meeting focused on establishing a follow-up mechanism of the recommendations by the IPoE and to decide on the roadmap of accomplishing the two outstanding studies i.e., hydrological modeling and environmental and socio-economic impacts analysis on the two downstream countries.
However, the meeting could not successfully achieve its objective for several reasons emanated from the strategy and tactic employed by the Egyptian delegates. It can even be argued that Egypt was not trying to get something out of the meeting rather it was simply trying to disrupt it for the following reasons.
Firstly, the Egyptian delegation almost denies that their country signed the final consensus report of the IPoE in May 2013.
Secondly, most of Egypt’s delegation was composed of personalities who are new to the negotiation process. Egypt stated that it has brought high level of competent delegates because the meeting is the centre of attention for them. Nevertheless, the fact is they brought new delegates to pull the negotiation process backward.
Thirdly, and confusingly, the Egyptian delegation insisted to set up another cycle of IPoE with regulatory capacity, instead of setting up a tripartite committee to draw best mechanism to expedite the implementation of the recommendations of the IPoE. These observations can lead any commentator towards the assertion that Egypt was in Khartoum to nullify the previous negotiations and to make further negotiations difficult.
Surprise to commentators, Egypt is trying to divert the blame towards Ethiopia. Egypt accuses Ethiopia of being rigid for rejecting Egypt’s new proposal of another round of IPoE – this sounds ridiculous because international meetings are conducted on predetermined agendum. Egypt brought new agendum into the tripartite meeting reflecting only its own interest disregarding others; therefore, Ethiopia’s insistence to keep the meeting on the previously agreed points is a reverential move highlighting its longest diplomatic negotiation tradition.
Therefore, given Ethiopia’s invitation to set up IPoE, provision of adequate information regarding the GERD and expression of its commitment to implement recommendations of IPoE, Ethiopia has been acting responsibly unlike Egypt, which is using variety of techniques to make trust and confidence building forums obsolete. Once again, 30% of the dam construction is completed and Ethiopia is playing fairly – the ball is in Egypt’s court!
********
* The author, Merkeb Negash, is a Lecturer of Political Science and International Relations at Jimma University. He is a bloger in this blog and can be reached at elroenegash@gmail.com
Leave a Comment