Essentially about a century ago the British Empire and Italian "Empire" made a number of unilateral treaties about who could use the water resources of the Nile. Unsurprisingly both nations had a bias towards the Mediterranean and thus the nation / British colony closest to the med, Egypt got the lion's share of the water. Due to Egypt geo-political position throughout the C20th it was both politically and militarily impossible for nations on the upper Nile to get a more equitable agreement. Consequently nations like Ethiopia and D.R. Congo could not benefit economically or agriculturally from one of the most fertile rivers in the world.
Things are however changing, in 1999 the UN and World bank helped the upper Nile countries set up the Nile Basin Initiative and after a decade of negotiation are moving forward with an initiative. Egypt's ability to quash this has been limited by a number of recent events. Firstly their standing in the Arab / North African world has diminished greatly, willingly accepting US bribes to recognise and not attack Israel, a weak or non-existent stand on issues important to the region, the end of the cold war removing the need for Russia and the US to woo / appease them and the simple fact memories of Nasser have long since faded mean their clout, while still significant, is a shadow of what it once was.
Secondly Ethiopia's star is rising, their little excursion in Somalia was a solid favour for the US. In addition the War on Terror (or whatever the arms and security industry subsidy is now called) is starting to focus increasingly on the horn of Africa, Yemen is just a thin, Somali pirate infested strip of water away from the horn. While Eritrea, Ethiopia's mortal enemy, is also considered an ally by America the simple fact remains Ethiopia is Christian and most of its' neighbours are Muslim. They may not be as powerful as Egypt right now but their recent actions have likely given the Nile Basin Initiative considerable leeway.
Thirdly there is the issue of continued Chinese colonisation of East Africa and America's AFRICOM response which requires a large amount of cooperation from and with African countries given America's relative manpower shortage compared to China in the region. Again this means leeway for the NBI countries, after all there is at least five of them. It may or may not be noteworthy that Sudan, a benefactor of considerable Chinese largess, is siding with Egypt. They are also benefiting from the 1958 treaty though so I'd be wary to say its a thing. Also there is little reason for America to worry about Egypt going Chinese even if they don't back them, they have other incentives to stay friendly.
However while Egypt is unlikely to be able to get this manoeuvre quashed by my powerful agents it still seems to be trying good old fashioned violence. Is war actually likely? I'm not sure. At a very shallow level I think there are convincng reasons for Egypt to go to war and for them not to. The not to side is the fact in the conflict over a river's water supply being downstream and relying heavily on it for your economy makes you very vulnerable to upstream enemies. Plus while Ethiopia's military is definitely weaker than Egypt's it is known to be a very able fighting force and Ethiopia's terrain makes it very difficult to invade. The use of funded guerillas is workable to an extent for Egypt but sugar daddy America likely wont be too pleased about Ethiopia having to waste the War on Terror weapons and aid its been given on rebels being indirectly funded by the US also. Why bring military action? Well at this point Egypt has no real non-violent means of compulsion as aforementioned but they really do want to keep their preferential access to the Nile. It might be deeply iniquitous but their economy is and has for a considerable time been dependent on that unfairness, this is a compelling reason to use whatever means necessary to keep things as they are.
Also there is the issue of "President" Hosni Mubarak's son succeeding him as ruler of the country. While Egypt pretends to be a democracy it is in reality a brutal dictatorship and a client state of the US (ctrl+F Egypt). It seems the people of Egypt even under great repression than usual are not happy about the country's lack of democracy being thrust in their faces so brazenly. Hosni's failing health means this is a time sensitive issue. The economic impact of the NBI would just add injury to insult and make the future of the dictatorship uncertain (likely someone else would step up to be US client but for the current oligarchs that might not be a good thing). On the other hand a successful military adventure and the nations' interests protected would definitely ease the transition.
At this point it seems very likely the Nile Basin Initiative will happen which, stepping away from realpolitik for a second, is definitely a good thing for the upper Nile region and the sweeping away of a negative legacy of colonialism. What reaction this will cause from Egypt is much less certain at this time.
No comments:
Post a Comment