Egyptians Foreign Minister Sameh Shukuri has written to the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) urging the international community not to take any unilateral action against the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD). In a letter to UN Secretary-General this week, Shukri called on the international community to pay attention to the need for good faith during negotiations to finalize an agreement on GERD in the coming months. Before the second round of filling, and he warned that the failure to reach an agreement would affect Egypt’s and Sudan’s water needs and security and increase tensions in East Africa, the Horn of Africa and world peace.
According to their argument lack of a legally binding agreement are a lack of political will on Ethiopia’s side and the need for water hegemony, which could lead to unwanted conflict and a serious threat to world peace and security. Along with this, Egypt’s Foreign Minister Sameh Shukuri addressed the House of Representatives, and said the second filling would not pose a threat to Egypt. There is no doubt that such kind of tricks is created with the desire to exploit all available options in times of stress.
Foreign Minister Samir Shukuri’s message to the House indicates many implications. First, there is the fact that the Nile water has been buried in the minds of the Egyptians for a long time. Second, in their speech, ‘the second filling does not pose much of a threat to Egypt, because of the reserve from the Aswan Dam’ Egyptians pretending as if they are terrifying for Sudan, but the reality they are trying to inflame Sudan to take aggressive measure, through following all the footsteps of Egypt. Thirdly, they need to amplify frustration as part of their system, which is recently using part of all their speech, if Ethiopia takes unilateral measure for the second round of filling before reaching a legally binding agreement, it will increase tensions in East Africa and throughout Africa and also threaten world peace and security. As usual, though it is nothing for Ethiopia, this can show their effort to call to the international community to pressurize upon Ethiopia. Finally, the talk “The second filling will not pose a threat to Egypt….” Kinds of massage make a sense as compared to the current coercion, which has been transmitted directly to Ethiopia, but the cardinal reason may not be to deescalate tension, rather taking, as sabotage to hinder Ethiopian speed is normal thinking.
Out of this assumption, it should be noted that Egypt’s requesting to UNSC not for the first time. It is a recent recollection UNSC rejected and that it was a referred to African Union (AU) since its development issue. It is important to attach the recent appeal with Sudan’s earlier calls for a “closed-door meeting” and “quartet mediation” that was drafted by Egypt and passed to Sudan because it is not uncommon for the Sudanese military to convey the idea initiated behind the curtain in Egypt. Note that for the first time, the issue of the GERD is of interest to the UNSC. In the past, the issue of sexual development has been a contentious issue in the AU. It is also important to note that this week’s complaint relates to previous calls from all three Sudanese leaders and quartet Mediation, because the type of Sudanese military group behind the curtain in Egypt is unheard of.
The fact is that Egypt and Sudan get tired of finding all the legal options available, which can support their interest. Now what they left at hand is the Declaration of Principle (DoP) that was signed in 2015 by the three countries. Even the DoP unless they strive to exploit it, by any means it never gives them friction of points to advocate their evil ideas. Out of the ten articles, the last article state how ways to resolve conflicts peacefully.
“The Three countries will settle disputes, arising out of the interpretation or implementation of this agreement, amicably through consultation or negotiation under the principle of good faith. If the Parties are unable to resolve the dispute through consultation or negotiation, they may jointly request for conciliation, mediation, or refer the matter for the consideration of the Heads of State/Head of Government.”
As it shows, if there is a divergence in the application of the principle, it should be resolved in good faith through consultation or negotiation. However, if the three countries could not resolve it in this way, the three countries could seek mediation or negotiation or refer the matter for the consideration of the Heads of State/Head of Government. Therefore, the idea of “closed-door meeting” and “quartet mediation” which are failed, deliberately intended to be part of the agreement, even if Ethiopia already understood this conspiracy, did not accept it. In the end, the idea is to mention as tired of using all sorts of legal options, including the DoP, and to label Ethiopia as stubborn; it is easy to assume that they were not sincere.
The final DoP document stated that the problem must be referred to a third party by the Heads of State/ Head of Government. If so while President Al-Sisi is the last person and the issue is a matter of concern to the UNSC and the international community, why the letter submitted by name of their P/Minister Mostefa Madbouly while there is President Al-Sisi? Even if they are the same Sudanese situation is confusing since they are in transition not clear who is Heads of State or Head of Government superior and who is subordinate. Well, what about Egypt? Is it intended to create a gap for next time to come with the President of Al-Sisi? We will see what will be the response from UNSC and the international community call of Egypt, Sudan and Ethiopia’s encounter submitted to UNSC.
The views expressed in the article do not necessarily reflect the views of The Reporter
Contributed by Zerihun Birhanu