This brief was originally written by Mariah Smith on March 2, 2022. It was updated and republished by Freya Pereira.
Ethiopia began building the Grand Ethiopian Resistance Dam (GERD) in 2011 and it has caused conflict and strained relations in the region ever since. The dam is located on Ethiopia’s stretch of the Nile River, and will impact water flow to the downriver nations including South Sudan, Sudan, and Egypt. Since building the dam commenced, negotiations have focused on assuaging Sudan and Egypt’s concerns over the impact of the decreased water supply but with little progress made. Ethiopia has not ceased construction based on the concerns posed by Sudan and Egypt and therefore GERD construction has remained a critical issue within East African geopolitics.
Ethiopia’s Position on GERD
While the GERD poses a geopolitical threat to the region, it also has tremendous potential to bolster Ethiopia’s economy.
- Energy: The GERD is estimated to quadruple Ethiopia’s energy output once completed, which would provide energy access to over 75 million Ethiopians. Currently, less than half of Ethiopia’s population of 110 million receive power from the national energy grid.
- Agriculture: The water harnessed by the dam will irrigate over one million acres of arable land, propelling Ethiopia’s agriculture-based economy.
- Jobs: the dam will require a large workforce for its maintenance. Ethiopia is expected to hire over 12,000 workers, creating both high and low skill jobs.
Originally, funding for the dam was restricted by the US government due to its potential for political destabilization. Yet, the arrival of Chinese bankers and engineers has revitalized the efforts and led to plans for more than 25 large hydroelectric dams. Ethiopia feels justified in utilizing the Nile because 85% of the water which flows through the Nile is runoff from the Ethiopian highlands. In addition, Ethiopia argues that the dam will not meaningfully restrict water supply although Egypt and Sudan disagree on this point.
Egypt’s Concerns about GERD
Egypt’s main argument relies on the 1929 Agreement that allocated all the Nile River’s waters to Egypt and the supplemental 1959 Agreement which included Sudan in water shares of the Nile. The 1929 Agreement was made between Egypt and Great Britain which represented Uganda, Kenya, Tanganyika (now Tanzania), and Sudan at the time and granted Egypt veto power over Nile River projects. The 1959 Agreement supplemented the previous agreement by including Sudan as an official shareholder. Both of these agreements did not give rights to Ethiopia and other upstream states. Ethiopia does not recognize these agreements as legally binding because it was not an independent nation at the time, and the agreements were made by Great Britain representing it as a colonial power.
Egypt is entirely reliant on the Nile River for its water supply, and sees the dam as an existential threat. The main issue at hand is what Ethiopia will do if there is a drought. Egypt wants a binding commitment that if there is a drought, Ethiopia will continue releasing water from the dam to maintain the flow downriver.
Sudan’s Dilemma about GERD
Sudan is caught in the middle between Egypt and Ethiopia. On the one hand, Sudan is also almost entirely dependent on the Nile River for water, and is not comfortable with relying on Ethiopia to moderate the water supply especially if water becomes scarce. On the other hand, the dam is projected to become a cheap energy source in the region, and facilitate other development projects which Sudan could benefit from.
The US Position on GERD Thus Far
Former President Trump’s Administration is most notable for taking a “hardball” approach to Ethiopia. The approach entailed temporarily pausing aid to Ethiopia due to “[the Administration’s] concern about Ethiopia’s unilateral decision to begin to fill the dam before an agreement and all necessary dam safety measures were in place.”. Egypt is a close ally of the United States, and one of the biggest receivers of US aid (1.43 billion annually). Egypt also has long standing diplomatic relations with key ally Israel, and has used its regional influence to promote ties between Israel and the rest of the Arab world. For this reason, many felt the US came down firmly on the side of Egypt and Sudan when attempting to mediate the conflict.
The current Biden Administration has decided to take a more neutral stance. In a recent move, the Biden Administration has delinked the pause in Ethiopian aid from the GERD policies which sends a less severe message to Ethiopia, a US ally, and represents a significant shift in the overall US approach moving forward.
