Nile River Basin

NILE RIVER BASIN

1. Water Event Intensity Scale

2. Power relations: Hegemony and Counter- Hegemony WATER EVENT INTENSITY SCALE

BAR EVENT DESCRIPTION SCALE 7 Voluntary unification into one nation 6 International Freshwater Treaty or Major strategic alliance (regional or international) 5 Military economic or strategic support 4 Non-military economic, technological or industrial agreement 3 Cultural or scientific agreement or support (non-strategic) 2 Official verbal support of goals, values, or regime 1 Minor official exchanges, talks or policy expressions--mild verbal support 0 Neutral or non-significant acts for the inter-nation situation -1 Mild verbal expressions displaying discord in interaction -2 Strong verbal expressions displaying hostility in interaction -3 Diplomatic-economic hostile actions -4 Political-military hostile actions -5 Small scale military acts -6 Extensive War Acts causing deaths, dislocation or high strategic cost -7 Formal Declaration of War Source: Wolf et al, 2003 WATER EVENT INTENSITY SCALE InsightsInsights LimitationsLimitations

• Identification of historic events and • Excessive quantitative focus – interactions – Water as the Driver of Water as the Driver of extrapolation of conclusions the Event • Water-related Events ranked by INTENSITY and NATURE • Focus not in Power relations • Clear definition of conflict and cooperation – different levels of • Scale does not include Intra- Intensity national events • Visualisation of Trends and Patterns • Analysis – Across riparian states • TFDD – All water treaties are • Analysis – Across the time coded at the same level of intensity • SCALE – Spectrum of events ranked of cooperation by intensity (Wolf et., 2002) BAR Scale – Nile Basin (1945-2004)

Bar Scale Conflict/Cooperation on the Nile 7

6 1959 Agr eement f or Ful l Utilization of the Nile NBI End of Col d War Waters - Egypt/ Sudan

5 C

4 A

Conver si on of the Col d T -

War al i gnments i n the Ni l e e l Basin C

3 Ni SE - e l U 2 Ni OA

0 194 194 194 194 194 194 195 195 195 195 195 195 195 195 195 195 196 196 196 196 196 196 196 196 196 196 197 197 197 197 197 197 197 197 197 197 198 198 198 198 198 198 198 198 198 198 199 199 199 199 199 199 199 199 199 199 200 200 200 200 200 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 -1

-2 Gol f War

-3

-4 Suez Ogaden War Crisis -5

Assassi nati on attempt Israel attacks Nile of Pr esi dent Mubar ak -6 water s i n Egypt i n Addi s Abeba Egypt/Ethiopia Ethiopia/Sudan -7 Nile Basin Dates Egypt/Sudan BAR Scale – Nile Basin (1945-2004)

Ethiopia-Egypt

Bar Scale 7

1959 Agreement for Full 6 End of Cold War Utilization of the Nile NBI Waters - Egypt/Sudan C

5 A Conversion of the T - e

Cold War alignments l C Ni 4 in the Nile Basin E S - ile N

3 U OA 2

Golf -2 War

-3

-4 Suez Ogaden Crisis War -5 Assassination Israel ataca águas sttempt of -6 do Nilo, no Egipto President Mubarak Egypt/Ethiopia in Addis Abeba Ethiopia/Sudan -7 Nile Basin Dates Egypt/Sudan NILE – Power relations

Downstream • Egypt – the downstream Hegemon • “Stable Control” of Nile waters • Methods: hydraulic mission, securitisation, knowledge construction, sanctioned discourse, etc. • Accumulation of Power

LEADERSHIP • Hegemony LEGITIMACY IDEAS CONSENT Gramsci, 1971 •Goal: Status quo NILE – Power relations Upstream • Upstream – no mobilisation of resources • “Historical consent” to Hegemony ¾ Ethiopia – “incapacity” ¾ Sudan – “unwillingness” ¾ White Nile – “wait-and-see”

• Ethiopia – the “silent partner” in the Nile?

From ConsentConsent to ContestContest “When“When therethere isis hegemony,hegemony, therethere isis alwaysalways aa locuslocus forfor countercounter--hegemony”hegemony” (Warner, 2000)

“War“War ofof position”position” (Gramsci, 1971) ETHIOPIA – Challenges to Hegemony

Inverted Triangle – How to challenge Hydro-Hegemony?

Tactics Reactive and Active Diplomacy Desecuritisation Reinforced cooperation Financial mobilisation

Political f easibility

Knowledge/expertise construction Discourse alternatives

Claim for legal principles Needs-approach

Strategies Water infrastructures construction Economic andSH inst itutional development

Social and political adaptive capacities

Goal SHARED CONTROL

COUNTER-HEGEMONIC TACTICS

•• PoliticalPolitical feasibilityfeasibility – central tactic •• DiplomacyDiplomacy – Letters of protest, participation in conferences and forums, transnational lobby campaigns, grasp international support •• DesecuritisationDesecuritisation – institutional arrangements, capacity and confidence-building, changing perceptions, water regimes “Regimes“Regimes beginbegin atat home”home” (Waterbury, 2002) COUNTER-HEGEMONIC TACTICS

•• ReinforcedReinforced CooperationCooperation (NBI)(NBI) – constructive shared control, win-win outcomes, “watchdog” to avoid domination •• InternationalInternational financialfinancial commitmentcommitment – multilateral and regional banks, mix public- private, incremental mix, NBI •• Knowledge/expertiseKnowledge/expertise – improve expertise, create knowledge, accurate information, dissemination, public debates (interests groups) COUNTER-HEGEMONIC TACTICS •• DiscourseDiscourse alternativesalternatives – deligitimise “sanctioned discourse” and belief systems, emphasis on “new” knowledge, prevent areas of ignorance •• LegalLegal principlesprinciples – focus on “equitable use”, refutation of 1959 Agreement, D3 Project •• RightsRights approachapproach – move from a rights-based perspective to needs-based approach (Wolf, 1999), clear definition of needs CONCLUSION Challenge the status quo

90s – new context – NileNile BasinBasin InitiativeInitiative

Ongoing cooperation process

Goal: Shared control

Political momentum