By Naomi Ishisaka
Seattle Times columnist

In my last column I wrote that the novel coronavirus outbreak showed us the gaps in our social safety net and the systems that we urgently need to fix.

But what this crisis has also exposed in the past week is the way in which people, guided by their hearts, are stepping up to support each other in extraordinary ways.

People like Yadesa Bojia, who is a Seattle-based artist and University of Washington graphic designer. Bojia recently became alarmed after talking with other Ethiopian American community members in his first language, Amharic, and realizing there was a lack of solid, scientifically grounded information about the coronavirus getting out to the community. Some people he talked to thought the disease was airborne, others thought it could be cured or prevented with traditional herbal medicine or stopped with vitamin C. Bojia knew that Public Health – Seattle & King County created coronavirus fact sheets in multiple languages, but didn’t think people in his immigrant community would know where to find them.

So on March 7, Bojia decided to do something about it. Armed with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s public health guidance, he started a Facebook live video to read recommendations for the community in Amharic. To his surprise, the video has been viewed 2,000 times and counting. Getting this information out, Bojia said, is “a matter of life and death,” for not just the nearly 25% of King County that are immigrants but the entire community.

Bojia is just one of many across the region who have lent their resources to help others during this unprecedented time. This pandemic has upended every part of our daily lives and sent social, economic and political shock waves throughout our society. Fear might bring out some of our worst instincts, but crises bring out the best in humanity as well.

In the days since the Seattle area became the epicenter of the outbreak, the outpouring of support has been moving and inspiring. On an individual level, people have offered free babysitting, cooking and food delivery for harried parents and medically vulnerable older adults.

After racist coronavirus fears drove down business in Seattle’s Chinatown International District, Bill Tashima, a board member for the local Japanese American Citizens League, created a Facebook group on Sunday to share ways to support small restaurants. Within days, the group had nearly 5,000 members, sharing ideas for restaurant takeout to boost business in the struggling district and creating a virtual “tip jar” that one member was using to collect donations for restaurant workers.

The artistic community, which already experiences economic insecurity in good times due to unpredictable contract-based work, saw all public events canceled like dominoes in the past week. Seattle-area author Ijeoma Oluo quickly set up a GoFundMe on Monday to raise and distribute funds for artists. Within days, the fund raised $80,000 and distributed $10,000 and was in the process of distributing another $30,000 to artists directly impacted by loss of income due to the coronavirus. Another group of people started a live-performance streaming site on Facebook called “The Quarantine Sessions,” where artists can perform and the audience can tip the band before their performance starts.

To support those who are most vulnerable in an emergency, a grassroots effort formed in Seattle called “Covid19MutualAid,” centered on people with disabilities, people of color, undocumented people, older adults and others. In addition to recruiting volunteers for direct support such as food and grocery deliveries, the group is also advocating for systemic changes that would make communities less vulnerable in the first place.

When Seattle Public Schools announced Wednesday they would be closing abruptly the next day, people across the city jumped into action, knowing that for the 32% of Seattle school district families that are low income, school lunches are a critical part of how children stay fed. Volunteers and staff distributed school lunches for pickup at Highland Park Elementary in West Seattle on Thursday and in Rainier Beach, Washington Building Leaders of Change or WA-BLOC and food justice organization FEEST planned a free hot lunch called “Feed the Beach” for families on Friday with additional lunches twice a week after that.

These are just a few of the many grassroots efforts that are just getting started in our region. Larger entities like the Seattle Foundation are also taking action, with rapid response resources like the COVID-19 Response Fund quadrupling to $9 million in a few days.

The coming months will challenge us in ways we have never before imagined. But if we continue, as writer Sonya Renee Taylor said, to “put radical love into practice,” we might emerge stronger than we began.

______

Editor’s note: The spread of novel coronavirus has left the state of Washington in a state of uncertainty. But amid the growing pandemic, members of the community have shown remarkable acts of kindness and efforts to take care of each other. From crowdsourced relief funds for local artists, to readers sending our own newsroom pizza after a long day, many people are rising to the occasion to uplift one another. Tell us your stories in the form below, and we’ll gather the best of these stories for publication.

By SAMY MAGDY/AP

CAIRO (AP) — A top Sudanese general on Sunday said his country would mediate a deal on an escalating dispute between Ethiopia and Egypt over Ethiopia’s controversial dam on the Nile River.

The deputy head of Sudan’s Sovereign Council, Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, said his country would work to bridge the gap and “reach an agreement” in the years-long dispute.

Tensions are rising in east Africa because of the impasse between Ethiopia and Egypt over the $4.6 billion Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam. It’s around 71% complete and promises to provide much-needed electricity to Ethiopia’s 100 million people. Egypt fears the project — set to be Africa’s largest hydraulic dam — could reduce its share of the Nile, the main source of freshwater for Egypt’s population, also more than 100 million people.

Dagalo’s remarks, which were carried by Egypt’s official news agency Sunday, came at the end of two-day visit to Cairo where he met Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sissi. Sudan sits between the Egypt and Ethiopia along the Nile’s route.

There has been public disagreement between Cairo and Addis Ababa after Ethiopia did not attend the latest round of talks over the dam on Feb. 26 in Washington. Ethiopia said it didn’t go because it needed further domestic consultations before signing a deal with Egypt.

The U.S. had crafted a draft deal after more than four months of talks on the filling and operation of the dam, and said the final testing and filling of the dam “should not take place without an agreement.” Egyptian officials have raised concerns that filing the reservoir behind the dam too quickly could significantly reduce the amount of Nile water available to Egypt.

Egypt signed the draft and urged Ethiopia and Sudan to do the same, describing it as “fair and equitable” and in the “common interest of the three countries.”

Ethiopia dismissed the deal, and is now drafting its own proposal on how to resolve the standoff, which will be presented to Egypt and Sudan soon, Ethiopia’s Foreign Minister Gedu Andargachew said in an interview with The Associated Press last week.

Ethiopia claims that President Donald Trump, who enjoys a warm relationship with el-Sissi, is favoring Egypt in the dispute.

The deadlock over the dam became increasingly bitter in recent weeks, with Egypt saying it would use “all available means” to defend “the interests” of its people.

Last week, Ethiopia’s top military officers visited the site of the dam and issued a statement vowing to “retaliate if there are any attacks on the dam,” a veiled warning to Egypt not to try to sabotage the structure.

Sudan’s government has been largely in disarray following the overthrow of President Omar al-Bashir last year, and its infrastructure has suffered from decades of sanctions. It’s currently ruled by a joint military-civilian government that has promised to hold elections in three years.

Symptoms

*This is based on what has been seen previously as the incubation period of MERS-CoV viruses.

If you develop emergency warning signs for COVID-19 get medical attention immediately. Emergency warning signs include*:

• Difficulty breathing or shortness of breath
• Persistent pain or pressure in the chest
• New confusion or inability to arouse
• Bluish lips or face

*This list is not all inclusive. Please consult your medical provider for any other symptoms that are severe or concerning.

How to Protect Yourself

Older adults and people who have severe underlying chronic medical conditions like heart or lung disease or diabetes seem to be at higher risk for developing more serious complications from COVID-19 illness. Please consult with your health care provider about additional steps you may be able to take to protect yourself.

Know How it Spreads

• There is currently no vaccine to prevent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).
• The best way to prevent illness is to avoid being exposed to this virus.
• The virus is thought to spread mainly from person-to-person.
  • Between people who are in close contact with one another (within about 6 feet).
  • Through respiratory droplets produced when an infected person coughs or sneezes.
• These droplets can land in the mouths or noses of people who are nearby or possibly be inhaled into the lungs.

Take steps to protect yourself

Clean your hands often

• Wash your hands often with soap and water for at least 20 seconds especially after you have been in a public place, or after blowing your nose, coughing, or sneezing.
• If soap and water are not readily available, use a hand sanitizer that contains at least 60% alcohol. Cover all surfaces of your hands and rub them together until they feel dry.
• Avoid touching your eyes, nose, and mouth with unwashed hands.

Avoid close contact

• Avoid close contact with people who are sick
• Put distance between yourself and other people if COVID-19 is spreading in your community. This is especially important for people who are at higher risk of getting very sick.

Take steps to protect others

Stay home if you’re sick

• Stay home if you are sick, except to get medical care. Learn what to do if you are sick.

Cover coughs and sneezes

• Cover your mouth and nose with a tissue when you cough or sneeze or use the inside of your elbow.
• Throw used tissues in the trash.
• Immediately wash your hands with soap and water for at least 20 seconds. If soap and water are not readily available, clean your hands with a hand sanitizer that contains at least 60% alcohol.

Wear a facemask if you are sick

• If you are sick: You should wear a facemask when you are around other people (e.g., sharing a room or vehicle) and before you enter a healthcare provider’s office. If you are not able to wear a facemask (for example, because it causes trouble breathing), then you should do your best to cover your coughs and sneezes, and people who are caring for you should wear a facemask if they enter your room. Learn what to do if you are sick.

• If you are NOT sick: You do not need to wear a facemask unless you are caring for someone who is sick (and they are not able to wear a facemask). Facemasks may be in short supply and they should be saved for caregivers.

Clean and disinfect

• Clean AND disinfect frequently touched surfaces daily. This includes tables, doorknobs, light switches, countertops, handles, desks, phones, keyboards, toilets, faucets, and sinks.
• If surfaces are dirty, clean them: Use detergent or soap and water prior to disinfection.

To disinfect:
Most common EPA-registered household disinfectants will work. Use disinfectants appropriate for the surface.

Options include:

• Diluting your household bleach.
  To make a bleach solution, mix:
  • 5 tablespoons (1/3rd cup) bleach per gallon of water
    OR
  • 4 teaspoons bleach per quart of water

  Follow manufacturer’s instructions for application and proper ventilation. Check to ensure the product is not past its expiration date. Never mix household bleach with ammonia or any other cleanser. Unexpired household bleach will be effective against coronaviruses when properly diluted.

• Alcohol solutions.
  Ensure solution has at least 70% alcohol.
• Other common EPA-registered household disinfectants.
  Products with EPA-approved emerging viral pathogens pdf icon[7 pages]external icon claims are expected to be effective against COVID-19 based on data for harder to kill viruses. Follow the manufacturer’s instructions for all cleaning and disinfection products (e.g., concentration, application method and contact time, etc.).

Complete disinfection guidance

What To Do if You Are Sick

phone icon

Call your doctor:  If you think you have been exposed to COVID-19 and develop a fever and symptoms, such as cough or difficulty breathing, call your healthcare provider for medical advice.

Printer friendly versionpdf icon

Steps to help prevent the spread of COVID-19 if you are sick

Follow the steps below:  If you are sick with COVID-19 or suspect you are infected with the virus that causes COVID-19, follow the steps below to help prevent the disease from spreading to people in your home and community.

Stay home except to get medical care

• Stay home: People who are mildly ill with COVID-19 are able to isolate at home during their illness. You should restrict activities outside your home, except for getting medical care.
• Avoid public areas: Do not go to work, school, or public areas.
• Avoid public transportation: Avoid using public transportation, ride-sharing, or taxis.

Separate yourself from other people and animals in your home

• Stay away from others: As much as possible, you should stay in a specific room and away from other people in your home. Also, you should use a separate bathroom, if available.
• Limit contact with pets & animals: You should restrict contact with pets and other animals while you are sick with COVID-19, just like you would around other people. Although there have not been reports of pets or other animals becoming sick with COVID-19, it is still recommended that people sick with COVID-19 limit contact with animals until more information is known about the virus.
• When possible, have another member of your household care for your animals while you are sick. If you are sick with COVID-19, avoid contact with your pet, including petting, snuggling, being kissed or licked, and sharing food. If you must care for your pet or be around animals while you are sick, wash your hands before and after you interact with pets and wear a facemask. See COVID-19 and Animals for more information.

Information for Household Members and Caregivers of Someone who is Sick

Call ahead before visiting your doctor

• Call ahead: If you have a medical appointment, call the healthcare provider and tell them that you have or may have COVID-19. This will help the healthcare provider’s office take steps to keep other people from getting infected or exposed.

Wear a facemask if you are sick

• If you are sick: You should wear a facemask when you are around other people (e.g., sharing a room or vehicle) or pets and before you enter a healthcare provider’s office.
• If you are caring for others: If the person who is sick is not able to wear a facemask (for example, because it causes trouble breathing), then people who live with the person who is sick should not stay in the same room with them, or they should wear a facemask if they enter a room with the person who is sick.

Cover your coughs and sneezes

• Cover: Cover your mouth and nose with a tissue when you cough or sneeze.
• Dispose: Throw used tissues in a lined trash can.
• Wash hands: Immediately wash your hands with soap and water for at least 20 seconds or, if soap and water are not available, clean your hands with an alcohol-based hand sanitizer that contains at least 60% alcohol.

Clean your hands often

• Wash hands: Wash your hands often with soap and water for at least 20 seconds, especially after blowing your nose, coughing, or sneezing; going to the bathroom; and before eating or preparing food.
• Hand sanitizer: If soap and water are not readily available, use an alcohol-based hand sanitizer with at least 60% alcohol, covering all surfaces of your hands and rubbing them together until they feel dry.
• Soap and water: Soap and water are the best option if hands are visibly dirty.
• Avoid touching: Avoid touching your eyes, nose, and mouth with unwashed hands.

Handwashing Tips

Avoid sharing personal household items

• Do not share: You should not share dishes, drinking glasses, cups, eating utensils, towels, or bedding with other people or pets in your home.
• Wash thoroughly after use: After using these items, they should be washed thoroughly with soap and water.

Clean all “high-touch” surfaces everyday

• Clean and disinfect: Practice routine cleaning of high touch surfaces.

High touch surfaces include counters, tabletops, doorknobs, bathroom fixtures, toilets, phones, keyboards, tablets, and bedside tables.

• Disinfect areas with bodily fluids: Also, clean any surfaces that may have blood, stool, or body fluids on them.
• Household cleaners: Use a household cleaning spray or wipe, according to the label instructions. Labels contain instructions for safe and effective use of the cleaning product including precautions you should take when applying the product, such as wearing gloves and making sure you have good ventilation during use of the product.

Complete disinfection guidance

Monitor your symptoms

• Seek medical attention: Seek prompt medical attention if your illness is worsening (e.g., difficulty breathing).
• Call your doctor: Before seeking care, call your healthcare provider and tell them that you have, or are being evaluated for, COVID-19.
• Wear a facemask when sick: Put on a facemask before you enter the facility. These steps will help the healthcare provider’s office to keep other people in the office or waiting room from getting infected or exposed.
• Alert health department: Ask your healthcare provider to call the local or state health department. Persons who are placed under active monitoring or facilitated self-monitoring should follow instructions provided by their local health department or occupational health professionals, as appropriate.

alert icon

Call 911 if you have a medical emergency: If you have a medical emergency and need to call 911, notify the dispatch personnel that you have, or are being evaluated for COVID-19. If possible, put on a facemask before emergency medical services arrive.

Discontinuing home isolation

• Stay at home until instructed to leave: Patients with confirmed COVID-19 should remain under home isolation precautions until the risk of secondary transmission to others is thought to be low.
• Talk to your healthcare provider: The decision to discontinue home isolation precautions should be made on a case-by-case basis, in consultation with healthcare providers and state and local health departments.

Footnote

¹Fever may be subjective or confirmed

²Close contact is defined as—

1. a) being within approximately 6 feet (2 meters) of a COVID-19 case for a prolonged period of time; close contact can occur while caring for, living with, visiting, or sharing a health care waiting area or room with a COVID-19 case

– or –

1. b) having direct contact with infectious secretions of a COVID-19 case (e.g., being coughed on)

If such contact occurs while not wearing recommended personal protective equipment or PPE (e.g., gowns, gloves, NIOSH-certified disposable N95 respirator, eye protection), criteria for PUI consideration are met.

See CDC’s updated Interim Healthcare Infection Prevention and Control Recommendations for Persons Under Investigation for 2019 Novel Coronavirus.

Data to inform the definition of close contact are limited. Considerations when assessing close contact include the duration of exposure (e.g., longer exposure time likely increases exposure risk) and the clinical symptoms of the person with COVID-19 (e.g., coughing likely increases exposure risk as does exposure to a severely ill patient). Special consideration should be given to those exposed in health care settings.

By Prof. Alemayehu G. Mariam

We now strive to live with our neighbors in peace and harmony. The Horn of Africa today is a region of strategic significance. The global military superpowers are expanding their military presence in the area. Terrorist and extremist groups also seek to establish a foothold.

We do not want the Horn to be a battleground for superpowers nor a hideout for the merchants of terror and brokers of despair and misery. We want the Horn of Africa to become a treasury of peace and progress. Indeed, we want the Horn of Africa to become the Horn of Plenty for the rest of the continent. –– H.E. Prime Minister Dr. Abiy Ahmed, Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech, Oslo, Norway, 2019.

I believe that unarmed truth and unconditional love will have the final word in reality. This is why right, temporarily defeated, is stronger than evil triumphant.” Dr. Martin Luther King —Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech, Oslo, Norway, 1964.

I have no problems with the U.S. playing the role of “meeting observer”, “discussion facilitator”, “meeting coordinator” or what have you in the GERD discussions and negotiations. But my abiding credo remains: AFRICAN SOLUTIONS FOR AFRICAN PROBLEMS. — Alemayehu G. Mariam

Author’s Note: In Part I of my commentary, I wrote about the sleazy global propaganda campaign being waged by Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin, World Bank Group President David Malpass and the Egyptian government (“Axis of Lies, Fake News and Disinformation”) to demonize and scandalize Ethiopia and  mischaracterize its position in the so-called Washington GERD talks. In Part II, I examine the role of two key individuals in the so-called Washington talks who spearheaded the preparation of the “agreement” and offer my prescriptions on how to fight back the Axis Forces.

Ethiopia is under a propaganda attack!

A multi-pronged propaganda war supported by officials in the Trump Administration, the World Bank, the Egyptian government, Egyptian-government hired international public relations firms and an assortment of sympatico Middle Eastern media networks, hired-hand academic types and pundits is being waged on Ethiopia today.

What are we Ethiopians – scholars, journalists, professionals in medicine, law, engineering and technology, activists, advocates, diasporans, citizens – doing to defend Ethiopia from the blitzkrieg of lies, fake news and disinformation?

What are we doing to defend Ethiopia from the barrage of misrepresentations in the U.S. Congress and in the Trump administration?

What are we doing to defend Ethiopia from the campaign of disinformation and fabrication in the halls of European governments and in the European Union and in the Middle East?

What are we doing to defend Ethiopia from the daily shelling and bombardment of disinformation on Ethiopia by Al-Ahram Online and Egypttoday Online?

Interestingly, Al-Ahram Online is the principal propaganda channel for the Egyptian government. Al-Ahram Online always concludes its articles by declaring use of the Nile is a luxury for Ethiopia but an existential life and death situation for Egypt.

Egypttoday is a fake news factory. A few days ago, Egypttoday put out a story about a handful of Egyptians rallying in front of the White House and posted a picture of certain Ethiopian human rights advocates in the Washington, D.C. area as supporting Egypt’s position and implying they were against Ethiopia. That was a patent lie! But that’s how Egypt’s disinformation machine works.

Fighting the Trump Administration’s “Consigliere” on the so-called “GERD Agreement”

In a letter dated March 5, 2020 to Deacon Yoseph R. Tafari, a distinguished Ethiopian human rights advocate, Adam Lerrick, Counselor to Secretary Treasury Steven Mnuchin offered patently false explnations.

Lerrick is Mnuchin’s “Counsellor” with the official duty of “advising the Secretary on policy initiatives, including international economic and financial stability issues.”

In 2018, Lerrick’s name was withdrawn as President Donald Trump’s nominee for assistant Treasury secretary for international finance because of “concerns about his ties to the Argentine Bond Restructuring Agency, the largest group of foreign investors in Argentina’s debt when the country defaulted.”

There is nothing in Lerrick’s official description that authorizes him to draft international treaties or prepare riparian (river water use) agreements of any type.

In his letter, Lerrick explained, “the sole objective of the U.S. government has been, and continues to be, to assist the three nations that share the waters of the Blue Nile in reaching a fair agreement on the filling and operation of the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam.”

I have serious doubts whether Lerrick is the “Counselor” or “The Consigliere” in the so-called “Washington GERD talks”.

Lerrick and David Sullivan, Assistant General Counsel for International Affairs, U.S. Department of the Treasury, secretly and in cahoots with Egypt prepared the so-called agreement.

It is a case of life imitating art.

Lerrick’s assurances about the “GERD agreement” remind me of Mafia Don Vito Corleone’s retort in The Godfather, “I am going to make him an offer he can’t refuse.”

Don Corleone was responding to his godson’s complaint that he was having difficulty getting a job with a film studio. The studio head later found the severed head of his expensive racehorse in his bed. And the godson promptly got the job.

The way I see it, that is precisely Don Mnuchin and Consigliere Lerrick are saying to Ethiopia: “We have made you an offer you can’t refuse.”

But if you do, well…

Quid pro quo, as they say. No sign agreement, no aid, no loan.

“Ethiopia, do you wanna be the Ukraine of Africa? Go ahead, make our day!” That is the real message in the so-called agreement.

Consigliere Lerrick talks with forked tongue as he tries to lullaby Deacon Yoseph in his letter with sweet-sounding words that are full of legal shrapnel.

He wrote:

The foundation of the agreement must be based upon the principles agreed between the three nations in the 2015 Agreement of Principles, in particular the principles of equitable and reasonable utilization, of not causing significant harm, and of cooperation. The agreement must respect the sovereign right of Ethiopia to develop its water resources… [and ensure] the safety of the dam.

We hope the Ethiopian national consultation process on the GERD agreement will be concluded quickly so that the agreement on the filling and operation of the GERD can be signed at the earliest possible date.

Lerrick lies through his teeth when he claims there is an “agreement” to which Ethiopia is party

First, a simple question to Consigliere Lerrick: What agreement?

The Ethiopian government has declared publicly they have seen no agreement which they agreed to sign.

So, why are Mnuchin, Lerrick and Malpass keeping the so-called GERD agreement SECRET?

Why aren’t they making their agreement public for all to see?

Have they hidden something in their “agreement” they do not want anybody to know?

In proving beyond a shadow of doubt that Lerrick and his boss Mnuchin are lying through their teeth about the so-called agreement and their exclusive role in its preparation, I ask them ONE and ONLY ONE question:

WHY DON’T YOU MAKE PUBLIC THE AGREEMENT YOU CLAIM RESPECTS THE SOVEREIGN RIGHT OF ETHIOPIA TO DEVELOP ITS WATER RESOURCES AND ENSURE THE SAFETY OF THE DAM?

Let us all see how it protects Ethiopia’s sovereign right and ensures dam safety.

The fact of the matter is that six weeks before the Mnuchin-Malpass agreement, a formal joint statement was issued by the parties stating the following:

The filling of the GERD will be executed in stages and will be undertaken in an adaptive and cooperative manner that takes into consideration the hydrological conditions of the Blue Nile and the potential impact of the filling on downstream reservoirs.

Filling will take place during the wet season, generally from July to August, and will continue in September subject to certain conditions.

The initial filling stage of the GERD will provide for the rapid achievement of a level of 595 meters above sea level (m.a.s.l.) and the early generation of electricity, while providing appropriate mitigation measures for Egypt and Sudan in case of severe droughts during this stage.

The subsequent stages of filling will be done according to a mechanism to be agreed that determines release based upon the hydrological conditions of the Blue Nile and the level of the GERD that addresses the filling goals of Ethiopia and provides electricity generation and appropriate mitigation measures for Egypt and Sudan during prolonged periods of dry years, drought and prolonged drought.

During long term operation, the GERD will operate according to a mechanism that determines release based upon the hydrological conditions of the Blue Nile and the level of the GERD that provides electricity generation and appropriate mitigation measures for Egypt and Sudan during prolonged periods of dry years, drought and prolonged drought.

An effective coordination mechanism and provisions for the settlement of disputes will be established.

Are these the elements in the heart of the “agreement” Mnuchin, Malpass and Lerrick say Ethiopia has refused to sign?

Then, why hide the “final agreement” which presumably incorporates what has already been made public? MAKE IT PUBLIC!

Ethiopia tells the truth when it says no agreement was reached

Ethiopia unambiguously and categorically denied there is any agreement ready for signature between the three parties in Washington.

Ethiopia does not accept the characterization that the negotiation on the Guidelines and Rules on the First Filling and Annual Operation of the GERD (Guidelines and Rules) is completed. The “text” reportedly initialed by the Arab Republic of Egypt in Washington D.C. is not the outcome of the negotiation or the technical and legal discussion of the three countries. Ethiopia made it clear that the Guidelines and Rules must be prepared by the three countries. The Countries are yet to address outstanding issues pertaining to the finalization of the Guidelines and Rules.

In a twitter message, Ethiopia’s Foreign Minister Gedu Andargachew condemned the Treasury Department’s announcement:

The statement issued by US Treasury on GERD is unacceptable & highly partisan, Ethiopia believes in continued engagement with Egypt & Sudan to address the outstanding issues and finalize the Guidelines and Rules on a win-win basis for all.

In a recent interview (see video below, author’s condensed translation) with Al Jazeera, Ethiopian Foreign Minister stated:

Egypt should stop its disinformation campaign and come to the negotiating table are resolve issues based on the 2015 Declaration of Principles. The Dam aims to uplift Ethiopians suffering from famine and privation. It will provide them electric power for their development. Pressure, intimidation and threats against Ethiopia will not work. If the U.S. does not want to maintain its declared “observer” role and tread on Ethiopia’s sovereignty, that will not be allowed. The U.S. can help us come together to discuss issue, but cannot command us to do something that is against our sovereign interest.

It is interesting to note that Egypt had already signed the “agreement” before the Ethiopia and Sudan had even a chance to read it!

What I want to know in the agreement are details framed in the following two questions:

Exactly what does the agreement say about “respecting the sovereign right of Ethiopia to develop its water resources”?

Exactly what does the agreement say about “ensuring the safety of the dam.”

Until we know the answer to these two critical questions, in my opinion, Mnuchin, Lerrick and Malpass can take their agreement and shove it!

The so-called agreement Lerrick talks about, if it exists, is in violation of federal law and the U.S. Constitution

I cannot overemphasize the fact that Mnuchin, Malpass and Lerrick are in violation of law and the U.S. Constitution when they drafted an “agreement” and tried to arm twist Ethiopia into signing it.

Lerrick, Mnuchin and Malpass know full well that they have no legal authority to conduct U.S. foreign policy, which is what they are doing by drafting an international treaty.

The subject matter of diplomacy with foreign countries is squarely in the domain of the State Department. All three know they have no authority to engage in foreign policy. That is because of the Act of Congress of July 20, 1789 which grants exclusive jurisdiction to the State Department on “communications with the ministers, consuls and agents of the United States, in foreign countries, and with the ministers and other officers of foreign powers…”

Simply stated, “discussions”, “negotiations” and “agreements” between the U.S and “officers of foreign powers” and “negotiations with public ministers or other foreigners, or to such other matters respecting foreign affairs,” are within the statutory jurisdiction of the State Department, not the Treasury department.

The Treasury Department was created By an Act of Congress of September 2, 1789, the “duty of the Secretary of the Treasury to digest and prepare plans for the improvement and management of the revenue, and for the support of public credit; to prepare and report estimates of the public revenue, and the public expenditures; to superintend the collection of revenue; to decide on the forms of keeping and stating accounts and making returns…”

To put it bluntly, Mnuchin, Lerrick and the entire Treasury Department are nothing more than bean counters for the U.S. government!

By no stretch of the imagination can they play the role of diplomats in foreign policy.

Most certainly, Lerrick has no authority to engage in treaty drafting. His official duty is  described as “Counselor to the Secretary of the Treasury”. In that role,

he advises the Secretary on policy initiatives, including international economic and financial stability issues.  His experience is in “designing and executing pioneering instruments to meet the large-scale financing needs of governments and financial institutions.

When bean counters become diplomats and experts on water law

The sad and truly tragic fact about the so-called agreement is that it written by Adam Lerrick and David Sullivan, Assistant General Counsel for International Affairs, U.S. Department of the Treasury in collusion with Egypt.

Sullivan “provides legal advice in connection with a broad range of international economic and financial matters, including issues involving the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank and other multilateral development banks, international trade and trade finance issues, the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) which the Secretary of the Treasury chairs, climate investment, and international banking and securities issues.”

If Lerrick is the “Consigliere” in the GERD agreement, Sullivan is definitely the “Hit Man” because he was the one who relentlessly defended the interests of Egypt better and more aggressively than the Egyptian negotiators themselves!

How could these individuals possibly draft an agreement in four months that has eluded water law experts, seasoned and skilled diplomats and political leaders for nearly a decade?

How could two “trade and financial advisors” possibly think they call pull out an agreement from their back pockets and expect to arm twist Ethiopia to sign?

The fact of the matter is that the U.S. has the leading experts in the fields of water rights, dam construction and safety, inspection and evaluation program and administers a massive scheme of water quality and environmental regulation.

Minimally, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which arguably has the very best dam safety program in the world and manages a portfolio of 694 dams, with public safety the number one priority, should have been at the table advising. The Corps has a proven and unsurpassed record of dam safety assessment preventing unacceptable risks to people, property or the environment.

Yet, Lerrick and Sullivan huddled with their Egyptian partners and cranked out an agreement which they tried to shove down Ethiopia’s throat.

Who is going to count on an agreement on dam safety drafted by bean counters?

Fighting liars, disinformationists and fake news propagators

All Ethiopians and friends of Ethiopia can and must play a role in fighting against the demonizing propaganda directed at Ethiopia in the media, in the U.S. Congress, in the Trump administration, diverse policy forums and mobilize opinion and community leaders in telling Ethiopia’s side of the story.

Self-educate on GERD issues so you can be a more effective advocate for Ethiopia

Many people who have read my recent commentaries continue to ask me elementary questions about the legal and technical issues involved in the so-called Washington GERD talks and agreement. There are many well-reasoned commentaries and analysis that address the issue. It is important to familiarize oneself with the basic documents including the 2015 Declaration of Principles, United Kingdom-Egyptian Government Agreement on the Use of Waters of the Nile, Nile River Basin Cooperative Agreement, the 1959 Egypt-Sudan Nile Agreement and other thoroughly documented scholarly analysis of Nile water use.

Educate your family members, friends and colleagues on GERD and energize them to join in the fight  

We often underestimate the collective power of small groups. When we led the fight for passage of H.R. 2003 (“Ethiopia Democracy and Accountability Act”), we gained the most effective advocacy when we mobilized the people in our immediate network. It is much easier to mobilize people with whom we have close relations than to reach out to others in cyberspace.

I am encouraged by the Ethiopian social media warriors who have taken up Ethiopia’s cause and defending its rights to use the Nile River. This has proven to me that social media can be used as a powerful tool for public education and information.

Those who are circulating online petitions spread the word and engage those who may not want to take a direct advocacy role.

Engage the American national policy communities by educating them on Ethiopia’s position and to get their support

I see a special role for the academic, professional, business, faith and advocacy communities in grassroots outreach activities to the American policy communities. I am encouraged to see many Ethiopians in the U.S. taking an aggressive approach to grassroots mobilization and advocacy.

I want to commend Deacon Yoseph Tafari of Colorado for taking the initiative to write a letter to Lerrick and demand an explanation. Deacon Yoseph has been a tireless advocate of human rights and justice for many years. All of us can follow in his footsteps and exercise our constitutional right to petition government and register our grievances with the Treasury officials in the so-called GERD agreement.

Several members of Congress have written firm letters to Secretary Mnuchin demanding fair treatment for Ethiopia including John Garamendi of California and Jason Crow of Colorado. Congressman Steve Horsford of Nevada stung Mnuchin by telling him to be evenhanded if he wants the Ethiopians to return to the discussion table.

Former U.S. Ambassador to Ethiopia David Shinn straight out said the U.S. was “putting its thumb on the scale in favor of Egypt.”

Even the Rev. Jesse Jackson condemned the “agreement” as a possible trap” to make Ethiopia a colony of Egypt.”

Other commentators like Laurence Freeman have pointedly asked, “Is the Trump Administration Violating Ethiopia’s Sovereignty?”

All Ethiopians in the 50 states should contact their members of Congress and ask for similar letters to be sent to Secretary Mnuchin and engage friends of Ethiopia to stand up with the righteous cause.

I believe we can bring the people of the United States to our cause if we can educate them on the truth and facts. Americans fundamentally believe in fair play and equal opportunity. As President Jimmy Carter once noted, “America did not invent human rights, but in a very real sense human rights invented America.” If we, as Ethiopian Americans, share the moral righteousness of our cause to the American people in our town and cities, places of worship and workplaces, schools and universities, we can definitely enlist them in the cause of Ethiopia and its sovereign right to use its own Nile River.

Reach out into your local community and engage leaders and create allies

I have observed that many Ethiopians engaged in human rights advocacy often undervalue the potential power of local community and civic leaders as valuable allies in their causes. Business and civic leaders have close ties to members of Congress and the administration. When we championed H.R. 2003, it was prominent local leaders who got us meetings with members of Congress when they returned to their districts.

Engage the American media and policy forums at the national, state and local levels

I am encouraged to see Ethiopians in the U.S. taking steps to engage the media and policy forums. I have read various thoughtful op ed pieces in national online magazines explain the GERD issues and sharing personal opinions. I have also seen some Ethiopians participating in policy forums organized by American think tanks and other similar outfits. The more the American people know the truth about the ignoble treatment of Ethiopia in the so-called GERD agreement, the more they will be willing to become our allies.

The fact of the matter is that all Ethiopians in America can play their part in defending and promoting Ethiopia’s righteous cause to use the waters of the Nile in a fair, equitable and reasonable way.

Silence at this critical time is not an option. Scholars, professionals, faith leaders, activists, students and all others must step forward and play their part. They must put their political differences aside, join hand and stand together for Ethiopia’s right to use her Nile and repel anyone who is determined to deny her that right.

The judgement of history awaits those who sit on the sidelines. As Dr. Martin Luther King said, “In the End, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.”

In the End, history will remember the silence of Ethiopians who could have been the voice of Ethiopia to the world, not the lies, fake news and disinformation of Ethiopia’s enemies!

I have no problems with the U.S. playing the role of “meeting observer”, “discussion facilitator”, “meeting coordinator” or what have you in the GERD discussions and negotiations.

Ethiopia will never accept a one-sided, unfair, unjust and partisan proposal or agreement written by the U.S.  for the exclusive benefit of Egypt!

But my abiding credo remains:

AFRICAN SOLUTIONS FOR AFRICAN PROBLEMS.

ETHIOPIA WILL NEVER SIGN AN AGREEMENT THAT WILL MORTGAGE AND BANKRUPT THE EXISTENTIAL INTERESTS OF GENERATIONS TO COME.

Ephrem Madebo

Egypt is one of the oldest civilizations in the world, and it has been the center of massive trade networks for millennia. The wealth, history, civilization and geographic location of Egypt has attracted outsiders, and no wonder that Egypt was occupied by almost every empire that ruled the world. As the center of attraction as Egypt was throughout history, a quarter of what Egypt is now and almost more than half of what Egypt has been through the millennia wouldn’t have been possible without the Nile River.

To many people around the globe, the Nile River is considered as the lifeline of Egypt. In fact, sometimes the name Nile is synonymous with the name Egypt. All the great powers that ruled Egypt, Egypt itself and the modern world share similar views towards the Nile River. They all believe that the Nile is not just lifeline to Egypt, but they also believe that the Nile belongs to Egypt, forgetting Uganda, Burundi, Rwanda and Ethiopia who actually own the two sources of the Nile River and their tributaries. Today, when some of these composed owners of the Nile start using their share of the Nile, the ever vociferous Egypt and some world powers start acting and making decisions based on this half-truth that the Nile belongs to Egypt.

Yes, there is no doubt that the Nile has played a decisive role in Egypt’s history, and the Nile has effectively created Egypt as a country. But, the Nile River is the source of pride, beauty, wealth and natural resources to another African country that has a long and rich history just like Egypt, and has been in the annals of human history as long as Egypt was. I don’t have to mention the name of this country because Egypt knows the name of this country just like it knows its own name. Besides, the Nile is an international river shared by eleven countries in Africa whose drainage basin covers Ethiopia, Sudan, Egypt, Burundi, Uganda, South Sudan, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Kenya, Tanzania, Rwanda and Eritrea.

The Nile has two major tributaries, the Blue Nile and the White Nile. The White Nile whose primary source is Lake Victoria in Uganda is one of the tributaries of the Nile River. But, make no mistake that Ethiopia is the source of most of the water and silt of the Nile (84% of the water and 96% of the silt carried by the Nile originates in Ethiopia). There are four other major rivers (Akobo, Tekeze, Atbarah and Baro) that originate in Ethiopia and eventually end up into the Nile somewhere in Sudan.

Disagreements over the Nile River have been the source of conflict between upper and downstream countries because life in both sides of the Nile highly depends on the waters of the Nile River. Historically, there have been many treaties over the Nile River that were negotiated between different stakeholders in different places in 1902, 1906, 1925, 1929 and in 1959. During the colonial era, Great Britain, France and Italy [specially Great Britain] either negotiated in the behalf of their colonies, or they controlled the Nile through their military presence in Africa.

One of the most contested Treaty over the use of Nile waters that included Ethiopia is the 1902 Treaty between the British government and Emperor Minlik. Article three of the treaty states: “His Majesty the Emperor Menilik II, King of Kings of Ethiopia, engages himself towards the Government of His Britannic Majesty not to construct or allow to be constructed any work across the Blue Nile, Lake Tana, or the Sobat, which would arrest the flow of their waters except in agreement with His Britannic Majesty’s Government and the Government of Sudan”. The English version of Article three of this treaty was different from the Amharic version. Hence, Emperor Minlik refused to sign the 1902 treaty. Another treaty that Ethiopia opposed is the 1925 treaty between Britain and Italy regarding Lake Tana of Ethiopia. Here is an excerpt from the treaty- “Italy recognizes the prior hydraulic rights of Egypt and the Sudan not to construct on the head waters of the Blue Nile and the White Nile (the Sobat) and their tributaries and effluents any work which might sensibly modify their flow into the main river”. Ethiopia unequivocally opposed this agreement and notified both parties of its objections.

Two of the most important Nile River agreements that ignored Ethiopia and vividly violated its sovereignty over the use of its own natural resources are the 1929 Agreement between Egypt and Great Britain (Britain representing its colonies) and the 1959 agreement between Egypt and Sudan. Here are some of the most unjust, arrogant and prejudiced parts of these two agreements that totally alienated Ethiopia, the natural owner of the most important part of the Nile River.

The 1929 Treaty between Greta Britain and Egypt

1. Egypt reserves the right to monitor the Nile flow in the upstream countries;
2. Egypt assumed the right to undertake Nile River related projects without the consent of upper riparian states.
3. Egypt assumed the right to veto any construction projects that would affect her interests adversely.

The 1959 Treaty between Egypt and Sudan

1. The agreement allowed the entire average annual flow of the Nile to be shared among the Sudan and Egypt at 18.5 and 55.5 billion cubic meters, respectively.
2. If the claim prevails and the Nile water has to be shared with another riparian state, that allocated amount would be deducted from the Sudan’s and Egypt’s and allocations/shares in equal parts of Nile volume measured at Aswan.
3. The agreement granted Egypt the right to construct the Aswan High Dam that can store the entire annual Nile River flow of a year.
4. It granted the Sudan to construct the Rosaries Dam on the Blue Nile and, to develop other irrigation and hydroelectric power generation until it fully utilizes its Nile share.

The 1929 Treaty gave Egypt unjustified veto power over the construction of agricultural and hydropower projects, not only on the Nile River, but on its tributaries too. Imagine, according to this treaty, Ethiopia cannot build dam on over 15 of its rivers without getting permission from Egypt. Both the 1906 and 1925 treaties denied Ethiopia its sovereign right over the use of its own water resources. Ethiopia through the years  has rejected all  Nile River related treaties that violated its sovereignty and denied its natural right over the Nile. However, during the colonial era when the British, the French and the Italians controlled most of Africa, Ethiopia neither had the diplomatic muscle nor the military might to protect its interest or to regain its use of the Nile water.

In the 19^th century the Pashas of Egypt sought to expand their reign southwards towards Sudan and Ethiopia to have total control on the sources of the Nile River. In 1875 they controlled Darfur and turned their attention to Ethiopia. Through the years the Egyptians have used different strategies to hinder Ethiopia’s attempt to develop its water resources on the Blue Nile and its tributaries. Military expeditions to control the source of the Blues Nile, destabilizing Ethiopia by supporting disgruntled internal forces, blocking loan or financial aid for the construction of dams on the Blue Nile or threatening the use of military force are the major strategies Egypt used to deter any development project on the Blue Nile River and its tributaries.

The most recent heated disagreement and acrimonious word of war between Egypt and Ethiopia started when Ethiopia announced its ambitious plan to build its very first hydroelectric dam on the Blue Nile River. Back in 2011 when the then Prime Minister of Ethiopia Meles Zenawi announced the construction of the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD), Egypt did not just voice its disagreement over the planned construction of the dam, it diametrically opposed the construction of the dam citing a colonial era treaty that gave her veto power over the construction of dam on the Nile River and its tributaries. This time, Ethiopia said “In Your Face” to Egypt; and it made it very clear to Egypt and to the international community that, it’s always ready and willing to negotiate on the socio-economic impact of the dam, but it doesn’t need external approval to build dam on its own river. The Egyptians flexed their diplomatic muscle and convinced the IMF, the World Bank and many other donor nations and organizations to not finance the GERD hoping poor Ethiopia would back off from building the dam. But, that same factor, poverty, that Egypt thought would deter the construction of the dam, united Ethiopians around the world and Ethiopia started building the dam with its own resources. Today, the largest dam in Africa, and the largest project in the history of Ethiopia has created a sense of “Yes we can” mentality among Ethiopians all over the country and has been the source of pride and national unity since its inception. If there is anything in Ethiopia today that would earn a unanimous “Yes” or “No” reply, it’s any question on the GERD.

Nine years later today, the same financial institutions, the IMF and the World Bank that sided with Egypt and perversely denied Ethiopia’s request for a badly needed loan in 2011, have once more shamelessly sided with Egypt to deny Ethiopia’s use of its God given natural resources. All in all, the Trump administration, Egypt and the tripartite of “The Washington Consensus” are trying to impose another “1929” on Ethiopia, and Ethiopians who are proud of what their forefathers did in Gura and Gundet are saying  . . .  Over Our Dead Body!

What do regional or bilateral treaties say on border crossing rivers? What do the UN and other international treaties say on the use of international rivers? The only universally applicable treaty that governs internationally shared freshwater resources is, the 1997 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Non-Navigational Uses of International Watercourses. The convention provides framework of principles and rules that may be applied and adjusted to suit the characteristics of particular international watercourses. The convention has 7 parts and 37 articles. Here we will see just three of the articles that I thought are closely related to this article.

Article 5, generally believed to be the cornerstone of the Convention requires that a State sharing an international watercourse with other States utilize the watercourse, in its territory, in a manner that is equitable and reasonable vis-à-vis the other States sharing it. Article 7, the other important provision of the Convection requires that States take all appropriate measures to prevent the causing of significant harm to other States sharing an international watercourse.

Part III of the Convention requires that, if a project or other measures are planned in a State and those measures may have a significant adverse effect upon another State or States sharing an international watercourse, the State in which the measures are planned must provide timely notification to the other States of the plans. If the notified States believe the planned measures would be inconsistent with the requirements of articles 5 or 7, a process of consultations and, if necessary, negotiations follows which is intended to lead to an equitable resolution of the situation.

Construction of the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam started in 2011, it is 2020 now and more than 70% of the GERD is completed. Why did Ethiopia and Egypt fail to reach an agreement on the GERD all these years? Based on the provisions of the international convention we saw above, what is that Egypt is asking for and what is it that Ethiopia is not offering? Do the Egyptians ever think that they will march their army all the way to Ethiopia and enforce their superiority over the Nile? They have repeatedly tired this in the past, but was there any time in history that the Egyptians marched to Ethiopia and made it back home? What makes it different now? Do these two ancient countries that account for about 17.5% of Africa’s population have any other means to solve their differences over the use of the Nile other than negotiation? The answer is very simple, it’s NO!

Ethiopia, Egypt and Sudan have been negotiating over the use of the Nile River and the GERD for the past nine years. The GERD has many contentious issues, but currently, how quickly Ethiopia fills the 74 billion cubic meters capacity reservoir is a key point of contention. Ethiopia proposed it will fill the reservoir over four to seven years, but Egypt disagrees with this proposal and insists a much slower timetable of 12 to 21 years; citing the possibility of protracted droughts or water shortages. Five years ago this week, Ethiopia, Egypt and Sudan reached a milestone and signed an agreement on the Declaration of Principles regarding the GERD in Khartoum, Sudan. Here are the four of the most important parts of the Declaration. These four provisions of the declaration are very similar, in fact, some of them are carbon copies of the 1997 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Non-Navigational Uses of International Watercourses.

1. The Three Countries shall take all appropriate measures to prevent the causing of significant harm in utilizing the Blue/Main Nile.
2. Where significant harm nevertheless is caused to one of the countries, the state whose use causes such harm shall, in the absence of agreement to such use, take all appropriate measures in consultations with the affected state to eliminate or mitigate such harm and, where appropriate, to discuss the question of compensation.
3. The Tree Countries shall utilize their shared water resources in their respective territories in an equitable and reasonable manner.
4. Agree on guidelines and rules on the first filling of GERD which shall cover all different scenarios, in parallel with the construction of GERD.

The 2015 declaration requires the three countries to use the Nile River equitably and reasonably in a manner that any project on the Nile will not cause significant harm to downstream countries. Ethiopia, Egypt and Sudan have gone through years of negotiations before and after 2015, but the trio couldn’t make much progress in solving the two highly contentious issues of the GERD, which are timetable of filing the massive GERD reservoir and the “Equitable and Reasonable” use of the Nile River.

In all of the negotiations Egypt wanted a settlement that secures a regulated amount of water flow, a timetable for filing the dam in its own terms, a process that monitors Ethiopia’s compliance and institutional mechanism that binds Ethiopia to the agreements. Ethiopia on the other hand neither wanted an agreements that forces it to commit to Egypt’s insatiable demand for water, nor accept Egypt’s inflexible rather imposed timetable of filling the GERD reservoir. President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi of Egypt quickly noticed this unwavering stand of Ethiopia, and started looking for a mediator that has the diplomatic, political and economic muscle to either convince or pressure Ethiopia to submit to Egypt’s demand. The look for this kind of mediator took President el-Sisi to the other side of the Atlantic, and the current rounds of negotiations started in November 2019.

The self-seeking Trump took el-Sisi’s invitation as an opportunity to make himself the third sitting US president to win the Nobel Peace Prize, and accepted his invitation to mediate the GERD negotiation without hesitation. Once the negotiations started, it didn’t take much time for President Trump to display America’s diplomatic and economic muscle to pressure Ethiopia to agree to one of the most important demand of Egypt. The Ethiopian government quickly saw America’s one-sidedness and decided to not participate in a negotiation that imposes undue submission on its sovereignty. The Egyptians who saw Ethiopia’s resolve and determination to continue with its plan of filling the dam, responded by throwing yet another belligerent rant. Here is what they said:   “If the water means electricity for Ethiopia, it is a life-or-death matter for Egypt”. . . . . . Well, deal with it, to us to Ethiopians, the Blue Nile is both!!!

Last week Egypt’s speaker of the parliament, Ali Abdel-Aal said – “In this respect, let me declare that Egypt will never waive its rights to the Nile water because this is a matter of life and death and it is an existential matter for all Egyptians”. Following his boss’ empty bravado, Egypt’s Minister of Water Resources and Irrigation, Mohamed Abdel-Ati said – “We need every drop of the Nile water and that we can never give up our rights in this respect”.

I’m not quite sure to whom Ali Abdel-Aal’s declaration is addressed to, and I’m not also sure what is meant by “We need every drop of water”, but I for sure know that this kind of recklessness, belligerence and bullying, and any ill-advised attempt to materialize the bullying will give Egypt “a bath full of blood”, not a drop of water. The only message I have to these two impulsive Egyptian warmongers is that, please read your own history that, every time the Egyptians sailed south with egoistic objective of controlling the source of the Blue Nile, your ships went back empty with no one to tell the “What Happened” story. Both the Egyptians and the Ethiopians, especially, the Egyptians must know that war on the Nile will never produce a winner, and none of them benefits from the war. The Egyptian government should realize that war should never be the option to solve differences on the GERD because exchanging blood for water will eventually force Egypt to settle for less water.

There is no doubt that the US has the diplomatic muscle to mediate between conflicting countries, but this is true only if the US chooses to be a fair and impartial mediator. Unfortunately, history tells us otherwise that the US hasn’t really been a neutral mediator. The US started mediating the Jews and the Palestinians since the 1970s. Today, five decades and 9 presidents later, the US ended up accepting Jerusalem as the capital city of the Jewish State and moved its embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, a city at the very center of the conflict. From 2011 to 2019, Ethiopia, Egypt and Sudan have gone through unending back and forth negotiations in Addis, Cairo and Khartoum. However, they made little or no progress towards reaching an agreement on the technicalities of filling and operating the dam. In October 2019, the impatient and the “all to me” el-Sisi dragged the US government into the GERD negotiation believing the Trump Administration would favor Egypt. Well, as expected, the US didn’t disappoint el-Sisi. After four months of US led negotiations, the US treasury Department imposed on Ethiopia the shorter version of the 1929 Nile agreement.

Currently, Egypt wants to go wherever Washington takes it because Washington seems to be ready to give everything Egypt wants. The Ethiopians have sensed correctly that if Washington is willing to give everything that Egypt wants, there is nothing left on the table for them. Besides, Washington or Egypt, when it comes to imposition, the only imposition Ethiopians allow is self-imposition. So why would Ethiopia go to Washington again unless Washington becomes a mediator, not a Pharaoh maker! An impartial facilitator, not a one sided imposer!

For generations, especially, after colonialism, the Egyptians and the western world have totally forgotten that Ethiopia is the source of the Nile, and Egypt its destination. For the past 120 years all treaties on the use of the Nile were made based on this false conception of the Nile River, and almost all of the Nile treaties were made in the absence of Ethiopia, its true owner.  Ever since the news of the GERD became public around 2011, Egypt wanted to dictate the fate of the GERD referring everything to the 1929 Treaty.  I think it’s about time for the Egyptians to admit that the 1929 Nile River Treaty is a useless piece of paper whose only place is the trash can. Egypt must come back to the 21^st century and acknowledge that Ethiopia is the source of the Blue Nile and it major tributaries. Hence, Egypt has no business of restricting the use of the Nile to the level of “a drop of water”.

We Ethiopians know the Nile is lifeline to the Egyptians, but this doesn’t mean everything that happens on the Blue Nile and its tributaries is decided in Cairo. The only time Egypt can talk about “a drop of water” on the Nile is only when the Nile River crosses its border and becomes the Egyptian part of the Nile River. For everything else, Egypt must respect international treaties and the national sovereignty of the Nile riparian countries. Ethiopians must know which I strongly believe they do that, a development project on the Blue Nile must not cause significant damage on the people of Egypt. The Egyptians should also know the difference between “significant damage” and building a dam on the Blue Nile River. It is this deference that Egypt and Ethiopia should negotiate and come to a common understudying. I strongly believe all differences on the use of the Nile can be negotiated, and any option other than negotiation would damage Egypt more than Ethiopia!

emadebo@gmail.com

Ethiopia on Monday closed schools across the country and banned all public gatherings, including sports events, for 15 days.

The decision was announced by Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed after consultations with top officials on measures to avert a COVID-19 outbreak in the country.

In a televised message, the premier said the steps were necessary after four new cases were confirmed in Ethiopia over the past 24 hours, raising the total to five.

Among the new cases are two Japanese and an Ethiopian national who had been in contact with the country’s first patient, a 48-year-old Japanese citizen.

The fourth case was an Ethiopian man who recently returned from Dubai.

Ahmed said his government was making efforts to provide protective face masks, medical kits, and disinfectants, including sanitizers, for the public.

He announced that government vehicles would be used for public transport to ease the burden on the existing system.

With only primary and secondary schools being closed for now, Abiy said that university students would be provided all essential care at their respective campuses.

After emerging in Wuhan, China, last December, the coronavirus has now spread to at least 146 countries and territories, according to the World Health Organization (WHO).

The global death toll is nearly 6,500, with around 165,000 confirmed cases.

While the WHO recently declared the global outbreak a pandemic, its head Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said the situation was controllable.

In his remarks at a March 3 briefing on COVID-19, Tedros also pointed out that the mortality rate from the virus was around 3.4%.

AA

Getachew T. Alemu, (@NapsterE), For Addis Standard

Addis Abeba, March 18/2020 – The world is shocked with the spread of a new strain of Coronavirus, now called COVID-19, which is categorized by the World Health Organization (WHO) as a global pandemic. The virus is spreading so fast that countries are closing borders, restricting mobility, instituting strict surveillance measures, establishing and operationalizing quarantines, putting money into social awareness programs, importing sanitation products and supporting the needy (particularly the elderly).

Globally, markets are seeing downward spiral. Major indices such as DOW Jones, NSADAQ 100, S&P 100, and NIKKEI have all been witnessing declines in the past few weeks. Jobs are getting lost, while savings are eroding in the face of increasing health care expenditures. Vulnerable groups, such as people without health insurance coverage, have increasingly become vulnerable.

Ethiopia has identified the first victim of the virus on March 13, 2020. By the time this article was composed, the total number of confirmed cases has reached 6, while the total number of people under close follow-up stands at 992. Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed has ordered 15 days of ban on gatherings, sporting events and school. As it stands, it looks like the number of cases will increase and so will the magnitude of the problem. But there is a higher chance to put the problem under control if stakeholders, from religious institutions to business people, are to coordinate their acts towards preventing the spread of the virus.

Much as the virus is affecting many aspects of life, the primary victim seems to be the economy. Although economic gurus are still struggling to understand the channels and magnitude of the impact of the virus on the global economy, it has become glaringly visible that the spread of the virus will put more pressure on the developing economies than developed ones. In light of what might transpire in Ethiopia, this article intends to look into where the economic strains of the pandemic will be and what needs to be done.

By so many standards, the Ethiopian economy remains fragile. For one, it hosts about 26 million absolute poor people, which is a huge poverty burden, in both prevalence and depth. At this point in time, 8.4 million Ethiopians need emergency food assistance, while additional 8 million live under the Productive Safety Net Program (PSNP).

Although the macro economy has been witnessing growth in the last 16 years, averaging around 10.1%, it remains to shoulder a debt burden of 58% of GDP, a budget deficit of 3.7% of GDP, a trade deficit of 12.4% of GDP and a current account deficit of 4.5% of GDP.

Besides, the economy is one wherein 58% of the population lack access to clean water, 89% live without safe toilets, 55.7% survive without electricity and 48 million people live further than 2Km from all-weather road. Despite the fast improvement in access to primary education and health care services, quality remains a huge challenge.

In light of this, the COVID-19 pandemic will have multiple channels through which it will impose a burden on the economy. First and for most, the fight against the pandemic will have a direct impact on the fiscal space. It will increase the cost of health care provision, in the form of costs for prevention, testing, identification, isolation and care. As this comes mid-way in the fiscal year, the expense will have to come from the rather tight budget line, which saw a supplementary budget of 27.9 billion Br last week. Covering this cost will put pressure on the fiscal space that already hosts a budget deficit of 97.1 billion Br.

As first round financing, the government has announced that it has allocated 300 million Br to the fight against the pandemic. But this seems to be small, compared to the risk related to the pandemic. As such, it is easy to expect further pressure on the fiscal space, which would mean further tightening in the government expenditure.

One has to understand that this is coming at the time that the government is implementing cost-saving mechanisms, in a wish to re-balance the public-private sectors, reduce budget deficit and contain inflation. Paradoxically, inflation has lately been increasing so fast that the annual inflation stands at 21.8%.

It does not end there, however. Instead, the increasing cost for the fight against COVID-19 entails expenses in the form of supplies, instruments and devices (such as testing kits and regents), man hour, training, surveillance missions and associated overheads, media air time and communication materials, cost of shifting personnel and equipment from standard health care services and what have you. All this means, the pressure on the health care line of the budget will surely be huge.

One has to take into account that in the case of a temporary lock down of some parts of the country, if the virus sees a surge, then, this will have an impact on the economy by way of slowing down economic activities, such as merchandise trading, export and manufacturing. In this sense, it will really be a challenging time for economic players in these sectors as they have to live with permanent expenses, such as payroll, while their production process is affected by the pandemic.

As an import dependent and supply constrained economy, one major channel through which the pandemic will be affecting the economy is through affecting imports. As of now, China, the manufacturing hub of the world and the number one import sourcing country for Ethiopia, is stuck. Middle Eastern countries, European Union and North America have also imposed their own flight restrictions. This means that importers could no more travel to make orders, freight forwarders could not effectively facilitate trade and transitors could not do the facilitation as they would normally do. Shipping lines will also be affected by the travel bans and it will take more time for cargo to be transported due to new protocols in terms of certification.

These all mean further pressure on the already constrained supply chain of the economy. No doubt that there is also a local element to it.

Cognizant of the risk related to the pandemic, the local segment of the supply chain will also experience new pain points. These will include lower agricultural marketable, higher farm gate price, sluggish supply due to longer collection time, longer transport time, higher loading and unloading markup, higher distribution cost and longer retail filling.

At the end of the day, the imported as well of local pressure on the supply chain will express itself in the form of shortage of commodities in the market as well as higher prices. Certainly, this will be a huge challenge for consumers that have already been affected by the ever-rising inflationary pressure in the economy.

Pushing the inflationary cycle upwards is the panic purchase that often follows such crises. It is typical for consumers to resort to stocking in such cases. The rush for stocking will instigate an overall panic purchase in the market, pushing prices up and draining available supply. What has transpired in the markets of Addis Abeba and major cities around the country in the last couple of days, from basic consumables, such as rice, to durables, such as cleaning equipment, is exactly that. Face mask that was being sold at 5 Br per a piece is now being sold at 300 Br per piece.

One aspect of the economy that will be hit hard by the pandemic and its resultant outcome is the service sector. This constitutes airlines, hotels, restaurants, event management, and tourism among others. According to projections by IATA, the global airline industry will see a passenger business loss amounting to between US$63 billion and US$113 billion due to the pandemic. Africa’s largest Airline, Ethiopian, has got itself into serious austerity measures, including cost savings, staff hour optimization, diversification of earnings and possible reduction in work force. Hotels are seeing considerable cancellations, while tour and travel agents are also feeling the hit. Reduced public gatherings mean reduced rate of eating out, lesser events and lower tickets to facilities, such as parks and museums. These all will add up to considerable reduction in service sector earnings, growth and jobs. Noting that service sector contributes over 45% of GDP, the impact of such reductions on the larger economy will not be small.

Although with a lesser magnitude, manufacturing will also be affected. And this has to do with availability of labor, costs of ensuring safety to employees, negative impact of the pandemic on input supply and output marketing, and overall reduction in production. For a sector that remains struggling with power outages, bureaucratic and costly customs, higher staff turnover, increasing cost of production and unfavorable business environment, the new lines of costs will further the challenge. If one is to go by the latest figures, this sector contributes 5.5% to the GDP and has been growing an average of 15.5% in the last 10 years. The new strain from the pandemic will have its toll on this trajectory, negatively affecting the value addition in the economy.

Slowing business, particularly stalling external sector, will certainly be a challenge for the financial sector. Much of the short-term portfolio financing of banks goes to the merchandise sector. This remains one of the sustainably profitable segments of their business. As such, a slowdown in the external tradable sector of the economy will put a pressure on the financial institutions. For a sector with limited opportunities of short-term investments, this will really be painful.

On the other hand, the increasing cost of living and higher health care costs will also mean lower savings going to the banking sector. No doubt that this will add to the pain the sector has been feeling from the liquidity crunch, largely caused by unimaginably high loan to asset ratio.

Generally speaking, the pandemic will put considerable challenge to the private sector. It should be recalled that the Ethiopian private sector is infant, less capitalized and hardly institutionalized. As such, it is vulnerable to seasonal changes. It is obvious that a factor as global as COVID-19 will have sizeable impact on the private sector. This is furthered by the fact that the market is also undeveloped and provides little alternative for risk diversification to the private sector.

As a specialized sub-sector of the private sector, the healthcare service industry will surely be affected hugely. Included in this are hospitals, pharmacies, emergency care service providers, importers, medical equipment suppliers, specialized laboratories, technical service providers and consultants. All will be overstretched and under-supplied, while at the same time the expectations from them will be tremendously high.

As the saying goes, extraordinary times require extraordinary measures. Regardless of the fact that the government is overstretched with multiple demands, from ensuring macro stability to national elections, it should take the fight against COVID-19 as a strategic priority. Recognizing the impact the pandemic will have on the economy and the resulting pressure on jobs, income and livelihood, the government has to institute tailored stimulus package. It ought to avail resources to support the private sector, with particular focus on relieving the pressure that health care service providers feel.

There is a need for the National Bank of Ethiopia (NBE) to avail foreign currency for health care suppliers, manufacturer of sanitation products and specialized testing laboratories. This is vital as controlling the spread of the virus will heavily depend on the efficiency of these agencies.

On the other hand, the stimulus package ought to also consider the service sector. Unless direct support is availed to service sector players, the sector will be seeing huge lay offs, which, during such a pandemic, will further the social cost to the country. As such, a stabilization fund wherein service sector players are de-risked for losses, in line with their willingness to retain employees have to also be crafted.

None of the above, however, will be possible without a fiscal readjustment. As such, it is high time for the central government to get back to the drawing table and adjust its fiscal space in line with the new priorities. As its fiscal space is pressured, what the time requires is fiscal optimization and risk-indexing of the fiscal elements. As such, it is time for the administration of Abiy Ahmed (PhD) to redo its sensitivity analysis and redraw the budgetary tangents. Only then can it equate its aspiration for controlling the spreading pandemic that is stressing people, institutions and systems.

There seems to be enough will in the administration to do what it takes to control the pandemic. It is now time to translate that will into a currency of actions. If all is done right, it will not take that long before the country stands stronger in the face of COVID-19.

But first thing first, let us all wash our hands, avoid touching our faces, clean and disinfect our surrounding and stay informed.

AS

___________________________________________//___________________

The post COVID-19’S TEST TO THE ETHIOPIAN ECONOMY appeared first on Ethiopian Registrar News/Breaking News/Your right to know!.

Africa must “wake up” to the coronavirus threat and prepare for the worst, the head of the World Health Organization (WHO) has said.

The continent should learn from how the spread of virus has sped up elsewhere, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said.

He warned that while Africa’s confirmed cases were currently low – around 640 – there was no reason for complacency.

“Africa should wake up, my continent should wake up,” said the Ethiopian, the WHO’s first African head.

Health experts warn that strained public health systems in Africa could become quickly overwhelmed if the virus takes hold, especially in overcrowded urban areas.

“WHO’s recommendation is actually mass gatherings should be avoided and we should do all we can to cut it from the bud, expecting that the worst could happen,” Mr Tedros told a news conference in Geneva, where the WHO is based.

In Africa, 16 people have died from Covid-19, the respiratory illness caused by coronavirus: six in Egypt, six in Algeria, two in Morocco, one in Sudan and one in Burkina Faso.

Image copyrightAFP

In South Africa, which has 116 cases, President Cyril Ramaphosa has declared a state of disaster, restricting travel, closing schools, banning mass gatherings and ordering bars to close or limit numbers to 50.

The country has also banned all cruise ships from its ports. This comes despite tests coming back negative for six people on board a cruise ship, which had been put under quarantine. All 1,700 people are now free to leave the ship and return home.

Anyone breaking South Africa’s coronavirus measures will be subject to a fine, or even imprisonment.

Other African nations have been imposing similar restrictions:

• Lagos state, the economic hub of Nigeria, has banned gatherings of more than 50 people and schools will close from next week
• Africa’s most-populous country, which has eight coronavirus cases, is also stopping flights from any country where there are more than 1,000 infections from Saturday
• Algeria, one of the worst-affected countries in Africa, has closed its borders and stopped flights
• The president has also banned mass gatherings, which would affect the weekly big anti-government demonstrations
• Rwanda, which has 11 patients with Covid-19, is banning passenger flights after Friday for 30 days
• Kenya, a deeply religious country like most on the continent, has suspended worship in some churches and mosques
• The government also says it will manufacture its own hand sanitiser and distribute it for free, in a bid to tackle shortages
• Liberia, which dealt with a deadly Ebola outbreak several years ago and has two recorded cases of Covid-19, has stopped issuing passports to stop people travelling and earlier this week banned entry to those from countries worst affected by the pandemic
• The Indian Ocean island of Mauritius has banned entry to tourists for two weeks – and confirmed its first three cases: two cruise ships workers and a British tourist
• Zambia, with two Covid-19 cases, has suspended parliament and schools and university will close after Friday
• Somalia, with one case, closed its air space overnight
• Uganda and Botswana, which have no cases so far, will close schools from next week
• Chad, with no cases, is suspending all passenger flights and closing some land borders from midnight on Thursday.

BBC News

The post WHO head tells Africa to ‘wake up’ to coronavirus threat appeared first on Ethiopian Registrar News/Breaking News/Your right to know!.

March 21, 2020

Africa’s largest carrier Ethiopian Airlines has suspended flights to 30 countries, as part of the measures to combat the spread of coronavirus pandemic with nine cases having been recorded in the country.

Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed arrives in South Korea-Photo by Office of the Ethiopian Prime Minister

While making the announcement on Television on Friday, Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed indicated that the decision was reached to stem the spread of the virus which has so far claimed thousands of people globally.

He also stated that to avoid suffocation, which help the virus to spread quickly, all night clubs in the capital, Addis Ababa will also be closed with immediate effect.

Religious leaders were also advised to help in the fight against the pandemic by discouraging crowded religious practices.

Ethiopian government also said all other visitors to Ethiopia will be subject to a 14-day quarantine period in designated hotels at their own personal cost.

Details about which countries the airline will stop flying to were not immediately given.

While many airlines across the world stopped flying to the pandemic “epicenter countries”  Ethiopian Airlines continued to operate in those countries.

Mr. Abiy also stated that the first shipment of testing kits, masks and guidelines donated by Jack Ma through Alibaba will arrive on Sunday, March 22, 2020.

“In this regard the committee is working on the distribution within the country as well as the intended African countries. It is also indicated that Correction facilities to expand and utilize other holding spaces in order to avoid overcrowding. Additionally, new prisoners to be tested for COVID-19 before confinement to correctional facilities. While visits have been temporarily halted, prisoners with minor offenses and release dates that are near will be released from imprisonment,” he said.

Reacting to the latest report, the premier also said, “Harassment of foreign nationals is not acceptable adding that the virus does not discriminate any person.”

The post Ethiopian Airlines suspends flights to 30 countries appeared first on Ethiopian Registrar News/Breaking News/Your right to know!.

Author’s Note: Over the past week, family and friends who have heard of the “state of emergency” in California have been calling to ask how we are doing battling COVID-19. There is no “state of emergency” in California, only an order by the governor to stay home so we minimize the chances of spreading the virus. I cannot report firsthand much on how things are going in California except to say schools, universities, sit-down restaurants, malls, retail stores and other establishments have closed. For those who have asked me to write a message in my usual Monday commentary, I can only say this: The dark cloud of coronavirus will soon lift having delivered a dire warning. COVID-19 is a wake call. If we ignore the call, the prophesy in that old Negro spiritual shall gain new meaning: “God gave Noah a rainbow sign. No more rain, viruses next time.”

My deepest concern is will the human race be ready for the Vi-race next me?

Self-quarantine, self-isolation, shelter in place in California

This past Thursday, Governor Gavin Newsom issued a proclamation ordering 40 million Californians to stay put and at home as part of the effort to disrupt and slow down the spread of the coronavirus disease,  a/k/a SARS-CoV-2, Coronavirus Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Disease, COVID-19.

Life as we know it has come to a screeching halt in California and from what I hear in most of the Western world.

Gov. Newsom’s order directs workers in energy, food, agriculture and financial services to “their work” but everyone else, “Stay home!”

The order specifically provided “those 65 years and older, and those with underlying health issues, are advised to self-quarantine, self-isolate, or otherwise remain in their homes to reduce the transmission of COVID-19.”

It is social distancing enforced by law.

Naturally, as a perennial 29-year-older, I was not particularly concerned about the “65 years and older” age limit warning, but out of an abundance of caution I decided to go along.

So, here we are in “Camp California”.

Hiding from mean ole Corona V.

There is just no place to run and hide from Corona V, s/he who is invisible and must be feared.

“V” stands for Vengeance. ReVenge of the viruses. Victory of the viruses?

Bill Gates warned us about the revenge of the V Army in 2015.

We blew him off. “Certainly, he meant circuses not viruses?”, we joked.

Gates rhetorically asked, “The next outbreak? We’re not ready. The failure to prepare could allow the next epidemic to be dramatically more devastating than Ebola.”

“Prophet” Gates’ message was clear: Fear not nuclear annihilation. Fear annihilation by invisible cell-sucking viruses.

We did not listen.

Many other experts have been warning of a coming pandemic for decades. Nobody believed them. “How could an invisible virus bring human civilization to its knees? Impossible!”

Now, we are paying dearly for turning a deaf ear to the ominous warnings of the coming of the first (certainly not the last) 21^st century plague in blood, sweat and tears.

So, here I am in self-quarantined in Camp California.

Ruminating philosophically.

Singing the blues.

Listening to the wisdom of good ole Bob Dylan’s 1964 song, “The Times They are A changing.

Come gather ’round people/ Wherever you are
And admit that the waters/ Around you have grown
And accept it that soon/ You’ll be drenched to the bone
If your time to you is worth savin’/ Then you better start swimmin’ or you’ll sink like a stone
For the times they are a-changin’
…
Come senators, congressmen/ Please heed the call
Don’t stand in the doorway/ Don’t block up the hall
For he that gets hurt/ Will be he who has stalled
There’s a battle outside and it is ragin’/ It’ll soon shake your windows and rattle your walls
For the times they are a-changin’
…

The line it is drawn/ The curse it is cast
The slow one now/ Will later be fast
As the present now/ Will later be past
The order is rapidly fadin’/ And the first one now will later be last
For the times they are a-changin’.

Yes, indeed. he times they are a-changin’. Life as we know it has changed forever as we now know we are stalked by an army of invisible viruses.

It is time to admit coronavirus has grown.

We better start swimming towards a vaccine or cure, or we’ll sink like a stone.

Trump, senators and congressmen, take heed the curse it is cast. The order – life as we know it — is rapidly fadin’ for the times they are a-changin’.

What is there to do in self-quarantine in Camp California?

For me, two things: Reflect on the human condition and destiny and/or sing the blues.

So, here I am sitting and reflecting on the philosophical issues COVID-19 has raised in my mind and how this invisible enemy has disrupted the lives of billions of people in the world.

My reflection is aided by memes and jokes, funny and tasteless ones, sent to me electronically (I keep strict social distancing) by friends and colleagues to lift my spirits.

One of the biggest philosophical questions I could not figure out was this: “Why is there a run on toilet paper in America and who the hell is hoarding them?”

I quickly found out. “You know who buys up all the toilet paper and hoards them? Assholes.”

But what can I do personally to deal with COVID-19 in self-quarantine?

There was a ready answer for that too. “You know what they say: feed a cold, starve a fever, drink a corona for Coronavirus.”

But there are “so many coronavirus jokes out there, it’s a pun-demic.”

When not reflecting on the philosophical issues raised by COVID-19, I just sing the California Blues on my acoustic guitar.

I love that great B.B. King song, “Why I sing the blues”.

Everybody wants to know/ Why I sing the blues
Yes, I say everybody wanna know/ Why I sing the blues
Well, I’ve been around a long time/ I really have paid my dues…

Well, you don’t have to ask me. I will tell you why I am singing the blues in Camp California. Here are the lyrics to my song:

Do you wanna know why I sing the blues?
I am told to practice “social distancing”
Don’t touch no one with a ten-foot pole
If someone sneezes, run like hell and show them your sole.

That’s why I am singing the blues in Camp California.

Schools, malls, restaurants and gyms are closed
Even the churches, mosques and temples have shut their doors
Telling their people to pray at home
Good Lord Almighty, will you save us all?

That’s why I am singing the blues in Camp California.

The 405 is empty and the 10 looks no better
Give me back the gridlock so I can see somebody
Where have all the Angelinos gone?
Where have all the Angelinos gone?

That’s why I am singing the blues.

The homeless zombie the streets and got nothing to eat
Maybe I will drop them a few boxes of pizza
To ease my conscience
Or should I ignore them to keep my social distance.

That’s why I am singing the blues in Camp California.

The experts say forget a recession, we’re headed for a depression
A million Americans have lost their jobs
Small businesses are ready to fold
And Trump says, “Everything is under control!”

That’s why I am singing the blues in Camp California.

Doctors and nurses their lives are out on the line
Our senators are insider trading making millions
They say it is a coincidence
I say it’s profiteering plain and simple.

That’s why I am singing the blues in Camp California.

But whenever Donald Trump’s opens his mouth, I slip sliding away into the deep end of depression.

Trump tells me and 300 million plus Americans, “Forget about it. It ain’t nothing. It’s just liked the sniffles. You’ll get over it!”

Trump thinks coronavirus is the flu. He said, “Does anybody die of the flu?’ I didn’t know people died from the flu.”

Trump talks about the Chinese virus. He says “it is all under control”.

As of this writing, there are 381, 649 reported coronavirus infections and 16, 558 deaths globally since the first case was reported in China on November 17, 2019.

As Trump dithers and blathers about a coronavirus is under control, as of this writing we have 43,734 infected persons and 553 deaths in America!

In just two weeks, we have over 11 percent of the global infection rate and all indications are it is going to get much worse as hospital are expected to reach theri breaking point in the next week or so.

South Korea with a population of 50 million seems to be on the verge of victory in slowing down the spread of the virus. As of March 17, South Korea reported  only 74 new cases compared to 909 at its peak on 29 February.

What is the South Koreans doing right that we are not doing in the U.S.?

Trump wants to include coronavirus into his reelection playbook as a polarizing issue.

He wants to give coronavirus a nationality, a flag, an ideology and political party affiliation.

But there is no republican, democrat, red state or blue state coronavirus.

There is only the United Armies of Viruses (UAVs).

These invisible enemies do not invade with a flag, a Chinese, Italian, French or American flag.

Asked if he should take responsibility for the failure to disseminate larger quantities of coronavirus tests,  Trump said, “I don’t take responsibility at all.”

In sober reflection I reach out for the wisdom of Forrest Gump, “Stupid is as stupid does” and is.

People who say stupid things follow up by doing stupid stuff.

Every day, Donald Trump concocts a deadly brew of half-truths and outright lies in a cauldron of arrogance and ignorance.

He makes nonsensical statements which prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that he simply does not have the intellectual candlepower and leadership skills to be the Commander-in-Chief in the War against Invisible Army of Corona V. (Not to be confused with his undisputed leadership of the other Invisible Army of the Knights of… ).

On the wings of Donald Trump’s thoughtless and dumbfounding words, Corona V spreads across the “Home of the Free and Land of the Brave”.

We need a Virusbuster president just like the Ghostbusters. “If there’s something strange in your neighborhood/Who you gonna call? (ghostbusters). If there’s something weird/ And it don’t look good/Who you gonna call? (ghostbusters).

If there is something strange called Coronoa V prowling your neighborhood, who you gonna call?

Not Donald Trump, for sho!

So, here I am in Camp California drowning in an ocean of Donald Trump “stupidioms” (I just coined that word to describe Donald Trump’s COVID-19 idiotic idioms):

“This is a pandemic. I felt it was a pandemic long before it was called a pandemic.” January 22, 2020.

“We have it totally under control. It’s one person coming in from China. We have it under control. It’s going to be just fine.” January 30, 2020.

“We think we have it very well under control. We have very little problem in this country at this moment — five — and those people are all recuperating successfully. But we’re working very closely with China and other countries, and we think it’s going to have a very good ending for us … that I can assure you.”  February 10, 2020.

“Now, the virus that we’re talking about having to do — you know, a lot of people think that goes away in April with the heat — as the heat comes in. Typically, that will go away in April. We’re in great shape though. We have 12 cases — 11 cases, and many of them are in good shape now.” February 14, 2020.

“There’s a theory that, in April, when it gets warm — historically, that has been able to kill the virus.  So, we don’t know yet; we’re not sure yet. But that’s around the corner.” February 23, 2020.

“We have it very much under control in this country.” February 24, 2020.

“The Coronavirus is very much under control in the USA. We are in contact with everyone and all relevant countries. CDC & World Health have been working hard and very smart. Stock Market starting to look very good to me!” February 26, 2020.

“So, we’re at the low level. As they get better, we take them off the list, so that we’re going to be pretty soon at only five people. And we could be at just one or two people over the next short period of time. So, we’ve had very good luck.” February 26, 2020.

“And again, when you have 15 people, and the 15 within a couple of days is going to be down to close to zero, that’s a pretty good job we’ve done.” February 26, 2020.

“I think every aspect of our society should be prepared. I don’t think it’s going to come to that, especially with the fact that we’re going down, not up. We’re going very substantially down, not up.” February 26, 2020. February 27, 2020.

“It’s going to disappear. One day — it’s like a miracle — it will disappear.” — Trump at a White House meeting with African American leaders. February 26, 2020.

“And I’ve gotten to know these professionals. They’re incredible. And everything is under control. I mean, they’re very, very cool. They’ve done it, and they’ve done it well. Everything is really under control.”  March 4, 2020.

“[W]e have a very small number of people in this country [infected]. We have a big country. The biggest impact we had was when we took the 40-plus people [from a cruise ship]. … We brought them back. We immediately quarantined them. But you add that to the numbers. But if you don’t add that to the numbers, we’re talking about very small numbers in the United States.” March 4, 2020.

“Well, I think the 3.4% [dead patients worldwide] is really a false number.” March 7, 2020.

“So last year 37,000 Americans died from the common Flu. It averages between 27,000 and 70,000 per year. Nothing is shut down, life & the economy go on. At this moment there are 546 confirmed cases of CoronaVirus, with 22 deaths. Think about that!” March 9, 2020.

March 10: “And we’re prepared, and we’re doing a great job with it. And it will go away. Just stay calm. It will go away.”  March 10, 2020.

The philosophical silver lining in COVID 19: My answer to President Ronald Reagan’s timeless question “What could be more alien to the universal aspiration of our people than war and the threat of war?”

Republicans used to have leaders who had vision and a mission. I did not always agree with their vision and mission. But I give credit where it is due.

In 1987, Ronald Reagan stood up and demanded, “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!”

He was talking about the wall that had separated West and East Berlin since 1961.

I don’t remember much about Reaganomics, Reagan’s Republican Revolution and Reagan’s Star Wars weapons systems.

But I remember the walls that came tumbling down not only in Berlin but throughout the communist world.

But I also remember Reagan’s penetrating observation and question in his 1987 U.N. speech:

In our obsession with antagonisms of the moment, we often forget how much unites all the members of humanity. Perhaps we need some outside, universal threat to make us recognize this common bond. I occasionally think how quickly our differences worldwide would vanish if we were facing an alien threat from outside this world. And yet I ask, is not an alien force already among us? What could be more alien to the universal aspiration of our people than war and the threat of war?

Now, I am ready to answer Reagan’s question and Trump’s too.

The threat to the universal aspiration of our people today is not the illegal alien, the alien with a cone head and oblong eyes, an alien species with plasma guns, unearthly demons, Klingons and Megatrons.

What could be more alien to the universal aspiration of our people than nuclear war and the threat of nuclear war are coronavirus and all the other invisible armies of viruses silently and relentlessly stalking the human race.

These virus armies know no geographical boundaries.

In fact, they will not only bust geographic boundaries but cell membranes, the cell walls and attack each person silently and relentlessly.

They do not care about race, gender, religion, language or age.

They don’t choose between rich and poor, strong and weak.

Their regime is absolutely democratic. “One virus, one (wo)man.”

Their motto: “With malice towards all humans and charity to none.”

They would just as soon take out presidents, kings, queens, billionares and millionaires as they would the homeless and penniless.

They do not discriminate. They are the great equalizers.

So, it is US humans against THEM viruses.

Donald Trump says he has declared a war on Corona V.

No, Corona V has declared war on us, on all humanity.

We are now in a war between humans and viruses.

But we humans are unprepared for the Virus Wars. We prefer to fight the windmills of nuclear war.

Our ignorant and arrogant leaders would rather spend hundreds of billions preparing for a nuclear war when an invisible army of viruses is slipping between the gates and ravaging us in our homes, schools, places of work, worship and entertainment.

Humanity today sails on a ship of fools floating on an ocean of viruses.

So, what do we do?

Is the end of times near? Is it Apocalypse Now?

Who are we as humans in the war against viruses?

Will our ignorance and arrogance protect us from the invisible virus army invading our cells?

Let me wax poetic and answer these questions in the words of T.S. Eliot’s poem, “The Hollow Men”.

We are the hollow men/ We are the stuffed men
Leaning together/Headpiece filled with straw. Alas!
Our dried voices, when/ We whisper together
Are quiet and meaningless

…

The eyes are not here/There are no eyes here
In this valley of dying stars/In this hollow valley
This broken jaw of our lost kingdoms…

This is the way the world ends/ This is the way the world ends
This is the way the world ends/Not with a bang but a whimper.

If we do not heed the lessons of the current COVID-19 invasion, the world will not end with a nuclear bang but a whimper in hospital beds, in clinics, at home and in the streets.

So far, COVID-19 is winning.

S/he is winning because s/he has other deadly allies that sit not inside the cells of humans but in the hearts of minds of men and women. These allies go by the names Fear, Despair, Ignorance and Arrogance.

Trump said Corona virus is the liberals’ “new hoax”.

Such a deadly mix of ignorance and arrogance spewing out of a man’s mouth could contribute to the deaths of tens of thousands who follow his thoughtless words!

There is a better way.

We can defeat coronavirus and the invisible massing armies of viruses on the invisible horizon.

But we too must amass as ONE HUMAN FAMILY and fight the armies of viruses in the hospitals, in the places of worship, in schools and universities, in restaurants and bars, on the football fields and basketball courts, on land, in the air and at sea.

Our motto: We must hang together and fight as one human family or the virus armies will hang us each separately.

Paraphrasing Dr. Martin Luther King’s admonition for our time:

We must learn to live together, work together and fight together against COVID-19 not only as brothers and sisters but as members of one human family or perish together as passengers on a capsizing ship of fools on an ocean of viruses.

Ruminations in self-quarantine to be continued

The post This Too Shall Pass… The Human Race Shall Overcome the Vi-race COVID-19! appeared first on Ethiopian Registrar News/Breaking News/Your right to know!.

Last Thursday, Father Juan Benitez blessed the city of Rochester in New York and its surrounding suburbs from 2000 feet above.

Father Benitez is the parochial vicar of Saint Louis Catholic Church in Pittsford, just southeast of Rochester. With the help of parishioner and pilot Anthony Daniele, Benitez was able to bless his parish the same way he says the priests in his native Colombia did when he was a child.

Benitez said he hoped to comfort the Faithful with his aerial sprinkling of Holy Water and blessing of Monroe Country during a time of fear and anxiety surrounding the coronavirus pandemic:

“The intention was just to tell the people that they are not alone. Many people are afraid, they have never seen this in their lifetime. In these moments, the church becomes someplace to find comfort.”

Daniele obtained special permission to fly at a low altitude, 2000 feet instead of the usual 6,000 feet. Slowing the plane down to just 90 mph, Benitez opened the window, poured out one of the bottles of Holy Water he brought with him, then said a prayer “extended to everyone, praying for the whole world and the whole country.”

“The world is stopping. This is an opportunity in the midst of a crisis. One of the positives things is families are together. Good things could come. Families could strengthen their bonds. The message is, ‘Don’t worry. God is with you. Enjoy your family, your people, be at peace, eat well, rest and recharge energy. And of course, be safe.”

Watch Father Benitez below:

New York Priest Blesses Entire City by Dropping Holy Water From a Plane

The post New York Priest Blesses Entire City by Dropping Holy Water From a Plane appeared first on Ethiopian Registrar News/Breaking News/Your right to know!.

How Europeans Can Lead an Alternative Way Forward?

By Ethiopian International Professional Support for Abbay (EIPSA)

This commentary is a response by Ethiopian International Professional Support for Abbay (EIPSA) to the article, “The Nile Conflict: Compensation rather Than Mediation, How Europeans Can Lead an Alternative Way Forward” by Tobias von Lossow, Luca Miehe and Stephan Roll (SWP Comments, March 2020).  EIPSA would like to state that it appreciates the effort by your institution to contribute to the dialogue on Ethiopia’s Grand Renaissance Dam (GERD) in the aforementioned article[1]

The article is informative and indeed provides an alternative to the conversations on the Nile. Encouraged by this, EIPSA has felt it necessary to provide constructive dialogue related to the order of the suggested approaches, and the tone and some of the lines of the arguments in the paper.   Specifically, our response piece attempts to evaluate the ‘mediation’, ‘compensation’ instruments as put forth by your article.

The article argues that mediation is a rather unwelcome option because it has failed to bring the negotiating parties closer. While that is a fair point, the reason for the lack of success of this particular instrument, as put forward by the article, is rather unpalatable. According to the article, the mediation effort has failed because it did not focus on water allocation. Ethiopia and the rest of the basin countries have repeatedly presented their position on the equitable share of the Nile towards a more just and sustainable use. Specifically, Ethiopia has no reason to shy away from discussions on water shares as a riparian party that contributes 86% of the Nile waters. However, the fact that it has been difficult to mediate the parties on the GERD-that has minimal effects on water flows is rather indicative of of Egypt’s positions, and not the weakness of the instrument itself. It is wrong to believe that a negotiation could not bear fruit because it is the only way for the sustainable use of the water among the 300 million-plus people in the basin. Despite the possible increase of precipitation in the basin, water quality deterioration, sediment deposition, and excessively increasing evaporative losses due to climate change (Walsh, 2020; Coffel et al., 2019) still requires shared agreement that works for everyone for equitable and sustainable utilization.

The key gap for no-progress so far has been the lack of a negotiated agreement between the countries to equitably share the Nile waters, which would lead to formulating a plan for coordinating the operation and filling of the reservoirs. Agreement for an equitable utilization of water between the basin counties can only be the result of negotiation and mediation in their rights. More food production and energy demand are not only the issue of Egypt but are also equally the problems Sudan and Ethiopia are facing. However, Egypt’s argument of sticking to the lone ownership of the water based on outdated colonial order is standing in the way of any meaningful cooperation to implement shared development and prevents a common effort  against inevitable environmental catastrophes before it is too late (e.g. flooding and sedimentation of the river channel). The article claimed with 5-7 years of GERD filling period, Egypt faces 25% and 30% water and energy reductions, respectively.  This is totally unreasonable claim without any reference study and methods. Strzepek (2015) had evaluated the effects of the filling policy for both Ethiopia and Egypt using Monte Carlo Modelling risk based approach. He evaluated four rates of filling: unconstrained, 3 years, 5 years and 10 years scenarios. He concluded that, for Ethiopia, slowing the GERD filling will create a loss of hydropower revenues & repayment and slowing of economic growth. However, the economic impacts on Egypt are very minor due to substitution in the economy and limited role of water in the GDP.

The potential impacts on water resources due to the GERD have also been investigated using SOBEK model by Abdelhaleem and Helal. As per the authors, reducing Egypt’s water use more than 15% induces superficial effects on the drinking water stations, by 10% induces no effect on the irrigation, and industrial pump stations and by 5% produces small effect on the safe navigation (Abdelhaleem and Helal, 2015).

Wheeler et al analyzed the strategies for filling the GERD and implications for downstream countries using a river basin planning model with a wide range of historical hydrological conditions and increasing coordination between the co-riparian countries. The analysis finds that risks to water diversions in Sudan can be largely managed through modifications of Sudanese reservoir operations. The risks to Egyptian users and energy generation can be minimized through combinations of sufficient agreed annual releases from GERD and a drought management policy [Wheeler et al].

Almost all of the reviewed researchers have agreed GERD does not cause any significant harm in filling in 5-7 years in contrast to von Lossow et al comments.  Independent experts and technical committees from the three countries have also presented that the filling of the GERD over 6-7 years could only result in minor impacts in Egypt and Sudan. Even if the impacts shown on the map on (von Lossow et al. 2020) are true, the water stored in one of the largest dam in the world-the High Aswan Dam and the subsequent reservoirs in Sudan (Sennar, Roseires, and Atbara dams) can easily offset the demands in both countries for domestic water use and agriculture.

Egypt’s concern for faster filling has got to do with a far more unjustified concerns such as  the lowering of levels  in Aswan Dam / reservoir  (e.g. Nada and Fathy, 2015), which showed a 0.4 -0.7 m reduction in water level, is way less than what Abdelhaleem and Helal (2015) suggested as the maximum allowable reduction. Egypt’s agricultural and water use practices are excessively wasteful. Egypt is also seated on Africa’s most abundant groundwater reservoir with 55, 200 km cube while mountainous Ethiopia has only 12,700 km cube (MacDonald et al, 2012). Egypt’s access to sea waters is also something landlocked Ethiopia does not have.

As the title indicates, the main focus of the article is on convincing readers how compensation is a more effective instrument to get an agreement on the GERD compared to mediation. EIPSA has hoped that, this perspective, given that it has been a little explored option, would be discussed in depth in the article. However, the article does not provide the pros and cons of this alternative, nor the context for it. To start with, compensation as an instrument in a setting where negotiating parties have diametrically opposing views on what involves ‘rights to the use of the Nile waters’.

Even with shorter term measures such as the time frame for the filling, the compensatory schemes need to look into not just the economic opportunity costs but,  also the social opportunity costs. It is important to note that the issue of opportunity costs can be more complex as it includes lost revenues from electricity sales, costs to delayed access to electricity, delayed planned development, and delays in human development (education and health). The compensation should also consider the long term benefits the downstream countries such as removing up to 86% of silt and sedimentation, steady water regulation flow throughout the year, reduction of catastrophic flooding to downstream countries and also water conservation in Ethiopian highlands by having lower evaporation and water recycling mechanisms (Tesfa, 2013) with cost benefit analysis.

The article goes into reasonable depth in analyzing the precarious situation of water shortage in Egypt. This is the kind of analysis that could inform the discourse surrounding the water use of the Nile. However, the analysis carries three kinds of fallacies. First, bringing the issue of water shortage in Egypt into the GERD discussions is out-of-place, at least, and misleading at best. Given that the Ethiopian Government has made it clear that the GERD does not reduce the amount of water that flows to the downstream countries, the authors pivoted their discussion only on the issues of negotiations regarding how long water filling should take without causing significant reduction. Without a doubt, this is a legitimate concern that also demanded the time and investment of heavy power observers (US Treasury Department) when the parties negotiated. While water shortage is a serious issue for Egypt, and indeed for all the riparian states, the GERD is not a relevant point of discussion related to it. Second, the analysis, which goes to great lengths to Emphasize Egyptian woes, does not devote even one sentence to discuss Ethiopia’s needs for electricity, its lion’s share contribution to the water’s of the Nile (86%), and Ethiopia’s right to build a Dam over the Nile, (something downstream countries have done in far greater numbers and capacity without consulting Ethiopia, including Egypt), more importantly Ethiopia’s right to use its natural resource within its territory, and the fact that the GERD does not, temporarily or permanently, affect water flows to downstream countries. It is also important to mention the bulk of research from Egypt (and international institutions) that shows ways to minimize impacts of reduced flow due to GERD through the implementation of several water conservation strategies that Egypt needs to take (e.g., El-Nashar and Elyamany, 2018). Third, the authors seem to limit the argument between Egypt and Ethiopia, while Sudan has a legitimate environmental and use rights that, we believe, it wishes to benefit from the negotiations.

If the article shows little disposition towards fairness, it does not seem to redeem itself by equipping itself sufficiently with scientific facts and respect for sovereign rights of use of their natural resources.

In summary the claim of the article which states the 5-7 years of GERD filling period, causes 25% and 30% water and energy reduction, respectively is untrue as shown by range of academic and technical reports. In addition, Nile is not the only sources of water for Egypt as it is claimed in this article. Egypt is seated on Africa’s most abundant groundwater reservoir compared to Ethiopia.  Finally, EIPSA believes before starting the discussion on compensation, the core principal of fair and equal share of Nile have to be accepted by Egypt to unlock further discussions.

Reference

A M MacDonald¹, H C Bonsor¹, B É Ó Dochartaigh¹ and R G Taylor (2012).  Quantitative maps of groundwater resources in Africa. Environ. Res. Lett. 7 (2012) 024009 Abdelhaleem and Helal, 2015: Impacts of grand ethiopian renaissance dam on different water usages in upper Egypt British J Appl Sci Technol, 8 (5), 461-483

Coffel, E. D., Keith, B., Lesk, C., Horton, R. M., Bower, E., Lee, J., & Mankin, J. S. (2019). Future hot and dry years worsen Nile Basin water scarcity despite projected precipitation increases. Earth’s Future, 7, 967–977. https://doi. org/10.1029/2019EF001247

El-Nashar W.Y. and A. H. Elyamany, 2018: Managing risks of the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam on Egypt, Ain Shams Engineering Journal,9 (4),2383-2388,https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2017.06.004.

K Strzepek, 2015.  Responding to the Crisis of the Filling of the GERD: An International Insurance Approach?  (accessed on Sep 2019). https://www.iwra.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/GERD_Presentation8.pdf

Kevin G. Wheeler, Mohammed Basheer, Zelalem T. Mekonnen, Sami O. Eltoum, Azeb Mersha, Gamal M. Abdo, Edith A. Zagona, Jim W. Hall & Simon J. Dadson (2016) . Cooperative filling approaches for the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam, Water International, 41:4, 611-634, DOI: 10.1080/02508060.2016.1177698

Nada, Fathy. Effect of Different Scenarios of Filling the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD) on River Nile Water Levels and Discharges Downstream of Aswan High Dam, Report, Hydraulics research institute, El-Qanater, El-Kalubi, Egypt; 2014, 2015. (in Arabic).

Tesfa, Belachew, 2013. Benefit of Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam Project (GERDP) for Sudan and Egypt. EIPSA Communicating Article. Vol 1. Issue 1

Walsh, D. Feb. 9, 2020: For Thousands of Years, Egypt Controlled the Nile. A New Dam Threatens That. http://www.nytimes.com

[1] http://www.eipsa1.com/cms/

The post Commentary response to article: The Nile Conflict: Compensation rather Than Mediation appeared first on Ethiopian Registrar News/Breaking News/Your right to know!.

March 21 , 2020
By Frank E. Watkins

Ethiopians are hard-working and well-educated people. The Ethiopian diaspora living in the United States “age 16 and older were more likely than individuals in the general US population to participate in the labour force: 74pc versus 64pc,” according to the Migration Policy Institute’s 2014 report.

The report also indicates 12pc of the Ethiopian diaspora age 25 and older have a master’s degree, PhD, or an advanced professional degree. The figure for the US general population is 11 percent.

Considering the rich history and work ethic that Ethiopians are known for, it behooves us to ask why their country is one of the poorest in the world?

The answers are due in equal parts to bad development policies, lack of committed leadership, and hindering international interventions that at times seem to work against the development aspirations of sub-Saharan African countries.

Take domestic issues. For half a century, Ethiopia was under the clutches of leftist autocrats. Property rights were frowned upon, democratic rights were viewed as a luxury Ethiopia could not afford and the free press was branded as the enemy of the people. The market economy was condemned as the source of all greed and evil.

In April 2018, Abiy Ahmed (PhD) burst onto the Ethiopian political scene, taking the mantle of the country’s prime ministership. At 42, he was the youngest African leader, raising doubts in some quarters if he could rise up to the challenge.

Soon after, he rolled out blitzkrieg political reforms at a dizzying speed. On the economic front, he announced a paradigm shift from a developmental state, where the government was the dominant player, to a free market economy where private industries are the engine of growth.

“These are not ordinary times in Ethiopia. Sweeping changes that seemed unthinkable just weeks ago have been announced almost daily since a new prime minister, Africa’s youngest head of government, took office,” Fox News, America’s conservative media powerhouse, reported. A liberal British newspaper, the Guardian, heralded the same view, noting that Ahmed has “earned comparisons to Nelson Mandela, Justin Trudeau, Barack Obama and Mikhail Gorbachev.”

“Ethiopia will have a chance not only to reinvent itself but also to bring a wave of reform and perhaps even democratization to the wider region,” Foreign Affairsassessed Ahmad’s performance in its September 2018 issue. A year later, a Financial Times op-ed piece shared a similar opinion, stating that his reforms are “an object of fascination around the continent. Success could ignite economic change through emulation equivalent to South Korea’s influence on Asia in the 1970s.”

In October 2019, Ahmed won the Nobel Prize for Peace in recognition of his efforts to “achieve peace and international cooperation” and for initiating “important reforms that give many citizens hope for a better life and a brighter future.”

Ethiopia’s prayers for good policy and inspiring leadership seemed answered and all the stars seemed aligned for a transformational change.

The country’s hope for prosperity is anchored in its bold plans for agricultural revolution and industrialisation. This is to be achieved by building a web of irrigation systems and large-scale industrial parks. One of the major obstacles to the country’s aspirations for prosperity is the lack of electricity to pump water into the irrigation systems and power the planned industrial parks.

Ethiopia’s answer to overcome that obstacle is the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD), the largest dam in Africa that it is building over the Nile River to generate hydropower. Ethiopians see the Grand Dam as a bridge to link their historic glory and their sense of future greatness.

The Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik (SWP), Europe’s leading think tank, seems to nod in agreement.

“Not just as an infrastructure project, but a project of the century, which should pave the way for the mod­erni­sation of the country,” it regarded the dam.

Though Ethiopia is the source of 86pc of the Nile water, and the Dam is built in its sovereign territory, Egypt, Ethiopia’s historic rival, sees the dam as a threat to its national security. Egypt considers Ethiopia’s plan to use the Nile River for her development needs as a “declaration of war” against the people of Egypt. In 2013, the Egyptian cabinet, chaired by then-President Mohammed Morsi, considered several overt and covert actions to stop Ethiopia from building the Grand Dam.

“One of the politicians suggested sending special forces to destroy the dam; another thought of jet fighters to scare the Ethiopians; and a third called for Egypt to support rebel groups fighting the [Ethiopian] government,” the BBC reported.

“If Egypt is the Nile Gift, then the Nile is a gift to Egypt. If it diminishes by one drop, then our blood is the alternative,” President Morsi said, summing up Egypt’s assumed absolute hegemony over the Nile.

Egypt has since softened its “not even one drop of water” stand but still demands Ethiopia must agree to stringent conditions to limit its water usage that are far more stringent than international water laws and equitable water sharing norms allow; reduce the power generation capacity of the Dam; abandon the four to six-year time frame to fill the Dam’s reservoir and instead fill it in 12 to 21 years.

Doing the bidding of Egypt, the United States government and the World Bank threw a dagger at the heart of Ethiopia’s hope for a better life and a brighter future. The United States gave Ethiopia a thinly veiled ultimatum to sign an agreement that it drafted with the World Bank, requiring the poor Sub-Saharan African nation to concede to Egypt’s hegemonic claim over the Nile River. Ethiopia, a nation known to fiercely defend its sovereign rights rejected the pressure.

Egypt’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, Ahmed Hafiz, is now portraying Ethiopia as an international pariah that has rejected an international agreement supported by the United States and the World Bank. The Minister stressed the negotiation was “sponsored by the United States and the World Bank” and the agreement was “developed by the American side and the World Bank.”

Citing the United States and World Bank sanctioned “agreement” as an international alibi, Egypt is threatening Ethiopia with war if it refuses to sign the document.

“If Ethiopia is pressured to sign the agreement, it will be a colonial-like agreement both in spirit and substance that will give Egypt uncontested hegemonic power over Ethiopia’s natural water resources,” Jesse Jackson, the American civil rights advocate, wrote for this publication. “History and international law will forever condemn the US government and the World Bank for their role in reviving Great Britain’s 1929 colonial treaty with a thinly disguised veneer and obfuscated legalese to make it look like a 21st-century treaty.”

There is no way to sugar coat this other than to state bluntly that the bedrock of the United States and World Bank intervention is the reincarnation of the 1929 colonial treaty. If the agreement is not unequivocally rejected by the world community, “Ethiopia Could become 21st Century Colony of Egypt”, as Jackson warned.

This is a story not only of water conflicts between two countries but also of systemic international interventions that stand in the way of the development efforts of poor Sub-Saharan African countries. If the United States and the World Bank fail to mitigate, if not eliminate, the negative impact of the draft agreement they have inked without mandate or legitimate authority, the international community must hold them responsible for any damage – financial or otherwise – Ethiopia and the region might suffer.

PUBLISHED ON Mar 21,2020 [ VOL 20 , NO 1038]

The post Ethiopia Under US, WB Pressure to Sign Colonial Treaty appeared first on Ethiopian Registrar News/Breaking News/Your right to know!.

Tecola W Hagos (30 March 2020)

“If you only have a hammer, you tend to see every problem as a nail.”
Abraham Maslow

                                                                       In General

The acceptance by the Government of Ethiopia the invitation of the Trump Government for

Ethiopia to continue the negotiations with Egypt and Sudan in Washington DC was a serious error of judgement of the Government of Ethiopia. It should have been absolutely clear to the Ethiopian Leaders that possible negative and adverse stance of the Trump Government against Ethiopia and in favor of Egypt. After listening to three of the Members of the Ethiopian Delegation, i.e. Engineer Gedewon Asfaw, Attorney Yacob Arsana, and Minister Selishi Bekele’s explanations for accepting the invitation, I am totally convinced that the three Ethiopians are as much upset and even more vehemently opposed to have America and the World Bank in the mix of things especially after they witnessed the unfolding of the diabolical scheme to have Ethiopia cornered.

My own reading of the three individuals’ statements from their video interviews left me with the impression that those three individuals might have argued to varying degrees against the acceptance of the deceitful invitation of the Trump Government. If I have some little doubt it is with Gedewon Asfaw, for he gave me the impression of being too rational and too trusting. Nevertheless, my admiration for these three honorable professionals is based in their demonstratable knowledge of the many complex legal and technical issues they have tackled and seem committed to defend and preserve Ethiopia’s Sovereignty over its watercourses, rivers, and lakes.  I did not take into consideration Minister Gedu Andargachew in the matrix of this discussion, I doubt if his presence in the Delegation was necessary at all.

PM Abiy Ahmed: In my view, the decision to accept that fateful invitation must have been the result of PM Abiy Ahmed’s inclination tipping the scale/choice for the acceptance of the invitation. Despite the fact that I support PM Abiy Ahmed in clear distinction to some of the prominent political competitors, such as Jawar Mohammed (nihilist, insanely anti-Ethiopia), Dawood Ibsa (leader of OLF working with the terrorist Jaal Maro in Western Wollega), Bekele Gerba (primitive ideologue, hateful separatist by ethnicity), Debretsion Gebremichael (anti unitary Ethiopia, supporter of tyrannical hold on power of narrow TPLF’s Tigrie Kilil), Berhanu Nega (unreliable opportunist, otherwise excellent economist and democrat capitalist), Eskinder Nega (most courageous activist, but now in the wrong field of narrow patrician local identity politics), he remains unquantifiable place-holder for our future developments. Those mentioned here are the tip of the iceberg of opposition politicians some of whom should be charged with serious murderous criminal activities.

Moreover, I still support PM Abiy Ahmed even if I have serious reservations on Abiy’s inner personality of his excessive desire to please others. I am worried of his unpredictable and do-good-to-all personality and drives. For example, waiting out at the entrance to his official office complex, defying all protocol, for Secretary Mike Pompeo, a mere Trump’s Cabinet member, and later driving Pompeo around are acts that demean us all. He seems to forget that he represents the People and State of Ethiopia. Unfortunately, he remains as the soft under-belly of Ethiopian patriotism, however,  he is the best choice as our leader for the decade ahead. Overall, one can say that the Ethiopian Leaders brought about the disastrous situation by their own utter miscalculations and/or misplaced trust in the leaders of the United States of America. But they did save the day by not cowering to America’s misguided bullying and by insisting that they will go ahead and fill the dam this coming heavy rain season. The challenge to all of us is how to protect and guide this phenomenal Leader to make the right choices that would benefit and protect our wonderful Ethiopia.

Mustafa Omer: The one Ethiopian who is capable and viable to supplement or replace Abiy Ahmed is the truly courageous statesman Mustafa Omer. Even the wild challenger of Ethiopian unity, the Ogaden National Liberation Front (ONLF), with its vociferous leaders cannot withstand the moral and political influence of Mustafa Omer. Despite a recent attempt on his life, his popularity and his demonstratable abilities to govern and administer a complex society have endeared him in the hearts of millions of Ethiopians all over the country.  Although Mustafa is a devout Muslim, he is considered as a beloved son and protector of the Ethiopian Orthodox Church just as much if not more like PM Abiy Ahmed. In such dire situation Ethiopia is now, it is wonderful to have amongst us Mustafa Omer, a man that uplifts our hopes and our pride in Ethiopia.

Isaias Afeworki: There is no question that Isaias Afeworki has come a long way from being violently antagonistic to Ethiopia to being its best defender and supporter. I am not making this statement lightly. His joy and excitement when visiting Addis Ababa, Awasa, Baher Dar cannot be faked. The people of Eritrea and Ethiopia when they met at the opening of the borders was heartbreaking. When it comes to Isaias, the issue is how much of it is genuine and how little is forced on him by circumstances both at home and from outside. I can make a categorical statement that Eritreans within Eritrea are far less ill-disposed toward Ethiopia the State  than most Diaspora Eritreans who are often insanely opposed to Ethiopia (not so toward Ethiopians, for these people do have genuine liking for each other more than any Horn people). I understand the tight political space Isaias is in,  difficult to manipulate the gathering political forces in opposition or in support of Egyptian blind demand of support from the Members of the Arab League. I am inclined to consider Isaias’s predicament not as a choice between Egypt and Ethiopia per se, but rather as a question how best he can maintain his relationship with Members of the League without betraying Ethiopia’s vital interests. His recent official rejection of Egypt having any military base on Eritrean territory is an affirmation of such good intentions. At any rate, he has to forego his grudge against the TPLF and work toward close relationship with the people of Tigray.

Focus of this Commentary: Having the above statements as a background, I will focus this paper on some international legal issues and questions by discussing where Ethiopian Government and Delegation Members protected our national interests. I will demonstrate also the abuses of Egypt of the waters of Blue Nile, the arrogant interference of Trump and his Government to force Ethiopia sign a revived colonial treaty. And finally, I will make the case for Ethiopia’s legitimate aspiration fighting stark poverty of its citizens, and a conclusionary remark on how to conduct negotiations on behalf of Ethiopia and its Citizens.

Some International Law Questions and Clarifications Concerning the GERD

The more the Egyptian leaders [the Executive body and/or the Legislative body] issue statements and resolutions against Ethiopia, the more they seem to me to be living in an alternate-universe in the realm of fantasy: they throw childish tantrum, they threaten, they support numerous subversive groups as liberation fronts, they lie, and/or they demand absurd solutions. The Resolution of the Council of Arab League is unbelievably sophomoric and delusional. The Council passed a resolution that forbids Ethiopia not to use its own natural resource of the water of Tikur Abay (Blue Nile) claiming historic 100% use of the river under colonial period treaty signed between Egypt, Sudan, and their colonial master of the period, the British Empire. Ethiopia, as a sovereign and independent country has repeatedly declared the invalidity of such agreements entered between two down-stream riparian territories and their colonial master.

The critical principles for us to consider in connection with Colonial period agreements and practices are two: the Nyerere Doctrine and the uti possidetis principle. In simplified language, the Nyerere Doctrine states that colonial period international treaties or agreements should be renegotiated when a State becomes independent, and thereby such a state may choose what treaties and agreements it will accede to or which agreements it will repudiate. Zerihun Abebe Yigzaw, a distinguished diplomate with the Ethiopian Government,  wrote an exceptionally potent article, Cain’s Path of Bernard Membe of Tanzania on the Nile, criticizing the then Minister of Foreign Affairs of Tanzania, Bernard Membe, for scuttling the ratification of the CFA and for further promoting the claims of Egypt based on Colonial period self-serving agreement with itself as a “protectorate” of Britain in 1929.  For full treatment of the Nyerere Doctrine I recommend highly, Yilma Makonnen, The Nyerere doctrine of state succession : Dar es Salaam to Vienna, New York: Eastern Africa Publications, 1985.

Even though I argued strongly for using the Nyerere Doctrine, I must also point out the fact that the focus of the Doctrine is/was the newly independent countries who were under colonial rules. Ethiopia was never under such colonial rule in its thousands of years of continuous existence except for a five-years occupation of Fascist Italy of its Capital City and major connecting highways et cetera, but most of the countryside was maintained and administered by the Ethiopian Patriot Leaders.

Even without the publicly declared position of Ethiopia, even without the great Nyerere Doctrine on State Successions, the age old International customary law and norm of rebus sic stantibus renders all such colonial period treaties and all other such instruments inapplicable or null and void when it comes to the utilization of the waters of cross-border rivers by riparian countries. I must also remind my readers that such principle of rebus sic stantibus is the exception to the much larger international law principle of pacta sunt servanda that holds international treaties and agreements must be respected and implemented appropriately. It is here that the uti possidetis principle figures out prominent, especially dealing with border disputes where treaties are not preeminent between new states with past colonial rule background.

“[T]he concept of uti possidetis shows deep links to colonization, self-determination, territorial integrity, sovereignty, statehood, creation of states, and territorial boundaries. The controversial notion of uti possidetis has shaped many modern states and created new identities for postcolonial states. In creating new identities, it dismantled precolonial identities of nations. Hence, in many instances it became a source of relentless battles and on many occasions bloody wars. A prodigious amount of literature exists on the principle of uti possidetis, including its origin, usage, and relation to issues of decolonization and self-determination. This Roman law doctrine was used to stabilize the border not only in the Spanish Empire in South America after the Spanish withdrawal but also during the decolonization process in Africa and Asia. The purpose of this principle was to maintain the territorial stability of newly created states at the time of decolonization and also to resolve issues related to title, boundary demarcation, and delimitation of maritime areas in situations in which a treaty did not exist or did not deal with such issues.”[F. N. Lone (May 2016) ‘Uti Possidetis Iuris’ Oxford Bibliographies Online: International Law, Oxford University Press.]

It is worthwhile effort to understand how the modern world has incorporated such ancient international norms in its Conventions. The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties of 1969 in its Article 62ff has rendered such norms for us to ponder and understand the complexity of international treaties and agreements. Even closer to our predicament is the 1978 Vienna Convention on Succession of States in respect of Treaties. It is not a case where for frivolous reasons nations can create conflicts. There is always the foolproof doctrine as a last resort the Doctrine of Nullification that would allow Ethiopia to nullify any agreement that would harm its vital national interest.

The highly paid journalist Yayehsew Shimeles of Ethio Forum interviewed  Ambassador Seyoum Mesfin recently.  Seyoum raised and discussed several extremely important issues not only about the recent crises between Ethiopia, Egypt, the United States, and the Arab League, but also, he freely offered us his observations on the state of governance of PM Abiy Ahmed.  I will discuss most of his observations here under. The issues that have bothered many patriotic Ethiopians (including me) most is the question of the depth of Abiy Ahmed’s commitment to the GERD Project. For example, during his official visit of Egypt 10-11 June 2018 at the official welcome ceremony, he made what amounts to a surrealistic statement swearing in the name of “Allah” that he will not do anything that will harm Egypt. Of course, such off the cuff statement has no legally binding effect on Ethiopia, but it lowers our stand in the eyes of both our friends and our adversaries. I must also point out the fact that in quoting and/or discussing  Seoum Mesfin here, I am not cleaning his alleged soiled past, often discussed by numerous writers, as one of the leaders of TPLF, as Minister of Foreign Affairs, or as Ambassador to China.

My own sever criticism of Seyoum has always been limited to a single item: the fact that he was the enabler of Meles Zenawi,  the author-executive of the most destructive degenerate political scheme of the Kilil system based on primitive ethnic government structure and operation that is still in place causing us tremendous harm to this very second. Whether Seyoum Mesfin is corrupt, I have no facts or opinion on such issue. But I know that Meles Zenawi is the most destructive Political Dictator even worse than Mengistu Hailemariam in the fracturing of Ethiopia, with the single redeeming act of building the GERD.

Even though I watched with great interest the interview with Ambassador Seyoum Mesfin, on the background of the GERD, I was also very disappointed why it took him so long to give us such valuable background information. He correctly attributed the credit for choosing the site and the timing of the building of the GERD to Meles Zenawi. I agree with Seyoum Mesfin that the GERD project has a long history starting with the Imperial Government early on in the 1960s with the United States survey and mapping team. Seyoum Mesfin stated that the building of such project was part of the program of TPLF since 1983. The first  international visit of the Transitional Government of Ethiopia was a delegation led by then President Meles Zenawi to Egypt in 1993. At the time I complained about the degree of secrecy and lack of information on the statement of understanding of the two Governments. Nevertheless, it was the first time that Egypt acknowledged in an international formal setting the reality of Ethiopia being a vital part of the Blue Nile Basin. Some of the provisions of the 1993 Accord:

Article 4:The two Parties agree that the issue of the use of the Nile waters shall be worked out in detail, through discussions by experts from both sides, on the basis of the rules and principles of international law.

Article 5: Each party shall refrain from engaging in any activity related to the Nile waters that may cause appreciable harm to the interests of the other party.

Article 6: The two Parties agree on the necessity of the conservation and protection of the Nile waters, in this regard, they undertake to consult and cooperate in projects that are mutually advantageous, such as projects that would enhance the volume of flow and reduce the loss of Nile waters through comprehensive and integrated development schemes.

Article 7: The two Parties will create appropriate mechanism for periodic consultations on matters of mutual concern, including the Nile waters, in a manner that would enable them to work together for peace and stability in the region.

Article 8: The two Parties shall endeavour towards a framework for effective co-operation among countries of the Nile basin for the promotion of common interest in the development of the basin.

The provisions in that Accord of 1993 are extremely vague and do not seem to make clear distinction in terms of “cause appreciable harm to the interests of the other party” by lower riparian’s to upper riparian States, such as originating State like Ethiopia for Blue Nile waters. It is truly a distortion of perception to use a common term or phrase in different circumstances without identifying such differences and different situations. It reminds me of an old Ethiopian moral folklore I was told when I was a child. It so happened two perpetual antagonists, hunter and prey,  chanced to  drink at a fast-moving river’s banks a few yards apart. The Hyena was drinking water upstream, and his usual prey, the Donkey, was drinking water downstream. The Hyena accused the Donkey of mudding his drinking water from downstream to his upstream drinking spot. Such is the “appreciable harm” idea being used in such provisions of so called accords or agreements between Ethiopia and Egypt.

How so is Egypt from its down-stream riparian position going to cause “appreciable harm” or any “harm”  to Ethiopia, an up-stream originating state? Rather than coming out and clearly stating that Ethiopia is the focus of the provision, they glossed over such negative demand on Ethiopia by including Egypt in such provisions. To make matters even more complex and possibly hurtful to Ethiopia, it was alleged that Meles Zenawi signed another agreement with Mubarak affirming Egypt’s quota over Nile, as reported by Al Aharam in December 2009. The alleged Meles/Mubarak bilateral accord had angered the other Nile Basin countries while enhancing Egypt’s position. When I consider what the Treasury Secretary of the Trump Government did come up with such outrageous draft and demand, I could see clearly where the fault line is in our Ethiopian policy in regard to the Nile basin issues.

I do not particularly care that much about the Khartoum Declaration of Principles of 2015, for it compromised to some extent the Cooperative Framework Agreement (CFA) of 2010 that was signed by all riparian states of the Nile River except for Egypt and Sudan. Mind you almost a decade before the CFA, there was the 1999 Nile Basin Initiative (NBI) with its headquarters in Entebbe, Uganda. “The basic aim of the initiative is to allow the upper stream riparian states to benefit from the non-navigational rights towards the basin. The change brought by the treaty is the requirement of a simple majority to build projects on the Nile. To this day Only Ethiopia, Tanzania, Uganda, Kenya and Rwanda are the countries that signed the agreement whereas Egypt and Sudan are not. “ That was the first concrete challenge to the monopoly of Egypt of the waters of the Nile and the Blue Nile and all the Basin’s water resources. I believe Ethiopia should not have abandoned that broad-based Black-Africa challenge of the Arab-Middle East oriented Egypt. Look now where Egypt mounted its massive misinformation and demonization of Ethiopia—The Arab League.

The CFA did carry the spirit of the 1999 NBI and also was/is far more reflective of existing international law regime on cross-border waterways and rivers. At the time, it was lauded as “an important step towards resolving a long-running dispute over the Grand Renaissance Dam.”  The Cooperative Framework Agreement’ (CFA) (2010) had introduced some creative principles taking advantage of the trend set by United Nations international conventions and treaty agreements of the modern era on international rivers. One important principle that overrides the old “historic use” principle is “the principle of equitable and reasonable utilization” (art 4, CFA) of the resources of the Nile and the Nile Basin. Actually, Egypt and Sudan by not signing are not serving their interest, for the other riparian States might amend the CFA and leave narrow watershed areas for cooperation.

The CFA was written solidly anchored in Article 5 Equitable and reasonable utilization and participation provisions of the “The 1997 United Nations Convention on Non-Navigational Uses of International Watercourses.” And that Convention is the most significant Convention to date that guides nations deal with the sharing of water resources of cross-border watercourses and rivers.  On the other hand, The Declaration of Principles used a differently worded but similar principle in Article 4. Article 4 provides for “Principle of fair and appropriate use” of the water of the GERD. whereas the 1997 Convention Article 5 provides for “Equitable and reasonable utilization and participation”. Do these two phrases carry the exact same  concepts? I believe overall they have similar imports, but they do differ in some respects. For your benefit, I have quoted extracts from the 1997 Convention hereunder in Appendix 3. Read carefully the quoted Articles relevant to our understanding of the legal regime that deals with international watercourses and rivers, which are arguably applicable to our dispute with Egypt.

There is no doubt in my mind that Ethiopia is within its sovereign right to build, fill, produce hydropower, commercialize that hydropower freely, and administer the GERD. It can mortgage, sell, bequeath, or destroy the GERD as its sovereign owner based on the classical public international law and norms principle of sovereignty (that has lost some of its absolute luster to observances of humanitarian principles, comity, treaties et cetera). This means you would go into the vast juridical ocean of complex legal regimes. The reason why “Conventions” are instituted is because they squeeze out from vast ocean of complex regime of both law and underlying history the principles that can be used easily in our modern setup.

By resolution A/RES/51/229 of 21 May 1997, the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted “The 1997 United Nations Convention on Non-Navigational Uses of International Watercourses” and opened it for signature at the Headquarters of the United Nations in New York, on 21 May 1997 and the Convention  remained open to all for signature until 21 May 2000. Sadly, Ethiopia had not signed nor ratified the Convention when it was opened at the United Nations for signature.  Egypt did not sign nor ratified the Convention either, but that is completely understandable.  I searched for evidence to show me otherwise, which I did not find. However, it is unfathomable to me why the Ethiopian Government of Meles Zenawi did not jump out to sign such important Convention that truly countered the colonial period treaties that Ethiopia opposed so vehemently. From my experience with the Ethiopian Delegation at the United Nations1975-76, what I observed was the inexplicable timidity to sign any thing on behalf of Ethiopia. At any rate, whether Ethiopia and Egypt ratified or formally acceded to the Convention, they are still bound by the legal principles and legal regime inscribed in the 1997 Convention.

Ethiopia must add the following New six conditions

Ethiopia, must add the following New six conditions and incorporate them in the conditions of agreements on the GERD:

1. Egypt should agree that it will not divert the Water of the Nile to any destinations away from the natural riverbanks of the Nile River for over fifty miles in any horizontal direction.
2. Egypt should never seek the interference of the United States Government in its dealings regarding the GERD.
3. Egypt shall not try to sabotage any financing that involves directly economic development of Ethiopia by interfering with the World Bank and its affiliates such as the IMF and others.
4. Egypt shall restrain itself from fermenting conflicts between Ethiopia and all and every Arab League Members
5. Egypt shall close down any military instalments and combat ready Soldiers from every State sharing borders with Ethiopia, namely from Djibouti, Eritrea, Sudan, South Sudan, and Kenya.
6. Egypt should pay an annual fee to help maintain the ecology of the Blue Nile Basin.

Egypt has Abused its Privilege of the Use of Blue Nile River’s Bounty

In a long commentary in 2013, I wrote in detail the problem facing us all as Ethiopians, and specifically I identified instances that Egypt was abusing its unduly huge share of water of the Blue Nile River flowing through its territory and yet Egypt complains about threats from Ethiopia in building the GERD meant to generate hydroelectric power. differ maintenance expenses of the ecology of the Blue Nile Basin in Ethiopia. Dams the world over generating hydropower never impede nor decrease the flow of water from such dams into their natural river courses.  Egypt should not be allowed not an ounce more than thirty percent  of the Nile Water, Sudan similar percentage, and Ethiopia utilize minimum of fifty percent of Blue Nile River water.  Even such percentage of water must be paid for by Egypt and Sudan.

Figure 1: Egypt wasting millions of gallons of precious Blue Nile water from Ethiopia creating artificial sea waves for Egyptians to frolic while Ethiopians are dying of thirst.

Figure 2: Aqua Waterpark, Cairo, one of ten mega Public water Parks. in addition to thousands of private swimming pools.

All must understand the fact no water from the GERD would be restricted permanently from flowing into its natural course with as much water as before installations of the turbans producing hydropower. It infuriates me when I ponder on the unjust and totally abusive campaign of Egypt encouraged by Trump in a diabolical and arrogant world-wide campaign to prevent our modest effort to advance our economy and the humble lives of truly poor tens of millions of Ethiopians.  If Egypt has its way, it wants to maintain its share of the yearly quota allocation of  over 55 billion cubic meter water under the 1959 agreement it entered with Sudan. This has nothing to do with Ethiopia for Ethiopia is not signatory to such agreement. In fact, Ethiopia has repeatedly officially through diplomatic channels let it be known that it is not bound by agreement of third parties and would maintain is sovereign right on its natural resources including rivers, lakes, and territorial waters. Moreover, one must examine to what use is the water of the Nile is being used in Egypt.

Figure 3: Waterpark, Cairo, frolicking Egyptians playing water-polo.

The Ethiopian Government officials have failed to organize and disseminate factual/statistical data on Egyptian use of the water of the Nile detailing the types of abusive use of precious water. We still do not have a detailed water use profile and statistical data on Egypt’s use of the water of the Nile.  For example, we have no idea how much water is being used in Egypt on frivolous schemes, such as watering golf courses in resort areas, feeding swimming pools, building channels to divert water into Sinai et cetera while in Ethiopia millions of Ethiopians are experiencing famine, poverty, and lacking clean drinking water et cetera.

It is incomprehensible to me how the Ethiopian Government has not mounted proper public campaign to show the degree of wasteful practices of excessive use and wastage of the Nile water by Egyptians. Do take serious note of the millions of gallons of fresh precious water used in the number of swimming pools owned by private Egyptians in Cairo and Alexandria. Do you understand how abusively they have channeled Nile Water to the Sinai and planning to deliver some such water to Israel? And yet our Ethiopian Government leaders, and our scholars and public intellectuals do not focus on such real problems. They often commenting on international law that they do not understand or have any depth of knowledge.

I heard on a video interview one such academic who teaches accounting and marketing (business) straddling two Continents making a statement that blew my mind. He said that he had not read the draft document, but he went ahead and stated that the mediated agreement presented by the United States Treasury Secretary for signature would be good for Ethiopia. Why don’t such people shut their idiotic mouths and just focus on the subjects they are hired to teach in a discipline they claim to be trained in? Media people are also responsible for seeking out individuals who are experts in the regime of international law relevant to the crises of the GERD rather than asking individuals whose academic credential and experience would have nothing to do with complex questions in international law.

The Long-Suffering Ethiopians

In most of rural Ethiopia, the problem is not per se scarcity of water sources, but accessibility. On the average an Ethiopian villager would have to travel over five mills in a rugged difficult terrain to reach a water source be it spring water, riverside pool, lake et cetera. Almost all water for domestic use is fetched and carried by female members of households with marginal support by young male members of the families.

Figure 4: Young beautiful  Ethiopian girls carrying potable water from distant sources.  I see in my mind these truly beautiful girls in academic gowns, or in office setups with computers. (Rural Ethiopia)

There is also a form of taboo that restricts male Ethiopians from handling pots to carry water. One can observe in the cold morning hours or in the shade of the late afternoon setting sun lines of poor Ethiopians hauling water carrying huge pots on their backs or on their heads. Such difficulties of access to water sources have had enormous negative impact on the health, hygiene, mental development et cetera of Ethiopians. Yes, the successive Governments of Meles Zenawi, Hailemariam  Desalegn, and the current Government of Abiy Ahmed have made a series of missteps, and especially the first two leaders did outright harm Ethiopia’s interest and legal position under international cross-border waterways/rivers regime. Abiy Ahmed’s errors are not maleficent but due to an excessive desire to please others. But that is expected of any complex situation that involves international law and norms, regime of specific areas of public international law, regional politics, international power games between three powerful forces, not to mention the local political power deadly rivalry based on ethnicity, religion, or pursuit of quick-get-rich schemes.

I weep tears of compassion when I reflect on the centuries of such hard labor of humble Ethiopian women and men including children building a nation that faced courageously on battle fields numerous would be conquerors be them Arabs, Egyptians, Ottoman Turks, Italians, British et cetera and remaining free and sovereign. We have earned every right to build the GERD and produce hydropower to transform our ancient country and ease the centuries old non-technological systems we have used over the years and join the modern world of technology and development. Look at Figure 4 and Figure 5 about Ethiopians fetching water from great distances, and Ethiopians walking home/market long distances on foot ten, fifteen, even twenty miles.

Figures 5 a, b: a) Ethiopian children, men, and women traveling long distances on foot due to lack of proper development of infrastructure and dirt-poor income levels. (Rural Ethiopia) (above)

1. b) Festive Ethiopians in traditional dresses during Meskel Demera in Addis Ababa (below)

Basic Negotiation principles and governmental positions

I have outlined hereunder some basic negotiation principles and governmental positions that all Ethiopian leaders and the Ethiopian Government as a whole should heed:

1. No agreement should be signed that impedes or creates limitations on the Sovereignty of Ethiopia on its resources. Such limitation might come hidden in provisions of bilateral or multilateral agreements creating the rights of consultation, a seat in Ethiopian national Committees, Creation of a body of Experts with a seat to foreign nationals et cetera.
2. Creation of Rights in rem (rights in things) must be avoided on any construction on Ethiopian territory, such as Dams, Power-stations, Distribution Centers, Grids, Powerlines. All rights in personam (obligatory rights) must be of the corporate type of holding shares in corporations fully established in accordance with the laws of Ethiopia. Shareholdings must be through a corporate structure, and no Sovereign direct ownership of any share in an Ethiopian Corporation should be allowed. [Remember the Rubatino Italian creeping sovereignty at Assab.]
3. Licensing must never create any rights in any corps of asset in Ethiopia. Ethiopia could license distributors of its power in different states through formal bids and business-based examinations of the principals.
4. Never guarantee a certain amount of water to Egypt and/or Sudan, for you have no control on the rate of the rainfall. Growing up in Dessie a life time ago, I remember that the heavy clouds always sail by from West to East, later I learned it is the Atlantic Ocean that feeds the water bearing cloud that finally dumps all that fresh water on Ethiopia. If that is not God’s blessing,

Figure 6 (a,b): Ethiopians building  and developing housing and  infrastructure and improving dirt-poor income levels.

5. Never agree to a provision that requires Ethiopia to appoint foreign arbitration, such as the corrupt and disastrous Border Commission that was established pursuant to the 2000 Algiers Agreement, a disgustingly anti- Ethiopian interest agreement that resurrected long dead colonial period treaties to deny Ethiopia’s historic right and territorial sovereignty on the Afar coastal territories all the way to the Islands and beyond. Never ever sign any agreement that affects our national security and economic development.
6. All Consultants, Arbitration Members, Ad hoc Committee of Experts, et cetera hired from foreign countries can be corrupted by wealthy Arabs in promoting Egyptian interest. Or could be biased on their own against our interest and in favor of Egypt hoping to get great deals later from the Arab countries. We do not have the resources to top such rewards. Our only equalizing force is to use violence against individuals who breached such professional code of conduct and hurt our economic and political interest. Thus, relay on Ethiopian Experts at all levels.
7. Never ever walk into a meeting fearing possible armed conflict even all-out war. Do not ever forget we are the people who stood free and sovereign in our destiny for thousands of years. We are in our Territory and anyone coming to attack us would necessarily lose.
8. Make sure that Ethiopia receives some form of compensation for the water that is preserved for use for both Egypt and Sudan.
9. The cost of maximizing the availability of water for the basin through prevention of soil erosion by planting hundreds of millions of trees and shrubbery must be sustained through some form of compensation by Egypt and Sudan.
10. Always remind Egyptians that 90% of the water they use is from the Blue Nile that Egypt does not contribute a single drop of water to the Nile water. Both Sudan and Egypt must work to dissuade fully all Arab League States from all political and economic campaign against Ethiopia. And to treat Ethiopian migrant workers in such countries with respect and justice.

Consider the Government of the United States as an Enemy of Ethiopia

The Declaration of Principles anticipates the filling of the Dam parallel to the negotiation of the comprehensive agreement. The Treasury Secretary Stephen Mnuchin arrogant instruction/command of a sovereign country that predates the very existence of the United states by thousands of years, and its immigrant population and their descendants should know their places in history. If you need to know your humble origins, read Emma Lazarus poem chiseled on the pedestal of the great symbolic “Statue of Liberty” on Staten Island: “Give me your tired, your poor,/ Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.”

Who is Trump or Mnuchin to have the dare for such derogatory stance toward Ethiopia? A nation that never was anybody’s colony, an independent and free people. The Arab League Council emboldened by the esoteric statements of Trump and Mnuchin, also repeated the insult threatening Ethiopia not to fill its own Dam with its own water. The Declaration of Principles signed by all three States (Ethiopia, Egypt, and Sudan) reads as follows:

“The three countries should cooperate to use the final findings in the studies recommended by the Tripartite National Technical Committee and international technical experts in order to reach: a. An agreement on the guidelines for different scenarios of the first filling of the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam reservoir in parallel with the construction of the dam.
b. An agreement on the guidelines and annual operation policies of the Renaissance Dam, which the owners can adjust from time to time.“ [emphasis mine]

I am addressing you vulgar and tyrannical bureaucrats of the United States’ Government; do you understand your own English language? The agreement you alluded to in making the outrageous demand that Ethiopia must not fill its own dam with its own water reads “different scenarios of the first filling of the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam reservoir in parallel with the construction of the dam,” for to hold otherwise would have allowed Egypt a veto power to postpone or hinder the filling of the dam indefinitely. No Ethiopian would sign an agreement that will tie the filling of the Dam to some agreement to be entered in the future with Egypt or anybody else. There is no such fool yet born in the world who will sign such stupidity.

Almost a decade ago, I wrote, “One serious problem facing Ethiopia, which is in the background of most conflicts that threaten the survival of Ethiopia, is the military assistance of the United States to Egypt to the tune of a couple of billion dollars every year for the last two decades. Such polarizing assistance to Egypt seems to add to the arrogance and inflexibility of the Egyptian Government. The United States Government either must stop such outrage or provide Ethiopia also with as much military assistance as it does to Egypt. Egypt did not help the United States in its global effort to squash Al-Qaida terrorist members. Some of the leaders of such anti-American groups are Egyptian citizens. By contrast, the Ethiopian Government is fully engaged in the fight against terrorism with the United States as a partner for peace and security. Why is the United States always undermining Ethiopia’s interest at crucial moments in our history for the last one hundred years of relationship with the United States? “  Ethiopia and the sovereignty over the Blue Nile, Tecola W Hagos (November 4, 2013)

On 6 March 2020, finally garnering enough courage after two days,  the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ethiopia presses a Statement rejecting the Executive Council of the Arab League resolution regarding the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD). The Statement reads as follows: “The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia notes with dismay the ‘Resolution’ of the Executive Council of the Arab League concerning the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD) issued on 05 March 2020. Ethiopia rejects the ‘Resolution’ in its entirety. This ‘Resolution’ gives blind support to a member state without taking into consideration key facts at the center of the GERD talks.” [for full text, go to Appendix I]

Election 2020 and Conclusion

The future holds great things in store for Ethiopia. The 2020 National Election is one important key for the continued success of Abiy Ahmed’s Government and in time to the laying of solid foundation for a democratic individual-based democratic society in Ethiopia. Those who love Ethiopia, must support the National Election of 2020. Do not listen to the garbage pontifical arguments of political leaders, such as that of Lidetu Ayalew’s argument that We are not ready for a national election. He pointed out several shortages and hinderances that would impede fair universal elections. If we accept such arguments there would never be a perfect situation to hold elections in Ethiopia to the end of time. I fully support Birtukan Mideksa’s intelligent decision to carry out the 2020 National Elections as scheduled. What she  must focus on are logistics and the quality and numbers of Observers. There is no such mythical “right time” to hold elections in Ethiopia or in any country around the world. Today, is the right time.

Figure 7(a,b): Truly lovely Ethiopian school children, behold our future.

I have stated in the past in numerous articles that the fact of going through the election process is far more important than the effort ensuring the results are not corrupted. The one fact that seems to elude the brains of such ‘perfectionists’ is the fact that no matter where they turn the Ethiopian political field is one and the same, and  whether you hold election today or ten years from now, unless drastic changes in cognition, social norms, and individual wealth have taken place, we will be exactly where we are now, at starting squares for democratic changes.

Just reading texts and understanding the English language will not be sufficient to properly understand and analyze complex international law issues. The expertise in international law requires specialized learning/knowledge and extensive experience. These fields of international border disputes and issues dealing with cross-border waterways/rivers are extremely complex and require years of experience and readings of the right documents, ICJ’s voluminous decisions, the writings of experts in their fields of expertise et cetera. It will not do by just reading captions, a couple of paragraphs, resolutions,  and bar room discussions with buddies.

Ethiopia has resilience and the advantage of youth. It has the youngest majority population in the World.  With youth comes great hope, faith, and inexhaustible energy. To a life that has not been pretzelled with life’s inequities, everything is possible. Ethiopians are truly generous and ethical people. Out of curiosity I conducted some form of survey by phone directly and indirectly through friends to find out firsthand how Ethiopians living abroad and those living in Ethiopia feel about the campaign by Egypt and America against the interest of Ethiopia in building/filling  the GERD.

I was amazed how vehemently all of the Ethiopians in my survey rejected Trump’s policy over that of Egypt’s agitations and concerns. None wanted to harm Egyptians but wanted them to share in the bounty of Blue Nile’s water and benefit from the hydropower from the GERD. However, they were also uncompromising on the subject of ownership and Sovereignty over the Waters that originate from Ethiopia. They favor equitable sharing and appropriate use of the water resource that almost totally originate in the Blue Nile Basin. By contrast, I have watched videos of Egyptian politicians and ordinary citizens going berserk expressing unbelievable greed to freely and exclusively use without limitations or sharing of the “Nile” water that originate close to 90% from the highlands of Ethiopia.  Nevertheless, Ethiopians must never consider Egypt (the Egyptian people and the Egyptian Government Officials) as the perpetual enemies and “boogeyman”, for we Ethiopians too have done many harmful things to our own people in the last fifty years. Thus, when we look outward for enemies, we must also look inward on ourselves for mistakes we have committed and for failures in our social systems.

My last conclusionary opinion is an admonishment of all Ethiopian Governments starting with Meles Zenawi. It was very opportunistic and myopic of Ethiopian leaders to downgrade the Nile Basin Initiative (NBI) and a serious error of Ethiopia to start any form of negotiation with Egypt and Sudan to the exclusion of the other Members of the Nile Basin Initiative. Ethiopia should have strengthened that structure to counter the rabid greed and arrogance of Egypt and its exclusivity in the use of the bounties of the Nile River.  Now, I urge PM Abiy Ahmed to claw back to that original vision of the Nile Basin Initiative (NBI) and reinvigorate the Members thereof. He should also publicly support the recent announcement of the visionary mercurial Leader of Uganda, President Yoweri Museveni, to build a dam near Lake Victoria on the Nile River for hydropower. I urge the two Leaders to establish a joint commission of hydropower experts for mutual support and to coordinate their efforts. I consider Museveni’s idea of building a new dam not as a competition to the GERD but supplemental desirable economic development of the region.

Tecola W Hagos

30 March 2020

APPENDIX I

Statement on the Arab League’s “Resolution” Concerning the GERD
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ethiopia
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
06 March 2020

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia notes with dismay the “Resolution” of the Executive Council of the Arab League concerning the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD) issued on 05 March 2020. Ethiopia rejects the “Resolution” in its entirety. This “Resolution” gives blind support to a member state without taking into consideration key facts at the center of the GERD talks.

Ethiopia, however, commends the stance taken by the Government of the Republic of the Sudan for refusing to endorse the “Resolution” of the Arab League. Sudan has once again demonstrated its position of being a voice of reason and justice in the latest orchestrated so-called “Arab League position” on the GERD. Ethiopia expresses its profound appreciation to Sudan’s principled position that helps advance win-win solutions for all the parties involved, through a commitment to open dialogue.

Ethiopia’s relations with the peoples’ and governments of member states of the Arab League are longstanding based on common values, deep rooted cultural ties and traditions. The relationship demonstrated the power of justice in the face of adversity, sanctuary in the face of persecution, cooperation at the time of need, and friendly relations during alienation. As an institution composed of sovereign countries, the League is expected to follow an approach that allows an accurate representation of facts and balances all interests involved. When acting contrary to this norm, the credibility of the League and its ability to promote peace, stability, and cooperation in the increasingly globalized world is at risk.

Ethiopia reiterates its longstanding and firm position as expressed by successive governments that it “has the right to use its Nile water resources to meet the needs of the present and future generations.” As the Nile is a transboundary water resource Ethiopia is committed to the principles of equitable and reasonable use, not causing significant harm and that of cooperation. We firmly believe that through continued open and transparent dialogue there is great potential to arrive at an amicable solution. Hegemonic posturing is unproductive and need not have a place in our interdependent global order.

Ethiopia is also firmly committed to the Agreement on the Declaration of Principles (DoP) which provides the basis for the first filling and annual operation of the GERD. The DoP provides that first filling will be done in parallel with the construction of the GERD.

Finally, Ethiopia is confident that the Arab League will live up to the standard of objectivity and the longstanding relations and common values in its engagements with Ethiopia. We look forward to a strengthened partnership and to work closely on common goals.

Source: The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ethiopia

APPENDIX II

Full text of ‘Declaration of Principles’ signed by Egypt, Sudan and Ethiopia,

Monday 23 Mar 2015

Introduction

Valuing the increasing need of the Arab Republic of Egypt, the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia and the Republic of the Sudan for their over-border water sources, and realizing the importance of the Nile River as a source of life and a vital source for the development of the people of Egypt, Ethiopia and Sudan, the three countries have committed themselves to the following principles concerning the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam:

1. Principle of cooperation:
– Cooperation based on mutual understanding, common interest, good intentions, benefits for all, and the principles of international law.
– Cooperation in understanding the water needs of upstream and downstream countries across all their lands.

2. Principle of development, regional integration and sustainability:
The purpose of the Renaissance Dam is to generate power, contribute to economic development, promote cooperation beyond borders, and regional integration through generating clean sustainable energy that can be relied on.

3. Principle of not causing significant damage:
– The three countries will take all the necessary procedures to avoid causing significant damage while using the Blue Nile (the Nile’s main river).
– In spite of that, in case significant damage is caused to one of these countries, the country causing the damage […], in the absence of an agreement over that [damaging] action, [is to take] all the necessary procedures to alleviate this damage, and discuss compensation whenever convenient.

4. Principle of fair and appropriate use:
– The three countries will use their common water sources in their provinces in a fair and appropriate manner.
– To ensure fair and appropriate use, the three countries will take into consideration all guiding elements mentioned below:
a. The geographic, the geographic aquatic, the aquatic, the climatic, environmental elements, and the rest of all-natural elements.
b. Social and economic needs for the concerned Nile Basin countries.
c. The residents who depend on water sources in each of the Nile Basin countries.
d. The effects of using or the uses of water sources in one of the Nile Basin countries on another Nile Basin country.
e. The current and possible uses of water sources.
f. Elements of preserving, protecting, [and] developing [water sources] and the economics of water sources, and the cost of the procedures taken in this regard.
g. The extent of the availability of alternatives with a comparable value for a planned or a specific use.
h. The extent of contribution from each of the Nile Basin countries in the Nile River system.
i. The extent of the percentage of the Nile Basin’s space within the territories of each Nile Basin country.

5. The principle of the dam’s storage reservoir first filling, and dam operation policies:
– To apply the recommendations of the international technical experts committee and the results of the final report of the Tripartite National Technical Committee during different stages of the dam project.
– The three countries should cooperate to use the final findings in the studies recommended by the Tripartite National Technical Committee and international technical experts in order to reach:
a. An agreement on the guidelines for different scenarios of the first filling of the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam reservoir in parallel with the construction of the dam.
b. An agreement on the guidelines and annual operation policies of the Renaissance Dam, which the owners can adjust from time to time.
c. To inform downstream countries, Egypt and Sudan, on any urgent circumstances that would call for a change in the operations of the dam, in order to ensure coordination with downstream countries’ water reservoirs.
– Accordingly, the three countries are to establish a proper mechanism through their ministries of water and irrigation.
– The timeframe for such points mentioned above is 15 months from the start of preparing two studies about the dam by the international technical committee.

6. The principle of building trust:
– Downstream countries will be given priority to purchase energy generated by the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam.

7. The principle of exchange of information and data:
– Egypt, Ethiopia and Sudan will provide the information and data required to conduct the studies of the national experts committees from the three countries in the proper time.

8. The principle of dam security:
– The three countries appreciate all efforts made by Ethiopia up until now to implement the recommendations of the international experts committee regarding the safety of the dam.
– Ethiopia will continue in good will to implement all recommendations related to the dam’s security in the reports of the international technical experts.

9. The principle of the sovereignty, unity and territorial integrity of the State:
The three countries cooperate on the basis of equal sovereignty, unity and territorial integrity of the state, mutual benefit and good will, in order to reach the better use and protection of the River Nile.

10. The principle of the peaceful settlement of disputes:
The three countries commit to settle any dispute resulting from the interpretation or application of the declaration of principles through talks or negotiations based on the good will principle. If the parties involved do not succeed in solving the dispute through talks or negotiations, they can ask for mediation or refer the matter to their heads of states or prime ministers.
Source: http://english.ahram.org.eg/News/125941.aspx

APPENDIX III

!997 Convention –  Convention on the Law of the Non-navigational Uses of International Watercourses Adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations on 21 May 1997 – extracts:

[full text: https://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/conventions/8_3_1997.pdf]

PART II.  GENERAL PRINCIPLES

Article 5 Equitable and reasonable utilization and participation

1. Watercourse States shall in their respective territories utilize an international watercourse in an equitable and reasonable manner. In particular, an international watercourse shall be used and developed by watercourse States with a view to attaining optimal and sustainable utilization thereof and benefits therefrom, taking into account the interests of the watercourse States concerned, consistent with adequate protection of the watercourse.
2. Watercourse States shall participate in the use, development and protection of an international watercourse in an equitable and reasonable manner. Such participation includes both the right to utilize the watercourse and the duty to cooperate in the protection and development thereof, as provided in the present Convention.

Article 6 Factors relevant to equitable and reasonable utilization

1. Utilization of an international watercourse in an equitable and reasonable manner within the meaning of article 5 requires taking into account all relevant factors and circumstances, including:

(a) Geographic, hydrographic, hydrological, climatic, ecological and other factors of a natural character;

(b) The social and economic needs of the watercourse States concerned;

(c) The population dependent on the watercourse in each watercourse State;

(d) The effects of the use or uses of the watercourses in one watercourse State on other watercourse States;

(e) Existing and potential uses of the watercourse;

(f) Conservation, protection, development and economy of use of the water resources of the watercourse and the costs of measures taken to that effect;

(g) The availability of alternatives, of comparable value, to a particular planned or existing use.

2. In the application of article 5 or paragraph 1 of this article, watercourse States concerned shall, when the need arises, enter into consultations in a spirit of cooperation.
3. The weight to be given to each factor is to be determined by its importance in comparison with that of other relevant factors. In determining what is a reasonable and equitable use, all relevant factors are to be considered together and a conclusion reached on the basis of the whole.

Article 7 Obligation not to cause significant harm

1. Watercourse States shall, in utilizing an international watercourse in their territories, take all appropriate measures to prevent the causing of significant harm to other watercourse States.
2. Where significant harm nevertheless is caused to another watercourse State, the States whose use causes such harm shall, in the absence of agreement to such use, take all appropriate measures, having due regard for the provisions of articles 5 and 6, in consultation with the affected State, to eliminate or mitigate such harm and, where appropriate, to discuss the question of compensation.

Article 8 General obligation to cooperate

1. Watercourse States shall cooperate on the basis of sovereign equality, territorial integrity, mutual benefit and good faith in order to attain optimal utilization and adequate protection of an international watercourse.
2. In determining the manner of such cooperation, watercourse States may consider the establishment of joint mechanisms or commissions, as deemed necessary by them, to facilitate cooperation on relevant measures and procedures in the light of experience gained through cooperation in existing joint mechanisms and commissions in various regions.

Article 9 Regular exchange of data and information

1. Pursuant to article 8, watercourse States shall on a regular basis exchange readily available data and information on the condition of the watercourse, in particular that of a hydrological, meteorological, hydrogeological and ecological nature and related to the water quality as well as related forecasts.
2. If a watercourse State is requested by another watercourse State to provide data or information that is not readily available, it shall employ its best efforts to comply with the request but may condition its compliance upon payment by the requesting State of the reasonable costs of collecting and, where appropriate, processing such data or information.
3. Watercourse States shall employ their best efforts to collect and, where appropriate, to process data and information in a manner which facilitates its utilization by the other watercourse States to which it is communicated.

Article 10 Relationship between different kinds of uses

1. In the absence of agreement or custom to the contrary, no use of an international watercourse enjoys inherent priority over other uses.
2. In the event of a conflict between uses of an international watercourse, it shall be resolved with reference to articles 5 to 7, with special regard being given to the requirements of vital human needs.

………………………………………..

CFA –  Read article: Salman M.A. Salman (2013): The Nile Basin Cooperative Framework Agreement: a peacefully unfolding African spring? Water International, 38:1, 17-29

To link to this article:  http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02508060.2013.744273

NBI – The Nile Basin Initiative (NBI) is an intergovernmental partnership of 10 Nile Basin countries, namely Burundi, DR Congo, Egypt, Ethiopia, Kenya, Rwanda, South Sudan, The Sudan, Tanzania and Uganda. Eritrea participates as an observer.

For the first time in the Basin’s history, an all-inclusive basin-wide institution was established, on 22nd February, 1999, to provide a forum for consultation and coordination among the Basin States for the sustainable management and development of the shared Nile Basin water and related resources for win-win benefits.

• To develop the Nile Basin water resources in a sustainable and equitable way to ensure prosperity, security, and peace for all its peoples
• To ensure efficient water management and the optimal use of the resources
• To ensure cooperation and joint action between the riparian countries, seeking win-win gains
• To target poverty eradication and promote economic integration
• To ensure that the program results in a move from planning to action

—————————————————————

APPENDIX IV

Agreement between the Republic of the Sudan and the United Arab Republic for the full utilization of the Nile waters signed at Cairo, 8 November 1959⁶⁴

[Entry into force: 12 December 1959 (in accordance with art. 7).]

(United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 453, No. 6519, p. 51.)

As the River Nile needs projects, for its fall control and for increasing its yield for the full utilization of its waters by the Republic of the Sudan and the United Arab Republic on technical working arrangements other than those now applied:

And as these works require for their execution and administration, full agreement and cooperation between the two Republics in order to regulate their benefits and utilize the Nile waters in a manner which secures the present and future requirements of the two countries:

And as the Nile waters Agreement concluded in 1929 6582/ provided only for the partial use of the Nile waters and did not extend to include a complete control of the River waters, the two Republics have Agreed on the following:

First
THE PRESENT ACQUIRED RIGHTS

1. That the amount of the Nile waters used by the United Arab Republic until this Agreement is signed shall be her acquired right before obtaining the benefits of the Nile Control Projects and the projects which will increase its yield and which projects are referred to in this Agreement; The total of this acquired right is 48 Milliards of cubic meters per year as measured at Aswan.
2. That the amount of the waters used at present by the Republic of Sudan shall be her acquired right before obtaining the benefits of the projects referred to above. The total amount of this acquired right is 4 Milliards of cubic meters per year as measured at Aswan.

Second
THE NILE CONTROL PROJECTS AND THE DIVISION OF THEIR BENEFITS BETWEEN THE TWO REPUBLICS

1. In order to regulate the River waters and control their flow into the sea, the two Republics agree that the United Arab Republic constructs the Sudd el Aali at Aswan as the first link of a series of projects on the Nile for over-year storage.
2. In order to enable the Sudan to utilize its share of the water, the two Republics agree that the Republic of Sudan shall construct the Roseires Dam on the Blue Nile and any other works which the Republic of the Sudan considers essential for the utilization of its share.
3. The net benefit from the Sudd el Aali Reservoir shall be calculated on the basis of the average natural River yield of water at Aswan in the years of this century, which was estimated at about 84 Milliards of cubic meters per year. The acquired rights of the two Republics referred to in Article “First” as measured at Aswan, and the average of losses of over-year storage of the Sudd El Aali Reservoir shall be deducted from this yield, and the balance shall be the net benefit which shall be divided between the two Republics.
4. The net benefit from the Sudd el Aali Reservoir mentioned in the previous item, shall be divided between the two Republics at the ratio of 14-1/2 for the Sudan and 7- 1/2 for the United Arab Republic so long as the average river yield remains in future within the limits of the average yield referred to in the previous paragraph. This means that, if the average yield remains the same as the average of the previous years of this century which is estimated at 84 Milliards, and if the losses of over-year storage remain equal to the present estimate of 10 Milliards, the net benefit of the Sudd el Aali Reservoir shall be 22 Milliards of which the share of the Republic of the Sudan shall be 14-1/2 Milliards and the share of the United Arab Republic shall be 7-1/2 Milliards. By adding these shares to their acquired rights, the total share from the net yield of the Nile after the full operation of the Sudd el Aali Reservoir shall be 18-1/2 Milliards for the Republic of the Sudan and 55-1/2 Milliards for the United Arab Republic.

But if the average yield increases, the resulting net benefit from this increase shall be divided between the two Republics, in equal shares.

5. As the net benefit from the Sudd el Aali (referred to in item 3 Article Second) is calculated on the basis of the average natural yield of the river at Aswan in the years of this century after the deduction therefrom of the acquired rights of the two Republics and the average losses of over-year storage at the Sudd el Aali Reservoir, it is agreed that this net benefit shall be the subject of revision by the two parties at reasonable intervals to be agreed upon after starting the full operation of the Sudd el Aali Reservoir.
6. The United Arab Republic agrees to pay to the Sudan Republic 15 Million Egyptian Pounds as full compensation for the damage resulting to the Sudanese existing properties as a result of the storage in the Sudd el Aali Reservoir up to a reduced level of 182 meters (survey datum). The payment of this compensation shall be affected in accordance with the annexed agreement between the two parties.
7. The Republic of the Sudan undertakes to arrange before July 1963, the final transfer of the population of Halfa and all other Sudanese inhabitants whose lands shall be submerged by the stored water.
8. It is understood that when the Sudd el Aali is fully operated for over-year storage, the United Arab Republic will not require storing any water at Gebel Aulia Dam. And the two contracting parties will in due course, discuss all matters related to this renunciation.

Third
PROJECTS FOR THE UTILIZATION OF LOST WATERS IN THE NILE BASIN

In view of the fact that at present, considerable volumes of the Nile Basin Waters are lost in the swamps of Bahr El Jebel, Bahr El Zeraf, Bahr el Ghazal and the Sobat River, and as it is essential that efforts should be exerted in order to prevent these losses and to increase the yield of the River for use in agricultural expansion in the two Republics, the two Republics agree to the following:

1. The Republic of the Sudan in agreement with the United Arab Republic shall construct projects for the increase of the River yield by preventing losses of waters of the Nile Basin in the swamps of Bahr El Jebel, Bahr el Zeraf, Bahr el Ghazal and its tributaries, the Sobat River and its tributaries and the White Nile Basin. The net yield of these projects shall be divided equally between the two Republics and each of them shall also contribute equally to the costs.

The Republic of the Sudan shall finance the above-mentioned projects out of its own funds and the United Arab Republic shall pay its share in the costs in the same ratio of 50 per cent allotted for her in the yield of these projects.

2. If the United Arab Republic, on account of the progress in its planned agricultural expansion should find it necessary to start on any of the increase of the Nile yield projects, referred to in the previous paragraph, after its approval by the two Governments and at a time when the Sudan Republic does not need such project, the United Arab Republic shall notify the Sudan Republic of the time convenient for the former to start the execution of the project. And each of the two Republics shall, within two years after such notification, present a date-phased programme for the utilization of its share of the waters saved by the project, and each of the said programmes shall bind the two parties. The United Arab Republic shall at the expiry of the two years, start the execution of the projects, at its own expense. And when the Republic of Sudan is ready to utilize its share according to the agreed programme, it shall pay to the United Arab Republic a share of all the expenses in the same ratio as the Sudan’s share in benefit is to the total benefit of the projects provided that the share of either Republic shall not exceed one half of the total benefit of the project.

Fourth
TECHNICAL CO-OPERATION BETWEEN THE TWO REPUBLICS

1. In order to ensure the technical co-operation between the Governments of the two Republics, to continue the research and study necessary for the Nile control projects and the increase of its yield and to continue the hydrological survey of its upper reaches, the two Republics agree that immediately after the signing of this Agreement a Permanent Joint Technical Commission shall be formed of an equal number of members from both parties; and its functions shall be:

(a) The drawing of the basic outlines of projects for the increase of the Nile yield, and for the supervision of the studies necessary for the finalising of projects, before presentation of the same to the Governments of the two Republics for approval.

(b) The supervision of the execution of the projects approved by the two Governments.

(c) The drawing up of the working arrangements for any works to be constructed on the Nile, within the boundaries of the Sudan, and also for those to be constructed outside the boundaries of the Sudan, by agreement with the authorities concerned in the countries in which such works are constructed.

(d) The supervision of the application of all the working arrangements mentioned in (c) above in connection with works constructed within the boundaries of Sudan and also in connection with the Sudd el Aali Reservoir and Aswan Dam, through official engineers delegated for the purpose by the two Republics; and the supervision of the working of the upper Nile projects, as provided in the agreements concluded with the countries in which such projects are constructed.

(e) As it is probable that a series of low years may occur, and a succession of low levels in the Sudd el Aali Reservoir may result to such an extent as not to permit in any one year the drawing of the full requirements of the two Republics, the Technical Commission is charged with the task of devising a fair arrangement for the two Republics to follow. And the recommendations of the Commission shall be presented to the two Governments for approval.

2. In order to enable the Commission to exercise the functions enumerated in the above item, and in order to ensure the continuation of the Nile gauging and to keep observations on all its upper reaches, these duties shall be carried out under the technical supervision of the Commission by the engineers of the Sudan Republic, and the engineers of the United Arab Republic in the Sudan and in the United Arab Republic and in Uganda.
3. The two Governments shall form the Joint Technical Commission, by a joint decree, and shall provide it with its necessary funds from their budgets. The Commission may, according to the requirements of work, hold its meetings in Cairo or in Khartoum. The Commission shall, subject to the approval of the two Governments, lay down regulations for the organisation of its meetings and its technical, administrative and financial activities.

Fifth
GENERAL PROVISIONS

1. If it becomes necessary to hold any negotiations concerning the Nile waters, with any riparian state, outside the boundaries of the two Republics, the Governments of the Sudan Republic and the United Arab Republic shall agree on a unified view after the subject is studied by the said Technical Commission. The said unified view shall be the basis of any negotiations by the Commission with the said states.

If the negotiations result in an agreement to construct any works on the river, outside the boundaries of the two Republics, the Joint Technical Commission shall after consulting the authorities in the Governments of the States concerned, draw all the technical execution details and the working and maintenance arrangements. And the Commission shall, after the sanction of the same by the Governments concerned, supervise the carrying out of the said technical agreements.

2. As the riparian states, other than the two Republics, claim a share in the Nile waters, the two Republics have agreed that they shall jointly consider and reach one unified view regarding the said claims. And if the said consideration results in the acceptance of allotting an amount of the Nile water to one or the other of the said states, the accepted amount shall be deducted from the shares of the two Republics in equal parts, as calculated at Aswan.

The Technical Commission mentioned in this Agreement shall make the necessary arrangements with the states concerned, in order to ensure that their water consumption shall not exceed the amounts agreed upon.

Sixth
TRANSITIONAL PERIOD BEFORE BENEFITING FROM THE COMPLETE SUDD EL AALI RESERVOIR

As the benefiting of the two Republics from their appointed shares in the net benefit of the Sudd el Aali Reservoir shall not start before the construction and the full utilization of the Reservoir, the two parties shall agree on their agricultural expansion programmes in the transitional period from now up to the completion of the Sudd el Aali, without prejudice to their present water requirements.

Seventh

This Agreement shall come into force after its sanction by the two contracting parties, provided that either party shall notify the other party of the date of its sanction, through the diplomatic channels.

Eighth

Annex (1) and Annex (2, A and B) attached to this Agreement shall be considered as an integral part of this Agreement.

Annex 1.

A special provision for the water loan required by the United Arab Republic

The Republic of the Sudan agrees in principle to give a water loan from the Sudan’s share in the Sudd el Aali waters, to the United Arab Republic, in order to enable the latter to proceed with her planned programmes for Agricultural Expansion.

The request of the United Arab Republic for this loan shall be made after it revises its programmes within five years from the date of the signing of this Agreement. And if the revision by United Arab Republic reveals her need for this loan, the Republic of the Sudan shall give it out of its own share a loan not exceeding one and a half Milliards provided that the utilization of this loan shall cease in November, 1977.

Annex 2.

A

To the Head of the Delegation of the Republic of Sudan

With reference to Article (Second) paragraph 6 of the Agreement signed this day, concerning the full utilization of the River Nile Waters, compensation amounting to 15 Million Egyptian Pounds in sterling or in a third currency agreed upon by the two parties, and calculated on the basis of a fixed rate of $2.87156 to the Egyptian Pound, shall be paid by the Government of the United Arab Republic, as agreed upon, in instalments in the following manner:

£3 million on the first of January, 1960
£4 million on the first of January, 1961
£4 million on the first of January, 1962
£4 million on the first of January, 1963

I shall be grateful if you confirm your agreement to the above.

…

B

To the Head of the United Arab Republic Delegation

I have the honour to acknowledge receipt of your letter dated today and stipulating the following:

[See Annex 2, A]

I have the honour to confirm the agreement of the Government of the Republic of the Sudan to the contents of the said letter.

————————————————————————————-

APPENDIX V

“DECLARATION OF PRINCIPLES” ETHIOPIA GOT A LOAF AND A HALF

Tecola W. Hagos

1. In General

I start this short commentary acknowledging Minga Negash, Seid Hassan, Mammo Muchie, Abu Girma, Aklog Birara and Getachew Begashaw (Scholars, for short reference) for bringing to our attention in a timely manner the copy of the translation in English of the Declaration of Principles (DoP, here after) agreed upon by Ethiopia, Egypt, and Sudan. I appreciate their brief comment as well even though it was cursory and glosses over key issues in generalized form: [See “Misplaced Opposition to the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD): Update”] By contrast, Dr Aklog Birara’s recent article is a lot more detailed and tackles several issues based on possible badfaith of Egypt and Sudan, the two signatory States, against Ethiopia. There is also the comment from the SMNE that seems concerned about full disclosure of the negotiation process of the DoP, but spoiled the whole exercise by interjecting overly sectarian political agenda.

My reaction to the DoP is a shade or two different than the comments by the Scholars, Aklog Birara and a number of other commentators and chat bloggers, but it seems to me that we all share fundamental grounds/principles in our consideration of the DoP i.e., our concern for a fair deal for Ethiopia that will preserve the sovereignty, security, and territorial integrity of Ethiopia. However, one significant problem I see in most of the comments has to do with competence, for such comments are mostly written by laymen with limited legal training or no training in international law at all. Even though some of the commentators are experts in different fields, these types of issues on international rivers non-navigational use or in general require specialized knowledge. Thus, my first advice to such commentators is to be less vociferous and also less dogmatic and learn from people who have the training and experience in the field, even better to form discussion groups on the rich literature (collected material) on the legal regime dealing with the non-navigational use of cross border rivers and lakes.

The first item that must be recognized by all of us is the existence of an international regime of law and custom dealing with the waters of the Blue Nile and all other rivers flowing into the Nile River from the Ethiopian highlands. As a sovereign nation Ethiopia too, just like all other nations, is a subject of existing international law regime. We often hear and read about the 1929, and 1959 agreements between Egypt and Sudan (interested parties) and their one-time colonial master/protector Britain. On the other hand, we hardly ever hear about other problematic treaties allegedly entered between Ethiopia and former colonial powers, such as Britain, or France, or Italy et cetera.

1. The Declaration of Principles [DoP]
2. New Paradigm

I consider the DoP as a step in the right direction. I am looking at a first international understanding by the three States with ancient roots, the DoP signatories, on the use of the waters of Abaye River (Blue Nile). No agreement, or understanding, or even an approving nod of any kind has ever happened where all the three States had participated in their long coexistence as  physically close neighbors.  The status quo has always favored Egypt the most and Sudan as a distant second. It is this stalled or frozen condition that is being thawed and changed to accommodate the national interests of Ethiopia and other riparian states of the Nile River. The status of the DoP in international law and custom may not be crystal clear. It could be seen as having the force of a “Preamble” to a well constituted multinational treaty only if such a treaty is entered, or it may be considered having the force of some moral convention. Obviously, the DoP is not a treaty, not even an international instrument notwithstanding the claims by some experts to the contrary under the Vienna Convention on Succession of States in respect of Treaties of 1978, 1996. If the DoP is considered in a court of law, it might be used to show intent pursuant to a valid claim by the suing nation pursuant to some breach of a valid bilateral or multilateral treaty.  The most significant provisions of the DoP were drawn from the UN Convention on the Law of the Non-navigational Uses of International Watercourses (here after, UN Convention). The Convention was adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations on 21 May 1997 and was entered into force on 17 August 2014. [See General Assembly resolution 51/229, annex, Official Records of the General Assembly, Fifty-first Session, Supplement No. 49 (A/51/49).]

This means the DoP is not some individuals’ hubris or esoteric formulations, but is based on international guidelines or framework for such agreements between riparian states that share a common watercourse with varying degrees of historical use, need, and colonial period experiences.  To wit:

1. DoP Article 1. Principle of cooperation, similar to UN Convention Article 8 General obligation to cooperate.

2. DoP Article 3. Principle of not causing significant damage, similar to UN Convention Article 7 Obligation not to cause significant harm.

3. DoP Article 4. Principle of fair and appropriate use, similar to UN Convention Article 5 Equitable and reasonable utilization and participation – To ensure fair and appropriate use, the three countries will take into consideration all guiding elements mentioned below, similar to UN Convention Article 6 Factors relevant to equitable and reasonable utilization.

4. DoP Article 7. The principle of exchange of information and data, similar to UN Convention Article 9 Regular exchange of data and information.

5. DoP Article 10. The principle of the peaceful settlement of disputes, similar to UN Convention Article 17 Consultations and negotiations concerning planned measures and UN Convention Article 33 Settlement of disputes.

The above five items represent uncanny similarities of the core provisions in both the Declaration of Principles (DoP) and the 1997 United Nations Convention on the Nonnavigational Uses of International Watercourses. These similarities in such significant areas of controversies ought to reassure skeptic Ethiopians to have some faith in the process of negotiation of a comprehensive series of agreements between the governments of Ethiopia, Egypt, and Sudan. I suggest for our benefit and sanity to think carefully before jumping into making statements just based on political personal agendas or hate of a group. Far from such group, the patriotic and often lucid advocate for good governance, Aklog Birara, seems to have a deeply felt skepticism on the possibility that Egypt will take advantage of the situation by interpreting the provisions of the DoP in a manner that will support its position of exclusive use of the waters of the Nile as it has done for centuries, and thereby reading in the text of the DoP all kinds of imaginary monsters lurking behind vague provisions/articles to bounce on poor and innocent Ethiopia. I am amazed how Aklog would reach such concrete negative conclusions on the DoP when he has read the very Convention that is the basis for most of the provisions of the DoP as I have shown above. He pointed out also how the panel of experts called Group of the Nile Basin (GNB) from Egypt could be used to subvert and undermine the Sovereignty of Ethiopia. I understand the concern of Aklog for I too never trusted international experts of any kind on a crucial life and death decision involving a sovereign nation; however, I believe that is of second-tier issue and there will be adequate mechanism to confine the scope of the decisions of such outside panel of experts.

I am convinced to give the benefit of doubt to our negotiators and the leadership behind all these effort with national agenda of good will rather than cut them down with sharp razor of political ambition and hunger for power. The DoP is no doubt a “Framework Agreement” than an international multilateral treaty. For that treaty to materialize, we may have to wait may be prompt the future of our country as events unfold on the ground while finishing the building of the Great Ethiopia Renaissance Dam. Key words: “finishing the building” of the Dam.

1. Problems of Layman’s legalese

When I read absolutist comments like the ones I mentioned above that assert in so many ways that Ethiopia has lost or is losing its sovereignty over its resources due to the signing of the DoP, I am concerned how anything could be done in Ethiopia at all. Such views tell me how one can easily lose sight of the way the world functions, that we pay no attention to the fact that nations, people, even individuals are tied together by complex man-made and natural systems and structures, such as conventions, economies, trade, travel, breeding, et cetera. No country is an island that is simply surviving on its own and on its own absolute terms. Even the United States, the richest and most powerful nation on earth, is tied down to great responsibilities and restraints to a great extent by such complex structures of conventions, law regimes, customs and norms, comparative advantages, history et cetera.

I have read a number of comments including the one by the Scholars that seem in panic mode that Ethiopia lost its sovereign power over its resource by agreeing to the DoP. As I said earlier, the DoP did not create and allocate any form of legally binding rights and duties at this stage to any of the signatory states of the DoP. For example, the Scholars wrote the following that can easily confuse readers whether there is room at all for the anticipated and fully expected negotiations: “In fact, it is not clear what Ethiopia is getting out of this agreement other than allaying Egypt’s official opposition to the dam. Indeed, Egypt appears to have succeeded in forcing Ethiopia to perform near impossible tasks as any perceived negligence or underperformance can serve as a ground for declaration of dispute. No free nation should be submitted into such a contract voluntarily.”

To begin with, there is no “contract” but only a declaration of principles to be used as guide in a future negotiation. And no contract is valid if entered under duress, anyways.  People should be really careful with their diction when they write incomprehensible statements like the one above that says absolutely nothing based on a fair reading of the DoP. Thus, this type of approach where individuals or groups write and argue as if there is already a treaty is premature and polarizes and undermines the future negotiations in tackling the serious problems that need be ironed out properly and a corresponding legal instrument is drawn. This is the beginning of a truly complex and difficult negotiations.

1. Sovereignty and National Security

Ethiopia must look at the situation of this “agreement” by looking at the half full rather than the half empty glass, to use a crude analogy.  We live in an ever interdependent World of numerous nation-states. And each maximizing its advantages and seeking more—thus the sources of conflicts. Here is where statesmanship, support by citizens, creative outside-of-the-box thinking et cetera matters. Simply screaming or repeating “I am Sovereign” will end up becoming a kind of mantra without existential life-impact on the people of Ethiopia or on the people of Egypt and Sudan.

The confusion between “property” and “sovereignty” seems to persist in the minds of some individuals who are posting responses to the comments of the individuals and groups I mentioned. Let me be absolutely clear here that Sovereignty is not a concept that is born out of United Nations General Assembly Resolutions, Conventions, Covenants, or Multi-state treaties; rather “Sovereignty” is well established political and legal concept in customary international law.  Wherever we are finding the term “sovereignty” used in conventions, covenants, multi-state treaties et cetera it can be considered as evidentiary, and strictly speaking such instruments are not sources of Sovereignty. I can understand the mix-up. Even those well versed in international law do falter at times in trying to figure out the demarcation where Sovereignty encompasses and where individual or corporate proprietary interest starts without affecting the basic concept of Sovereignty.

The concept of Sovereignty is presumed in very many United Nations Declarations, Covenants, Conventions, and multi-lateral treaties.  I am stating, as a matter of fact, that the term “sovereignty” is being affirmed or being codified and not being created or sourced in such international instruments. We must appreciate the fact of the process of defining “sovereignty” also limits its scope as well.  For Example, the ICCPR Article 47 is not a provision dealing with allocation of resources, it simply affirms the sovereign rights of States in exploiting their resources. Some have raised arguments to draw some kind of parameter (limitation) on the concept of sovereignty by claiming that ICCPR dealt with only shared resources and not all resources. There is not a single authoritative writing on that point. In fact, the legislative history as well as formal reservations and declarations of State Governments on record deposited with the United Nations Secretariat did not mention in any of such international public instruments anything of “shared resources.”

1. Patriotism is Laudable

I acknowledge the fact that our leaders, past and present, with the best of intentions sometimes might have made wrong decisions that might result in disastrous consequences in years to come. The most recent was committed by Meles Zenawi in signing up the Algiers Agreement of 2000 preempting and reviving long dead colonial period Treaties and convention thereby resulting in Ethiopia’s loss of its coastal territories and territorial waters historic claims of Sovereignty. Failure to discuss such poor judgments of our leaders is no less problematic than the original errors. For example, we are deliberately avoiding even an oblique discussion of the 1902 Treaty entered between Emperor Menilik II and Great Britain that both Egypt and Sudan claim the Treaty rights therein as successor states wherein Menilik II had agreed not to construct dams on the Blue Nile, the Atbara/Sobat, and Lake Tana that would “arrest” the flow of their waters:  Art. III – His Majesty the Emperor Menelek II, King of Kings of Ethiopia, engages  himself towards the Government of His Britannic Majesty not to construct, or allow to be constructed, any work across the Blue Nile, Lake Tsana, or the Sobat which would arrest the flow of their waters into the Nile except in agreement with His Britannic Majesty’s Government [and the Government of the Soudan.] [Note that the Amharic version has no reference to ”the Government of the Soudan.”]

The fact of the matter was that Menilik II was threatened with an imminent invasion by Britain unless he signed such a Treaty, and within such confined atmosphere he used language to protect Ethiopia’s interest as best he could and succeeded to some extent too. The Treaty does not forbid construction as long as there is flow of water. Of course, the validity of such a colonial period treaty is questionable for obvious reasons of the fact that it is violently constituted. However, one must not justify using the argument of “colonial treaty” the independent actions of Ethiopian Emperors who dealt with colonial powers the same way as those leaders of colonized nations who sign agreements under full control of the colonial powers. The fact that Ethiopia was not a colony of Britain or of anybody else, must weigh in our comments. True, the 1902 Treaty was a treaty between two independent sovereign States but with enormously unequal military and economic power. [See Edward Ullendorff, “The Anglo-Ethiopian Treaty of 1902,” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, Vol 30, pages 641-654, 1967.]

A more enlightened interpretation of that Treaty holds that Ethiopia can build dams as long as Ethiopia does not “arrest” [“completely block,” in the Amharic version] the flow of the waters of the Blue Nile, or that of Lake Tana. There are other problems with that treaty due to challenges whether the treaty was properly ratified in Britain and a challenge as to the status of Sudan as a successor state. Nevertheless, the construction of the GERD seems to be mindful of such understanding of our past Emperor’s decision to sign the 1902 Treaty.

• The Experience of other States

Ethiopia is not the only state with riparian state controversies. The number of international treaties governing or regulating the use of great rivers like the Nile River, the Euphrates River, the Rhine River, the Mekong River, the Ganges River et cetera are in abundance and the literature can be easily accessed by anyone willing to do the research and bear the reading of such painfully boring legal documents. I can attest to that tedious process because I have studied a number of such international agreements, treaties, and conventions on cross-border rivers and lakes shared by several nations. This would include also international dams that are shared by several nations.

Although there have been thousands of conflicting claims on sharing the waters of international rivers and dams built thereon, there was only  one case that the International Court of Justice (ICJ) considered and entered judgment on, in its almost seventy years of life. [GabCikovo-Nagymaros Project (HungarylSlovakia), Judgment, 1. C. J. Reports 1997, p. 7] It is quite puzzling that there were not that many cases decided by the ICJ. One plausible explanation could be the element of time, such conflicts when they flare-up quickly escalate to deadly confrontations of states facing other states with military might, leaves no time for courts. Thus a number of all-out wars were averted through the mediation of third countries. For example, a serious conflict between Syria and Iraq erupted in 1975 due to the building of Tabqa Dam by Syria that interfered with the flow of the waters of the Euphrates River into Iraq and it was Saudi Arabia’s mediation that averted a sure war..

Itaipu Dam in South America is the largest gravity dam in the world until recently. It has some of the legal issues and concerns that my fellow Ethiopians raise in their comments and essays concerning the GERD, a dam that is also a gravity dam. I do not know how far the Ethiopian officials and their experts have studied this particular Dam, a dam that seems to be a useful guide to deal with similar issues of allocation of power, management of the flow of  the water of the Blue Nile, and the different claims of contentious riparian states. The Itaipu Dam is built across the Parana River on Paraguay-Brazil borders; it was the world’s largest hydropower producing dam until China’s Three Gorges Dam over took it by 2007. Argentina is also an interested party because it is a down-stream riparian State and concerned of flooding if the water of that Dam was released or the Dam overflows.

1. President El-Sisi Addressed the Ethiopian Parliament I heard President El-Sisi’s speech addressing the Ethiopian Parliament with great hope and anticipation. I heard him with the simultaneous translation of his speech into Amharic—probably the most authentic before it is reconstructed to reflect the special interests of diverse groups. I am more than satisfied in the content of his speech and even more watching on video his genuine reaction to the way the Ethiopian Parliamentarians received him. I admit that I liked el-Sisi from the day he toppled the terrorist Mohammad Morsi and his fanatical Muslim Brotherhood who spread havoc in the Christian community and young liberals in the short time they were in power.

I liked his speech for concrete reasons, though I was already biased in his favor because of his willingness to go to war defending a tiny Egyptian minority of Coptic Christians who were murdered in Libya. After recanting the intimate relationship the Egyptian People have with the Nile River from ancient time to date, he concluded his speech by pointing out clearly that the past should not confine us from moving to a future of wider horizon. Throughout his speech he repeatedly referenced that the people of Egypt and Ethiopia are tied by a long history as brothers. He reminded his audience that Egypt and Ethiopia were the founding members of the OAU, and recently Egypt was one of the countries who championed the move to keep the OAU/AU headquartered in Addis Ababa.

I believe Ethiopian leaders have in el-Sisi a partner that they can work with in promoting peace, prosperity, national security, and lasting friendly relations in the region. This a practical

man a soldier by training who appreciates the consequences of war and will not go to battle like some terrorist leader at a drop of a hat.

1. No Claw-back Provisions

I did not find what can be truly characterized as a claw-back provision in either the DoP or in the speech of el-Sisi addressing the Ethiopian Parliament. I am truly impressed with el-Sisi. I imagine Egypt with Morsi and shudder, and thinking of the type of difficulties we would be facing right now. El-Sisi in no uncertain terms stated in concluding his speech after emphasizing the historic role of the Nile River in the life of the People of Egypt that he was moving into a wider horizon and to be being confined by past history.   The most difficult to comprehend is the function of Article 5: On the principle of the dam’s storage reservoir first filling, and dam operation policies. What they are exactly after is very helpful to Ethiopia. It cannot be a claw back provision. It allows Ethiopia to make the final decision whether to accept/apply the recommendations of the international technical experts committee. Here is the full text: “Article 5: – To apply the recommendations of the international technical experts committee and the results of the final report of the Tripartite National Technical Committee during different stages of the dam project. – The three countries should cooperate to use the final findings in the studies recommended by the Tripartite National Technical Committee and international technical experts in order to reach:

1. An agreement on the guidelines for different scenarios of the first filling of the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam reservoir in parallel with the construction of the dam.
2. An agreement on the guidelines and annual operation policies of the Renaissance Dam, which the owners can adjust from time to time.
3. To inform downstream countries, Egypt and Sudan, on any urgent circumstances that would call for a change in the operations of the dam, in order to ensure coordination with downstream countries’ water reservoirs. – Accordingly, the three countries are to establish a proper mechanism through their ministries of water and irrigation. – The timeframe for such points mentioned above is 15 months from the start of preparing two studies about the dam by the international technical committee.”

1. The Duty to Negotiate

The only serious obligation that I can imagine that maybe derived from the DoP and a cause for further legal process is the “duty to negotiate.” I considered the possibility of forced negotiation as one possible obligation based on the DoP. After a discussion with Prof Alemante Gebre Selassie who indicated to me that we should consider that concept on its own rather than think of the concept as simply the inner working of the good-faith aspect of any agreement. That was a good call. The duty to negotiate is implicit in any declaration of principles in anticipation of future negotiations.

The concept of “the duty to negotiate” has evolved from the Civil Law countries dealing with contract law and extended to cover some aspect private international law. It has managed to creep into the Common Law countries jurisprudence. In cases of international law, “the duty to negotiate” is primarily used to pressure national governments in the international environmental conventions, which of course includes healthy lives of rivers and dams et cetera. I believe one

important concern that I would like the Scholars and others focus their expertise is on the concept of the “duty to negotiate” that also invites concepts of “good faith” and “fair dealing.” The more interesting question ultimately as I stated above is whether the DoP creates a “duty to negotiate” between Ethiopia, Egypt, and Sudan.

1. Serious Error that must be Rectified

Ethiopian negotiators as well as the leadership of Ethiopia failed to recognize the value of having at the very least one other Partner in the negotiation as well as in the sharing of responsibilities from source countries such as Uganda and/or Kenya. Three members to a Group has inherent weakness for destabilization is inherent. At the worst one should aim at a stalemate, and that is possible only with four members than three. It also seems that the Ethiopian Government has abandoned long standing supporters in challenging Egypt and Sudan’s monopolistic claim as historic right to all of the waters of the Nile River. This form of international relations of going after one’s self interest and abandoning comrades who fought along leaves bad diplomatic aftertest and would potentially destroy any future cooperation.

One of the attributes of greatness of Emperor Haile Selassie was his choice of partners when he identified newly independent African Nations just coming out of colonialism as the right brother and sister nations that Ethiopia can form solidarity with to stand against historic enemies as well as newly minted ones. Though I had criticized him about his shift of focus from Israel to Arab countries, I always thought of his African union effort greatly admirable. I was very impressed during the transition period of 1991-1993 how steadfastly African states except those in league of the hostile Arab States such as Egypt, Sudan, and Somalia, stood for the territorial integrity of Ethiopia against Hell-bent effort of Meles Zenawi and his supporters in the EPRDF who worked over-time to the cession of Eritrea from Ethiopia, thereby leaving Ethiopia land locked and at the mercy of tiny Djibouti as its only viable outlet to the rest of the world to date.

The Ethiopian government must find a way to bring back such loyal fellow African riparian States of the Nile River in the actual negotiation. I see no provision in the DoP that forbids expanding the number of participatory states in the final processes of negotiations.  .      Conclusion The fact is we did not have a Third World War, though at times it seems we are engaged in one (the never ending Middle East crisis). Even for that conflict solutions are just around the corner, for we are learning to love others by loving properly ourselves first. This optimism is not that of a jaded neophyte, but of a person that had studied the problems surrounding the Blue Nile River and its basin for a lifetime. One must have not only basic understanding of the international law regime dealing with cross-border rivers and their non-navigational use, but also compassion.

I believe the DoP signifies a major paradigm shift. The process must have involved the most difficult piece of negotiation and mature handling of the questions as embedded as the major principles based on “causing no significant harm” (Article 3) and the principle of “fair and appropriate use” with nine guiding principles (Article 4). One must applaud such great strides away from the antiquated claim of “historical use” advocated by Egypt and its junior partner Sudan for almost a  century based on some colonial period treaties of 1929 and 1959  that did not include Ethiopia as a participant. Now Ethiopia is the Key holder, and supreme Spigot master, as it should be, for 90% of the Water of the Nile is from Ethiopia’s Abaye (Blue Nile) basin. Now I pray that all leaders of Ethiopia, Egypt, and Sudan grow further in wisdom and familial love and understanding. To be a warrior requires at the minimum some courage and a shield and a sword/spear, but to be a statesman requires a lifetime of wisdom and love of humankind.

Tecola W Hagos 
Washington DC
April 1, 2015

The post WISDOM PRECEDES BRUTAL FORCE: EGYPT AND TRUMP/Kushner AGAINST ANCIENT ETHIOPIA? appeared first on Ethiopian Registrar News/Breaking News/Your right to know!.

by Jeremy Harris

(KUTV) – The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is in the process of repatriating thousands of missionaries as a result of the Coronavirus pandemic.

Several hundred missionaries who were in Africa returned to the United States on two chartered Ethiopian Airlines flights to Salt Lake City Tuesday and Wednesday, church officials confirmed to 2News.

Both planes are scheduled to depart Utah and return to Africa in the next 24 hours.

The Church has ordered missionaries from around the globe to return to their home countries – some will be reassigned to different areas and others will be released from missionary service early.

Graphic of mission reassignments from Church Newsroom

Earlier in the week, approximately 1,600 missionaries returned to the United States from the Philippines on charted Delta Airlines flights.

Ethiopian Airlines

Ethiopian Airlines

The post Ethiopian Airlines flights return missionaries from Africa to Utah due to pandemic appeared first on Ethiopian Registrar News/Breaking News/Your right to know!.

By Alemayehu G. Mariam

Ethiopia has risen to meet the challenge and become Africa’s first responder in the war on COVID-19.
Led by H.E. Prime Minister Dr. Abiy Ahmed, Ethiopia is proposing to the G-20 (20 of the largest economies in the world) a three-pronged approach to deal with the potentially (and in the views of most experts highly likely) devastating effects of the coronavirus crises on African economies and societies.

In the short-term, the proposal is to get as many test kits, masks and protective clothing as possible for all of Africa as part of a robust and aggressive effort to prevent the spread of the virus.

In the long-term, the aim is to get Africa increased budget support, enhanced balance of payment support and debt relief for all of Africa through G-20 financial packages.

It is a bold, timely, forward-looking and manifestly practical proposal.

Ethiopia’s short-term strategy to deal with the COVID-19 crises

On March 15, 2020 H.E. Prime Minster Dr. Abiy Ahmed talked to Jack Ma, Executive Chairman of Alibaba Group to solicit donations of critical medical supplies in anticipation of the COVID-19 invasion of Africa.

Their conversation produced a commitment by the Jack Ma Foundation to deliver vitally needed medical supplies for distribution throughout Africa.

By March 22, Ethiopian Airlines had airlifted from China “5.4 million face masks, kits for 1.08 million detection tests, 40,000 sets of protective clothing and 60,000 sets of protective face shields.”

Each of the continent’s 54 nations will receive 20,000 testing kits, 100,000 masks and 1,000 protective suits in the fight to contain the spread of the virus.

By March 23, Ethiopian Airlines was delivering the supplies to Eritrea, Djibouti, Egypt and Sudan.

Ethiopian Airlines is delivering the supplies at one of its most challenging financial moments in its corporate history. It is absorbing the entire cost of this mercy mission.

Watch video here.

I keep asking myself, “How could millions of face masks, detection tests and protective clothing be delivered to critically affected African countries in less than a week from start to finish?”

I believe there are great lessons in leadership to be learned from what PM Abiy and Jack Ma were able to accomplish with lightning speed.

1. African leaders need to think outside the box when their countries are facing existential threats.

PM Abiy did not go to the traditional international aid agencies snarled in bureaucratic red tape to ask for lightning fast emergency assistance. He thought outside the box to save Africa and Ethiopia. He picked up the phone and called his friend Jack Ma to get immediate action.

Would he have gotten the same response if he had called the U.S. Secretary of State or the British Foreign Secretary or someone at the European Union’s External Action Service? I doubt it.

Let’s face it and be honest. How many in the Trump administration would be interested in saving 54 “shit hole countries” in Africa by airlifting millions of masks, tests and protective clothing? Trump talks about coronavirus being under control and life getting back to usual by April 12 as the number of infections and deaths soar.  In just two weeks, the U.S. has nearly 13 percent of the global infections!

I wish I was the fly on the wall listening to PM Abiy and Jack Ma talking about emergency delivery of medical supplies.

PM Abiy: “Listen Jack. Hear me good. Africa is facing a threat like no other. COVID-19 could devastate the continent in no time. I need your help to defend all Africa before the invisible Army of COVID-19 slips through our borders. I need your help NOW, not tomorrow, not next week.”

Jack Ma: “Not a problem. When can you send your plane to pick up the supplies?”

PM Abiy: “How about tomorrow?

Jack Ma: “Done!”

PM Abiy: “Thanks, Jack.”

How else can one explain the breakneck speed with which supplies were delivered?

African leaders need to learn to make friends not only with national leaders but also key global leaders of industry and foundations. The world has changed. African leaders must wake up and adapt. Make friends with the likes of Jack Ma, Bill Gates and the other Foundation leaders. What has been learned today is that when the going gets tough, the likes of Jack Ma will get Africans through the tough times faster and in a more timely manner than any government can.

It is like the old song, “I am gonna make it with a little help from my friends.”

2. PM Abiy demonstrated how Medemer philosophy can bring all Africans together against a common enemy.

What amazed me the most is the fact that PM Abiy did not call Jack Ma to ask him for medical supplies for Ethiopia only. I brood over this moral question as I write this piece: Would I even consider turning over a small batch of the medical supplies Jack Ma sent over to my other African brothers and sisters or will I keep it all for my Ethiopian brothers and sisters?

To be perfectly honest, I think I would fail that moral test miserably.

I will be honest. If it were up to me, I would call up Jack and say, “Help me save my people.” My thinking would probably be, “Let the other African leaders fend for themselves. I am responsible only for my own people.”

PM Abiy manifestly believes saving Ethiopia alone from COVID-19 would not be possible. COVID-19 knows no borders. There is no wall anyone can build around Ethiopia to keep out the Coronavirus Army. No amount of medical supplies could save Ethiopia alone.

I realized why PM Abiy wanted an African Maginot Line, not an Ethiopian one, to keep out the Coronavirus Army.

In his Nobel lecture, PM Abiy said:

Growing up, my parents instilled in me and my siblings, an abiding faith in humanity. Medemer resonates with the proverb, “I am my brother’s keeper. I am my sister’s keeper.” [There is] a saying shared in many African languages, which means, “For you to have a peaceful night, your neighbor shall have a peaceful night as well.”

When PM Abiy asked Jack Ma for help, he understood the only way we can fight and win against the Coronavirus Army is if we adopt the motto, “Yes, I am my African brothers’ and sisters’ keeper.”

For Ethiopia to be defended from the curse of COVID-19, all of Africa must be defended from COVID-19. Indeed, the whole human race.

That is the quintessence of Medemer for me in the war against COVID-19: ONE Ethiopia for ALL Africa. ALL of Africa for ONE Ethiopia.

I am so proud of PM Abiy. Ethiopians are blessed to have a leader who looks out not only for Ethiopia but all of Africa.

3. In fighting COVID-19, we need African leaders that see Africa not as 54 states but as ONE continent with 54 states.

We need African leaders who see Africa’s fate and destiny in the same way Dr. Martin Luther King saw the destiny of humanity:

In a real sense all life is inter-related. All men are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly. I can never be what I ought to be until you are what you ought to be, and you can never be what you ought to be until I am what I ought to be…

In a real sense, All Africans are interrelated. Whatever affects Africa will inevitably affect Ethiopia.

Whatever affects Ethiopia will inevitably affect Africa.

Ethiopia and Africa, Africa and Ethiopia are tied in a single garment of destiny. They will sink or float together.

It reminds me of John Donne’s poem, “No Man is an Island.”

I say, no African country is an island.

Paraphrasing Donne’s poem:

No African country is an island entire of itself; every country
is a piece of the continent, a part of the main;
if a country be washed away by the sea, Africa  
is the less, as well as if a promontory were, as
well as any manner of thy friends or of thine
own were; any man’s death in Africa diminishes me,
because I am involved in mankind in Africa.
And therefore never send to know for whom
the coronavirus bell tolls; it tolls for thee.

4. A leader with strategic thinking skills could anticipate emerging problems and act proactively and preventively 

There is an old saying, “A stitch in time saves nine.” The metaphor is intended to suggest it is better to act or deal with problems immediately, because if you wait and deal with them later, things will get worse and the problems will take longer to deal with.

What PM Abiy and Jack Ma tried to do was nip the spread of the COVID-19 threat in the bud, in its infancy, before the full invasion, not sit around in Lala Land saying, “It’s all under control.”

Although Africa has 1.2 billion people, as of this writing 46 African states have reported a total of 3,426 positive cases and 94 deaths, according to the Africa Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

We have over 320 million people in America.

“My president” Donald Trump, who lives at the White House in Washington, D.C. when he is not on exoplanet Gliese 581c, says “it is all under control and all will be back to business as usual by April 12.”

As of this writing (today), as Trump dithers and blathers about a coronavirus under control, the U.S. has 141,732 coronavirus cases and 2,471 deaths.

It is sad that Trump is more interested in saving his reelection chances than American lives. C’est la vie!

Never in my wildest imagination would I have thought Ethiopia will teach a lesson to America in anything, least of all control of a global epidemic.

The great Bob Dylan was right in his song, “The Times they are A-changin.’

The curse it is cast/The slow one now
Will later be fast/ As the present now
Will later be past/ The order is rapidly fadin’
And the first one now will later be last
For the times they are a-changin’

The Coronavirus curse is cast.

Ethiopia always the slow one, always the last one, is today the first one, the first responder, the fastest one in Africa to lead the life and death struggle  in the war against coronavirus!

5. Ethiopian Airlines, the New Spirit of Africa, “Africa’s Air Force in the War on Coronavirus”, spreads its wings to protect the continent.

I am so proud of Ethiopian Airlines, its leadership, the pilots, mechanics and cabin crew. They are the best. Skytrax 2019 World Airlines Awards says Ethiopian Airlines is the “Best Airline in Africa” for the third consecutive year.

Ethiopian Airlines is an independent corporation that does not receive a penny from the government budget.

I have met and discussed the glorious history and future prospects of the airline with CEO Tewolde Gebre Mariam (no relation) when I visited Ethiopia in February. A couple of weeks ago, Ethiopian Airlines sent an all-female crew to Washington, D.C. on “Women’s Day”. I wrote a piece in celebration of that extraordinary event which I hope to share soon.

What is so amazing to me is the fact that Ethiopian Airlines undertook the task of distributing the medical supplies of all African countries with out asking a penny in return from any African country. These are extremely hard times for the airlines industry globally and Ethiopian is no exception. But Ethiopian Airlines was more interested in saving human lives than saving its bottom line. I am so proud of them!

I take my hat off to Ethiopian Airlines!

Ethiopia’s long-term strategy to deal with the economic and social fallout of the COVID-19 crises

On March 24, 2020, PM Abiy proposed a three-point plan to the G-20 to proactively deal with the inevitable the economic and social fallout of the coronavirus crises in Africa.

The first prong of the plan is an “Africa Global COVID-19 Emergency Financing Package.” This proposal would tackle head on the crushing USD 44 billion interest payment African countries are carrying today on their outstanding loans, which exceeds the continental budget for all health care expenses. The proposed financial relief plan would include USD 150 billion for increased budgetary support from the World Bank and balance of support payments from the International Monetary Fund. It would also require trade financing, working capital support, etc. from the International Finance Corporation.

The second prong consists of a Global Health Emergency Package which would engage the World Health Organization in strengthening the public health sector in Africa by increasing emergency preparedness and financing of health equipment purchases by the Global Fund for AIDS, TB and malaria.

The third prong proposes writing off of all interest payment to government loans, partial debt write-off for low-income countries and conversion of the remaining debt into long term low interest loans with 10 years grace period before payment. Moreover, all debt repayments will be limited to 10% of the value of exports.

Africa’s #2 enemy today, after coronavirus, is crushing foreign debt

The total amount of external debt for the continent is estimated at USD $417bn.

Nearly one-half of all sub-Saharan African countries are said to be on the verge of insolvency unable to service their debts and with little change of paying it all.

The World Bank has classified 18 African countries as at high risk of debt distress, where debt-to-GDP ratios surpass 50%.

PM Abiy’s three-point plan is both a wake up call for all African countries of an impending doom catalyzed by the coronavirus crises and a clarion call to the G-20 that without their help 1.2 billion people will likely face death, destruction and hardship of unimaginable magnitude.

The handwriting is on the wall.

African leaders should rally behind PM Abiy and aggressively push the three-point plan before the G-20.

The alternative is to watch Africa careening towards the cliff like a runaway train.

In May 2018, I wrote a prophetic commentary entitled, “Ethiopia Shall Rise!” noting, “A new day is dawning over the horizon and Ethiopia is rising. Let us all rise and shine in the Land of 13-Months of Sunshine.”

I am so proud Ethiopia is rising and shining over all of Africa by becoming the first responder when Africa is about to go into triage.

I am so proud Ethiopia is taking leadership for the continent’s long-term viability by proposing a three-point plan to deal with the inevitable economic and social fallout of the coronavirus crises.

Above all, I am so proud Ethiopia is teaching the world, “I am my brother’s keeper. I am my sister’s keeper. For you to have a peaceful night, your neighbor shall have a peaceful night as well.”

For Ethiopia to win the war against coronavirus, all Africa – indeed the human race —  must win the war against coronavirus.

Thank you, PM Abiy.

Thank you CEO Jack Ma and the Jack Ma Foundation.

Thank you, Ethiopian Airlines, “Africa’s Air Force in the War on Coronavirus”.

The post Ethiopia Becomes Africa’s First Responder in the War on Coronavirus (COVID-19) appeared first on Ethiopian Registrar News/Breaking News/Your right to know!.

By: Zerihun Gudeta Alemu (alemu_zerihun@yahoo.co.uk)
28 March 2020

1. Introduction

Every media outlet we tune into these days is giving coverage to the coronavirus pandemic. This is good. It helps broaden peoples’ awareness of the virus. One could argue that this is not enough though. Existing efforts must be revamped and where possible new alternative information diffusion methodologies explored. There are millions more out residing in far distant places (physical and digital media-wise) with little or no information about the virus. Further, much is desired from the media houses (mainstream and social) to improve on the content of the information they are disseminating. At times it is disappointing to see that they are excessively dwelling on information that could be accessed cheaply from a number of dedicated media websites. I think more time should be devoted to the dissemination of knowledge than discussions about confirmed cases, new infections, number of deaths, etc. (Even my eight year old son Eebbaa could access this online).

The menace of the virus is not confined to peoples’ health alone. It is multidimensional (social, cultural, political, and economic to mention a few). It is scary to realize that its economic contagion effect is spreading as fast as the spread of the virus. I expect the same is true with other aspects of social life per se. They may seem less important in the first phase of the pandemic because protecting lives comes first. However, failure to appreciate and keep abreast of developments in other dimensions could cost us dearly now and in the aftermath of the pandemic. I wish experts in these fields also share their perspectives. Here, I attempt to make my two cents contribution on what I think would be the possible economic impact of the virus and proffer some suggestions (drawing from experiences elsewhere) that may be helpful to minimize the economic impacts of the pandemic.

So far, affected countries have implemented various types of measures to combat the spread of the virus. Some have already become household names – ‘social distancing, ‘lockdowns’, shutdowns, etc. In Ethiopia, ‘social distancing’ is the one that is currently being promoted. One exception is in the Tigray region; it is relatively a bit ahead of the curve. It imposed a 15-day region-wide state of emergency on the 26th of March. It combines social distancing with restrictions on the intra-state movement of people. In general, judging by its implementation, people are questioning if a voluntary social distancing approach would work for Ethiopia on sociocultural grounds. I think, it is an issue better left to the experts in the field for in-depth insight. Nevertheless, follow-up action is needed (if not already loading). As is done elsewhere, the government could deploy law enforcement agencies to enhance the effectiveness of social distancing. Or it could be elevated to the next higher relatively stringent containment measure – a ban on intrastate and interstate movement of people and goods to align it with that of the region of Tigray or maybe something even higher.

2. Economic Impacts

The focus of economists on the matter has evolved. If my memory serves me right, in February and the better part of March, when the financial contagion effect of the virus became visible (e.g. the security markets tumbled globally), the priority in unaffected economies was protecting sectors exposed to developments in China and other affected countries (e.g. trade, finance, and tourism relations). As a result, more or less, a sector-driven approach was promoted to insulate these sectors from external shocks. Fast forward to mid-March, when the virus spread to almost all countries and country-specific measures to contain the virus begun to emerge, the focus broadened. Now, it is no longer about insulating economies to external shocks. It is rather about saving economies from collapsing.

In response to the above-mentioned developments, policy discussions morphed to what is now devising local and global response actions to support economic stimulus packages suited to needy countries’ circumstances. The depth and breadth of the stimulus package have varied from country to country depending on their respective policy spaces. In general, they aimed, in a very simplified jargon of economists, at minimizing the direct effect of the virus on the foundations of economic activities i.e. production, distribution and consumption. This is to ensure that the damages to these activities do not translate into massive job, income and consumption losses (indirect effects). This entails keeping businesses afloat and protecting the disposable income of vulnerable households.

In the context of Ethiopia, according to my reading, the focus so far has been more on administrative measures to contain the spread of the virus and less on economic policy interventions. This is understandable. The country does not have sufficient policy buffer to fall back on to which it can deploy to mitigate impacts.

I think while waiting for assistance from the global community, candid discussions must be in order involving the stakeholders – the government, the private sector, think-tank groups and others- to come up with appropriate/feasible local response actions. Lessons learned from the experiences of other affected countries point to the application of various types of interventions. They are mentioned in the paragraphs that follow. Where applicable, views are expressed if it is possible to localize the said interventions considering Ethiopia’s current economic situations.

On the fiscal policy front, broadly speaking, a wide range of fiscal policy measures have been implemented by affected countries. They included wage subsidies, tax relief, cash transfers, income support to laid-off workers, the extension of tax deadlines, extension of loan maturity, etc. Ethiopia does not have the luxury of such choices for the simple reason that it does not have a fiscal buffer. The economic stabilization package unveiled on the 27th of March is in support of this. It lacks depth and coverage compared with what we have seen from other countries with similar macroeconomic fundamentals and exposure to the pandemic.

There are only two fiscal policy measures in the stabilization package. The first relates to direct support to the health sector. It provided tax exemptions for the importation of equipment and material used in the containment of the virus. The second required the Revenue Authority to expedite tax refunds. I was expecting to see together with the second instruction to the Ministry of Finance to expedite the settlement of pending bills owed to the private contractors for supplying goods and services to the government. Maybe it is less of a concern in Ethiopia?

Quick processing of company tax refunds and payment of pending bills are some of the low hanging fruits that most low-income countries have considered to improve cash flows of businesses. Pending bills are becoming important contributors to growth in domestic debt arrears in many of the highly indebted countries. Maybe this is because most policy dialogues on debt management issues have so far focused on external than domestic debt. Some African countries are seeking assistance from the International Financial Institutions (IFS), as part of the emergency assistance package, to pay tax refunds and pending bills. Maybe this is an avenue the authorities could explore to free up resources for use elsewhere.

Another important area to explore is to reprioritize fiscal expenditures (especially capital expenditure) to free up resources to support the stimulus package. I take cognizant of the fact that Ethiopia is under the IMF/WB program. Ethiopia should learn from other countries that are in the IMF/WB program as Ethiopia but managed to quickly put together a raft of fiscal stimulus measures. Some did it by juggling expenditure items around. Therefore, while waiting for financial inflows from the international community, which may take time and may not be as fungible as one might expect, Ethiopia should initiate (if not done already) negotiation with the lenders to delay some of the agreed reform actions that might not be attained (anyway) if current situations persist. In the meantime, it could embark on a fiscal expenditure implementation audit to identify uncommitted/underutilized funds lying around that could be diverted to the fiscal stimulus package.

Yet another area to explore to create fiscal space is to take advantage of the plunge in the international price of crude oil. It fell from USD60 a barrel three months ago to about USD22 today, a 47 percent decline. This is equivalent to the oil import bill saving of not less than USD1.3 billion. I think, Ethiopia should not allow a 100 percent pass-through of this windfall gain to the consumer. It should rather see to it that a significant percentage of the gain finds its way to boost government revenue so that it could be accessed if need be to support the economic stimulus package.

On the monetary policy front, most central banks in affected countries, with sufficient monetary policy spaces, have responded with accommodative monetary policies. They lowered the cost of borrowing for MSMEs (e.g. by lowering policy rates) and/or injected liquidity into the system (e.g. by lowering cash reserve ratio). We have also seen some central banks taking important preemptive actions. They applied various mechanisms to respond to the possible surge in the demand for credit on the one hand and to address difficult financial conditions on the other. In the case of the former by creating funds dedicated to increasing credit supply to curb the possible credit-crunch dynamics – a situation where banks not availing credit at the same time as the demand for credit increases. In the case of the latter (i.e. difficult financial conditions), they introduced innovative financing mechanisms such as providing credit guarantees to support the cash flow of affected businesses and/or allow needy businesses to refinance/roll over maturing debts.

The odds are stacked against Ethiopia. Inflation is already in double-digit. This is giving the National Bank a limited room to maneuver to introduce an accommodative monetary policy as others did (i.e. policy rate, minimum reserve, and open market operation). Inflation is expected to surge further caused by supply and value chain disruptions. Furthermore, liquidity in the banking system is already in a precarious state. Analysis points to the fact that it is a cumulative effect of neglect by the NBE of its prudential guidelines.

The economic stabilization package talks about availing Birr 15 billion liquidity for the private banks to provide debt relief and to support customers in need. For the records, this is not the first time National Bank injected liquidity into the system. The last time it did the same was a few months ago. At the time, it was meant to bail out banks failing to meet the 15 percent liquidity ratio threshold. Maybe it has a wrong signaling effect. It might suggest that if situations don’t improve or things get rough in the sector, the NBE would take the unconventional monetary policy route. This is the least the market needs during such a difficult time. The National Bank must give utmost priority to keeping the banking industry in shape. Otherwise, with liquidity challenges looming and commercial banks struggling to stand on their own feet, additional liquidity injections alone would not achieve the intended targets.

3. Conclusion

In summary, minimizing the economic contagion effect of the pandemic is an area that warrants urgent attention. Unfortunately, Ethiopia lacks the policy spaces needed to organize an effective domestic response action/economic stimulus package to minimize the economic impact of the pandemic. The priority of the stimulus should be to ensure not only that the direct effects of the pandemic on production, distribution and consumption are minimized; but also that they do not translate into significant losses in employment, income and consumption. The intended beneficiaries of such an economic stimulus package must be businesses and vulnerable households. The following are areas that authorities could explore to revamp the government’s economic stabilization package announced on the 27th of March: reprioritize the budget, capitalize on oil price windfall gain, and leverage on funds anticipated to come from international financial institutions and other donors.

So long!

The post The Economic Impact of the Coronavirus on the Ethiopian Economy:  Some Suggestions to Deepen the Economic Stabilization Package appeared first on Ethiopian Registrar News/Breaking News/Your right to know!.

March 30, 2020
By Mahemud Tekuya

The Blue Nile hydropower dam has been constructed in accordance with international legal principles and Ethiopia has the right to make it operational.

In an apparent fit of pique at Ethiopia’s refusal to sign on to its terms, on 28 February the U.S. Treasury Department warned Ethiopia not to start filling and testing the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam without an agreement with Sudan and Egypt

In addition to expressing concerns about dam safety, it said:  “Consistent with the principles set out in the DOP, and in particular the principles of not causing significant harm to downstream countries, final testing and filling should not take place without an agreement.”

But does international law, including the 2015 Declaration of Principles (DoP), require an agreement for filling dams like the GERD? It does not seem so.

Principles

Considering the first filling and testing of the GERD as parts of the construction, Ethiopia has said that it will start filling the dam with or without an agreement. Egypt rejects this, stating that “Ethiopia violates the article No. 5 of …[DoP], which stipulates that all three countries shall reach an agreement on the rules of filling and operating the dam before starting the process of filling the reservoir with water.”

This is a stretch and contravenes the DoP, which does not say that the parties “shall reach on an agreement before” Ethiopia starts filling the dam. Instead, it states that “The three countries, in the spirit of cooperation, will utilize the final outcomes of the joint studies…to agree on guidelines and rules on the first filling of GERD which shall cover all different scenarios, in parallel with the construction of GERD.”

One may dispute Ethiopia’s position and argue that first filling and testing is not part of the construction as striking a deal on the first filling is impossible after filling has begun. But, even assuming for the sake of argument that is valid, Ethiopia can still legally fill the dam without an agreement.

The DoP states only that the three countries will use studies to agree on the first filling and annual operation of the dam. That is why they have been negotiating since 2015. But what if they fail to agree on the studies?  The DoP is silent and did not address this scenario. In other words, nothing in the DoP prohibits Ethiopia from filling and testing the GERD, even if the DoP commitment was to agree on “first filling.”

After the Permanent Court of International Justice (PCIJ) landmark decision on the lotus case in 1927, it has been a longstanding principle of international law that “that which is not prohibited is allowed.”

Indeed, as advocated by proponents of natural law theory, this presumption is reputable if a given action or inaction, regardless of its source (state consent or other norms), is prohibited by international law. As demonstrated below, there is no international law prohibiting Ethiopia from filling the GERD without an agreement.

Precedent

True, under international law, states are required to take all appropriate measures to prevent and mitigate significant transboundary harm to other states. But the nature of the obligation is due diligence which requires states to take only reasonable actions. Due diligence means there is an obligation of conduct, rather than an obligation to take action that guarantees non-harm will result, for instance, by signing a preliminary agreement. This is shown by legal precedents.

In the Lake Lanoux arbitration case between France and Spain, in ruling against Spain’s claim that “the exclusion of the French project required the preliminary agreement of the two Governments and that in the absence of such agreement [France] could not have freedom of action to undertake the works,” the tribunal concluded: “The rule that states may use the hydraulic power of international waterways only if a preliminary agreement between states concerned has been concluded cannot be established as a customary rule or, still less, as a general principle of law.”

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) also confirmed the tribunal’s decision in its 2010 judgment in the Pulp Mills Case between Uruguay and Argentina. In deciding whether Uruguay was entitled to proceed with the construction and commencement of the manufacturing operations on the River Uruguay after having failed to reach an agreement with Argentina, “the court concluded that there was nothing that prevents Uruguay from doing so.” The court explained that there was nothing that alters the rights and obligations of Uruguay, including the right to implement the project as its sole responsibility, since the period for negotiation has expired.

In both cases, the justification behind ruling against the need for preliminary agreement is that a ruling otherwise would hinder the state’s “right to act alone as a consequence of unconditional and discretionary opposition of another state. This is to admit a right of consent or a veto right, which at the discretion of state paralyzes another state’s exercise of territorial competence.”

Therefore, under international law, including the DoP, an agreement is not a precondition and Ethiopia can start filling and testing the GERD as planned without a deal.

Process

But unilateralism does not mean acting irresponsible, let alone illegally. Since the beginning of the GERD project in 2010, Ethiopia has taken various measures to prevent significant harm to the downstream countries, thus meeting its international obligations and showing concern for its neighbors.

Ethiopia conducted transboundary impact studies; initiated a tripartite committee consisting of experts from the three countries, and established an International Panel of Experts (IPoE) comprising ten members, six from the three countries (two from each) and four international experts. Ethiopia also submitted all 153 design and study documents of the GERD to the IPoE.

In June 2013, after a rigorous review of the documents and several site visits, the IPoE release its final report. The report, reaffirming the benefits of the GERD to the three countries, confirmed and “appreciated” that the design and construction process of the dam is in line with “a number of international standards, Codes and Guidelines…” The IPoE also recommended the three countries conduct two studies: one on hydrological modeling and the other on the impact of GERD on Sudan and Egypt.

While international law allows Ethiopia to conduct transboundary impact studies by itself and report the finding to Sudan and Egypt, Ethiopia agreed to joint studies and established a Tripartite National Committee (TNC) as a mechanism to conduct the two studies.

Later, the TNC decided international consultants would carry out the studies, and hired two French firms, BRLi Group and Artelia to carry out the studies. However, when the studies started, Egypt apparently insisted that the baseline data to determine the impact should be its current uses of the Nile waters and even reportedly suggested the exclusion of Sudan from the GERD negotiations.

Practice

After the TNC process ran aground, Ethiopia agreed to establish a new National Independent Scientific Research Group (NISRG) to develop scenarios on the filling and annual operation of GERD. However, instead of refining and agreeing on the work of NISRG, Egypt submitted unacceptable proposals in August 2019 and later internationalized the GERD issue, with the U.S. and World Bank involved in the negotiation as observers.

Many Ethiopian think that Egypt, using the U.S. and the World Bank, wanted to impose unjust colonial treaties on Ethiopia. No doubt that coming to the U.S. was historic wrong on Ethiopia’s part, but the fact that it agreed to the process shows the extent to which Addis Ababa is going to perform its due diligence obligation of preventing significant harm on Egypt and Sudan.

Although a way forward is absent thus far because of Egypt’s insistence to maintain its claimed “historical rights”, Ethiopia is likely to continue to undertake all necessary measures in good faith to prevent significant harm on Egypt and Sudan.

The concern about dam safety can also be addressed under the due diligence obligation detailed above. As noted, under international law, Ethiopia is required to undertake a transboundary impact study and notify the outcome to Sudan and Egypt. But Ethiopia went beyond this and established the IPoE, NTC, and NISRG. The three countries have already recognized and appreciated these measures in the DoP. Since ensuring dam safety is a continuous process, Ethiopia should in good faith continue to take all related measures throughout the lifespan of the GERD.

The post Ethiopia does not need Egypt’s permission to start filling GERD appeared first on Ethiopian Registrar News/Breaking News/Your right to know!.

By Sertse Desta

One can observe that the rate of spread of COVID19 virus in East Asian countries is much lower than the rest of the world, especially the European and US. One might suspect that this is not coincident. We know that there is very low genetic differentiation that ranges only F_ST (fixation index) between 0.002-0.009 among the East Asians (the Han (Chinese), Korean, Japanese) while the smallest differentiation between European and East Asian people scores FST= 0.0838 goes as high as 0.1059 (Wang et al. 2018). i.e., the genetic variation between the East Asians and Europeans is up to over 50 times the variation among the East Asian Major groups (Han (Chinese), Korean, Japanese). The low rate of spread of COVID 19 in east Asian countries, including where the disease started, perhaps is related to the genetic makeup of the people in these countries apart from the mitigation effort. Yet, the unprecedented efforts by the Chinese to bring down the virus after 80,000 cases should not be overlooked. Likewise, I acknowledge the deployment of advanced and intensive actions by Japanese and Korean to contain the virus. My view here is to bring other possibilities to attention based on what I can observe from the trend of data across regions.

Among the Europeans, we see the low death rate in Germany even though the spread is still nearly the same as the other severely hurt ones such as Italy and Spain. This somehow seems connected to the more advanced and well-structured system of Germany, not only the health care system but also many more, including the tradition of Germans exceptionally complying with rules and regulations.  The spread of the disease in North America, particularly in US, looks like what we see in European hot spot nations.  When it comes to genetics, once again, the vast majority of US citizens are of European origin.  Canada is way at a lower rate than its immediate neighbor and with also uncontrolled high population flow between the two.  Interestingly, the British Colombia province of Canada, where a large number of East Asian population in Canada lives, the virus seems spreading very slow relatively compared to the Quebec and Ontario provinces. However, BC was the province with a large number of cases when the virus entered the country.

Here is just to alert people working on this virus for one of the possibilities. East Asians might be inherently resistant to this disease. They might also acquire immunity in some unrecorded infection by the virus in the past. If the virus exists in the region, be it in batts or other animals, people might be exposed to this virus somewhere in the past, and for some reason, the virus might disappear. i.e., the current infection may not be for the first time in a human. Hence, individuals with inherited-acquired immunity from their ancestress might exist in large numbers in those regions (East Asia). There were also some unverified reports claiming Africans more resistant than Chinese. May be true.  Genetically, Africans are more deviant than European from the Chinese and/or East Asians.  But Africans and East Asians can have a similar incidence of the disease in a long history.  Or maybe due to homeoplastic evolutionary incidence.

I am sorry for my too much speculation. But it might be worthy sometimes to think of all the possibilities.

May almighty God have mercy on us and the entire world! Amen!

ቅዱስ እግዚአብሔር ምህረቱን ለዓለም ሁሉ ይላክ! ኢትዮጵያንና ሕዝቧን ይጠብቅ! አሜን!

Thank you!

Wang Y, Lu D, Chung Y-J, Xu S (2018) Genetic structure, divergence and admixture of Han Chinese, Japanese and Korean populations. Hereditas 155:19

The post Are East Asians resistant to COVID19? Is this virus for the first time in humans? appeared first on Ethiopian Registrar News/Breaking News/Your right to know!.

Blast targets Ethiopian peacekeepers part of African Union Mission in Somalia, al-Shabaab claims responsibility

The post 2 Ethiopian soldiers killed in Somalia blast appeared first on Ethiopian Registrar News/Breaking News/Your right to know!.