عربي English Türkçe اردو فارسى
Logo
Latest News
Arab World

Nile Dam Dispute Escalates Ahead of UN Security Council Debate

Ethiopia insists on filling the dam reservoir as a first stage in July without regarding Egypt and Sudan’s objections (AFP)
Ethiopia insists on filling the dam reservoir as a first stage in July without regarding Egypt and Sudan’s objections (AFP)
TT
TT

Nile Dam Dispute Escalates Ahead of UN Security Council Debate

Ethiopia insists on filling the dam reservoir as a first stage in July without regarding Egypt and Sudan’s objections (AFP)
Ethiopia insists on filling the dam reservoir as a first stage in July without regarding Egypt and Sudan’s objections (AFP)

A dispute between Egypt and Ethiopia over the filling and operation of the $4 billion Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD) escalated on Monday.

Cairo threatened “an open and clear procedure,” in case the UN Security Council fails to return Ethiopia to the negotiating table.

Ethiopia, for its part, began filling the dam reservoir unilaterally.

Addis Ababa stressed that “no internal or external force can prevent it from moving on with the filling process early July.”

Egypt referred the issue to the UN Security Council after Egypt, Ethiopia and Sudan failed again last week to reach an agreement on the rules for filling and operating the dam.

Ethiopia insists on filling the dam reservoir as a first stage in July, with about five billion cubic meters, without regard to Egypt and Sudan’s objections.

Egyptian Foreign Minister Sameh Shoukry challenged on Monday Ethiopia to “resume negotiations immediately since it declared abiding by its international obligations not to fill it unilaterally.”

Ethiopian Foreign Minister, for his part, accused Egypt of escaping from negotiations and resorting to the Security Council.

Shoukry affirmed his country has been engaged, in a spirit of good faith, for almost a decade, in innumerable rounds of negotiations on GERD to meet all parties’ interests.

Ethiopia refused to sign a final agreement on the rules of filling and operating the dam earlier this year, under the auspice of the US Treasury and the World Bank.

“The UN Security Council shall shoulder its responsibility to prevent any harm to international peace and security by preventing Ethiopia from taking any unilateral action that negatively affects Egypt’s water rights,” he stressed in a statement.

The FM warned that filling the reservoir without an accord would violate the 2015 declaration of principles governing their talks — and rule out a return to negotiations.

Shoukry affirmed that the Egyptian government has not threatened military action, has sought a political solution and has worked to convince the Egyptian public that Ethiopia has a right to build the dam to meet its development goals.

“Egypt has never, never over the past six years even made an indirect reference to such possibilities.”

Yet, he further noted that if the Security Council fails to bring Ethiopia back into negotiations and the filling begins, Egypt “will find itself in a situation it has to deal with.”

“When that time comes, we will be very vocal and clear in what action we will take,” he stressed.

Starting to fill the reservoir now, he said, would demonstrate “a desire to control the flow of the water and have effective sole determination” of the water that reaches Egypt and Sudan.

He called on the US and other Security Council members, as well as African nations, to help reach a deal that “takes into account the interests of all three countries.”

Most Viewed

 
 
Arab World

Battered by War and Divisions, Lebanon Faces a Long List of Challenges after Ceasefire Deal

Women stand in front of a destroyed building, in the southern Lebanese town of Nabatieh, on the second day of the ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah, Lebanon November 28, 2024. REUTERS/Adnan Abidi
Women stand in front of a destroyed building, in the southern Lebanese town of Nabatieh, on the second day of the ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah, Lebanon November 28, 2024. REUTERS/Adnan Abidi
TT
TT

Battered by War and Divisions, Lebanon Faces a Long List of Challenges after Ceasefire Deal

Women stand in front of a destroyed building, in the southern Lebanese town of Nabatieh, on the second day of the ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah, Lebanon November 28, 2024. REUTERS/Adnan Abidi
Women stand in front of a destroyed building, in the southern Lebanese town of Nabatieh, on the second day of the ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah, Lebanon November 28, 2024. REUTERS/Adnan Abidi

Hours after a US-brokered ceasefire to end the war between Israel and Hezbollah went into effect, Lebanon woke up to the sound of celebratory gunfire instead of Israeli airstrikes and drones buzzing overhead.
It was a rare moment of respite for Lebanon, as bombs stopped falling after a year of war. Thousands of displaced people joyfully drove back to their towns and villages in southern and eastern Lebanon, The Associated Press reported.
But the realization of what lies ahead quickly sank in. Town after town in the south and east as well as parts of Beirut have been destroyed, entire border villages leveled to the ground, and thousands of buildings damaged. The World Bank estimates losses amounting to some $8.5 billion.
For the tiny and broken Mediterranean country, which has dealt with compounded calamities for over half a decade, the ceasefire deal has brought more questions than answers.
Among them, who will foot the bill for rebuilding? Will Hezbollah fully remove its fighters and arsenals from the south, relocating north of the Litani River — and how will the Lebanese army ensure that it does so? And will Israel ultimately accept the militants being pushed back, battered but not destroyed?
Meanwhile, Lebanon’s political paralysis between groups allied and opposed to Hezbollah has only worsened during the war — raising the possibility of instability that could rattle the ceasefire. Anger has grown among some over that they see as the Iran-backed group’s decision to provoke another disastrous war with Israel.
Temporary calm or a step toward long-term security? During the 60-day first phase of the ceasefire deal, based on Security Council Resolution 1701, Hezbollah and Israeli forces are to withdraw from south Lebanon, and the Lebanese military is to step in.
The Lebanese troops are to ensure that Hezbollah dismantles its facilities and military positions and that it doesn’t try to rebuild. That’s a major point of tension, potentially putting the army in a dangerous confrontation with the more powerful militant group.
The army, largely funded by the United States and other Western governments, is a rare point of unity in Lebanon’s tense sectarian power-balancing political system. But it's always tried to avoid friction with Hezbollah, which is backed by a large constituency among Lebanon's Shiite Muslims.
Hassan Fadlallah, a Hezbollah lawmaker, told reporters Thursday that the group will cooperate with the army to implement the ceasefire. But he also said the military doesn’t have the capability to defend Lebanon against Israel — a role Hezbollah has long claimed. He said the group would continue in that role.
“Can anyone say if Israel attacks, we watch?” Fadlallah said. “When Israel attacks our country, we will fight and resist. This is our right.”
Mike Azar, a Lebanese commentator, said the army is “in an impossible position.”
“To suggest that it can disarm or dismantle Hezbollah’s infrastructure is, frankly, absurd,” he said in an online post.
A Lebanese military official told The Associated Press that troops’ deployment will be gradual into areas of the south, including those from which Israeli troops withdraw. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because of not being cleared to speak to the media.
The US and France will also be involved in a monitoring mechanism to make sure Resolution 1701 is implemented.
Its viability is really being put to the test — “if there really is going to be that commitment” by all sides, said Salman Shaikh, who served as political adviser to the UN special envoy for Lebanon during the 2006 war, when the resolution was passed. He now runs The Shaikh Group, a mediation and conflict resolution organization.
Critics of the deal fear the pressure is far greater on Lebanon, and Israel has more space to attack Hezbollah — which it has vowed to do if it believes Hezbollah isn't abiding by its terms.
With US support, Israel has given itself “almost total freedom to determine when it needs or wants to attack Lebanon again for whatever reason,” said Matt Duss, executive vice president of The Center for International Policy, a Washington-based think tank.
Cash-strapped Lebanon needs support for its military and battered country Lebanon since late 2019 has been mired in a crippling financial crisis that pushed millions into poverty, destroyed its banking system, and limited the country to just a few hours of state electricity daily.
The Lebanese military has suffered as well, with troops quitting or working second jobs to pay the bills. Yet, the aim of the agreement is for Lebanon to recruit more and deploy an additional 10,000 troops south of the Litani River. Without significant funding, this would be impossible — especially with the huge rebuilding costs Lebanon now faces.
The international community in a donor conference in Paris last month pledged $1 billion dollars for Lebanon, including $800 million for humanitarian assistance and $200 million to support the army. But aid groups say none of that funding has materialized yet.
Mercy Corps says Lebanon’s gross domestic product shrunk by 6.4% — some $1.15 billion — just in the last two months of the war. The organization is scrambling to secure housing and services for displaced people ahead of the winter.
“The worst civilian impacts could still be ahead,” Laila Al Amine, Mercy Corps' Lebanon country director, said in a statement.
A looming question is who will foot the bill. Iran has offered to help, but it's cash-strapped and under Western sanctions. Oil-rich Gulf Arab states, who helped rebuild after the 2006 war, are weary of Lebanon’s political class and not inclined to step in.
Growing tensions over Hezbollah at home
Even before the war, Hezbollah and its arsenal were a point of contention in Lebanon. Its allies say Hezbollah’s militants are crucial in protecting Lebanon, while critics say its weaponry violates state sovereignty and is used to pressure political opponents. They have long demanded Hezbollah be disarmed.
Senior parliamentarian Alain Aoun said Lebanon has a long list of urgent matters to address, including electing a president after over two years of vacuum, securing reconstruction funding and resolving a host of neglected economic issues.
“There are a number of challenges awaiting us,” Aoun told the AP.
Hezbollah's opponents were also angered over its decision to unilaterally start firing rockets into northern Israel on Oct. 8, 2023. The group said it was acting in solidarity with its ally Hamas in the Gaza Strip and vowed not to stop until a ceasefire there was reached. Critics say it dragged Lebanon into war and brought Israel’s destructive bombardment.
Even some of its allies expressed frustration.
Lawmaker Gebran Bassil, who heads a party that for years was Hezbollah’s main Christian ally in government, said in a video posted on X that Hezbollah “should be at the service of the state,” not the other way around.
Hezbollah's top ally Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, who spearheaded negotiation efforts, has long pushed for Hezbollah to decouple its campaign against Israel from the war in Gaza. Now he is calling for parliament to vote for a president in January in order to ease Lebanon’s political gridlock — a move that could put Hezbollah's political power to the test.
This is where international funding and political support would also be crucial, says Shaikh.
The international community, he said, needs “to help the Lebanese sort out their issues, which still persist and which are not exclusively just to do with the Israeli actions against them.”