عربي English Türkçe اردو فارسى
Logo
Latest News
Arab World

Shoukry: Ethiopia's Second Filling of Dam Won't Affect Egyptian Water Interests

Foreign Ministers of Egypt, Sudan, and Ethiopia in Kinshasa (File photo: Reuters)
Foreign Ministers of Egypt, Sudan, and Ethiopia in Kinshasa (File photo: Reuters)
TT
TT

Shoukry: Ethiopia's Second Filling of Dam Won't Affect Egyptian Water Interests

Foreign Ministers of Egypt, Sudan, and Ethiopia in Kinshasa (File photo: Reuters)
Foreign Ministers of Egypt, Sudan, and Ethiopia in Kinshasa (File photo: Reuters)

Egyptian Foreign Minister Sameh Shoukry said that his country is confident the second filling of the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD), scheduled for next July, will not affect its water interests. Speaking during an interview with the TEN channels, Shoukry explained that Egypt can deal with the issue through “strict management of our water resources.” The Minister asserted that it is important to join international efforts to convince Ethiopia of the need to reach an agreement, as the negotiating parties approach a crucial point. Shoukry was speaking from Paris, where he was accompanying President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi for an international summit on Sudan. Egypt and Sudan have been negotiating with Ethiopia for almost 10 years to conclude a legal agreement regulating the filling and operation of the dam, which Addis Ababa built on the main tributary of the Nile to generate electric power. Shoukry warned that Egypt will spare no effort in defending its water interests and taking measures to preserve them if the dam was used for any other purpose than what it is originally intended for. “The international moves show the importance of the issue and allow the president of the African Union to be briefed on the Egyptian viewpoint, which is characterized by flexibility, moderation, and the desire to get out of the crisis by reaching an agreement," noted Shoukry. For his part, the Ethiopian Minister of Water and Irrigation, Seleshi Bekele said that the construction of the dam is proceeding according to plan. In April, the Egyptian Ministry of Irrigation indicated that the Ethiopian claim that the two bottom outlets of the dam are capable of enabling an average flow of Blue Nile is incorrect. The capacity of releasing Nile water from these two bottom outlets does not exceed 50 million m3/day, the ministry said, an amount that does not meet the needs of the two downstream countries. The ministry added that such an amount of water is not equivalent to the average water release coming from the Blue Nile. “The situation will be more complicated starting from the flood season (Next July) as the bottom outlets will release an amount lower than usual in July and August,” read the Ministry's statement. Meanwhile, the Ethiopian News Agency (ENA) highlighted Shoukry's statements and quoted the Ethiopian Foreign Ministry's adviser, Ibrahim Idris, as saying that “Sudan and Egypt are using the Renaissance Dam to pressure Ethiopia to give up its water rights.” Idris says that the two downstream countries are not interested in the dam in the first place, but with the Nile waters, noting that they are seeking to obtain a legal concession from Ethiopia through threats, pressure, and international persuasion

Most Viewed

 
 
Arab World

Türkiye, Syria Advance Strategic Partnership to Support Reconstruction

Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan (R) and Syrian Foreign Minister Asaad al-Shaibani shake hands during a joint press conference after their meeting in Ankara, Türkiye, 09 April 2026. (EPA)
Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan (R) and Syrian Foreign Minister Asaad al-Shaibani shake hands during a joint press conference after their meeting in Ankara, Türkiye, 09 April 2026. (EPA)
TT
TT

Türkiye, Syria Advance Strategic Partnership to Support Reconstruction

Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan (R) and Syrian Foreign Minister Asaad al-Shaibani shake hands during a joint press conference after their meeting in Ankara, Türkiye, 09 April 2026. (EPA)
Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan (R) and Syrian Foreign Minister Asaad al-Shaibani shake hands during a joint press conference after their meeting in Ankara, Türkiye, 09 April 2026. (EPA)

Türkiye and Syria are moving to forge a broad strategic partnership spanning all areas of cooperation, backing reconstruction and efforts to restore stability after 14 years of war.

A flurry of meetings in recent days has aimed to accelerate coordination between the neighbors across multiple sectors.

Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan said shielding Syria from spillover from the regional crisis, including tensions involving Iran, the US, and Israel, is essential.

He said protecting gains toward sustainable stability in Syria remains a top priority for Ankara.

Speaking alongside Syrian Foreign Minister Asaad al-Shaibani in Ankara, Fidan said Türkiye would stand by Syria’s efforts.

Ankara is closely tracking the integration of the Syrian Democratic Forces into state institutions and wants the process completed without disruption to safeguard Syria and its neighbors, he added.

Lasting peace in the Middle East will remain out of reach unless Israel stops its expansionist ambitions. He described Israel’s actions in Lebanon as “genocide,” warning that stability cannot be achieved under continued escalation.

Shaibani said Syria and Türkiye have entered a new phase defined by a “strategic partnership,” anchored in the “Four Seas Project,” aimed at turning them into a key energy corridor linking the Gulf, the Caspian Sea, and the Mediterranean and Black seas.

He said talks covered energy, trade, and infrastructure, as well as tighter security coordination to control borders and counter threats to national security.

Shaibani said Damascus is pressing ahead with a comprehensive agreement with the Syrian Democratic Forces, with work underway to integrate them into the Syrian army and restore state control over border crossings, oil and gas fields, and civilian institutions.

Both ministers welcomed a temporary US-Iran truce and called for concrete steps to bolster regional stability.

Shaibani said Syria has endured more than 14 years of Iranian interference and militia activity, leaving one million dead, 15 million displaced or forced to flee, and 4 million homes destroyed.

He said Syria supports Arab countries hit by what he called unjustified Iranian attacks and backs efforts to ensure state control in Lebanon and Iraq, rather than armed groups operating outside official authority.

Shaibani said Syria seeks a strategic and economic partnership with Lebanon and supports a ceasefire and the Lebanese government's efforts to resolve issues through national means.

He also called for US and international backing to implement the 1974 disengagement agreement, urging Israeli forces to withdraw from Syrian territory and allow reconstruction to proceed.

After talks with Fidan, Shaibani met the US envoy to Syria and the ambassador to Türkiye, Tom Barrack, to discuss regional and international developments.

Earlier, a Turkish-Syrian investment forum in Istanbul brought together Turkish Trade Minister Omer Bolat and Syrian Economy Minister Mohammad Nidal al-Shaar to boost cooperation in transport, energy, investment, trade, and customs.

Bolat said transit trade through Syria to the Middle East and the Gulf is set to resume after a decade-long halt, with operations expected to begin next week following eased visa procedures for Turkish truck drivers via Saudi Arabia.

He said bilateral trade reached $3.7 billion last year, up 40%.

Separately Turkish Transport Minister Abdulkadir Uraloglu signed a trilateral transport deal in Amman with Jordan’s Nidal Qatamin and Syria’s Yarub Badr to deepen regional integration and develop transport infrastructure amid disruptions linked to the Iran conflict.

Uraloglu said the deal will ease truck movement, expand rail transport, boost port activity, and expand market access, adding that a Turkish technical delegation will visit Saudi Arabia next week as part of a broader plan to link the Arabian Peninsula with Central Asia and Europe.

Arab World

Lebanon Asserts Itself at Israel Negotiations, Undermining Hezbollah and Iran

Rescuers work at the site of an Israeli strike carried out on Wednesday, in the southern suburbs of Beirut, Lebanon, April 10, 2026. (Reuters)
Rescuers work at the site of an Israeli strike carried out on Wednesday, in the southern suburbs of Beirut, Lebanon, April 10, 2026. (Reuters)
TT
TT

Lebanon Asserts Itself at Israel Negotiations, Undermining Hezbollah and Iran

Rescuers work at the site of an Israeli strike carried out on Wednesday, in the southern suburbs of Beirut, Lebanon, April 10, 2026. (Reuters)
Rescuers work at the site of an Israeli strike carried out on Wednesday, in the southern suburbs of Beirut, Lebanon, April 10, 2026. (Reuters)

Lebanon is set to enter direct negotiations with Israel for the first time, marking a fundamental shift in how the state manages the conflict and underscoring its insistence on sovereign decision-making free of external tutelage.

The shift follows Iranian attempts to preserve what is known as the “unity arenas” in talks due to be held in Pakistan, against firm Lebanese insistence, voiced by President Joseph Aoun and Prime Minister Nawaf Salam, that the Lebanese state alone is authorized to negotiate on Lebanon’s behalf.

The talks carry added weight as they come after a series of pivotal state decisions, most notably banning Hezbollah’s military wing and operations and restricting weapons in Beirut to legitimate forces. They also follow steps rejecting Iranian interference in Lebanon, the latest being the expulsion of the Iranian ambassador.

These moves intersect directly with calls to disarm Hezbollah, an issue set to dominate the negotiations, especially as Israel moves to link any withdrawal from southern Lebanon to tangible progress on that front.

The developments have angered Hezbollah. Officials and supporters have sharply criticized the move, going so far as to accuse Prime Minister Nawaf Salam of treason.

Hezbollah supporters also staged a protest against Salam on Thursday and Friday after the government decided to make Beirut a demilitarized city.

Blow to Hezbollah

Lebanese Forces MP Razi El Hage said Hezbollah had bet on Lebanon being included in a ceasefire deal between the United States and Iran, allowing it to declare what he described as a false victory and use it to pressure the government to reverse its decisions.

He said the state is now more serious than ever about imposing monopoly over arms.

People with an image of slain Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah gather as rescuers with heavy machinery work at the site of an Israeli strike carried out on Wednesday, in the southern suburbs of Beirut, Lebanon, April 10, 2026. (Reuters)

Political analyst Ali al-Amine said Hezbollah has long sought to turn political and military developments into what appears to be victory, even if illusory, relying on an organized propaganda machine and its influence over its support base.

“Had a ceasefire in Lebanon coincided with a truce involving Iran, the party would have rushed to declare a divine victory and stage celebrations,” he told Asharq Al-Awsat.

But recent developments have undercut that approach, he added. Continued Israeli strikes coincided with the Lebanese state taking action, weakening Hezbollah’s ability to exploit developments in its favor, he explained.

He pointed to Salam’s initiative and Aoun’s efforts to cement the principle that the Lebanese state alone negotiates on behalf of Lebanon, a shift that has angered Hezbollah.

Hezbollah’s problem is exclusion

Al-Amine said Hezbollah’s core problem is not with the negotiations themselves. The party has long taken part in them through Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, including during maritime border talks.

“The issue now is that it no longer leads or monopolizes this track, nor does Iran behind it,” he said.

He added that Salam’s clear statement that Lebanon negotiates for itself, followed by Aoun’s backing, marked a turning point. Hezbollah responded with a political campaign that went as far as accusing Salam of being “Zionist.”

Israel’s announcement that it is ready to negotiate deepened the shock, he said, not because of the talks themselves but because the initiative had slipped from Hezbollah’s hands.

Women gesture while looking out from a window of a damaged building at the site of an Israeli strike carried out on Wednesday, in the southern suburbs of Beirut, Lebanon, April 10, 2026. (Reuters)

Al-Amine also pointed to a shift in the US approach, with no back channels opened with Hezbollah and clear support instead for the Lebanese government as the sole negotiating party.

Test for the state

As the outcome of the talks remains uncertain, al-Amine said the next phase hinges on the Lebanese state, particularly Salam and Aoun, taking practical steps to strengthen its position.

Chief among these is implementing the decision to make Beirut a demilitarized city, a key step toward restoring state authority and institutions, he said, noting that success will require serious Arab and international backing.

Hage said the negotiations mark a step forward and will focus on one central issue, the state’s ability to guarantee exclusive control over arms.

He added that Lebanese Forces ministers had submitted a memorandum to the Cabinet outlining a clear legal and political path to exit the current crisis, hold those responsible to account, and pursue Iran in international forums over the losses caused by Hezbollah dragging Lebanon to the war.

Arab World

Lebanon Between 2026 War and Negotiation Talks Next Week

Residents search for belongings in the rubble of a building hit by an Israeli strike in the Ain el-Mreisseh area of Beirut (Reuters)
Residents search for belongings in the rubble of a building hit by an Israeli strike in the Ain el-Mreisseh area of Beirut (Reuters)
TT
TT

Lebanon Between 2026 War and Negotiation Talks Next Week

Residents search for belongings in the rubble of a building hit by an Israeli strike in the Ain el-Mreisseh area of Beirut (Reuters)
Residents search for belongings in the rubble of a building hit by an Israeli strike in the Ain el-Mreisseh area of Beirut (Reuters)

Lebanon, under sustained Israeli air strikes and an open war, is entering a pivotal week as it prepares for preliminary meetings expected next week that could open a new negotiating track to secure a ceasefire, stabilize the border, and regulate the south.

The move brings Lebanese-Israeli negotiations back into focus, not as a precedent, but as a continuation of a path shaped by wars and facts on the ground.

The key shift lies in the form. Most past negotiations were indirect, conducted through the United Nations, international mediators, or technical committees. Lebanon has seen only one formal round of direct negotiations at this level, the May 17, 1983, agreement. That makes the 2026 track, in form, the closest parallel, though it differs sharply in context, conditions, and aims.

From armistice to border demarcation: indirect track

Negotiations between Lebanon and Israel began with the 1949 Armistice Agreement, signed in Naqoura after the 1948 war and the Lebanese army’s participation in the al-Malikiyyah battle.

It established a ceasefire, adopted the armistice line based on international borders, and set up a joint committee under UN supervision.

Since then, all frameworks, except the 1983 deal, have stayed within indirect or technical formats.

In April 1996, Israel’s “Grapes of Wrath” operation and the Qana massacre led to the April Understanding, which barred targeting civilians. It set up a monitoring committee including Lebanon, Israel, the US, France, and Syria, helping curb escalation until Israel’s withdrawal from the south in 2000.

After the 2006 war, United Nations Security Council Resolution 1701 set the international framework for the southern border, including a halt to hostilities, deployment of the Lebanese army south of the Litani River, expansion of UNIFIL, and restricting weapons in the area to the state.

In 2022, US-mediated indirect talks on maritime borders ended with the adoption of Line 23 and recognition of Lebanon’s right to develop the Qana field, seen as a model for technical, non-political negotiation.

In November 2024, border escalation produced a fragile ceasefire that included partial Israeli withdrawal from some points, expanded Lebanese army deployment south of the Litani, and a halt to hostilities. Repeated violations and weak implementation exposed its limits, prompting calls for a stricter mechanism.

“Mechanism”: toward direct engagement

In 2025, the term “mechanism” emerged as a practical framework to anchor a ceasefire. The proposal centers on a five-party committee including Lebanon, Israel, the US, France, and the United Nations, backed by technical and field monitoring.

Lebanon insists the Lebanese army alone must implement any arrangements on its territory, rejecting any Israeli operational role on the ground.

This marks the core shift. Unlike previous talks, which were indirect or technical, the 2026 meetings are set to be direct or semi-direct, making them the second such test after May 17.

Second time since 1983

Former MP Fares Soaid said Lebanon is entering “the second instance of formal direct negotiations with Israel,” after the first, which followed the 1982 invasion, when President Amine Gemayel pursued talks to secure Israeli withdrawal and reach an understanding.

He said 1983 unfolded under vastly different conditions. “The obstacles were enormous. The Cold War shaped the scene, and the Soviet Union, led by Yuri Andropov, opposed any track that could pull Lebanon fully into the US camp,” he said.

Arab capitals, led by Damascus under Hafez al-Assad, were not supportive, and Lebanese public opinion, especially among Muslims, was not ready, he added.

Although the May 17 agreement won majority backing in parliament, Damascus, aligned with the Soviet camp, mobilized local forces, leading to the February 6 uprising and the collapse of the deal, effectively besieging Gemayel in Baabda, Soaid said.

He said 2026 presents a different landscape. “There is no Soviet veto, the international climate is more positive, and Arab and Islamic positions are more open to negotiations,” he said.

“There is no objection from Damascus and no real internal opposition. The negotiating delegation is expected to be formed in line with the constitution and presidential powers,” he added, saying the chances of success are far higher than in 1983.

Negotiation is not normalization

A Lebanese parliamentary source said conflating negotiation with normalization has no legal or political basis, stressing that talks do not amount to diplomatic recognition or normal relations.

Lebanon has repeatedly negotiated, from the armistice to the April Understanding and the maritime demarcation, without changing its legal or political stance toward Israel, the source said.

“Negotiation is a political decision governed by international law and the Vienna and Geneva conventions,” the source said, adding that legal doctrine does not treat negotiation as recognition.

Lebanon has used multiple formats, from separate rooms to technical committees, all confined to specific files tied to security, borders, and sovereignty.

“The issue is not the form, but the substance,” the source said. “If the goal is to stabilize borders, stop violations, and restore sovereignty, that falls within the core duties of the Lebanese state.”