SA and US conflicted over the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam

The complex interrelations between various role players in the Egyptian-Ethiopian disagreements over the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam is threatening to permanently derail the very tripartite talks meant to resolve the impasse among the three countries in the disputed project.

The relations are intertwined and the web has drawn South Africa and the US into the eye of the storm that has brewed since Ethiopia turned the sod to lay the foundation for the dam’s construction.

Both South Africa and the US are so conflicted in the disputed project they should just back off if a solution is to be found between the three parties to the dam dispute – Ethiopia, Egypt and Sudan.

The gist of the matter is that Ethiopia is diverting part of the Blue Nile’s waters for its hydro-electricity development to boost its energy and economy and export power to its neighbours. But Egypt has been opposed to the development believing it would have a negative impact on the flow of the historic Nile River that has anchored the country’s economy since the beginning of time.

The third leg in the tripod is Sudan which has more than a water issue with Ethiopia, but a century-old border dispute.

The Institute for Security Studies said a potential border war brewing between Sudan and Ethiopia threatened to destabilise the two nations and the entire region. It  noted the verbal exchange when Sudan “increased bellicose propaganda” about its border and negotiations over the dam.

Ethiopia also expressed anger at Sudan’s 1 May claim of sovereignty over Ethiopia’s Benishangul-Gumuz region, where the dam is being constructed.

The tension over over al-Fashaga, an area between Sudan’s eastern province of Al Qadarif and Ethiopia’s Amhara and Tigray regional states, has since spilled over into the stalled dam negotiations.

What put the area on tenterhooks was the fact that Egypt and Sudan signed a military cooperation agreement that includes a common defence pact. Should the brewing war materialise, it could put the entire African Union, particularly Ethiopian friend South Africa in a quandary.

Enter the two outsiders – South Africa and the US

South Africa appears to be compromised in the dispute, but not the extent of the US. Pretoria does not havea great interest in the dam dispute other than to find “African solutions to African problems”.

South Africa is a close ally of Ethiopia whose Prime Minister, Abiy Ahmed paid a “never-before” official visit to South Africa on 11-12 January 2020, barely seven months after President Cyril Ramaphosa assumed office.

This coincided with Ramaphosa beginning his term as chairperson of the African Union. Ahmed took the ties a step further when he attended the governing ANC’s 108th birthday celebrations.

A joint communique by the two leaders said their discussions were held “in the spirit of friendship and the historical links” between the two countries. Both leaders acknowledged the importance of the visit to South Africa.

Ethiopia supported the ANC liberation struggle, including training Umkhonto we Sizwe cadres and hosting its Radio Freedom.

As a result, South Africa is not regarded as a trustworthy mediator, despite its offer, with both Egypt and Sudan preferring America but Ethiopia obviously choosing South Africa.

Ramaphosa is determined to forge ahead, however, hoping that the earlier relationship he forged with Egypt’s President Abdel Fattah Al-Sisi during his African Union chairmanship would bring some understanding with Cairo. Will it work? That remains to be seen.

The US under the Trump administration wanted to facilitate an agreement between the parties but came with a hidden agenda to widen its footprint in an African region in which China also has an interest.

A satellite image shows the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam on July 11, courtesy of Maxar Technologies. Picture: Maxar Technologies/AFP

The US was no more concerned about Sudan than it was about outdoing China in the region and Africa as a whole.

Obviously the US, now under Biden administration, has continued where Donald Trump left off, demonstrating to all and sundry there are certain US foreign policy interests that will not change, whether there’s a Republican or  Democrat in the White House.

Before he went to the elections on 3 November last year, Trump talked Sudan into entering into diplomatic relations with Israel – along with a few other Arab states in the Middle East – in exchange for delisting Sudan as a sponsor of terrorism and to offer it development aid.

That is where the fraternising between Washington and Khartoum began.

At the same time, despite wanting to continue as a mediator in the conflict, the US this week imposed economic sanctions against Ethiopia over alleged human rights abuses in the Tigray region where it has been in an armed conflict with the Tigray People’s Liberation Front in the north.

The US sanctions will affect other aspects such as security assistance – which is how Washington deals with a country it has identified as unfriendly to its interest.

Addis Ababa had been sceptical about the US’s sincerity as a mediator in the dam conflict and regards US sanctions as “unfortunate” and “meddling in its internal affairs”. This further complicates the dam dispute, with the US ruling itself out of its mediation role.

The relationship between the US and Egypt has come a long way since the first Camp David dialogue with Israel.

In the age-old Israel-Arab conflict, Egypt had always been the go-between and the only Arab nation to which Tel Aviv has listened. The delicate ceasefire between Israel and Hamas following the violent clashes between Israeli forces and the Palestinian people was facilitated by Al-Sisi and sponsored by Biden in what he termed “quiet and relentless diplomacy”.

There is one solution to the whole confusion – South Africa and US must back off and let other (unconflicted) players come in to mediate the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam dispute, maybe even the Tigray conflict.

• ericn@citizen.co.za
  Eric Naki is The Citizen Political Editor and an author