The History, Management & Utilization

of

The Nile Basin Waters

SNDF – Workshop on Dams on the Nile Lessons Learnt on Future Perspective Khartoum –

January 2008

By: Yahia Abdel Mageed Former Minister of Irrigation - Sudan & Secretary General UN Water Conference

e-mail yamageed@yam-cdc.com

1- Introduction

Human interferences in river basins are as old as the history of mankind. The emergence of the fluvial civilizations since times immemorial witnessed the initial forms of human interference & control of rivers for agriculture and navigation.

The river Nile witnessed the initial interference by diversion of its water 4500 years for basin irrigation of the low lying fertile lands in its lower reaches in Egypt. The navigability of the river in its lower reaches also facilitated the unification of upper and lower Egypt.

In search of information on the mysteries of fluctuation of the river

flows bringing damaging floods one year and drought, with famine threats the other, the ancient

Egyptians pushed south to the forth cataract and came in contact with

the Meroitic Civilization, establishing the early forms of contact between

the basin societies.

"Trade that flourished in ancient time between the Upper and Lower basin

of the river proved that physical unity of, the basin is stronger than

the political division" (Teclaff - River Basins in History and Law - New

York Library 1967)

2- Concepts of River Basins Control Works & Water ManagementControl concepts & approaches have developed from simple diversions to complex control structures & management techniques to meet the increasing & diversified needs for human settlements, water supply, agriculture, energy, navigation, flood control & recreation.

In contemporary history the single purpose control works for irrigation, navigation & energy emerged. This was followed by the beginning of twentieth century with the development of sciences & knowledge by the multi purpose control works, providing water demands & services by one structure.

Following World War I & the depression years of the 1930s, in an effort to stimulate employment & economic growth in many parts of the world particularly in Europe & America, the concept of integrated river basins management & development emerged. This concept recognized the hydrological unity of the basins & the pivotal role of water in mobilization of the natural resources base of the basins for the welfare of their societies.

The hydrological boundary of the basin was recognized as the ideal unit for planning & economic & social development. This period witnessed the emergence of the integrated river basin development plans in the Mississippi, St. Lawrena, Missouri, Colorado basins in the United States of America & the Felimendoza & the Rhone basins in Europe.

However this concept did not live long in the industrial countries due to the revival of the world economics after World War II particularly during the fiftieth & sixtieth that witnessed huge progress in industrial development. The river basins in the developed world lost their integrity as an ideal unit area for planning & economic development.

The developed world moved towards the establishment of huge industrial & urban conglomerates & became concerned with the environmental challenges of pollution & chemical hazards, which in turn provided support & subsidies to other economic sectors of development including agriculture, research, education & health.

Contrary to this, the concept of integrated river basin development & management with the basin area as the ideal unit area for planning & economic development remained valid to our present times for development of the natural resources base, in the developing world.

This does not mean closing the activities within the basin, but on the contrary the economic development

within the basin will create vast opportunities to move excess

production goods over its needs and to receive excess goods from the

neighboring basins in terms of electric power, trade, labour & other economic

goods.

However we need to recognize the complications in shared basins, associated

with political issues concerning sovereignty & territorial integrity. Such issues are no

longer difficult to solve in the world of today where the shared benefits & issues of

economic integration & environmental stability in the basin countries super-

impose over issues of conflicts between them.

However we need to recognize the challenges that have constrained the

progress in achieving meaningful development in many basins in the developing world particularly in the

African Continent.

The Nile basin is an example, where most of the countries of the basin are among the least developed countries in the world & the majority of the basin societies & population still lack the basic needs & services including water, food, shelter, health, education in addition to forthcoming environmental challenges & problems associated with climate change.

3- The River Basins in History & Law To protect & secure the hydrological & economic unity & integrity of the river basin, the legal & administrative frameworks are considered major factors to guarantee the basin integrated development, realization of shared benefits, management of conflicts & protection of the environmental stability of the basin ecosystems.

A number of legal frameworks & precedences have been realized for

utilization of shared water resources over the years & laid down a number of

guidelines to manage conflicts between the basin beneficiaries & water users.

Though progress has been rather slow in this context there are a number of

achievements that can be quoted from governmental & non-governmental

organizations.

Examples include the Helsinki Rules 1963, Stockholm Declaration 1972, Mar

del Plata Action Plan 1977, the Dublin Declaration 1992. This in addition to

agreements & protocols that have been concluded between & among nations

sharing basins.

Finally, the International law Commission of the United Nations after intensive efforts since the Seventies was able to formulate the International Law for Water other than Navigational Uses in 1997. This now provide a useful instrument to help nations sharing river basins save guard their interest, resolve conflicts & protect the ecosystems of the basin.

Following this short introduction of the world heritage of experience in the management & development of basin control concepts & techniques let us now look into the situation in the Nile basin.

4- The Natural Characteristics of the Nile BasinThe equator almost bisect the African content which struddle the tropical zone except its northern & southern tips which lies in a temperature zone. This unique location characterized the continent climate & its environmental features which are influenced by the movement of the inter-conversation- zone (ITCZ) north-ward & south-ward behind the sun crossing the equator twice a year causing rainfall with a short dry period in between.

Rainfall decrease as one moves south & north of the equator. Consequently the dry seasons increase from one in the equatorial zone to four in the Sahra desert in the north & Kalahari desert in the south. The northern & southern tips of the continent witness winter rains only. See Fig (1).

Figure 1River Basins in Africa

The annual rainfall in the whole continent of Africa amount to about 20700 mld m³ 78% of this rain falls between 15° N & 20° S, 75% of it is lost by evaporation leaving 2480 mld m³ for surface run-off, 90% of this surface run-off exists in rivers & lakes between 10° N & 20° S of which 19% in rivers flowing north & south and 77.5% in rivers flowing east & west and 3.5% in islands.•(Source: Regional Report of the Economic Commission for Africa to the UN Water Conference 1977).

The Nile basin constitute one of the most important north flowing basins with an annual mean flow of 84 mld m³ at Aswan which amount to 4% of the total surface flow of the content. The flow at Aswan /km2 of the basin is 29000 m3 compared with other major basins in the African Continent shown below.

ItemRiver Basin Basin Area km2

Mean Annual mld

m3

Flow / km2

m3

1Nile2,900,000 8429,0003

2Congo3,830,000 132546,000

3Senegal338,000 2162,000

4Niger3,100,000 2000645,000

5Zambezi1,250,000 10384,400

6Volts390,000 39100,000

The River Nile is a complex hydrological system originating in three distinct

geographical and climatological zones. The Ethiopian and Eritrean plateaus, the Equatorial lakes and the Bahr El Ghazal

region, the catchment of the basin extend over an area of 2.9 million km2 and

incompass ten riparian states including Brundi, Congo, Egypt, Ethiopia, Eritrea,

Kenya, Rawande, Sudan, Tanzania & Uganda see Fig. (2).

FIGURE (2)THE NILE BASIN

Almost half of the river length run in arid and desert land. The total length of the river and its tributaries amounts to 37205 km, its main lake areas total 81550 km2 and its swamp reaches extend over an area of 69 720 km2. The river extends from 4° S to 31° N with a length of 5750 Km almost halh of it in desert & falls from 1200 – 1800m m sea level in the Mediterranean. See Figs. (3) & (4).

FIGURE 3Slope of Nile from Victoria to Mediterranean

• The Equatorial Lakes Region • The total normal rainfall in the basin in the

Equatorial region, which extends over 10-12 month in the year, is estimated at 451 milliard cube meters. The total annual flow entering the Sudan at Nimule is 22.7 mld m3. The flow at Mangalla is 27 mld m3 including torrent flows between the exit of Lake Albert and Managalla.

It constitutes about 6% 0 of the total rainfall in the region. Almost 50% of this flow is lost in the Sudd region, where only about 13.5 mld m3 reaches Malakal. The whole run-off from the Bahr El Ghazal, which originates from within Sudan's borders, is lost in the swamps and only 0.5 mId m3 reaches the Nile at Lake No out of a total of about 20 mld m3 , see Fig. (3).

• The Ethiopian and Eritrean Region

These comprise four sub-basins: the Baro-Akobo, the Eastern torrents, the Blue Nile and the Atbra. The rainfall duration ranges from three months in the north to eight months in the south. The flows entering the Sudan from these sub -basins are as follows:

Sub-basinArea Rainfall

Surface run-offNile entering Sudan

km2mld m3mld m3mld m3mld m3

Baro-Akobo

41.40 82.80 13.4012.00

Eastern torrents

10.30 11.60 1.741.74

Blue Nile 203.00 250.00 54.7054.70

Atbra 100.0050.0012.0012.00

Total 354.70394.40 81.8480.44

The Blue Nile longitudinal Section is shown in Fig. (4)The estimated flows at Aswan are:

• R. Sobat 11.78 mld m3• R. Blue Nile 49.56 mld m3• R. Atbara 10.92 mld m3

• R. Bahr El Jabal 11.76 mld m3• Total 84.00 mld m3

• Source : (The Kenana Handbook of Sudan- Chapter 48 Water Resources by Yahia Abdel Mageed 2007)

In addition to this mean surface flow potential in the main Nile & its tributaries

reaching Aswan of 84 mld m3 the basin is endowed with direct rain potential in the

Equatorial Lakes of 400 mld m3, the Ethiopian & Eritrean Plateaus of 250 mld m3 & 480 mld m3 in Sudan. This rainfall

potential provide adequate soil moisture to support rainfed farming, grazing lands &

forests & irrigated lands.

In addition to this the stored water potential in the lakes in the basin in the

Equatorial region is estimated at 2910 mld m3, in Lake Tana 28 mld m3 & the

swamps & the water lands of Equatorial region & the Sudd region in Sudan provide 69720 Km2 which could be

mobilized for power generation, water conservation & ecosystem protection.

5- The Hydro Polices of the Nile WatersThe fall of the Turkish Empire which

dominated Egypt and Sudan and other parts of the basin marked the

beginning of the stage of political influence by the foreign European

powers. This was evidenced by the protocols and boundary agreements

made between the British who influenced a major portion of the

basin; the Italians in Ethiopia and Congo Free State dominated by the

Belgians.

Those include the 1891 Rome Protocol, the 1902 agreement for the Blue Nile, and

the 1906 Agreement with Congo Free State. All those Agreements prohibited

any construction on the tributaries of the Nile obstructing the flow to Sudan and

Egypt without consultation and consent of the downstream riparians.

Since then basin-wide plans started to emerge for annual storage works for control of the river

in the interest of Egypt to improve the low summer flows, increase the Nile yield through

conservation of water from the swamps and Sudd region in the Southern Sudan, flood

control works and the over-year concept in the Equatorial lakes and Lake Tana in the Blue Nile basin to store water from high yielding years to

meet shortage during the occurrence of low years. A number of commissions were

established to examine those plans and the allocation of waters between Egypt and the

Sudan.

Based on the recommendations of those commissions the 1929 Agreement was

concluded in the form of exchange of notes incorporating the report of the commissions between the Egyptian

Government and the Administration of Sudan and East Africa on behalf of the

Government of Great Britain.

This was motivated by the uprising of the Egyptian army and the Sudan

defense force against the British army in Sudan: the “1924 Revolution” and

the assassination of the governor general of Sudan Sir Lee Stack in

Egypt, and expanding cotton irrigation in Sudan.

While this agreement recognized the need for development of irrigation in the Sudan, it stipulated that any increase of the use of the Nile waters as a result of such development should not infringe Egypt natural and historic rights. The working arrangements based on this agreement provided for the Egyptian

rights on the whole of the natural flow of the river during low flow period January

to July.

Apart from small withdrawals from the natural river during this period, the Sudan has to meet its requirements from water stored at the tail of

the flood. So in the years that followed up to independence, the Sudan irrigation

development was restricted to the Gezira Project (British Syndicate) with cotton as the

main crop in an area of about one million acres and crop intensity of 50%. During the Korean

War and the sharp rise in cotton prices further areas were developed by pumping amounting

to about 500,000 acres from the Blue and White Niles under flood licenses only.

The 1929 Agreement also required the East African countries not to construct any works in the Equatorial lakes without consultation with Egypt and Sudan. The British government would use its good offices to facilitate establishment of over-year storage in the Equatorial Lakes connected with the conservation project in the Sudd region for increasing the Nile yield for interest of Egypt.

The Egyptians in 1938 also presented to the British Administration in Sudan the

plan for the Sudd diversion canal at Jonglie. The canal aim with the over-year storage in Equatorial Lake (known as the

Equatorial Nile Project) to conserve about 7.5 mld m3 of timely waters to

improve the summer Nile flow at Aswan.

Following World War two a new political environment prevailed characterized by

the call for self-determination and liberation of the colonized territories. The Nile Basin became an important political

stage in this phase. These included the Egyptian struggles for evacuation of

military occupation in the Suez Canal, the Sudan struggle for independence or Unity with Egypt, the Mau land struggle and the

Ethiopian struggle against the Italian occupation and influence. Since then the Nile Waters became a central issue in the

politics of the area.

The British Administration in Sudan established in 1945 the Jonglie

Investigation Team to consider the Egyptian Project Proposal. The team came

out with a modified Equatorial Nile Project. While keeping the original

objectives of the project, it modified the storage and regulation of flow of the lake Albert to ensure minimum disturbance to the swamp regime in the Southern Sudan

and the prevailing subsistence socio-economic systems associated with it.

With the emergence of the Egyptian revolution in 1952, the Administration in the Sudan embarked on the preparation

of the Sudan case for share in the Nile Waters. While the Sudan has genuine

case in the Nile Waters, the political motives of raising this matter at this time

can not be overlooked for preparing the two sister countries to a phase of

conflict.

The period 1954 – 1958 witnessed further development of events, the emergence of

plans for extending the irrigation area in the Sudan and building of Roseries Dam in the

Blue Nile which require increase of the Sudan share in the Nile Waters, the Egyptian plan for over-year storage at Aswan High Dam with its

reservoir extending 150 km into Sudan and completely submerging the old Halfa town and

all the villages in this reach affecting a population of about 50,000 inhabitants. At the same time the Report on the Nile Valley Plan

was under preparation authored by H. A. Morrice and W. N. Allan advisors to the Sudan

Government.

At the same time the Report on the Nile Valley Plan was under preparation authored by H. A. Morrice and W. N. Allan advisors to the Sudan Government.

The Nile Valley Plan is a purely hydraulic plan designed to improve the distribution and utilization of surface waters mainly by means of dams, which store that water on its way to the sea. As stated by the authors “We wish to emphasize that our investigation have been confined to the hydraulic aspects of the matter.

We feel confident that the Nile Valley Plan we advocate is in essence

economically sound, but we have made no attempt at an economic analysis. We fully realize that such an analysis must

eventually be made for each component project, but we believe that the first step

must be to draw up an outline plan based on the hydrological characteristics of the

Nile Valley”.

The Nile Valley Plan is primarily an attempt to control the Nile and its

tributaries in order to assure the largest amount of water for irrigation particularly

for Sudan and Egypt and full development of the hydroelectric potential along the

Nile and its tributaries.

Due to absence of information the plan assumed abstraction amounts in

Ethiopia and the East African territories. The Plan lacks the economic and

environmental dimensions. It remained all these years in the archives. However it

is rated as an important scientific contribution.

The emergence of the High Aswan Dam Plan led to further complications

transcending the boundaries of the basin to international politics. Following the withdrawal of western countries and

the World Bank from the initial support they gave to the project, the Egyptian government approached the Eastern

Block (USSR) for technical and financial support to the project and as retaliation

nationalized the Suez Canal.

This was followed by the triptrite aggression into Egypt in 1956 and

brought the High Dam Project to international highlight and a worldwide war waged by many circles against the

project environmental and socio-economic impacts.

Within the basin the period 1957 – 58 witnessed political conflict between

Sudan and Egypt over the High Aswan Project and sharing of the waters and

negotiations came to a closed road, when the Sudan declared from one side non-adherence with arrangement of the

1929 Nile Water Agreement and the pressure for new arrangements to

increase the Sudan share heightened.

Following a military take over in Sudan in November 1958, Sudan and Egypt in November

1959 concluded a new legal and technical agreement to replace the 1929 arrangement.

Egypt was allowed to go ahead with the plans to establish the High Aswan Dam for over-year

storage arresting and controlling the full discharge of the river at Aswan, of 84 mld m3 the net total benefits of the project of 22 mld

m3 was divided 7.5 mld m3 to Egypt and 14.5 mld m3 to the Sudan and sharing equally the

10 mld m3 to be lost by evaporation at the Aswan Lake.

This new water allocation increased the Sudan share to 18.5 mld m3 and Egypt share to 55.5 mld m3. The High Aswan

Project as over-year storage have protected Egypt against floods and low

years and enabled full control of the river in its own territory.

The dam propjet to a great extent mitigated the conflicts between the

Sudan and Egypt with regards to the restrictions imposed by the 1929

Agreement prohibiting withdrawal from the natural flow during December to

July and increase of its share. The agreement recognized the other

riparian rights and agreed to share equally the amount to be agreed to

meet these rights.

The two countries also agreed to establish a Permanent Joint Technical Commission to undertake on behalf of

the two governments control of the river and studies to increase its yield to meet

future demands of the two countries.

• The 1959 Nile Water agreement between Egypt and Sudan generated a number of reactions from the other riparian states.

Ethiopia while welcoming the cooperation between Egypt and Sudan

stressed its legitimate rights in the waters of the rivers originating from its

plateau.

It initiated studies with the assistance of the United States Bearu of

Reclamation to identify power and irrigation projects within the Blue Nile,

Atbara and the Baro of the Sobat system. It established a Water

Resources Commission to undertake water resources management and

development.

On the eve of the independence of the East African Countries and following the

1959 Nile Water Agreement between he two downstream countries, the British Administration of the territory brought

about to the attention of the governments of the downstream countries Egypt and

Sudan, claims of the water rights of those countries and the necessity to make new arrangements to supersede the 1929 Nile

Water agreement.

It was agreed to initiate informal technical talks between the Permanent

Joint Technical Commission representing the two downstream

countries and the Coordinating Nile Water Committee (established for the

purpose) representing the East African Countries, Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda. It became apparent during the talks that the Administration have no ready plans

to indicate and substantiate the water requirements of those countries.

It was therefore agreed to initiate joint studies in the catchment of Lakes Victoria,

Kioga and Albert to determine the water balance of the lakes area and establish the

necessary data and information base and identify the necessary storage works to meet the future demands of the riparian

states.

They invited other countries to join in this basin cooperation including Burundi,

Rwanda, Congo and Ethiopia. All the countries agreed to join in this effort with

exception of Ethiopia who opted to join as observer.

• Under the assistance of UNDP and WMO as executing agency, the hydromet survey of the

Equatorial Lakes was launched in 1967. A Technical Committee was established with

representative from all the participating countries with Ethiopia as observer, to

undertake on behalf of the governments overseeing the project. Counter-part staff and

counter-part funds were assigned and provided respectively. The head-quarter of the

project was established in Entebbe Uganda. This was one of the most successful forums

for basin cooperation despite the limitation of its area extent to the lakes catchment only.

• After successful completion, the project was extended to a second

phase with further assistance from the UNDP for formulation of mathematical

model representing the Upper Nile at the Equatorial Lakes. Efforts to extend the model to include other reaches of

the river could not be realized.

The Hydromet Project now under the full administration of the Technical

Committee and finance of the participating governments continue to

collect hydrometerological data. The ambitious plans put since the late

seventies to develop the Technical Committee to a basin authority and

widen its scope of functions collided with deep-rooted political suspicions that

have accumulated over the years during the cold war eve.

With the initiative of UNDP the first meeting of the concerned ministers of the basin countries met in

January 1986 in Bangkok. Those attended the meeting included Egypt, Sudan, Uganda,

Tanzania, Congo(Zaire), the Ambassador of Ethiopia in Paris and high level civil service

officials from Burundi and Rwanda. Excited by the experience in the Mokong basin, they decided to

promote effective and similar cooperation among themselves in the Nile basin. They requested the

UNDP to make the necessary assistance to study and propose appropriate mechanism to realize

such cooperation.

The UNDP provided financial assistance to support a fact-finding mission and to

organize the second meeting of the ministerial committee in January 1989. The terms of the reference for the facts

finding mission was finalized by the Technical Committee of the Hydromet

survey in 1989.

It aimed to identify the interest of basin countries in joint development, control

and management of the basin waters, to specify concrete regional development activities of schemes and programmes,

assess the status of development activities carried to date in the basin

countries & assess national capabilities and external technical and financial

assistance required.

The Mission report outlined the context of development, presented an

assessment of water resources potential of the basin and demand in the mid and

long terms and suggested an action plan to control the basin waters. This report

was supposed to serve as a basic document for the third ministerial

meeting to be held late 1989.

At the technical level the terms of reference and the report were not well

received. It seemed that the consultation during the formulations of the terms of

reference were not sufficient. The report itself concentrated on the White Nile

without reference to other tributaries in the Ethiopian plateau.

The Initiative of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)

In accordance with the action plans for the human environment & the Mar del Plata on water development & management and the

resolution of the governing council, UNEP in cooperation with the United Nations

Organizations, have launched, the Environmentically Sound Management of Inland Waters (EMINWA) to assist governments in the

integration of environmental concerns & impacts into the management of water

resources.

One of the main sub-programmes of EMINWA is the African Inland Water Programme which

lends high priority to water management & the mitigation of the effects of drought in Africa as

outlined in the framework of the action plans programme for African cooperation adopted by

the first African Ministerial Conference on the Environment in Cairo in 1985. The committee on

the river and lake basins (CORALB) operating under the Cairo African Ministerial Conference on the Environment in its meeting in Harare in

1989 recommended high priority to the development of the action plan for the Nile

basin.

In the spirit of EMINWA programme UNEP in 1989 developed an initiative to

assist the Nile countries to develop a framework for cooperation for

sustainable management & development of the water resources.

Following a series of meetings with the permanent representatives of the Nile

basin countries, UNEP engaged a consultant (author of this paper) to study

and evaluate the constraints impeding cooperation and identify challenges and opportunities to realize a framework for

basin – wide cooperation among the riparian countries of the Nile for

sustainable management & development of its water resources.

The initiative aim to formulate in the short term a Nile Basin Action Plan

(NILPLAN) as a demonstration for comprehensive environmental sound

management of the water resources systems & preparation of an agreement for adoption by the governments. It was

anticipated that the Hydromet Committee will act as steering committee & its

members as country focal points.

An organization meeting of the Panel of Government – Nominated Experts of the

Nile Basin was convened by the executive director of the UNEP in August 1991.

During this meeting the members of the panel made observations on the

background document prepared by the consultant and finally adopted the

functions of the steering committee, the desirability of country reports and agreed

to hold the first meeting of the panel in early 1992 to finalize the format for country

report and the terms of reference for the diagnostic study for formulation of the

action plan.

This initiative ended at this stage without apparent reasons. However in 1993, the

technical Cooperation Committee for the promotion of the development and

environment protection (TECONILE) was formed in an effort to focus on a

development agenda. Parallel with this development a series of conferences “ The

Nile 2002 Conferences” were launched to provide opportunities for informal

dialogue and exchange of views between countries of the basin and the

international communities.

This activity was supported by the Canadian International Development

Agency (CIDA). In 1995 with the support of CIDA, a Nile River Action Plan was

formulated within the framework of Teconile. The Nile Council of Ministers

(Nile-Com) requested in 1997 the World Bank to lead & coordinate donor support

for the Action Plan. Following this the Nile Basin Initiative was conceived.

On the request of the Nile – Com., the World Bank agreed to coordinate donor

support for the action programme and convene a consultative group meeting for

setting a framework of the International Consortium for Cooperation on the Nile

(ICCON). The first meeting of ICCON was convened in Geneva in June 2001.

It is a partnership between and among the Nile riparians & the international community, to raise and coordinate

funding from bilateral, multilateral and private entities in support for the Shared Vision & Subsidiary Action programmes. It is also hoped that ICCON will provide a

forum for discourse that will include riparians and donors, civil society, NGOS

and the private sector.

6- Present Water Control Works in the Nile Basin

"The Nile basin is perhaps the archetype of the historical pattern of international river

basins development: early & significant development in the delta & lower basin & later – in this instance several thousand years later

– development in the upper basin" (Garetson Hayton & Olmstead – The Law of International

Rivers- New York 1967).

The existing control works in the basin are shown in the schematic diagram Fig. 5.

• In Egypt the control works started with an annual storage dam (1901) single-

purpose for irrigation, with a system of barrages diverting water to the fertile lands on both banks of the river. This

was supported with Jabal Aulia storage dam in the White Nile forty Km from

Khartoum (1937).

Both Aswan & Jabal Aulia Dams augment the meager Nile summer flows during the

period January to May. Both dams were abandoned in 1972 when the over-year

storage at Aswan dam became operational & finally secured Egypt water

requirements not only during the dry season but provided protection against the occurrence of low flow year & high

floods years. Egypt was able to achieve full control of the river basin within it for

irrigation, power generation & flood control.

• In Sudan, the Sennar barrage/storage dam was constructed in the Blue Nile &

becaome operational in 1925 for irrigation of the Gezira scheme. The first phase of Roseries dam was constructed

& became operational in 1965 for irrigation of Rahad Irrigation Project &

power Generation. The Khashm ElGirba Dam in Atbara River was constructed &

became operational in 1965 for irrigation & power generation.

• The Jongoli Canal, the first conservation project was under

construction when abandoned in 1983.

• The Merrewi storage dam is under construction in the Main Nile &

expected to become operational during 2008 for power generation.

FIGURE ( 5 )The Nile System. A Schematic of Delivery & Abstractions

• In Ethiopia power was generated from lake Tana by closing the reefs of the

lake.

• In Uganda, the Owen Fall dam was constructed in the exit of Lake Victoria

in Jinja for power generation & became operational during the 1950s.

• These were the achievements for the last hundred years & the basin today is

in deplorable state of under-development.

7- The New VisionThe Nile Basin is endowed with vast natural

resources, its unique climate from the tropics to the Mediterranean , its rainfall,

surface run-off, lakes, swamps, aquifers, its agricultural lands potential, its forests and

animal resources & fisheries, its energy potential in the water & underground & from the sun & its inland navigation possibilities for linking the basin societies and above all

the human population with their cultural heritage & ancient fluvial civilization who are

now over 260 million people & who will be over 600 million by the mid of the century.

The meager development in the basin that was achieved in the last

hundred years is like an ant in an ocean of poverty. The Nile basin is faced with gross inequalities in the

quantity & quality of means of production, wealth, income,

education and social services. This is the great challenge that face the

basin.

A dual economy exists with modern & traditional subsistence sectors, the latter

encompassing the majority of the population who live in the rural areas &

now in an exodus process because of this inequality moving to the urban areas to live in shanty shelters surrounding the

urban proper with its luxuries & social services. If matters remain like this by

mid of this century half of the population of the basin will be living in poor urban

centers.

A new vision & unusual strategies are needed for the development of the Nile

Basin under the concept of the Integrated River Basin Development, recognizing the hydrological unity of the basin & the basin

area as the ideal unit of planning for economic & social development. It is also important to realize the pivotal of natural

resources of the basin for the wellbeing & welfare & of the societies.

In this context let us learn the lessons that the water resources of the basin is not 84 mld m3 at Aswan. This is the surface run-off of the river but not the water resources of the basin. As mentioned earlier, the basin water resources include in addition to this the direct rainfall on the basin of 1130 mld m3 & about 3000 mld m3 in the lakes, swamps & wetlands of the basin & finally the groundwater resources.

• The challenge is to mobilize all these resources under the Integrated River

Basin Development rather than quarrel over an 84 mld m3 at Aswan. The

environmentally sound management & development of water resources of the

basin will ultimately increase the flow at Aswan and not reduce it.

The problem in the basin is therefore not lack of water resources but lack of

development from which the basin has suffered due to the hydro politics &

political mismanagement that has prevailed in the basin over the last

hundred years.

The basin countries like many parts of Africa suffered an era colonization,

became victim of the cold war & now left fighting each other under the new world

order & globalization & facing the challenges of climate change & its

associated problems.

In conclusion we need to stress in this forum that the basin has all the potential to

combat the state of underdevelopment through the process of Integrated River

Basin Development for transformation of the basin societies, contribute to their

wellbeing.

A dynamic movement is needed to be lead by the intellectuals of the basin &

the scientific community in the front line with effective participation of the basin

people & a strong & sustainable political will by the countries of the basin with a

new forward looking vision.