By- Asrat Birhanu @renaissancedam
Recent diplomatic activities, primarily kept from the public eye, reveal Turkey’s role in the ongoing dispute between Ethiopia and Egypt over the Renaissance Dam. As Ethiopia’s second-largest investor after China, Turkey’s economic and military involvement is substantial, with more than 200 Turkish companies operating there as of 2022. Additionally, Turkey provided crucial military support to Ethiopia, which played a decisive role in helping the Ethiopian government secure victory in the recent civil conflict.
Turkey has previously offered to mediate border disputes between Sudan and Ethiopia, showing its interest in maintaining regional stability. Now, Ankara is using its influence to broker a potential compromise between Ethiopia and Egypt over the GERD—a project essential for Ethiopia’s development that Egypt views with growing concern.
Hakan Fidan’s Diplomatic Shuttle
Turkey’s Foreign Minister, Hakan Fidan, has been actively engaged in shuttle diplomacy, visiting Addis Ababa and Cairo to deliver messages between the two governments. His recent trip to Cairo, following discussions in Addis Ababa, signals a possible thawing of relations between Egypt and Ethiopia, with Turkey playing a central mediating role.
In July 2024, Egypt’s intelligence chief, Abbas Kamel, reached out to Turkey, showing Egypt’s desire for a mediator who could influence Ethiopia. Recognizing Turkey’s significant investments and position, Egypt sought Ankara’s help to resolve the standoff. Egyptian Prime Minister Mostafa Madbouly even mentioned that secret talks had been held with Turkey about the dam, highlighting the behind-the-scenes efforts to find a solution. During his visit to Egypt, Fidan is also reportedly working on arranging a future meeting between Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan in Ankara, which could further the dialogue initiated during Erdogan’s previous visit to Cairo.
Ethiopia’s Firm Stand and Egypt’s Desperate Pleas
However, the messages exchanged between Egypt and Ethiopia reveal a deep and ongoing rift. Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed has been persistent in his refusal to commit to specific water shares for Egypt, rejecting the outdated colonial notion that Egypt has any right to a fixed allocation of the Nile’s water—whether during the GERD’s filling or its subsequent operation. Ethiopia maintains that the Blue Nile’s waters, Originating from Ethiopian rainfall, are a natural resource that Ethiopia has every right to use, just as other countries utilize their oil or natural gas.
In response, Egyptian officials have communicated their usual “red lines” to Addis Ababa, warning that a certain level of water deficit is unacceptable and could escalate the dispute. They added that Egypt’s position remains that the solution lies in a negotiated agreement regulating the GERD’s filling and operation, supposedly balancing the interests of upstream and downstream nations. However, this position ignores the reality that Egypt contributes nothing to the Nile’s flow and continues to cling to a colonial-era mindset that is both unjust and outdated.
Conclusion: Ethiopia’s Just and Logical Stance Versus Egypt’s Colonialist Demands
Ethiopia’s stance on the Renaissance Dam is logical and justifiable. As the primary source of the Blue Nile, Ethiopia has a legitimate right to utilize its waters for its development. Egypt’s demands, deeply rooted in outdated colonial-era agreements, are unreasonable and fail to reflect the modern reality that Egypt contributes nothing to the Nile’s flow. This sense of entitlement is a profound injustice that disregards contemporary dynamics and Ethiopia’s sovereignty.
In any unilateral negotiations with Egypt, Ethiopia should remain firm in applying the fait accompli policy. This strategy ensures that Ethiopia’s interests are safeguarded and not compromised by Egypt’s unfounded demands. The ultimate resolution should be aligned with the Entebbe Agreement, a pivotal accord among Nile Basin countries that promotes equitable and reasonable use of the Nile’s waters. This agreement should serve as a basis to compel Egypt to sign the CFA and formally recognize Ethiopia’s rights. The need for a fair resolution is urgent, and it is in the best interest of all parties involved.
If these negotiations are genuinely based on mutual concessions, it raises the question: What is Egypt prepared to offer? Egypt appears to engage in these talks solely to gain, without contributing to the discussion or the flow of the Nile. Ethiopia’s position goes beyond merely defending its rights—it is about challenging and rectifying the colonial-era inequities that have long allowed downstream nations like Egypt to exert undue control over the Nile’s waters.
No nation that does not contribute to the Nile should have the authority to impose conditions that infringe upon Ethiopia’s sovereignty and rightful use of its natural resources.
