The Nile Basin Initiative (NBI) is a partnership between nile-bordering states that ”aims to develop the river cooperatively, share important socio-economic benefits, and promote regional peace and security.” [1] The BNI initiated a dialogue among riparian states, which led to a common vision goal of ”achieving sustainable socio-economic development through the equitable use and benefits of shared water resources in the Nile Basin”. [1] [2] It was officially launched in February 1999[2] by the water ministers of nine countries that share the river: Egypt, Sudan, Ethiopia, Uganda, Kenya, Tanzania, Burundi, Rwanda, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and Eritrea as observers. From the outset, the Nile Basin Initiative has been supported by the World Bank and other external partners. The World Bank`s mandate is to support the work of the NBI as the lead development partner and as the manager of the Nile Basin Multi-Donor Trust Fund. [3] One of the partners is the Nile Basin Discourse, which describes itself as ”a civil society network of organizations that have a positive impact on the development of projects and programs under the Nile Basin Initiative.” [4] Over the years, especially as the populations of other Nile basin countries have increased and these countries have developed the capacity to use Nile water more effectively for national development, disagreements have arisen that Egypt has insisted that the water rights it acquired through the 1929 and 1959 agreements (collectively referred to as the Nile Water Accords), and that no construction project on the Nile or any of its tributaries will be carried out without the prior authorization of Cairo. In fact, various Egyptian leaders have threatened to go to war to protect these so-called ”acquired rights.” Upstream riparian States such as Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda and Ethiopia have argued that they are not bound by these agreements because they have never been parties. In fact, the new ruler of Tanganyika (now Tanzania, after unification with Zanzibar in 1964), Julius Nyerere, argued shortly after his independence from Britain in 1961 that the Nile water agreements exposed his country and other upstream riparian states to Egypt`s mercy, forcing them to submit their national development plans to Cairo`s control and surveillance, and that such an approach to public policy did not coincide with the country`s status as sovereign. an independent State would be compatible. Condition.
All upstream riparian states have since come out in favour of a new, more inclusive legal framework for the management of the Nile basin. Joint decision to give more time to seek a joint agreement This agreement between Egypt and Sudan, which complements the previous agreement, gave Egypt the right to 55.5 billion cubic meters of Nile water per year and Sudan to 18.5 billion cubic meters per year. The 1929 and 1959 agreements both sparked resentment and demands for changes to the pact among the other Nile states, which Egypt resisted. The heads of state and government of Egypt, Ethiopia and Sudan signed a cooperation agreement on the Great Renaissance Dam in 2015 to ease tensions. The agreement should pave the way for further diplomatic cooperation. Key principles of the agreement include prioritizing downstream countries for the electricity produced by the dam, a dispute resolution mechanism and compensation for damages. Egypt wants an alternative to the agreement, which now allows other Nile Basin countries to carry out projects along the river without its prior consent. Nearly two decades after its creation, the Nile Basin Initiative (NBI) Transition Mechanism has been credited with fulfilling several components of its institutional commitment – building an atmosphere of trust and dialogue among riparian states. However, negotiations under the auspices of the NBI have failed to accomplish one of the organization`s most fundamental tasks: the creation of a permanent legal framework and an institution that is ”acceptable” to all States in the basin. .