Sudan And Egypt Nile Agreement

“So it`s a really good time to start filling the dam. It would affect Egypt less. Egypt therefore has some incentive to accept this point at this stage. At best, they will return to the negotiating table, and they will agree quickly and move things forward. It is therefore clear that, while the world as a whole will welcome the state art that assured Fallah, Egypt, that the Nile would remain above all its river and that this flow would be primarily intended to make its fields productive, colonization is by no means a precedent for Colorado or other problems. Political considerations have forced Sudan to subordinate its interests to those of Egypt. The Nile water agreement did not seal in more detail the great legal problem that matters so much to irrigation experts in the Western world. But Egypt`s difficulties are overcome, at least for the time being. And this, not the creation of a global precedent, was the task facing London and Cairo.

It should be recalled that on 28 February 1922, Great Britain recognized Egypt as an independent sovereign state, with the caveat that certain matters “should remain at the discretion of Her Majesty`s Government until it may be possible, through free discussion and friendly agreements between both parties, to conclude agreements on this subject between Her Majesty`s Government and the Egyptian Government.” Sudan — the “black country,” a vast region in southern Egypt, between the 22nd and fifth parallels — was the subject of the fourth of these reservations. This area had been recaptured jointly by Great Britain and Egypt in the campaigns of 1896-8. It is governed by a condominium. The flags of England and Egypt fly side by side. The Egyptians claim that Sudan belongs to them and that it should be admitted to their kingdom. The English deny it. Since the war, Downing Street has fluctuated somewhat in relation to its Egyptian policy. But she remained stubborn and consistent on one point: England will not abandon Sudan. That has not changed.

Britain`s willingness to adapt the Nile water issue before Sudan`s fate is resolved, if at all, underlines this. But the balagh, the Wafd spokesman, as it is now called in opposition, took a completely different view and published on 18 May a lengthy critique of the agreement. Parliament was not in session when the agreement was signed, so there are no decisive ways to say what Fellah thinks about the case. However, a passionate analysis seems to show that the agreement, perfect or imperfect, takes a significant step forward in the creation of healthy Anglo-Egyptian relations and registers a net profit for Egypt. “To the British government: the British government has already started negotiations with the Ethiopian government on its proposal and we had imagined that the negotiations with us would have been concluded, whether this proposal came into force or not; we never thought that the British government would reach an agreement with another government on our sea.┬áThe essence of the agreement is therefore clearly the safeguarding of Egypt`s “natural and historical rights in the waters of the Nile.” This river has been the river since the beginning of Egypt`s history. The recent agreement tends to perpetuate this relationship. It plans to allow Sudan to source quantities of Nile water that would not affect this traditional prerogative or violate Egypt`s “agricultural expansion requirements.”