KEYIR NEWS - Ethiopia’s chief negotiator on the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD), Fekahmed Negash, has accused Egypt of deliberately spreading misinformation about the dam’s impact on downstream communities, reviving one of Africa’s most complex and enduring geopolitical disputes: the struggle over the waters of the Nile.
In a recent interview with Gazette Plus, Fekahmed, who also serves as Ethiopia’s Minister of Water and Energy and Chair of the Transboundary Rivers Negotiating Team, rejected Egypt’s longstanding claims that the dam would displace millions of farmers and devastate agricultural lands.
“The Egyptians have been threatening and confusing the world by pretending that their country’s farmers will be displaced due to the Renaissance Dam,” he said.
According to Fekahmed, Cairo has repeatedly warned that filling the GERD would trigger a humanitarian and security crisis. “They claimed that when the dam holds one billion cubic meters of water, two million Egyptian farmers would be displaced, half migrating to Europe and America, and the other half turning into terrorists. The world now sees this as a complete falsehood,” he asserted.
Ethiopia argues that far from reducing water availability, the GERD will regulate the flow of the Blue Nile, ensuring greater predictability and efficiency in water use across the basin. Fekahmed noted that even with the GERD now fully operational, Egypt’s Aswan High Dam remains full and no farmers have been displaced.
“The construction of the dam ensures better water management and benefits for all riparian countries,” he emphasized.
Addis Ababa maintains that the GERD, a $4.8 billion project and Africa’s largest hydroelectric dam, is central to Ethiopia’s development agenda. Once fully operational, the dam is expected to generate more than 6,000 megawatts of electricity, nearly doubling the country’s power supply and positioning Ethiopia as a regional energy hub.
For Ethiopia, the GERD is not just an infrastructure project but a symbol of sovereignty, resilience, and the right to equitable use of shared resources.
Egypt, however, views the Nile as an existential lifeline. With more than 95% of its population living along the river, the Nile provides the country with nearly all of its freshwater. Cairo argues that rapid upstream development, particularly the GERD, could reduce water flows, threaten food security, and exacerbate political instability.
Egypt’s claims are grounded in historical agreements, notably the 1929 and 1959 Nile Waters Treaties, which allocated the lion’s share of the river’s waters to Egypt and Sudan, while excluding Ethiopia and other upstream states.
Addis Ababa has long rejected these colonial-era treaties as unjust and outdated, noting that Ethiopia, which contributes more than 80% of the Nile’s waters through the Blue Nile, never consented to the agreements.
In recent years, Egyptian officials have warned of “national security threats” linked to the GERD and lobbied the international community, framing the dispute as a potential trigger for regional instability.
The Nile has been a source of contention for over a century, but the GERD project has brought these disputes into sharper focus. Ethiopia began construction on the dam in 2011, financing much of it through domestic bonds and public contributions. From the outset, Egypt opposed the project, calling for legally binding guarantees on water release during filling and operation.
Negotiations, mediated at various times by the African Union, the United States, and the World Bank, have failed to produce a comprehensive agreement. Ethiopia has consistently resisted what it sees as attempts to limit its sovereign right to develop its resources.
Despite the tensions, analysts note that the GERD has already begun to reshape regional politics. Ethiopia insists that by reducing flooding and sedimentation, the dam could benefit downstream states, including Egypt and Sudan. Addis Ababa also highlights potential avenues for electricity exports and integrated water management, framing the GERD as a project of shared prosperity rather than conflict.
But trust remains in short supply. Cairo continues to press for a binding deal, while Addis Ababa favors a more flexible arrangement grounded in the principles of equitable and reasonable use under international water law.
For Fekahmed and other Ethiopian officials, the way forward lies in shifting the narrative from zero-sum competition to cooperative development. “The world has proven that Egypt’s argument is a lie,” he said, adding that the GERD should serve as a foundation for shared growth rather than division.
Observers argue that regional cooperation could unlock enormous potential. Joint investments in irrigation efficiency, agricultural modernization, and energy trade could transform the Nile Basin into a model of transboundary development. Yet political will and trust remain key obstacles.
As the GERD begins full-scale operations, the Nile dispute is unlikely to disappear. For Ethiopia, the dam represents long-overdue justice in a system of water governance skewed by history. For Egypt, it raises existential fears about survival in one of the world’s most water-scarce regions.
The challenge for both nations, and for Africa more broadly, lies in moving beyond mistrust toward a new framework of cooperation. Whether the GERD becomes a catalyst for conflict or a cornerstone of shared prosperity will depend on political choices made in Addis Ababa and Cairo, as well as the ability of regional institutions to mediate a path forward.
For now, the dam stands as both a triumph of Ethiopian ambition and a flashpoint in one of Africa’s oldest and most sensitive geopolitical rivalries.