The Egyptian Illusion of Guardianship over Nile River Demolished Foreever

By Staff Writer

                                                                      Sept. 23, 2026 (ENA)

No matter a government change or leadership in Egypt, one thing remains constant in the official Egyptian discourse regarding the Nile River, which is dealing with the resources of the basin countries from a perspective of guardianship and considering development in the upstream countries an issue that requires Cairo’s approval.

However, this pathetic hydro-imperialist mentality is no longer capable of explaining the reality of the Nile today. Africa has changed and the regional system of the Nile Basin has changed, while the Egyptian discourse continues to use language belonging to a historical era that the continent moved beyond decades ago.

As aptly put by the Ethiopian Ministry of Water and Energy the recent statements by the Egyptian Minister of Water Resources and Irrigation reflect a “crude colonial mentality” that characterizes Egypt’s policy toward African countries. This characterization was not prompted solely by the latest statements, as the Ethiopian Ministry of Water and Energy had previously warned against the continuation of what it described as a mentality associated with the colonial era in dealing with the Nile issue, affirming that Ethiopia would not relinquish its right to use the river to meet the development needs of its people.

The oft repeated official Egyptian discourse and the phrases used in reference to the Nile are “historical rights,” “all available measures,” and “water security”; as though repeating these terms could in itself grant a state additional rights in a transboundary river. But words, no matter how sharp and undiplomatic they may be, cannot change the fact that Ethiopia is a sovereign state and that its natural resources located within its territory are part of its right to development.

Ethiopia's Water and Energy Minister Habtamu Itefa had previously stated that Ethiopia does not need permission from any country to develop its water resources, explaining that the country built the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam without obtaining permission from anyone and that it would continue developing other dams in its river basins when the needs arise. This is not mere political statement, but reflects a reality that has already been established on the ground. The dam has been completed and is producing energy; and Ethiopia has transformed from a country that faced major electricity-generation deficit into a country expanding energy exports to its neighbors, while moving toward exploiting its enormous hydropower potential to provide   electricity access for its people, support industrialization and development.

The unbridled double standard

One of the clearest paradoxes in the Egyptian discourse is Cairo's insistence on  the need for consultation and approval by it before upstream countries establish projects, while Egypt itself proceeded with the construction of the Aswan High Dam without the upstream countries having a comparable role in deciding the project. The Ethiopian Ministry of Water and Energy pointed to this double standard in its statement issued, stressing that Cairo treats its approval as a prerequisite for the Nile Basin countries to develop their water resources, despite the fact that Egypt built the Aswan High Dam without consulting the upstream countries.

Here emerges the question that political discourse cannot evade: If Egypt has the right to develop its water resources within its territory without seeking permission from the upstream countries, why does not the same principle apply to Ethiopia and the other countries? Unbridled double standards do not create a fair system for managing transboundary rivers.

Unjust legacy cannot govern the future

A fundamental part of the Egyptian position has remained based on historical arrangements and agreements dating back to political circumstances entirely different from today’s African reality.  Ethiopia was not a party to the 1959 Agreement, nor did the other upstream countries participate in shaping a system that sought to determine the future of Nile waters without their participation. Therefore, attempting to present those arrangements as a definitive basis for the rights of all basin countries ignores a fundamental fact: A state that was not a party to an agreement cannot, with the passage of time, become bound by it merely because another state insists on it.

Africa has changed politically, demographically, and economically. The needs for electricity, food, and water have multiplied, new regional integration projects have emerged, and the upstream countries have become more capable of developing their natural resources. Therefore, reproducing past arrangements as the only solution for the future is not cooperation. It is an attempt to preserve an unjust legacy despite the changing circumstances that produced it.

Ethiopia maintains that transboundary rivers should be bridges for cooperation, development, and integration, not tools for excluding upstream countries or imposing restrictions on their right to development. In January 2026, Water and Energy Minister Habtamu Itefa affirmed that Ethiopian transboundary rivers should be viewed as shared resources and opportunities for cooperation and green growth, stressing that the availability of water in Ethiopia could bring potential benefits to Sudan, South Sudan, Kenya, Somalia, and Egypt.

This is the Ethiopian position: Water is not the exclusive property of Ethiopia, but neither is it the exclusive property of Egypt. Ethiopia is not demanding a monopoly over the Nile; rather, it rejects turning participation in the river into a pretext for depriving it of the use of its resources. The difference between the two positions is fundamental.

The Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam: A counter-hegemonic project 

The Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam is no longer a project that can be influenced by political statements or Egypt’s media-worn diplomatic warnings. It has become a developmental and strategic reality. Water and Energy Minister Habtamu Itefa said that the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam contributed to doubling Ethiopia’s electricity-generation capacity to about 9.6 gigawatts, and has also become a catalyst for electricity interconnection and regional economic cooperation. He also explained that Ethiopia exports electricity to Djibouti, Sudan, and Kenya, and seeks to expand its electricity interconnection network with other countries.

Thus, the project that Egyptian discourse attempted for years to portray as a source of threat has, in reality, become part of a broader transformation in Africa’s energy system. More importantly, Ethiopia does not view its water resources as a means of exercising influence over others, but as a foundation for overcoming energy poverty and achieving industrialization and economic growth.

Egypt's problem is not however only about the GERD. For those who read between the lines, the underlying desire of the country has been repeatedly expressed by its official statements. Cairo is never prepared to accept Ethiopia as a strong developing country capable of investing in its natural resources without waiting for external approval.

 But Ethiopia has already demonstrated that it is capable and determined to develop its resources without any one's permission. Accepting this reality and mutually developing the region is the right answer. In August, the Ethiopian Water and Energy Minister affirmed that his country would continue developing its water resources and would build other dams when necessary. The minister also stressed that Ethiopia’s future is closely linked to the Abay River and the Red Sea, and that the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam represents a transformative project that has changed the country’s position in the fields of energy, development, and regional integration. Thus, betting that strong political statements can return Ethiopia to a stage of hesitation or waiting is a bet on a reality that no longer exists.

Ethiopia has repeatedly declared that transboundary rivers should be drivers of cooperation and shared prosperity, while at the same time rejecting any concept of water hegemony that deprives upstream countries of their sovereign rights. This is the position reaffirmed by the Ministry of Water and Energy. Consistent with this principle, Ethiopia continues to build its capabilities, continues to generate electricity and export energy, and continues to invest in its water resources. It also continues to work on watershed rehabilitation, afforestation, environmental conservation, and strengthening the sustainability of the Abay Basin, a point highlighted by the Ministry of Water and Energy in its latest statement.

Ethiopia is not going back

Repeated Egyptian statements will not change this course, nor will sharp rhetoric grant Cairo authority that neither law nor reality has given it. Past agreements will not turn back the clock, and they will not make Ethiopia relinquish its right to use its natural resources. Rather, the continuation of this discourse may produce the opposite result: Exposing the depth of a mentality that still views Ethiopian development as a threat instead of seeing it as an opportunity for African cooperation.

Hence, the time has come for Egypt to deal with the Nile as a shared African basin, not a sphere of unilateral influence. The time has also come to recognize that Ethiopia is not a country waiting for permission to decide its future. The Nile will not be a tool of domination and Ethiopian development will not stop because of political rhetoric, no matter how loudly it is expressed.

The reality of the 21st century imposes a different rule. Mutual respect instead of guardianship, cooperation instead of hegemony, and shared development instead of exclusion. This is not merely an Ethiopian vision. It is the only path capable of moving the Nile Basin from a legacy of conflict into a space of African integration.