The United Nations Watercourses Convention from the Ethiopian context: better to join or stay out?

Abstract

The 1997 Watercourses Convention is the first and the only worldwide instrument enacted under the auspice of the United Nations as far as the non-navigational uses of international watercourses is concerned. Although the Convention has entered in to force in 2014 after seventeen years of its adoption, many watercourse states are still hesitant to join the Convention. Given the divergent views of the respective countries towards the provisions of the Convention coupled with the existing tension and lack of genuine trust among downstream vis-à-vis upstream blocks, none of the Nile riparian states are currently parties to the Convention. The article is thus aimed to examine whether joining to or staying out from the Convention provides a betteroff position for Ethiopia particularly in its relation with the two downstream Countries-Egypt and Sudan. Owing to the confusing and downstream favored provisions of the Convention coupled with the Egyptians’ long lasting adherence to historic right based argument, the article asserted that the move to join the Convention might be expensive for Ethiopia which may force it to pay unnecessary bills for the advantages of the two downstream countries. Therefore, I argue that it is better for Ethiopia to stay out from the Convention and the complexities thereto while expecting at least ‘a half and a loaf’ from the application of the customary international water law regime, if there is any.

Keywords: equitable use, framework convention, Nile basin, riparian, significant harm, watercourses