The Cooperative Framework Agreement (CFA), a landmark legal instrument designed to establish a Nile Commission at the level of heads of state and government, remains in limbo despite its formal adoption. Experts point to waning momentum among member states as a primary obstacle to its implementation.
On October 13, 2024, after nearly two decades of negotiations and diplomacy, the CFA officially entered into force as international law governing the management of the Nile River. This vast waterway, the world’s longest river, flows through 11 East and Central African nations: Eritrea, Sudan, South Sudan, Egypt, the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Uganda, Ethiopia, Rwanda, Burundi, Tanzania, and Kenya.
The agreement, initially negotiated among nine riparian nations—Burundi, DRC, Egypt, Ethiopia, Kenya, Rwanda, Sudan, Tanzania, and Uganda—required adoption by at least six countries to take effect. Burundi, Ethiopia, Rwanda, Tanzania, and Uganda signed and ratified the CFA, while South Sudan, which gained independence in 2011 and was absent during the negotiations, acceded to the agreement later.
RELATED POSTS
In a jubilant statement, the Nile Basin Initiative (NBI) hailed the CFA’s enactment as a turning point for regional cooperation. “Today, October 13, 2024, we witness a defining moment in the history of the Nile Basin and in the broader story of Nile transboundary water cooperation,” read the statement. It further noted that the African Union, as the agreement’s depository, confirmed the CFA’s legal standing on September 4, 2024, in accordance with Articles 43 and 45.
Despite the historic milestone, the CFA’s adoption has been met with sharp resistance from Egypt and Sudan. Both nations rejected the agreement outright, with Egypt explicitly citing its incompatibility with the 1929 and 1959 Nile River Agreements.
“The CFA violates the 1929 and 1959 Nile River Agreements,” Egypt declared, underscoring its refusal to recognize the new framework. These colonial-era treaties granted Egypt and Sudan disproportionate rights over the river’s waters. The 1929 accord, signed between Egypt and Britain (on behalf of its colonies), gave Egypt veto power over upstream projects. The subsequent 1959 agreement allocated 55 billion cubic meters of the Nile’s annual flow to Egypt and 18.5 billion cubic meters to Sudan, leaving evaporation and other losses unaccounted for.
A Break from Colonial Legacy
Ambassador Ibrahim Idris, a legal expert and former diplomat deeply involved in the arbitration of regional boundary and water disputes, argued that the CFA is a direct response to these outdated agreements. “Ethiopia and the other nations, which were under colonial rule at the time, were not party to these obsolete and exclusionary treaties,” he told Reporter Magazine.
Ibrahim, who once served as Ethiopia’s Ambassador to Egypt and as Director General of Boundary and Transboundary Rivers Affairs at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, emphasized the inequity of past arrangements. “The 1929 and 1959 agreements were deals between two downstream countries. The CFA seeks to rectify that by advocating equitable and reasonable utilization of the Nile’s resources among all riparian states.”
He criticized Egypt’s reluctance to relinquish its historically privileged position, stating, “Egypt has politicized and securitized the Nile waters, despite contributing nothing to its flow. The CFA is an opportunity to move beyond colonial legacies and foster genuine cooperation.”
In a 2018 article titled “Agreements that Favour Egypt’s Rights to Nile Waters Are an Anachronism,” Salam Abdulqadir Abdulrahman, then Head of the Political Science Department at the University of Human Development in Iraq, argued that colonial-era treaties favoring Egypt disregarded the needs of other riparian nations. “These bilateral agreements totally ignored the needs of other riparian countries, including Ethiopia, which supplies 70 percent to 80percent of the Nile waters. Consequently, none of the other Nile basin countries has ever approved the agreements,” Abdulrahman wrote.
He emphasized that the Cooperative Framework Agreement (CFA), a multilateral and intergovernmental initiative, offered a diplomatic path forward. “Egypt’s threatening stance doesn’t allow compromise because security is directly connected to people’s lives and their survival. But the growing challenges are unlikely to be met with force,” he noted, highlighting the futility of Egypt’s confrontational approach.
Ambassador Ibrahim concurs, asserting that Egypt’s insistence on securitizing the Nile River could ultimately backfire. “By securitizing the Nile, Egypt risks jeopardizing the long-term interests of its own people. It is attempting to block the natural dynamism brought about by changing realities on the ground,” Ibrahim said.
He added that upstream nations, responding to their growing populations’ needs, would proceed with water utilization projects regardless of Egypt’s objections. “The CFA, by coordinating equitable and reasonable utilization, is a tool that benefits downstream nations,” he explained.
A Cooling Commitment
Despite Ethiopia’s instrumental role in spearheading the CFA, experts worry that the country’s enthusiasm for the agreement has waned since its adoption. The next critical step—the establishment of the Nile River Basin Commission (NRBC)—has stalled, leaving the CFA’s full implementation in question.
“I don’t think Ethiopia is giving it the attention it deserves,” said Fekahmed Negash, former head of transboundary rivers affairs at Ethiopia’s Ministry of Water and a former Executive Director of the Eastern Nile Technical Regional Office (ENTRO).
The situation became evident in late December 2024, when Uganda hosted a meeting of Nile Basin Initiative (NBI) water ministers. Attendance was sparse, with only Uganda and South Sudan represented at the ministerial level, while other nations, including Ethiopia, sent lower-level delegations.
According to Fekahmed, this lack of high-level engagement undermined efforts to transition from the NBI to the CFA. “The meeting should have included a sideline discussion among water ministers from the six CFA nations to plan the transfer of NBI assets and responsibilities to the CFA, as previously agreed,” he told Reporter Magazine. Instead, Egypt seized the opportunity to challenge the process, arguing that the NBI could not be dissolved without unanimous consent from all member states, including Egypt, which had suspended its membership years ago.
Legal, political, and diplomatic complications have since arisen, particularly regarding how to transition NBI assets and institutional roles to the CFA. “The water ministers of the CFA nations should have drafted a road map to guide the next steps, but this did not happen,” Fekahmed said.
Ambassador Ibrahim, however, remains optimistic. He believes the CFA nations can find ways to bypass the current deadlock. “Now that the CFA has come into force, these details are manageable,” he said.
Ethiopian-American hydraulic expert Tirusew Assefa (PhD), who has extensive experience in transboundary river studies, describes the CFA as a historic achievement. “We must appreciate what has just happened. The CFA was nearly three decades in the making, and even after signing began, it took another two decades to reach this point,” he said.
While acknowledging the impatience of those eager to see the CFA implemented, Tirusew emphasized its transformative potential. “The CFA represents a generational change in how Nile Basin countries collaborate, rejecting the colonial-era monopoly of water use in the world’s longest river. Such shifts are inherently challenging and slow, especially when the status quo is deeply entrenched. However, the progress we’ve seen is encouraging, and I believe the basin countries will soon adopt sustainable, cooperative water use practices,” he said.
Establishing the Nile Basin Commission
Tirusew highlighted the importance of Article 15 of the CFA, which stipulates the automatic establishment of the Nile River Basin Commission (NRBC) once six countries ratify the agreement. “Technically, the NRBC is already declared established. However, an orderly transition from the Nile Basin Initiative (NBI) to the NRBC is essential. This involves the legal and asset transfer specified in the CFA,” he explained.
He added that resistance to change is expected but surmountable. “The status quo is always difficult to shake off, but my understanding is that basin countries are ready to officially announce the implementation of the NRBC. This is an exciting opportunity for those of us who have watched this process unfold over decades.”
Tirusew also called on Ethiopia to take a leadership role in executing the CFA. “Ethiopia, with its significant stake in equitable water use and decades of advocacy for cooperation, must lead the effort to bring the CFA to life. This agreement addresses the longstanding imbalance of colonial-era water allocations.”
Many experts, including Ambassador Ibrahim and Tirusew, stress the need for trust among Nile Basin countries. Both expressed hope that Egypt and Sudan would move beyond unilateral water use practices and embrace the CFA’s inclusive framework.
“The Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD) and the Aswan High Dam constitute the largest water storage infrastructure within a single basin in the world. By definition, these two dams require cooperation,” Tirusew noted. He pointed to successful international models, such as the Columbia River Basin managed jointly by the United States and Canada, as examples of how transboundary cooperation can work.
“The CFA promotes transboundary cooperation, ensuring that all riparian states have a voice in managing the river’s resources. Water does not recognize borders, and with growing demand on finite resources, cooperation is the only sustainable path forward,” he emphasized.
The CFA provides a framework with broad mandates for the NRBC. According to Fekahmed, the NRBC may choose to allocate water volumes among member countries, focus on resource management, or adopt other utilization strategies—so long as they adhere to the spirit and principles of the CFA.
