The Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam is inaugurated without Egypt and Sudan

9 September 2025

On 9 September, Ethiopia officially inaugurated the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam on the Blue Nile, a project first announced nearly 14 years ago. The ceremony was a solitary affair, with only Ethiopia present – lacking Egypt and Sudan, despite its direct impact on all three nations. 

The dam, which has a storage capacity of 74 billion cubic metres—roughly the equivalent of the annual share of Sudan and Egypt combined—quickly became the subject of a legal, technical, and political struggle whose repercussions are still being felt.

During his speech at the $5 billion-dollar dam’s opening, the Ethiopian Prime Minister reiterated that “the Renaissance Dam will not harm the interests of Egypt and Sudan” and confirmed his government’s readiness to continue dialogue.

Sudanese and Egyptian concerns

From the outset, Khartoum viewed the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD) as a project with potential benefits but also grave risks unless legal and technical reservations were addressed through a binding agreement that ensured coordination in operations, data exchange, and the safety of both dams and people.

The Roseires Dam, which is only about 100 kilometres from the construction site, poses the greatest risk. The significant difference in storage capacity between the two dams—more than tenfold—means that any failure in operation or coordination would threaten the lives of millions of Sudanese. Authorities estimate that approximately 20 million citizens living along the Blue Nile are at risk in the event of a collapse or disruption in operation.

As for Cairo, its most prominent concerns were the direct impact on its historical share of Nile water under the 1959 agreement, as filling the dam’s reservoir would mean a reduction of approximately 15 billion cubic metres annually, in addition to the risk of Ethiopia gaining unilateral control over the river’s course.

In addition, Egyptian and Sudanese experts have warned of risks related to the dam’s safety and uncontrolled discharges, especially during years of prolonged drought, as well as concerns about a potential collapse threatening agricultural land between the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam and the High Dam in Egypt.

In contrast, Addis Ababa has consistently rejected any agreements it views as an extension of the colonial era, asserting that 86% of the Nile’s waters originate in its territory, while well over 65 million Ethiopians live in darkness. It has presented the dam as a development project aimed at generating electricity without harming downstream countries.

Ethiopian officials argued that any binding agreement on filling and operating the dam would restrict their “natural right” to development and considered Khartoum and Cairo’s concerns exaggerated, pointing to expected benefits for Sudan such as regular water flow, reduced siltation, and increased electricity production.

Stumbling in negotiations

Over the course of 14 years, the three countries engaged in multiple rounds of negotiations under the auspices of the African Union, Washington, Abu Dhabi, among other countries. The most prominent of these was the so-called “2+2 Mechanism,” which brought together the foreign and irrigation ministers of the three countries. The negotiations continued intermittently. Despite these meetings, a final, binding agreement was not reached, prompting Ethiopia, in February 2022, to begin generating electricity from the dam’s first turbines. Sudan and Egypt considered this a breach of international obligations and a disregard for the principle of prior notification.

While Cairo and Khartoum adhered to the international option through the Security Council and the Arab League, Addis Ababa emphasised that the solution must remain “within the African framework”.

Leaked agreement

A major surprise was revealed by leaks published by Al Jazeera this September, revealing a bilateral agreement between Sudan and Ethiopia, dated October 26, 2022, regarding the filling and operation of the dam. The agreement, which has not yet been officially announced, acknowledged the interconnected nature of the safety and operation of the GERD and the Roseires Dam and stipulated several technical arrangements, most notably Ethiopia’s commitment to gradual filling during the rainy season, reducing storage in drought situations, and setting the operating level between 625 and 640 metres above sea level.

In addition to establishing a joint coordination mechanism that makes decisions based on consensus and monitors emergency situations, the agreement also highlights each party’s responsibility for the safety of its dams.

This leak came just hours after the Quadripartite Mechanism meeting, which brought together the foreign and water ministers of Egypt and Sudan in Cairo on September 3, 2025. The two countries affirmed their rejection of any unilateral actions in the Eastern Nile Basin and their view that the Ethiopian dam violates international law and threatens regional stability. According to experts, this leak was a major embarrassment for Khartoum, revealing a clear discrepancy between its public positions and previous understandings with Ethiopia regarding the dam.

Egyptian reaction

In its first response to the opening of the GERD on Tuesday, Egypt affirmed that it will not allow Ethiopia’s efforts to unilaterally dominate the management of water resources.

The Egyptian Foreign Ministry asserts that it is committed to implementing international law on the Nile River and reserves the right to take all measures guaranteed by international law and the UN Charter to defend the existential interests of its people.

Egypt, represented by Foreign Minister Dr Badr Abdel Aty, addressed a letter to the President of the United Nations Security Council in protest on the day of the inauguration. “Despite all the flimsy efforts to provide the Ethiopian dam a false veneer of acceptance and legitimacy, the dam remains a unilateral measure that violates international law,” the letter reads. The minister claims Egypt has “exercised utmost restraint” in handling the matter with Ethiopia, while, conversely, “Addis Ababa has adopted intransigent positions, sought to delay negotiations, and imposed a fait accompli, driven by a political agenda—not based on development needs.”

The Sudan-Ethiopia agreement

According to Dr Ahmed El-Mufti, an expert in international law and water resources, the leaked Sudan-Ethiopia agreement represents a step in the right direction by providing a framework for mitigating the immediate risks to Sudan. However, it remains incomplete unless it is ratified and developed into a joint management of the dam and subsequently expanded to include Egypt.

Dr El-Mufti pointed out that Cairo considers the leak a confirmation of its fears of being bypassed in bilateral arrangements and has once again resorted to the Security Council, demanding that its “existential rights” be guaranteed. He explained that the agreement does not directly affect rights but rather focuses on improving transboundary water management and enhancing regional cooperation to share benefits while taking precautions against negative impacts on Sudan.