July 18, 2024
Please read below the response by my colleague and friend, Dr Birhanu, to President Trump’s unthoughtful remarks on Ethiopia’s Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam.
Re: “Trump says US ‘working on’ resolving Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam dispute
by Dr. Birhanu Lenjiso, Oromiya, Ethiopia
On July 15, 2025, Mada Masr published an article titled “Trump Says US ‘working on’ resolving Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam dispute,” that has several points that call for scrutiny and clarification, particularly about the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD) and its financing.
First, the article states that U.S. President Donald Trump described the GERD dispute as “a big problem” that the U.S. is “working on” resolving, and it highlights Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi’s appreciation for Trump’s commitment to a “fair agreement” between Egypt, Sudan, and Ethiopia. It also references a 2019 meeting hosted by Trump with representatives from these countries to discuss the dispute.
While Trump’s remarks signal U.S. interest in mediating the GERD dispute, the article overstates the significance of his involvement by framing it as a novel or decisive intervention. The GERD dispute, ongoing since 2011, has seen multiple rounds of negotiations mediated by various parties, including the African Union and the United States, with limited success. Trump’s previous efforts during his first term yielded no binding agreement, as Ethiopia and Sudan withdrew from a draft agreement in 2020, frustrating U.S. mediation attempts. The article does not contextualize this history adequately, presenting Trump’s recent statements as a fresh initiative without acknowledging the complexity and entrenched positions of the parties involved.
Furthermore, the article does not critically examine Trump’s motives or the feasibility of his proposed mediation. Commentators with both from US and Ethiopian side shows skepticism about U.S. involvement, noting that Trump’s comments may be tied to his self-image as a global dealmaker rather than a deep understanding of the issue. The article’s optimistic tone about U.S. mediation overlooks Ethiopia’s insistence on sovereignty over the dam and Egypt’s rigid stance on water rights, which have repeatedly stalled talks.
Second, the article indirectly references Trump’s claim, made during a meeting with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, that the U.S. “financed” the GERD, which he described as stopping the flow of water into the Nile River.
The assertion that the U.S. funded the GERD is baseless and widely disputed. The Ethiopian government has consistently said that the GERD, a $4 billion project, is entirely financed domestically through bonds, public contributions, and other local resources. The Public Coordination Office for the GERD in Addis Ababa has explicitly rejected Trump’s claim, and no credible evidence supports U.S. financial involvement. The article does not challenge or fact-check this claim, allowing a significant inaccuracy to persist without scrutiny. By not addressing Ethiopia’s self-financing efforts, which were undertaken to avoid external influence and requirements to seek approval from downstream countries, the article perpetuates a misleading narrative, more than misinforming its audiences.
Moreover, Trump’s claim that the GERD “stops the flow of water” to the Nile is an oversimplification. The dam is designed primarily for hydroelectric power, not to block water flow entirely, and Ethiopia has maintained that it will not significantly harm downstream countries. Studies and diplomatic assurances, suggest that the GERD’s operation, if managed cooperatively, does not inherently threaten Egypt’s water security. The article’s uncritical repetition of Trump’s statement risks amplifying a skewed perspective that aligns with Egypt’s concerns without acknowledging Ethiopia’s position or technical realities.
Third, the article emphasizes Egypt’s “existential concerns” over water security, noting that the GERD imposes a “fait accompli” on downstream countries, potentially compromising their access to water or forcing unfavorable resource-sharing agreements. It cites an Egyptian government source outlining three non-negotiable terms: a minimum annual water release, legally binding mitigation measures, and no permanent concession on water rights.
While Egypt’s reliance on the Nile for over 97% of its water needs is undeniable, the article frames the GERD as an inherent threat without sufficiently exploring Ethiopia’s perspective or the dam’s actual impact. Ethiopia has argued that the GERD, located on the Blue Nile, will regulate water flow, and benefit downstream countries by reducing flooding and providing electricity, which could support regional development. Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed has emphasized “shared progress” and assured that the dam’s operation will not harm Egypt or Sudan. The article does not mention that recent fillings of the dam have not significantly disrupted Nile flows, partly due to abundant rainfall in the Ethiopian highlands.
The article also omits the historical context of Nile water disputes, particularly the 1929 and 1959 agreements, which Egypt and Sudan cite as guaranteeing their water shares, but which Ethiopia rejects as colonial-era impositions that exclude its rights as an upstream nation. By focusing solely on Egypt’s concerns, the article presents a one-sided view, ignoring Ethiopia’s legitimate need for energy development, with over 60% of its population lacking electricity access. The claim of a “fait accompli” oversimplifies the issue, as Ethiopia has engaged in negotiations, albeit with disagreements over terms, and the African Union has been a primary mediator.
Fourth, the article suggests that Trump’s comments align with Egypt’s position, as shown by al-Sisi’s praise and Egypt’s appreciation of Trump’s recognition of the Nile as a “source of life.” It also notes that Trump’s remarks were made in the context of Egypt’s long-standing concerns about the GERD.
While Trump’s statements appear sympathetic to Egypt’s water security concerns, the article does not critically assess whether this reflects a consistent U.S. policy or merely Trump’s position. During his first term, Trump indeed leaned toward Egypt, even suggesting in 2020 that Egypt could “blow up” the dam, a statement that heightened tensions. However, his recent comments lack specificity on how the U.S. would mediate or what a “fair agreement” entails, making the article’s portrayal of his stance overly optimistic. But comments on the issue so far highlight skepticism about Trump’s understanding of the issue, with some suggesting that the remarks lack a coherent strategy.
Additionally, the article does not address Sudan’s role or perspective, despite Sudan being a key stakeholder in the dispute. Sudan has expressed concerns about the GERD’s safety and water flow but has also acknowledged potential benefits, such as flood control and cheaper electricity. By focusing primarily on Egypt’s approval of Trump’s remarks, the article sidelines the tripartite nature of the negotiations and the need for a balanced solution.
In conclusion, the Mada Masr article presents an incomplete and partially misleading account of the GERD dispute and Trump’s involvement. It fails to challenge Trump’s claim of U.S. financing, overemphasizes Egypt’s perspective without adequately addressing Ethiopia’s position, and portrays U.S. mediation as a promising development without acknowledging the historical complexities and failures of past negotiations. A more balanced report would have critically examined Trump’s claims, included Ethiopia’s and Sudan’s viewpoints, and highlighted the technical and diplomatic nuances of the GERD’s impact on Nile water flows. The article’s reliance on Egyptian sources and lack of skepticism toward Trump’s statements contribute to a narrative that risks misinforming readers about this complex regional issue.
Read my earlier Post: Completed Ethiopia Dam-GERD Can Power East African Nations
͏Lawrence Freeman is a Political-Economic Analyst for Africa, who has been involved in economic development policies for Africa for 35 years. He is a teacher, writer, public speaker, consultant on Africa, and an analyst of global strategic relations. Mr. Freeman strongly believes that economic development is an essential human right. He is the creator of the blog: lawrencefreemanafricaandtheworld.com, also publishes on: lawrencefreeman.substack.com, “Freeman’s Africa and the World, and on X @lkfreemansafrica