The threat of the use of force continued. But a security mindset will not guarantee Egypt its past share in the waters. The body thus elected presented its report on 25 August 1920. It was unanimous, with the exception of the issue of the distribution of the increased water supply available by the Nile projects and the distribution of the costs of the proposed works. The president and the Cambridge candidate judged that the agreement is the result of lengthy negotiations to replace the 1929 treaty, written by Britain, granting Egypt the right of veto over any project concerning the Nile from upstream countries. Under the conditions, Egypt would receive 48 billion cubic meters of water per year and Sudan 4 billion cubic meters of water. Egypt would not need the agreement of upstream states to carry out water projects on its own territories, but could veto projects on all tributaries of the Nile in upstream countries, including the 43,130-square-kilometer Lake Victoria. The world`s second largest freshwater lake is fed by direct rainfall and thousands of streams from Tanzania, Burundi, Uganda and Kenya, all located in east central Africa. If Ethiopia acts to block our right to the waters of the Nile, there will be no alternative to the use of force.

The manipulation of a nation`s rights to water manipulates its life and a decision to go to war from that point is undeniable within the international community. These differences over the use of the Nile are not new and have a long history due to the high dependence of these countries on the waters of the Nile. In 1929, an agreement was reached between Egypt and Britain on the use of the waters of the Nile – Britain is said to have represented its colonies in the Nile basin. [1] The Anglo-Egyptian Treaty dealt with many issues relating to the Nile and its tributaries. It is particularly important for this debate that it grants Egypt an annual allocation of water of 48 billion cubic meters and Sudan 4 billion cubic meters for an estimated average annual yield of 84 billion cubic meters. In addition, the 1929 agreement granted Egypt a veto over construction projects on the Nile or one of its tributaries in order to minimize disruptions to the flow of water to the Nile. 3.C therefore, the Egyptian Government accepts the conclusions of the Nile Commission of 1925, the report of which is annexed and which is considered to form an integral part of this Agreement. However, in view of the delay in the construction of the Gebel Aulia dam, considered equivalent to the Gezira project, in accordance with paragraph 40 of the Nile Commission report, the Government of Egypt proposes to change the date and quantities of progressive sampling of Nile water by Sudan during the flood months, in accordance with Article 57 of the Commission`s report: Sudan may therefore not withdraw more than 126 cubic metres per second before 1936, with the measurement and consultation that the periods referred to in the above Article remain unchanged until the fixed value of 126 cubic metres per second is reached. .

. .