Lake Victoria Water is one of the most basic and essential resources of people of Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania. The fish species in Lake Victoria that share life on earth with humanity, the environment and many users with diverse interests, create competition over this limited resource.
Fishing communities survive on Lake Victoria water. Frequent meetings can avert conflicts.
Competition for potential access to the resources may be the cause of the conflict in some countries. The current conflict between Egypt and Ethiopia where water problems involve diverse issues, hinge on food production and health of populations, quality of the environment, power production, navigation on rivers and fisheries – all issues that determine the fate of this and future generations.
The most effective way to manage this resource in a sustainable way is for all the stakeholders of a common water resource to cooperate in jointly managing, protecting and developing it. But also to principally agree on recommendations to sign a new deal.
Then the stakeholders should also concur and put in place a machinery and modalities for resolving water disputes if and when they arise. This underlying philosophy creates a challenge (for water resources managers, governments, local and international NGOs and national and international Institutions) to seek ways of avoiding conflicts and resolving them amicably and effectively.
“In order to accomplish this, there is a need to raise the capacity of these organisations so that they can better prepare and respond to challenges that arise because of constantly changing circumstances,” says Enock Bujiku of Bulubi Isle in Ukerewe District in Mwanza Region.
He added that this capacity is especially critical in areas where there is potential conflict brewing. Capacity building involves training those involved in the skills of negotiation and teaching the value of mediation. Other forms are facilitating negotiation, training of trainers and facilitators and development of replicable techniques and materials to support others in learning and using these techniques.
It also requires assistance in creating strategies and organisational structures to support novel negotiation, conflict management and prevention skills. If there is goodwill, a desire to avoid confrontation and dispute and an understanding that all parties can benefit from a strategy of using alternative dispute resolution approaches, there is an opportunity to reduce the damage caused by conflicts and move from potential conflict to potential cooperation.
This can be done either by negotiation or with the help of an impartial third party who will act as mediator. Third-party intervention is used when a negotiation reaches an impasse. It is used to restore belief in the possibility of a beneficial resolution for the parties, future dialogue and restored relationships, while leaving the control over the decisions with the parties. President Carter acted as a mediator between President Sadat of Egypt and Prime Minister Begin of Israel.
Former US Senator George Mitchell acted as a mediator in Northern Ireland. An outside third party, whether a person (Archbishop Desmond Tutu), a group of people, a representative of a state (Henry Kissinger) or an international organisation (The Vatican, The UN) can act as a mediator, in an attempt to help the parties reach an understanding and an agreed solution to the conflict.
A third party, a neutral, can also act as an arbitrator, hear the parties’ arguments and reach a decision which can be binding or non-binding according to the agreement made beforehand. A dispute between Israel and Egypt over the location of the border between the two countries in the Gulf of the Red Sea was settled in favour of Egypt by an international arbitration panel, on September 29, 1988.
Israel had to return the town of Taba, a resort town near Eilat, to Egypt as a result of the arbitration. Adjudication is another method that can be used as an alternative in the international arena (The International Court in The Hague) and in the national local system.
The courts have the ability to enforce the law in the case of a failure of the parties to reach agreement through negotiation or mediation. There is a law, and a way to enforce it without the consent of the parties. In international disputes, where states are involved, when problems arise due to opposing interests, such as security and/or resources, an outside enforcer cannot act where it is not acceptable to one or more of the parties involved.
Ruling by the International Court can end the conflict only if the two countries agree to abide by its ruling. Conflict prevention, deescalation, management and resolution can all be applied to conflicts involving water. The choice of the applicable process will depend on the particular circumstances and context of the water conflict. We will examine each of these key processes than review their potential role in water conflicts.
On the range between an agreement reached by the parties by direct negotiation, based on mutual understanding and a binding decision rendered by a third party’s authority in a procedure of adjudication, there are many other ways of dealing with disputes.
These options and possibilities create “a menu” of alternative or appropriate dispute resolution (ADR) that parties may choose to use, with the intent of removing a potential source of conflict, preventing its escalation into a dispute and finding the way back to a constructive cooperative and a potentially productive future working relationship.
The ADR “movement” started in the United States in the 1970s in response to the need to find more efficient and effective alternatives to litigation. Today, ADR is 5 flourishing throughout the world because it has proven itself, in multiple ways, to be a better way to resolve disputes.
The Nile riparian countries have been agitating for the review of the water treaty, saying the old one was signed before their independence. The concern here is that the new treaty would avoid unnecessary conflicts. However, Egypt and Sudan have been at the forefront to oppose new proposals by the Nile riparian countries.
By MOSES MATTHEW, Tanzania Daily News
