The White Nile Canal project, which proposes to carry water from the White Nile into Sudan and Egypt, is at the crossroads of opportunity and controversy. Originally planned in the early twentieth century, this ambitious program aims to overcome water scarcity and unleash huge agricultural potential in some of the world’s most arid locations. However, its potential is accompanied with considerable costs, including environmental, social, and geopolitical issues that could transform the destiny of the Nile Basin.
While proponents suggest that it could recover millions of acres of farmland, ensure food security, and strengthen regional economies, critics stress the dire consequences of changing ecosystems, in particular.
A legacy of disputes
The canal was originally conceived by British colonial engineers in 1904 and subsequently gained momentum in the 1970s. Despite significant progress, the project was abruptly halted in the 1980s when civil war broke out in Sudan and the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) bombed the construction site in a dramatic move which completely halted progress.
Dr. Ana Elisa Cascao, a leading expert on Nile governance, noted that by taking this step the SPLM’s actions “highlighted local resistance to external control over resources vital to their survival”.
She went on to explain the complexities of this arrangement to DevelopmentAid:
“Egypt wanted to ensure Sudan did not utilize too much water, while Sudan was largely indifferent to its wetlands. Over time, however, the project became a flashpoint, particularly for local communities who viewed it as a threat to their land and livelihoods.”
The stalled project remains contentious and South Sudan’s independence in 2011 introduced a new layer of complexity as local groups resisted what they saw as external control over their resources.
Environmental and social trade-offs
The White Nile and its wetlands are vital ecosystems that support diverse wildlife and sustain local livelihoods. Experts have warned that altering these wetlands could trigger far-reaching ecological and social consequences.
The Sudd wetlands, Africa’s largest freshwater wetland, span over 3,500 square miles and are so vast that they can be seen from space. They are home to one of the world’s largest mammal migrations, with 1.3 million antelope traversing the region, as well as thousands of crocodiles, hippos, elephants, and zebras. The wetlands are valued for their ecosystem services, with an estimated total economic worth of £2.6 billion.
International water diplomacy expert, Maysoun Al-Zoubi, voiced her concerns by explaining:
“these wetlands support Africa’s largest mammal migrations. Shrinking them could reduce fishing, disrupt animal migration, and lower groundwater levels, turning lush areas into deserts.”
Emphasizing the environmental risks of the project, Dr. Cascao commented:
“The idea of cutting a wetland in half – like the Sudd wetlands – is profoundly disruptive. Wetlands are not just reservoirs of biodiversity; they regulate water flow and sustain communities downstream.”
Shrinking the wetlands to increase water flow could have devastating consequences for habitats and biodiversity. Hydrologists warn that reducing evaporation from the wetlands may benefit Egypt by increasing water availability but could also lower rainfall for nearby farms and rainforests and exacerbate environmental challenges.
The project’s social ramifications are equally significant. Nomadic communities rely on the wetlands for grazing livestock during seasonal migrations. Dr. Cascao warned of potential displacement noting that “a canal would disrupt these routes, destroy livelihoods, and create tensions in already fragile regions.”
Flooding, which displaced thousands around the wetlands last year, adds another layer to the debate. Some South Sudanese ministers, such as Vice President Taban Deng Gai, argue that the canal could help to mitigate such disasters. However, South Sudan’s environment ministry strongly opposes the project, citing irreversible ecological damage.
Promises of development
Despite the risks, the White Nile Canal offers considerable opportunities. Al-Zoubi highlighted the project’s potential to improve water efficiency and boost agriculture, saying:
“the canal might cut evaporation losses in wetlands, allowing irrigation for up to 7.5 million acres of farmland. This would improve food security and accelerate economic growth in Sudan and Egypt.”
However, she warned against ignoring the environmental and social implications.
“Development should not come at the expense of ecosystems or communities. Before proceeding, rigorous investigations must be conducted to assess the potential consequences,” she stressed.
Dr. Abbas Shraqi, an expert in water resources and geology, pointed to inefficiencies in South Sudan’s water management where vast quantities are lost in swampy regions:
“The Nile’s flow weakens in South Sudan as water becomes trapped in the Sudd wetlands. Deepening the canal could unlock more water for productive use, benefiting all nations involved.”
However, Dr. Shraqi acknowledged the difficulties of regional cooperation given the historical tensions among Egypt, Sudan, and South Sudan.
“Progress has been hindered by mistrust. Countries need assurances that their interests won’t be compromised,” he explained.
Feasibility and future prospects
Aside from the environmental and socioeconomic concerns, the canal presents substantial financial and political challenges. Large-scale infrastructure projects demand significant expenditure, creating concerns about funding. Dr. Cascao questioned the project’s practicality, stating that it would involve spending billions of dollars for unclear results.
“Can Egypt afford it? Who would fund such a project in today’s economic climate?”
The ongoing turmoil in Sudan has exacerbated the problem. Dr. Cascao highlighted the difficulty of managing construction in a volatile location, stating that implementing a mega-project in Sudan is impractical due to instability.
“Land control is too uncertain.”
Despite these obstacles, Dr. Shraqi was optimistic about the canal’s ability to convert South Sudan’s marshes into arable land, commenting that “completion of the canal could boost agriculture and drive economic development, but it requires political will and regional collaboration.”
Al-Zoubi emphasized the necessity for Egypt, Sudan, and South Sudan to work together on water management.
“A regional approach backed by comprehensive studies could balance environmental and social concerns while maximizing benefits,” she told DevelopmentAid.
She also stressed the importance of community engagement:
“Transparent communication with local communities is essential for building trust and reducing resistance. Public awareness initiatives can help stakeholders align around common goals.”
