| OCR Text |
Show -110- The principle is accepted that the waters of the Nile, that is to say, the combined flow of the White and Blue Niles and their tributaries, must be considered as a single unit, designed for the use of the peoples inhabiting their banks according to their needs and their capacity to benefit therefrom; and, in conformity with this principle, it is recognized that Egypt has a prior right to the maintenance of her present supplies of water for the areas now under cultivation, and to an equitable proportion of any additional supplies which engineering works may render available in the future . In recent discussions of the proposed Aswan High Dam, the Sudanese Government has said: "It is not disputed that Egypt has established a right to the volumes of water which she actually uses for irrigation. The Sudan has a similar right"'2. The Sudan fixes its "established right" at k billion cubic meters, and Egypt's at 48 billion^.. The two Governments agree that new supplies if made available on the Nile must be apportioned equitably, but disagree on the basis of the equitable division « 5. Brazil-Uruguay: Legal Status of the Frontier, 1933« Article 19. Each of the two States shall be entitled to dispose of half the water flowing in the frontier watercourses. Article 20. When there is a possibility that the installation of plant for the utilisation of the water may cause an appreciable and permanent alteration in the rate of flow of a watercourse running along or intersecting the frontier, the contracting State desirous of such utilisation shall not carry out the work necessary therefor until it has come to an agreement with the other State -J. 6. Dominican Republic-Haiti: Treaty of Peace, Friendship, and Arbitration, 1929. This Treaty in addition to establishing arbitration procedures, provides: Article 10: In view of the fact that rivers and other streams rise in the territory of one of the two States and flow 1. Paper regarding negotiations for a treaty of alliance with Egypt, Egypt No. 1, Cmd. No. 3050, p. 31 (1928). 2. "The Nile Waters Question", Min. of Irrigation and Hydro-Electric Power, Khartoum, p. 13 (1955). 3. Ibid., p. 5. k. Ibid., pp. 36-41. 5. 181L.N.T.S. 85-8?. |
| Source |
Original book: [State of Arizona, complainant v. State of California, Palo Verde Irrigation District, Coachella Valley County Water District, Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, City of Los Angeles, California, City of San Diego, California, and County of San Diego, California, defendants, United States of America, State of Nevada, State of New Mexico, State of Utah, interveners] : |
