Water in the wrong hands?

At the culmination of the 2-week long COP26 conference, Biden re-emphasised his pledge to support developing countries with his ‘Build Back Better World (B3W)’ initiative that aims to invest $40 trillion in transcontinental infrastructure by 2035. Is this a sincere endeavour to provide worldwide equitable and green development or is this just another neo-colonial attempt at securing influence over foreign resources? 

To many, this is seen as a retaliatory move within a zero-sum game between China and the US. For those that indulge in this Cold War narrative, the B3W initiative counters growing Chinese influence in primarily African countries, showcased by McKinsey’s findings that ‘China has become Africa’s biggest trading partner.’ Increasing Chinese involvement in foreign affairs was most notably signalled by the introduction of the Belt and Road Initiative, founded in 2013. The plan set out ambitious infrastructure projects around the world to expand and connect its ‘high technology economy’. The cold-war connotations partially stem from its similarities with the Marshall plan, that catalysed US-Russia rivalries in the mid 20th Century, and suggest that African countries are, once again, at the mercy of international power struggles. The diagram (1) below offers a visual illustration of the main investor countries in Africa.  

Diagram 1: Please note that this diagram does not offer absolute figures and only focuses on financial investments, rather than donations or military involvement. 

What does this have to do with water?

Trade and infrastructure, especially for food production and agricultural commodities, are highly reliant on water and in many countries, make up over 80% of freshwater use. To put this in perspective; the coffee beans required to make your daily cup of coffee take up to 140 litres of water. These extortionate amounts, largely hidden behind the mechanics of our international food chain, are labelled by experts as ‘virtual water’. Virtual water explains why foreign powers are so keen to invest in water projects on African soil and forebodes significant foreign exploitation over water resources. Rulli et al. testify to this with their estimations that 0.7-1.75% of the world's agricultural land has been 'grabbed' and that 47% of the total land grabbed is located in Africa.

Water diplomacy

In the Horn of Africa, Chinese loans in the water sector have amounted to $634 and $346 million in Ethiopia and Sudan respectively, from the year 2000 to 2017. With regards to the GERD on the Nile (addressed in previous posts) China has also granted $652 million in loans to Ethiopia, in 2017 alone, to help finance the project. However, according to the Financial Times, these loans may have more sinister undertones, with new research suggesting that these transactions are ‘saddled with hidden debts’ that could total up to $385 billion. Many western experts brand this as a strategic ‘debt trap’ that allows China to prey on weaker states’ resources or assets. 

In response, critics argue that equating indebted African countries to ‘hapless gamblers’ and ‘Beijing’s puppets’ is a simplistic and western-centric portrayal of the realities at play. Instead, research carried out by the School of Advanced International Studies suggests Chinese banks often offer bilateral debt relief, and sometimes in secret, to allow the borrower to save face.

Recently, smaller political players have also entered the scene, with Turkey showcasing an aggrandised stage presence in the region. The Turkish state has increasingly backed Ethiopian interests in GERD negotiations and has signed an agreement on the financing of resources for water management. Many see this as a ‘revival of neo-ottoman dreams’ in which Turkey envisions an expansion of its economic and political power base.  

The above examples show how foreign powers benefit from hydro-projects to gain power and influence in these African countries. Although the affected countries may profit from foreign involvement, they often lose a degree of sovereignty over their resources and become increasingly dependent on outside support and investment. Equally, I want to stress that foreign interference is a common global practice, of which the West is not exempt, and we should, therefore, make an effort to recognise our biases when critiquing or condoning such acts.