Your view on the 1902 Ethiopia and UK Treaty?

3 Comments

  • Tesfaye T. - 4 years ago

    As outlined the significant part of the statement was "arrest" and I don't see any harm because obviously you cannot stop flow of the Nile.
    The official agreement with GB that Atse Minilik seal placed was regarding the border declaration to Sudan, which declared Metema as part of Ethiopia.
    The second modified version by Great Britain was sent to Ethiopia, which includes Nile River but not responded from the Ethiopian side. This proposed statement was sent to Atse Minilik was explained in great length by an Ethiopian expert in 2016, where the Sudanese claim was at the peak. The person used to work in land survey at the city hall in Addis, later moved to UK and I haven't seen anyone who knows every land mark placed between sudan and Ethiopia from Atse Minilik to the derg gov. I will find the documents presented on the interview with ESAT at the time. The nastiest part of our politics is targeting to score a point, not to unleashed the truth.

  • Gezahegn Ayalew - 4 years ago

    Any treaty signed by colonialists, should be null and void once the colonized nation becomes independent and free. In the 1902 treaty the word “arrest” is significant as it alludes to refraining from interfering in the Nile’s natural flowing course. There is no mention of Ethiopia’s right to utilize the river as it sees fit without “arresting” it.

  • daniel tesema - 4 years ago

    This agreement is by far the most selfish one. How come one with the origin of water and source can not benefit from it?

Leave a Comment

0/4000 chars


Submit Comment