Geopolitics, energy and the Great African Lakes
<
http://www.opendemocracy.net/author/shaantanu-shankar> Shaantanu Shankar ,
10 October 2012
The spectres of colonialism are haunting Eastern Africa. A border dispute
between Malawi and Tanzania over the Lake Malawi/Nyasa have re-emerged after
a British corporation was given the green light for hydrocarbon exploration.
In the centre of the dispute lies the Heligoland-Zanzibar Treaty of 1890
delineating the borders of former colonies.
The <
http://wysinger.homestead.com/berlin-conference-doc.html> Berlin
Conference on Africa held in 1884-1885 exemplified European colonial 'divide
and rule' policies implemented in the non-industrial world, dictating the
political future of the African continent. The conference, initiated by the
German Chancellor Otto Bismarck and convened by Belgian King Leopold II,
effectively cut the African continent into arbitrary pieces on the basis of
colonial spheres of interest, allocating resources between the European
powers. The geopolitical impact of these colonial divisions as an indirect
source for regional conflict has been evident in the continent's
post-independence phase. Intrastate conflicts in Saharan Africa, the Congo
Basin, the Gulf of Guinea and the African Great Lakes have been influenced
by the entrenched colonial legacies left behind by the rule of the
industrial powers.
Now in the 21st century, regional divisions and related territorial disputes
have re-emerged as flashpoints of instability and conflict in the East
African Great Lakes, albeit in a different manner. An unresolved
territorial dispute between Tanzania and Malawi regarding the border line
along Lake Malawi/Nyasa has recently attained prominence as a regional issue
due to the commencement of hydrocarbon exploration by British corporation
Surestream Petroleum in blocks
<
http://thinkafricapress.com/malawi/tussles-tanzania-over-lake-malawi-nyasa>
awarded in the disputed area by the Malawi government in September 2011.
Without sufficient indigenous capacity in terms of both technology and
capital, the development of hydrocarbon industries has been subject to
foreign investment not only in these East African nations, but across the
continent as a whole. Through participation in Malawi's hydrocarbon sector,
international oil and gas corporations, in this case Surestream Petroleum,
<
http://allafrica.com/stories/201208220371.html> have re-ignited sparks
causing diplomatic uncertainty between the two nations in question. The
dispute over Lake Malawi/Nyasa could have broader geopolitical ramifications
for the East African region, an emerging hydrocarbon frontier in Africa.
Lake Malawi/Nyasa is Africa's third largest lake, with its Western and
Southern shore lines in Malawi and Northern and Eastern shoreline across
Tanzania and Mozambique. The disputed waters lie north of the
Mozambique-Tanzania borderline, between Malawi and Tanzania. While Tanzania
officially claims fifty per cent of the lake waters along the Tanzanian
shoreline,
<
http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Energy-Resources/2012/08/08/Tanzania-Malaw
i-in-energy-dispute/UPI-37281344431209/> Malawi vehemently opposes these
claims, citing full ownership of the questioned waters under the principles
of the Heligoland-Zanzibar treaty signed between the United Kingdom and the
German Empire, also known as the Anglo-German Agreement of 1890.
History of the dispute
Throughout its colonial history, Lake Malawi/Nyasa has represented a
natural geographical boundary between different sovereigns. Up until World
War I, the lake was shared between the British, German and Portuguese
empires. After World War I, the British took control of majority of the
lake, with the Portuguese occupying the remaining south-eastern shoreline
and adjacent waters. The Heligoland-Zanzibar treaty of 1890 delineated the
limits of the British and German spheres of influence in Nyasaland (now
Malawi) and Tanganyika (now Tanzania) respectively. However, both sides
refer to different provisions of the same treaty to back their national
claims over the lake waters.
According to the provisions laid down by the 1890 agreement, German
influence extended from the northern limit of the Mozambique border
(Portuguese colony), following the shoreline up till the mouth of the Songwe
River to the north. However the agreement did not officially limit German
influence to the lake shore, indicated by the presence of German ports and
the German administration of small lake islets in the eastern section of the
lake. Additionally, the agreement accounted for freedom of navigation,
stating the waters to be free to the flags of Britain, Germany and Portugal.
In the post-World War I phase, the British Empire controlled both the
Nyasaland and Tanganyika shoreline of the lake, administering the Lake from
Nyasaland itself. This has featured as another point supporting Malawi's
claims. Further strengthening this claim was the acceptance of colonial
borders by African leaders at the time of independence with reference to
Nyasaland's administration of the lake. However, in spite of historical
evidence favouring Malawian claims, international conditions were
significantly different during the colonial period, when only land borders
held true strategic significance. Water bodies were open to free
navigation, facilitating the maritime trade that was critical to imperial
strength of the colonial powers.
In contemporary international relations, borders have attained greater
significance as national boundaries and clear delineation of maritime
territory has also become a prominent practice due to strategic importance
of maritime space. Taking this into account, a redrawing of the
international border in Lake Malawi/Nyasa favouring both sides could emerge
as a more 'relevant' outcome.
Post-colonial emergence of the issue
Tanganyika's attained independence in 1961, which was followed by its union
with Zanzibar officially forming Tanzania in 1964. In the same year, Malawi
also attained independence with both nations accepting the pre-set colonial
borders. However, the lack of clarity in the Heligoland-Zanzibar Treaty
relating to lake ownership provided potential scope for emergence of the
lake boundary as an issue of contention for both nations.
At the time of Malawi's independence, diplomatic relations with Tanzania
were strained. The ideological and political differences due to Malawi's
political affiliation with the apartheid regime in South Africa and alleged
Tanzanian aid to Malawi exiles and opposition in Tanzania served as the
catalysts in the emergence of the issue. Malawi's President at the time,
Joyce Banda, perceived lake ownership as an issue of national security due
to its potential as an infiltration route into the country. Diplomatic
tensions with Banda's Tanzanian counterpart, Julius Nyere, further
influenced Malawi's assertiveness on the issue.
The Tanzanian government officially asserted its claim over lake ownership
in 1967, stating that 'fair' and 'just' delineation of maritime space would
be through the division of lake waters between the two nations along a
'median' line between eastern and western shorelines till the southern
extent of the Tanzanian border. The war of words that followed between the
two leaders sparked fears of cross-border conflict. However, relations
between the two states improved in the aftermath of the 1968 Organization
for African Unity (OAU) summit in Algeria, resulting in the temporary
settlement of the dispute. Both nations appeared content to sideline the
issue.
Since 1968, other than an occasional flare-up, tensions did not escalate to
a considerable level. More than thirty years later in 2005, both nations
finally agreed to form a committee to facilitate border negotiations with
regards to lake ownership, but no definite consensus has been established
since.
Oil and the Great Lakes: re-emergence of the dispute
East African nations have carefully monitored Uganda's developments around
Lake Albert, where successful exploration efforts indicate exploitable oil
reserves estimated at 2.5 million barrels. Lake Malawi/Nyasa lies in the
same Great Lakes system stretching along the African Rift Valley and the
prospects of potential hydrocarbon discovery in the lakes waters has
resulted in the re-emergence of the issue over ownership of the lakes
waters.
The prospect of hydrocarbon wealth has created an optimistic mood around
Malawi, an economy primarily dependent on small-scale agriculture and
foreign aid. The lake emerges as the only prospective hydrocarbon deposit
in Malawi, further strengthening the nation's firm position in the dispute.
In September 2011, Malawi awarded Surestream Petroleum, a British
corporation, licenses for oil and gas exploration in the eastern section of
the lake resulting in the resurgence of the dispute. The issue has resulted
in an escalation of diplomatic tensions between the two states, especially
since July 2012 when Tanzania demanded a halt in exploration activities
until the dispute over lake ownership was settled. Tanzania further
published
<
http://www.malawitoday.com/news/126755-new-tanzania-map-cuts-lake-malawi> a
new map showing the border in question passing through the median line of
the lake.
Since July, bilateral negotiations have not resulted in any sort of
consensus, even with regards to arbitration. Right wing forces in both
nations have issued statements inherent with aggression. In light of the
recent events, there is clear indication towards Malawi's intent of taking
the dispute to the International Court of Justice (ICJ). However, Tanzania
continues to emphasize the need for a diplomatic solution to the dispute.
Energy geopolitics in East Africa
Initially, economic prospects of lake ownership were limited to fishing
resources, limiting national assertiveness with regards to the issue.
Hydrocarbon presence has resulted in diplomatic fallout between the two
nations, with greater possible regional ramifications.
However, African analysts have suggested that in spite of an escalation in
tensions, the dispute will be resolved peacefully and amicably. Malawi and
Tanzania are both stable African nations, with positive democratic
credentials in the African continent and militarization of the conflict
seems extremely improbable.
The presence of hydrocarbons in Lake Albert (Uganda) has also prompted
efforts towards exploration in a number of other East African nations.
Burundi, Rwanda, Tanzania and Uganda have stepped up exploration activity
along the African Rift Valley in Lake Kivu, Lake Tanganyika and Lake Edward.
Though these nations have achieved consensus with regards to territorial
limitations, they all share an extremely porous border with the
insurgency-hit Eastern Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). Additionally,
these nations, with the exception of Tanzania, have a history of animosity
and conflict.
Successful hydrocarbon exploration in the region could invigorate
hyper-nationalist tendencies among sections of populations, resulting in
cross-border conflict either between two states or between state and
militant grouping. The swift resolution of the Lake Malawi/Nyasa dispute
gains greater significance due to its regional implications.
Conclusion
It can clearly be established that hydrocarbon prospects have resulted in
the re-escalation of the dispute over ownership of Lake Malawi/Nyasa. Both
sides cite different provisions of the Heligoland-Zanzibar Treaty to back
their claims, but the influence of the agreement in future negotiations is
questionable, especially considering the different geopolitical climate of
contemporary East Africa.
The issue did flare up in 1967 once again, but strained political relations
proved to be the factor behind escalation of tensions around the Great Lake.
The essential difference in the recent resurgence of the dispute is that
lake ownership itself has become the focal point of strained political
relations, posing a serious challenge to negotiating a settlement.
The limited capacity of hydrocarbon industries in the East African states
makes foreign investment a necessity for the overall development of related
capabilities. Foreign corporations, unlike national corporations, are
neither attached nor sensitized to local issues and regional geopolitics.
Analysts indicate that in spite of the escalation of tensions, both Malawi
and Tanzania will be able to arrive at a diplomatically negotiated
settlement over the question of lake ownership. However, hydrocarbon
investment could potentially result in conflict in other more sensitive East
African maritime borders, such as Lake Albert, Lake Kivu or Lake Edward, all
bordering the insurgent hit-Eastern Democratic Republic of Congo.
Unchecked and unregulated foreign investment, as experience indicates, has
had a detrimental impact on regional stability in a number of African states
including Sierra Leone, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Angola and Sudan.
Investment in the region could possibly be streamlined through a regional
energy forum of sorts to limit its impact on inter-state relations and its
influence in fuelling small-scale conflict.
A regional mechanism to oversee investment and facilitate joint cooperation
between East African nations could possibly serve to prevent escalation of
tensions in the region. The focus of this would have to be limited to a
narrow mandate to ensure 'non-confrontational' foreign investment and to
encourage local investment.
East Africa is emerging as the next hydrocarbon frontier in Africa, and a
majority of the nations are conducting extensive exploration-related
operations. Oil and natural gas resources, in a majority of the region,
have not been commercially exploited. The region encompasses some of the
most sensitive ecosystems in the world and there is a need for a strong and
thorough legal framework in order to avoid the infamous impacts of an 'oil
curse' on society, economy, politics and inter-state relations.
(The author is currently a researcher affiliated with the Observer Research
Foundation, Delhi, working under the Africa Studies Programme)
The nomenclature is different in Malawi and Tanzania. In Tanzania the lake
is known as Lake Nyasa, whereas in Malawi it is known as Lake Malawi
Courtney Meyer, 'Who Owns Lake Nyasa', Think Africa Press, 21 August 2012
'Tanzania, Malawi in Energy Dispute", United Press International Online, 8
August, 2012
"Heligoland-Zanzibar treaty 1890", German History in Documents and Images,
<
http://germanhistorydocs.ghi-dc.org/pdf/eng/606_Anglo-German%20Treaty_110.p
df>
http://germanhistorydocs.ghi-dc.org/pdf/eng/606_Anglo-German%20Treaty_110.pd
f
James Mayall, "the Malawi-Tanzania boundary dispute", The Journal of Modern
African Studies, v.11, n.04,
<
http://www.jstor.org/stable/161618?origin=JSTOR-pdf>
http://www.jstor.org/stable/161618?origin=JSTOR-pdf
ibid
Petrus de Kock & Kathryn Sturman, "The Power of Oil: Charting Uganda's
Transition to a Petro-State", SAIIA Research Papers, n. 10
"New Tanzania map cuts into Lake Malawi", Malawi Today, 27 September 2012
------------[ Sent via the dehai-wn mailing list by dehai.org]--------------
Received on Wed Oct 10 2012 - 17:53:45 EDT
