upepo
Elder Lister
In the last few months, no subject has dominated public discourse in South Sudan as that of the Sudd Wetlands, also known as the Nile floodplains. The debate on the wetlands has become so huge it has overshadowed all other social challenges facing the country. Most people in Africa and beyond have probably never heard of the Sudd Wetlands, yet this region covering 57, 000 km2 is the second largest wetland in the world. For perspective, 57, 000 km2 is the equivalent of Rwanda and Burundi combined (important for those who think large equates to a 40 x 80 patch of rock in kajiado). The floodplain begins as a narrow strip at Juba and extend 500 km northward where it fans out to a width of 200 km between Mongalla and Malakal.
Fig. 1 (a) shows a map of the horn of Africa area containing the Nile basin and the Sudd watershed
Fig. 1 (b) shows the delineated area of the Sudd wetland marked with a red border. Note the incomplete Jonglei canal (in purple), which was meant to shunt water around the Sudd wetland.
A picture of the Nile tributary as it snakes lazily across the wetland, spilling its waters on the floodplains during the wet seasons.
The idea of draining the swamp was first conceived in the 1950’s by the British, Sudan’s colonial rulers at the time, when they developed plans for the construction of Jonglei canal, through which the river waters would bypass the swamp. The rationale was that doing so would increase the volume of water in downstream Nile by avoiding evaporation and transpiration in the swamp, which account for a significant ‘loss’. With additional water, Egypt would be able to put more land under irrigation. The actual construction of the Canal began in 1978 but was halted a few years later in 1984 by the then rebel movement of the South, the SPLA. At the point of disruption, 240 km of the 360 km had been excavated.
The idea of reviving the canal has been re-ignited by several factors. First, the watershed that feeds the swamp has been experiencing above-normal precipitation, creating higher, longer lasting, and more disruptive floods in the swamp. This flooding is responsible for a humanitarian crisis in the region, with many people displaced from their homes. The second push factor comes from Egypt which, faced with the possibility of reduced water flow from the construction of the Ethiopian grand renaissance dam, sees the canal as an opportunity to mitigate the risk. Actually, Egypt has put so much energy behind the revival of the canal it is accused of giving financial inducements to political leaders to buy their support.
A picture of marooned homesteads during the flood season
Opponents of the revival are many, with most of the opposition coming from local communities, non-governmental organizations, and environmental groups. Although most acknowledge that the frequent flooding has become a threat to the community, they are worried that draining the swamp will have far worse effects for the millions who depend on the swamp for survival (through grazing, farming, and fisheries) and the countless flora and fauna that call the swamp home. In addition, it is feared that draining the swamp could lead to reduced rainfall in the region as well as a drop in groundwater levels. The debate continues with no hope of either side convincing the other. The participation of external parties, such as Egypt and environmental organizations, has only made the issue more complicated. Surprisingly, however, neighboring countries that could be affected by climate changes from the disruption of the Sudd wetlands seem to be little bothered. It remains to be seen whether the South Sudanese will come up with a solution acceptable by all.
Wildlife that thrives on the food abundance provided by the Sudd wetlands.
It is also important to note that the Sudd wetlands contain oil, which would be easier to exploit without the challenges posed by flooding. Therefore, it is not farfetched to postulate the involvement of the oil industry in the push to drain the wetlands.
The existing oil blocks in South Sudan, a few of which lie in the Sudd wetland
Fig. 1 (a) shows a map of the horn of Africa area containing the Nile basin and the Sudd watershed
Fig. 1 (b) shows the delineated area of the Sudd wetland marked with a red border. Note the incomplete Jonglei canal (in purple), which was meant to shunt water around the Sudd wetland.
A picture of the Nile tributary as it snakes lazily across the wetland, spilling its waters on the floodplains during the wet seasons.
The idea of draining the swamp was first conceived in the 1950’s by the British, Sudan’s colonial rulers at the time, when they developed plans for the construction of Jonglei canal, through which the river waters would bypass the swamp. The rationale was that doing so would increase the volume of water in downstream Nile by avoiding evaporation and transpiration in the swamp, which account for a significant ‘loss’. With additional water, Egypt would be able to put more land under irrigation. The actual construction of the Canal began in 1978 but was halted a few years later in 1984 by the then rebel movement of the South, the SPLA. At the point of disruption, 240 km of the 360 km had been excavated.
The idea of reviving the canal has been re-ignited by several factors. First, the watershed that feeds the swamp has been experiencing above-normal precipitation, creating higher, longer lasting, and more disruptive floods in the swamp. This flooding is responsible for a humanitarian crisis in the region, with many people displaced from their homes. The second push factor comes from Egypt which, faced with the possibility of reduced water flow from the construction of the Ethiopian grand renaissance dam, sees the canal as an opportunity to mitigate the risk. Actually, Egypt has put so much energy behind the revival of the canal it is accused of giving financial inducements to political leaders to buy their support.
A picture of marooned homesteads during the flood season
Opponents of the revival are many, with most of the opposition coming from local communities, non-governmental organizations, and environmental groups. Although most acknowledge that the frequent flooding has become a threat to the community, they are worried that draining the swamp will have far worse effects for the millions who depend on the swamp for survival (through grazing, farming, and fisheries) and the countless flora and fauna that call the swamp home. In addition, it is feared that draining the swamp could lead to reduced rainfall in the region as well as a drop in groundwater levels. The debate continues with no hope of either side convincing the other. The participation of external parties, such as Egypt and environmental organizations, has only made the issue more complicated. Surprisingly, however, neighboring countries that could be affected by climate changes from the disruption of the Sudd wetlands seem to be little bothered. It remains to be seen whether the South Sudanese will come up with a solution acceptable by all.
Wildlife that thrives on the food abundance provided by the Sudd wetlands.
It is also important to note that the Sudd wetlands contain oil, which would be easier to exploit without the challenges posed by flooding. Therefore, it is not farfetched to postulate the involvement of the oil industry in the push to drain the wetlands.
The existing oil blocks in South Sudan, a few of which lie in the Sudd wetland
Last edited:
