Replies

I’m not taking a stand on one side or the other. But here are some thoughts.
Due to the arid nature of the region some peculiar math starts impacting the amount of water available. When the Soviets built the Aswan dam they failed to take into account the amount of water lost to evaporation. So the dam had a huge impact on the amount of water available. This really didn’t matter as there was only one dam and it was close to the river’s terminus. Also, the pre-dam fast flow of the water held down the amount of parasite caused disease in Egypt. The water slowed and the parasites proliferated. Disease ran rampant.
The Nile’s tributaries pass through several countries, all of which are motivated to use this great resource, which to them is simply being wasted. It’s possible that if they all build dams and construct irrigation that the Nile, without which all of Egypt would starve, will look like the Rio Grande when it gets to Mexico. (Mostly, a dry ditch.)

Fortunately, or unfortunately, depending on whether you’re American or Mexican, Mexico can’t do much about the Rio Grande. But there’s no question Mexico would be much richer if the Rio Grande held water they could use when it crosses their border. Unlike Mexico Egypt has a large army and an air force. Faced with extinction they will destroy the dams constructed by other governments thus contributing to the impoverishment of those countries.

The water wars, which will occur this century throughout the Middle East, will have effects widely felt around the world. Migration to western countries from those regions, for example, is likely to skyrocket. This will spread poverty and poorly developed cultures like cancer cells into what was formerly known as the first world.

There probably are solutions. For example Israel is apparently the world leader in turning salt water into fresh water. But these solutions will likely be too little and too late.