A dam on the Juba is actually a net good because it smoothens the flood/drought cycle, providing a steady flow of water across the seasons. Ethiopia cannot really use the water of the Juba because the area in which it flows is mountainous and not suitable for large agricultural development very much like the area near the Blue Nile dam. The Juba has almost 3x as much water as the Shabelle, so impounding it behind a dam will not result in as much evaporative loss. The Sha
Ethiopia did a great service for Jubaland, flood risk in Jubaland is now a thing of the past.
Lies. Lies. Lies. Let me break it down
A dam on the Juba is actually a net good because it smoothens the flood/drought cycle, providing a steady flow of water across the seasons.
You are being intentionally misleading and saying stuff that's factually INCORRECT. We are not talking about "a dam", we are talking about between
10 and 22 dams, that Ethiopia is building on the rivers that flow into Somalia. So it's not just
"a dam". You are intentionally trivialising this issue, which any reasonable observer can tell is of huge security importance for South Somalia. There was no consultation by Ethiopia, no technical committee from Somalia, no consideration of the down stream communities.
Secondly, yes it does smooth the flood or drought cycle, but for Ethiopia, not Somalia. It takes months or in some cases years to fill the dam reservoirs. Which means that during those months, the water will be diverted from The Shabelle and Jubba into Ethiopia's reservoirs. Little water will actually go to downstream communities in South Central Somalia. So while Ethiopia uses the water first to generate electricity and then to irrigate is massive cash crop plantations, South Central Somalia will be left high and dry. It will become an arid dust bowl region within months.
Ethiopia cannot really use the water of the Juba because the area in which it flows is mountainous and not suitable for large agricultural development very much like the area near the Blue Nile dam.
Bullshit. Again you are being intentionally misleading, or are woefully misinformed. Why would Ethiopia dam the water if it has no use for it? Of course it will use the water. That's why it's building miles upon miles of CANALS to take the water from the reservoirs to industrial scale sugar and other plantations, where the water will be used to irrigate massive Ethiopian, Chinese, Arab and Israeli food plantations.
The dams are great for Ethiopia and a CATASTROPHE for South Central Somalia. Only an Ethiopian would say otherwise.
The Juba has almost 3x as much water as the Shabelle, so impounding it behind a dam will not result in as much evaporative loss.
Again another lie. Evaporation is a function of the volume of water in a reservoir, there will be immense evaporation loss, particularly on the Jubba river. What's worse is the nutrient rich soil and silt that comes with the rivers and naturally fertilizes South Central Somalia's agricultural will be gone forever. Food production yields in South Somalia will fall off a cliff.
Ethiopia did a great service for Jubaland, flood risk in Jubaland is now a thing of the past.
Firstly, flooding is a natural phenomena and a natural part of river basins and natural water drainage systems. Flooding is not the problem. Humans building on flood planes is the problem.
Secondly, of course if you dam and use the rivers inside Ethiopia and no water flows to South Central Somalia, there can be no flooding in Somalia. But that's not a true solution. It's like throwing the baby out with the bathwater to stop it crying, or cutting off your arm to stop an itch. If what your saying is, permanently removing rivers in South Somalia will stop flooding, then I agree. But that will lead to catastrophic famines for decades to come.