The country loses 40% of its water to crumbling pipes, with peaks of 45% in the eThekwini (Durban) metropolitan area. Drought, climate change, corruption and ineffective management of funds contribute
to the problem.

South Africa is a semi-arid country with an average annual rainfall of 497 mm, compared to the global average of 860 mm. The rains in late December and early January have eased the water crisis, but have not solved it. The problem, partly due to climate change and the resulting decrease in rainfall, is aggravated by the dilapidated water distribution network and poor maintenance. This was highlighted by the Minister of Water and Sanitation, Pemmy Majodina, who recently addressed the municipal administrations asking them to commit to the maintenance of the pipes to limit water waste in the distribution network.

Soweto. Nationwide, a staggering amount of water is lost, estimated to exceed 40% of the total supply. File swm

According to the same minister, losses amount, on average, to 33% in the municipalities of the province of Gauteng (including the cities of Pretoria, Johannesburg and Ekurhuleni) and reach up to 45% in the metropolitan area of eThekwini (whose main city is Durban). The water disruptions in Gauteng and parts of KwaZulu/Natal, the minister stressed, were not caused by drought but by increasing leaks in the distribution network. Nationwide, a staggering amount of water is lost, estimated at more than 40% of the total supply. The cause is precisely the inefficiency of the structures.

Administrations in difficulty
However, municipalities often do not have sufficient funds to meet the costs of maintaining the network due to the lack of invoicing for lost water and the arrears of many users.
Majodina announced that his ministry will launch a vigorous awareness campaign to urge citizens and businesses to use water sparingly, expressing concern about the high-water consumption in Gauteng and eThekwini, where the daily per capita consumption is 218 litres, well above the international average of 173 litres.

A cracked underground asbestos pipe is leaking large amounts of water. MD_Photography

If the campaign fails, local governments will have to impose and enforce stricter restrictions. What the minister failed to highlight was that corruption is a major factor in South Africa’s water crisis, along with mismanagement of funding and lack of investment in infrastructure.
Modernisation funds have been diverted elsewhere, leaving pipes rusting, water treatment and purification plants in disrepair, and many communities without water. Regulatory efforts also often fail, as enforcement measures fail to address widespread corruption.

Rural areas hit hard
The hardest hit are those living in rural and peri-urban areas with limited or no access to services. Currently, 19% of the rural population lacks access to a reliable water supply, and 33% lacks basic sanitation. In addition, over 26% of schools (urban and rural) and 45% of health care centres do not have access to water. Poorer communities with limited political influence are the last to benefit from infrastructure
repairs and improvements.

A government signpost which encourages citizens to save water in the town. MD_Photography / Shutterstock.com

In townships and informal settlements, residents often find few alternatives, forced to rely on unsafe sources or pay exorbitant prices to private water vendors. In regions such as Limpopo, the Free State, the Eastern Cape and parts of Gauteng, women and children walk kilometres every day to fetch water from rivers and ponds. It is a bitter irony that the poorest communities, who contribute the least to water waste, are the ones who suffer most from its scarcity. (Open Photo: Water flowing from the pipe. Shutterstock/tum3123) – (E.T.)

Mauritius and the United Kingdom have reached an agreement on the sovereignty of the Chagos Archipelago, almost bringing to a close a little-known but truly global dispute. One of the atolls hosts a major US military base.

The Chagos Archipelago is located in the heart of the Indian Ocean: a group of 60 small islands located exactly halfway between Zanzibar and Indonesia. The largest of the islets, Diego Garcia, hosts a US military base that is considered one of the most important defence installations in the world. From Diego Garcia, the US can conduct naval operations in the most diverse and important theatres: from the Persian Gulf to Central Asia to the South China Sea. But the Chagos are not a US territory. They are governed by Great Britain.

British Indian Ocean Territory, BIOT, political map. Atolls of the Chagos Archipelago in the Indian Ocean, with the largest island Diego Garcia, the site of a Joint Military Facility. 123rf

In 1965, London separated the archipelago from Mauritius, its colony at the time, to create the so-called British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT), the last colonial entity to be established by the British Empire, now in decline. The BIOT also includes territories belonging to the Seychelles: the islands of Aldabra, Desroches and Farquhar. While these were returned to the Seychelles once the country achieved independence in 1976, the same did not happen for the Chagos.
On the contrary, Great Britain decided to adopt a very clear line: to continue to exercise control over the island as long as it would be useful for defence and security reasons.

Second to Washington
BIOT was created to serve the interests of the United States. The dominant ally in the West during the Cold War. In exchange, Washington would have guaranteed a discount of 14 million dollars on a shipment of Polaris missiles. Between 1965 and 1974, the authorities of the United Kingdom then expelled the native inhabitants of the islands, the Chagossians (whose number was around 1500 at the time), so that the US military could manage Diego Garcia without any civilian population nearby. Once the local inhabitants were removed, London committed to setting up a legal and political architecture that could guarantee the Pentagon maximum secrecy, isolation and operational flexibility.

B-2 bomber takes off, B-52 bombers on tarmac on Diego Garcia. (Photo: Us Army)

The importance of the base has grown since the 1970s. Initially a structure with modest responsibilities, used mostly to monitor Soviet naval activity, its functions have since expanded to become essential as a naval base, airport and logistics hub. The base has been fundamentally, for example during the conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq, conducted under US leadership since 2001. Diego Garcia has taken on a new specific strategic weight in the rivalry with China. Although the base is often described as jointly managed by the US and the UK, even in official documents, the truth is that the British rarely make use of the structure located in the heart of the Indian Ocean; the naval installations in Bahrain and those of the air force in Qatar, the United Arab Emirates and Oman are much more important for London than remote Diego Garcia. BIOT is also a rather peculiar jurisdiction. It is the only administrative unit present on earth that exists with the exclusive function of hosting the military base of a foreign country. A political status and a history so peculiar that they have been subjected to a profound legal review in recent years. The result is that British sovereignty over the islands could become a thing of the past before long.

Colonial abuse
In short, it can be argued that the separation of the Chagos Archipelago from Mauritius in 1965 was illegitimate because it was contrary to the prevailing international norms of decolonization and self-determination.
At least, this is what the United Nations and the vast majority of governments in the world have argued. From this perspective, therefore, the Chagos Islands are a territory of Mauritius illegally occupied by Great Britain.Mauritius has claimed sovereignty over the islands for decades. For a long time, London rejected any protest from Port Louis and refused to enter into negotiations on the issue. The US did the same. But the Chagos affair became impossible to ignore in 2019. That year, the UN International Court of Justice supported Mauritius’ position with an advisory opinion. That same year, at the General Assembly, 116 countries urged London to withdraw from the Chagos. Only five governments (including Washington) sided with the UK.

The agreement
The path has now been set, with London and Port Louis announcing last October that they had reached an agreement to resolve the dispute over the Chagos Islands. In the agreement, London intends to recognize sovereignty over the entire Chagos Archipelago in exchange for authorization to continue to administer Diego Garcia for a period of at least 99 years. During this first century, the island will continue to host the US military base under conditions substantially similar to those that have governed its management up to now. The pact also includes an economic component, the terms of which have not been disclosed. What is known is that London will pay an annual sum to Mauritius.

Westminster. The agreement results from several rounds of negotiations between British and Mauritian diplomats. CC BY-SA 4.0/Thomas Dahlstrøm Nielsen

An important aspect is that the agreement establishes that Port Louis will have to facilitate the return of the Chagossians to the archipelago (with the exception of Diego Garcia). What is the reason for this agreement? And why was it reached now? The impression is that London and Washington arrived at it after having achieved two objectives. The first is that Great Britain’s legal position was untenable. A state of affairs that, if not remedied, could also have compromised the operation of the Diego Garcia base. The second is that in the end, Mauritius is a somewhat tolerable “landlord”: a country that can be co-opted by the West even with just bilateral agreements and without resorting to obsolete imperial-style governance methods.

A historical provocation
A turning point occurred in February 2022, when Mauritius sent a ship to one of the islands of the archipelago (not Diego Garcia) as part of a mission officially defined as scientific (in theory, to document the rise in sea levels). The initiative, however, was full of political and legal value. Although London had in fact been informed in advance of the plans of the Mauritian delegation, the British authorities refused to intervene once the vessel entered Chagossian territorial waters. Indeed, British and American officials were present, as representatives of the Mauritian mission disembarked to raise the Port Louis flag on the territory of the archipelago. The symbolic gesture was carried out by an enthusiastic group of Chagossian diplomats, lawyers, journalists and activists.

Salomon Atoll is one of the many above-water features of the Chagos Archipelago. CC BY 3.0/Charles and Anne Sheppard

London’s hesitation on this occasion is not difficult to explain: given the uncertain status of the islands, Crown officials were not sure whether they were legally authorized to block Mauritian visitors and were therefore not prepared to take legal responsibility for any intervention. Given this situation, it is clear why US officials also considered the British era on the archipelago to be over. If London is not sure of its legal authority to stop unauthorized visitors to the islands, then it can no longer be considered a reliable “host.” If we add the fact that Mauritius had repeatedly publicly committed to guaranteeing the security of the US base under the terms of the sovereignty agreement, it is understandable why Washington began to seriously question whether it was worth remaining anchored to the old status quo.

Of the two contenders, USA wins
The October 2024 agreement is the result of several rounds of negotiations between British and Mauritian diplomats. The intensification of diplomatic efforts is due to the awareness that the status quo was now unsustainable for everyone. The talks have been strongly supported by the administration of former US President Joe Biden. On 1 April 2025, U.S. President Donald Trump approved the deal between the UK and Mauritius. Under the terms of the deal, the UK will give up control of the Chagos archipelago while paying to maintain control of a joint US-UK military base on the largest island, Diego Garcia, under a 99-year lease. The agreement, the Diego Garcia base will finally be able to rely on a clear legal basis without having to incur significant changes in its daily functioning. London would remain an intermediary between Washington and Port Louis and will also be responsible for paying the rent: for the US, this is a clear victory.

The Chagos Archipelago is a hotspot of biodiversity in the Indian Ocean. CC BY 3.0/Charles and Anne Sheppard

The agreement has nevertheless been criticised. In the United Kingdom, the opposition complained about the abandonment of the archipelago, stating that London should not give up its sovereignty. Even in the US, there is no shortage of critical opinions: some have raised fears of possible Chinese interference once the islands return to Mauritian control. The Chagossian diaspora is also divided: while some have welcomed the news of the agreement with joy, others have strongly opposed it. Finally, the new government of Mauritius led by Prime Minister Navin Ramgoolam, elected in the elections last November, has accused the previous executive that signed the agreement of having obtained too little for the country. (Open Photo: Chagos Islands flag, wide brush stroke on transparent background. 123rf)

Peter Harris

After diamonds and minerals, soft drinks and other products are increasingly profiting from bloodshed. Most of the world’s supply of Gum Arabic, which the food industry relies on, is controlled by Sudanese warlords. Moreover, alternatives are unlikely
to emerge soon.

Traditionally, gum Arabic, derived from the sap of acacia trees, serves as an emulsifier in the food industry, particularly for making soft drinks, including the classic “Coke. ” This product, known in Egypt since the era of the pharaohs as “kami” and used to ensure the cohesion of mummies, is also employed today by breweries to create the desirable foam much appreciated by beer consumers. Additionally, it is utilised in various other industries, including textiles, construction, printing, and painting. In the cosmetics sector, it is used to mix, stabilise, and thicken ingredients in products such as lipsticks.
Most of the world’s production originates from the Sahel region, particularly Sudan, which contributes 70 to 80 per cent of the total. This is where the acacia groves are located in the Blue Nile, Southern Kordofan, and Southern Darfur provinces. Following Sudan are Chad, Nigeria, and other nations such as Senegal, Mali, Niger, Burkina Faso, Eritrea, Egypt, and Southern Sudan.

From Left: General Abdel Fattah Al Burhan’s Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and General Mohamed Dagalo’s paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF).

However, since the outbreak of the conflict between General Abdel Fattah Al Burhan’s Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and General Mohamed Dagalo’s paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF) in 2022, there has been growing suspicion that revenues from the production and trade of Gum Arabic are being used to fill the coffers of Sudanese warlords.
Most of the business has been in the hands of the RSF since they took control of the main rubber-harvesting regions in western Sudan
at the end of 2024.
Until then, production had been exported through Port Sudan. The SAF levied export duties, general taxes and forestry fees that amounted to $1,500 per tons of rubber, thus fueling the war effort of General Burhan, who had been sanctioned by the United States for his role in bombing civilian infrastructure, schools, markets and hospitals.

Displaced people in Darfur. Since the outbreak of the conflict in 2022, more than 12 million people have been displaced. File swm.

But now the RSF, accused by the US of genocide in a war that has displaced 12 million people and killed at least 150,000, are reaping most of the rewards. The RSF have also burned fields, raided farms, killed farmers and looted thousands of tonnes from warehouses in the capital, Khartoum. According to the Sudanese Chamber of Commerce, 30,000 tonnes of gum arabic have been looted since the war began. Most of it has been recovered by RSF. This amount represents about a quarter of the world’s annual production of Gum Arabic. According to industry sources, the RSF extorts about $2,500 per truck, which alongside higher transport costs caused a spectacular increase to $4,000 a metric ton from $1,200 before the war.  Nowadays, the RSF is controlling almost all the Sudanese Gum Arabic supply chain,  which poses ethical challenges for the main traders and clients of the product, who are seriously exposed to the risk of funding indirectly the Sudanese warlords.

Traceability is a challenge.
According to UNCTAD (United Nations Conference for Trade and Development), the main importers are the French companies Nexira and Alland & Robert which buy annually up to 50 percent of the Sudanese Gum Arabic production. Other important clients include the Kerry Group from Ireland, the Dutch corporation FOGA Gum and the Indian Savaji Group which created a joint venture with Alland & Robert in 2019 to sell Gum Arabic on this huge market.

The main importers are the French companies Nexira and Alland & Robert, which buy annually up to 50 percent of the Sudanese Gum Arabic production. Courtesy Nexira.

Further downstream, important Gum Arabic consumers include the powerful American soda drinks giants Coca Cola and Pepsi Cola. Both companies value so much this magic product which stops the sugar from falling to the bottom of the can that they successfully lobbied the US administration to carve Gum Arabic out of the sanctions package imposed on Sudan in 1997 for sponsoring terrorism and providing refuge to Osama bin Laden.
Some of the main consumers such as Nestlé and Mars have made statements claiming they abide by ethical principles. Nestlé says it is committed to source commodities in a responsible way while Mars, which makes M&Ms, claims to engage with its suppliers regarding the situation in Sudan and is prepared to take action in the event of a violation of its policies. By contrast, Coca-Cola and Pepsi have
remained silent so far.

A man sells gum Arabic in a market in Chad. Shutterstock/Pierre Laborde

However, traceability of the product is a challenge. Sudanese gum is smuggled into neighbouring countries that are also producers, making it difficult for Western companies to protect their supply chains from conflict gum. Last March, Reuters reported that traders in Chad, Egypt and South Sudan have begun aggressively offering the commodity at low prices and without proof that it is conflict-free.
Meanwhile, Kenya and Cameroon, which so far had exported small quantities to the EU, have increased their sales on this market after the start of the Sudanese civil war. The Rapid Support Forces are also exporting it via the Central African Republic. Egypt, which traditionally is a minor exporter, has seen its exports rise as well, according to industry sources. According to Reuters, exports from South Sudan have also increased since the beginning of the Sudanese civil war.

Diversification, a long process
The identification of the source of origin is also difficult because traders in the neighbouring countries are reluctant to reveal that they may be involved in smuggling operations or in the resale of stolen products. Industry consultants estimate that nearly all the Sudanese production, now under the RSF’s control, is smuggled, although the Association for International Promotion of Gums (AIPG), the main industry lobby which represents the main processors of the product, declared last January that there was no evidence of links between the gum supply chain and the Sudanese belligerents.

Sudan. Warehouse for storing Gum Arabic. Most of the world’s production originates from the Sahel region, particularly Sudan, which contributes 70 to 80 per cent of the total. Photo: UNOPS

Nevertheless, major players such as Nexira implicitly acknowledge the existence of such a link and seek to protect their reputations by arguing that they have taken steps to reduce the impact of the conflict on their supply chain by cutting imports from Sudan and diversifying their sourcing to ten other countries. But such diversification is a long process: according to Bloomberg, the French company has imported at least 149 shipments totalling 3,679 tonnes of gum arabic from Sudan since the war began. Some of Nexira’s imports came from the Sudanese company Afritec, which has paid extortion money to the RSF.
The main Gum Arabic processors and buyers belong to the Sedex platform used by companies to assess and manage ethical and sustainability risks within their supply chains. But Chadian traders are often not able to provide a Sedex certification that guarantees buyers that their suppliers meet sustainable and ethical standards, while Sudanese suppliers in Sudan say that buying Gum Arabic that meets ethical standards has become nearly impossible.

A few alternative
The problem is that in the short run, there are very few alternatives to replace Sudan, the swing producer of the commodity. Chad or Nigeria are also producers but it would take years before they could boast from groves large enough to compete with the Sudanese ones. According to the chairman of the Chadian Gum Arabic Exporters Association, Abechir Ahmat, the demand is soaring there but also in Mali and Niger.

Pieces and powder of raw gum arabic.CC BY-SA 3.0/Simon A. Eugster

The 10 percent growth of the world market of gum Arabic up to 2 million dollars by 2030 projected by the Market Research Future experts is a powerful incentive for Sudan’s neighbours to build an important alternative production capacity. Chad has a huge potential to become such an alternative, since it could produce the double of the current global crop, says a note from the economic service of the French Embassy in Yaoundé. But for the time being, there is no alternative to the Sudanese production.
More specifically, there is no immediate alternative to natural Gum Arabic. However, should the main consumer countries, the European Union, Japan and the United States, declare a boycott of ‘conflict’ gum from Sudan, one of the medium-term options could be for the chemical and food industries to develop the production of synthetic emulsifiers.
But the consequences of such a well-intentioned policy could be disastrous for African producers, wiping out the tens of millions of smallholders who depend on Gum Arabic, often organised in cooperatives, in Sudan alone. (Open Photo: Gum Arabic, also known as acacia gum. 123rf)

François Misser