Sudan's disposition was strong of these two focuses which are clear in its adherence to the standards of the global law and its conviction that the advantages of the dam exceed its harms.
In any case, during the entire time of the exchanges, Sudan has been voicing (its) confirmation that these advantages can be achieved without upsetting the advantages of Egypt or Ethiopia by going to a concurrence on the standards of first filling and the standards of activity.
This is on the grounds that you can't work Sinnar Dam when you have no data about the activity of Rosaries Dam. (Here the pastor of water system clarified that he had been filling in as a working specialist at Sinnar Dam site in the 1980s. He likewise said Sinnar Dam is found 240 kilometers from Rosaries Dam)
In this way, he proceeded, the activity of Rosaries Dam relies totally upon the activity of the Renaissance Dam. From this came Sudan's request to consent to the arrangement before beginning the Dam filling process. This is an essential point for Sudan.
During the entire time of the arrangements, Sudan's advantages don't mean harming Egypt's or Ethiopia's inclinations. The issue is a success win circumstance. In other words, Ethiopia can produce power and Sudan can work its dams easily and advantage from the sorted out progression of the water. The quintessence of the issue spins around territorial co-activity. Along these lines the renaissance dam can be an activity of territorial co-activity in which all gatherings can profit.