botswana/namibia - Cour international de Justice

to sidestep these inconvenient facts, facts which the aerial photographs and relevant maps so
clearly substantiate.
315. The Namibian Government first attempted to overcome its difficulties by acknowledging
that the northern channel was the present main channel but on the supposition that a change of
circumstances from the present silted up condition of the southern channel to a time
approximate to the making of the 1890 Agreement when it operated as the main channel. This
scenario, however, proved unsustainable in the light of the extensively researched
geomorphology of the region which establishes the Chobe River in its present system as a
mature system enduring from two thousand years ago or more.
316. Accordingly, and in particular taking into account the record of aerial photographs from
1925 to the present date showing the unchanged configuration of the channels, the 'change of
circumstances' thesis was abandoned, and the Namibian Government asked Professor
Alexander to provide an alternative scientific explanation in support of the southern channel.
This he has most ingeniously done, with a fine display of diagrams, sketch maps, and
coloured photographs (most of which are irrelevant).
317. Unfortunately, the 'Alexandrine' thesis is equally unsatisfactory; it contradicts the
evidence of official surveys (the Eason, Trollope and Redman, and the Joint Survey of 1985).
It contradicts all the relevant map evidence, evidence on which Namibia had hoped to place
great reliance. Confronted with the 'Alexandrine' thesis Namibia's other expert and
cartographer, Mr. Rushworth, is reduced lamely to apologising:-
"Of course, all the maps have been made in the dry season when access for surveyors is easy
and skies are clear for air photography". (Namibian Memorial, Vol. V, Annex 102 at p.52.)
318. Even more fundamentally, the 'Alexandrine' thesis gives no support to the southern
channel as the main channel but constructs a wholly hypothetical flood zone of dimensions
fluctuating with the magnitude of the yearly flood, drawn in a north/south direction across the
island. This zone does not follow the well-defined sinuosities of the southern channel and is
sited somewhat extraordinarily on the highest part of the Island (see Professor Sefe's Analysis
of Alexander's Report p.15, para.37 at Appendix 4). With no visible banks or margins, the
Court is asked to undertake the impossible task of locating a boundary in the centre of this
uncharted shifting zone.
319. As demonstrated in the preceding paragraphs of this Chapter, this novel 'Alexandrine'
thesis is based on the fundamental misconceptions that the Chobe is not a river, has no
continuous downstream flow, and is merely part of the Zambezi flood plain. He grossly
misrepresents the geomorphology and hydrology of the region, ignores the measurements of
bed profiles of the two channels, and the flow statistics. He misrepresents the nature of the
southern channel; without any supporting evidence and in total disregard of comparative
depth, current, and continuity of line with the river, asserting that substantially all the annual
flow is carried in this channel. He misunderstands the processes of sedimentation and erosion
as applied to the mature river system of the Chobe and misinterprets evidence concerning the
presence of black soil and sand bars.
320. The Sedimentological Report carried out by Professor Sefe and Mr.Muzila's assistance
demolishes any credence in Professor Alexander's assertions that the southern channel alone