Of course, the "three-part" construction actually has a connection with the overall international economic development, which brings us back to the 1873 economic crisis. From the East African perspective, it seems that the impact of this economic crisis has long ended, or even did not occur, and may even have more positive significance for East Africa than negative.

In reality, the negative impact of the 1873 economic crisis continued until now (historically from 1873 to 1896). Although it officially ended in 1879, the world economy and trade subsequently fell into a depression, specifically manifested in the replacement of free trade by trade protectionism, and Europe and America have not yet fully emerged from its shadow.

A typical example is Russia, whose economy remained depressed after the economic crisis ended. After all, Russia's economic system was the weakest among Western countries, so even after the crisis ended, due to a lack of investor confidence, Russia's economic growth was severely lacking.

Other countries were relatively better off, especially Germany and the United States, which recovered their economies through various economic means. As for England and France, they followed the colonial route, transferring the crisis to their colonies, which was also one of the triggers for the South African War.

Unfortunately, even using military means, the United Kingdom failed to pry open the East African market, and as a result, Britain could only intensify its exploitation of colonies like India.

However, as time goes on, the economic crisis, which had the greatest impact in the 19th century, will eventually end. Now it is 1895, and historically, the impact of the 1873 economic crisis would end next year.

Subsequently, the world economy would experience a period of "great prosperity" lasting over thirty years, although a "world war" occurred in Europe during that time, which allowed countries outside the region, like the United States, to gain substantially.

For East Africa, this also represents a significant opportunity. Of course, the pre-condition is to disengage ahead of the next economic crisis, but this is still premature for East Africa at the current moment, as even the outbreak and timing of World War I remain unknown.

What East Africa needs to do is strengthen itself in the next thirty years, under the condition of a favorable international market and possibly an increased demand for war economies due to European wars.

East Africa must increase its domestic productivity levels to claim a larger share, so East Africa needs to complete the construction of its national market before 1900, boost the development levels of its industrial and agricultural sectors, and subsequently compete with various countries.

...

After "encouraging" the transportation and railway departments, the Minister of Water Resources hurried to Ernst's office.

Minister Yar placed a thick stack of documents on Ernst's desk. This was an extensive canal construction plan, with the cover of the materials labeled with the words "East African Grand Canal" plan, which from the name alone suggested its "craziness."

"We plan to connect the four major inland waterways of the Malagasy River (the largest river in the Highland Province), the Zambezi River, the Congo River, and the Kwanza River (located in Angola)."

"Hmm, quite a bold idea!" Ernst could only say this, as no one had attempted this in the previous era. However, thinking about it, given the fragmented national pattern of Africa in the past, entangled with numerous warlords and tribal powers, even if the productivity level in Africa was not backward, it would still be impossible to undertake such a large-scale project requiring comprehensive planning.

"But, what about this plan's feasibility? I need a satisfactory answer," Ernst asked.

Yar adjusted the legs of his glasses and said slowly, "In fact, our Ministry of Water Resources already had a plan for this. During the first national water resources planning period, we had a similar concept, but now the Angola region is newly added."

"In the first national water resources construction, we thoroughly and systematically modified the central and eastern rivers. During this process, our Ministry of Water Resources and experts obtained complete and detailed information on East African rivers."

"Therefore, after fully summarizing, calculating, planning, and verifying, we proposed the East African Grand Canal plan."

"The key to this plan is to consider the Katanga Plateau and the Bie Plateau in terms of water flowing towards lower elevations, so according to the terrain, East Africa must leverage the terrain to link the four major basins together."

"This is evident from the source of East African rivers. Many tributaries of the Congo River and Zambezi River originate from the East African Plateau, Katanga Plateau, and Bie Plateau, so the Katanga Plateau and Bie Plateau, located at the center of the four river basins, are crucial for realizing mutual navigation between these basins in the central East African region."

Yar said a lot, but it wasn't actually very complicated. Simply put, the highland terrain in East Africa can be viewed as the plains of the Far East Empire. The major plateaus in the middle of the nation are essentially connected, and East Africa uses the tributaries in these connected regions to link the major rivers together.

It's similar to the Far East Empire's Grand Canal, which passes through the North China Plain and the middle and lower Yangtze Plain, interspersed with some smaller terrains.

And the plateaus that Yar pointed out can be likened to Jiangsu Province, with the northern part of Jiangsu being the North China Plain and the southern part belonging to the middle and lower Yangtze Plain, with no clear boundary between the two.

Of course, the East African Grand Canal, although sounding similar to the Grand Canal of the Far East, is actually entirely different.

After all, the Grand Canal has a distinctly single waterway, stretching over a thousand kilometers, whereas East Africa clearly lacks such geographical conditions.

Yar also explained: "The East African Grand Canal is not a standalone waterway but rather forms an inland shipping network covering the entire central territory of East Africa by connecting various rivers' tributaries through dozens of canals."

The main rivers in East Africa flow in different directions: the Zambezi River flows east into the Indian Ocean, the Congo River flows west into the Atlantic Ocean, and the Nile River flows north into the Mediterranean. The overall river network is scattered.

So, trying to connect the main channels of these rivers is practically impossible, but these rivers have thousands of tributaries apart from the main courses.

The East African Grand Canal leverages these tributaries to achieve the purpose of connecting East Africa's inland waterways to oceans, thus reducing inland transportation costs.

"According to our calculations, the actual length of the East African Grand Canal could reach about 1,700 to 2,300 kilometers, with the exact value depending on the adopted plan."

"Because the East African Grand Canal plan is actually composed of dozens of small canal schemes, and some selection and trade-offs must be made among these small canal schemes, causing the data to fluctuate."

More accurately, the East African Grand Canal plan should be called the East African Canal Network Plan. East Africa's water resources experts have also formulated many alternative plans. Which plans to ultimately adopt depends on the specific construction circumstances.

This bold concept from the Ministry of Water Resources impressed Ernst, showing that he indeed had capable people under his command.

Inland navigation issues in East Africa had always been a concern, but the East African Grand Canal plan cleverly used river tributaries as support points. Since the main channels couldn't be interconnected, connecting their tributaries was a form of tactical detour.

Although tributaries fall short in terms of riverbed and water volume compared to main channels, achieving interconnectivity in an inland water shipping network would already be a great benefit for East Africa.

Large vessels may not be navigable, but small ships are acceptable. After all, even small vessels have much lower costs than highways and railways. If not considering time and certain specific factors, waterway transportation would be the priority option.

"Very well, the overall plan has no obvious flaws, but you also need to conduct more field investigations, address potential issues, and submit a summary by July of this year, then report to me," Ernst said to Yar.

While agreeing very much with this plan, Ernst chose to remain cautious. After all, this plan involves a large number of significant tributaries, numbering over a hundred, and has a vast impact on the central land coverage of East Africa.

Of course, ecological concerns were not Ernst's main focus. Following this logic, other countries should not have built canals either.

The 19th to 20th centuries was actually a peak period for canal construction worldwide, especially among powers like England, the United States, Germany, and France, yet historically, the canals they built did not seem to have caused significant ecological impacts.

Of course, regarding species that might go extinct due to canal construction, Ernst could only express apologies, as the East African government is entirely "people-oriented," and economic development is the hard truth.