This study applied game theory to examine Ethiopia and Egypt's strategic interactions and interests in the GERD dispute. The study discovered that the conflict could be resolved by considering the various concerns and motivations of the parties involved. The study also investigated potential collaborative solutions and negotiation strategies for resolving the environmental conflict. The study's research objectives were to identify the key players in the GERD debate. Analyze the decision-making procedures used by Egypt and Ethiopia, and consider any possible outcomes from the conflict. Make appropriate alternatives for resolving disputes. The study found that the GERD controversy is a complicated problem with conflicting interests. While Egypt is concerned about the dam's effects on its water supply, Ethiopia is interested in using it to produce hydroelectric power. The study discovered that both nations' concerns must be considered to resolve the conflict. The study considered various cooperative dispute-resolution options as well. These remedies include water-sharing contracts, payment systems, and other cooperative actions. According to the study, these solutions could promote a fair and protracted conflict settlement. The study's conclusions help clarify the complexities of the GERD controversy and offer guidance to those involved in the debate as policymakers and stakeholders. The study offers helpful recommendations for fostering communication, encouraging collaboration, and arriving at a conclusion considering the worries and interests of all parties involved in the GERD dispute.