Ethiopia's Game with Fire: Power Claims and Geopolitical Tensions

At the end of 2023, Ethiopia's Prime Minister, Dr. Ahmed Abiy, caused a stir when he declared that Ethiopia is "a nation whose existence is connected to the Red Sea" and, therefore, it needs access to a port. This statement included the incendiary possibility of seeking this access both through peaceful means and by threatening force. Although the Ethiopian government later backtracked from these bellicose statements, emphasizing peaceful intentions, they shed light on deeply rooted imperialist power dynamics in contemporary Ethiopian politics.

The Prime Minister of Ethiopia addressing his parliament (1)

Reactions to Abiy's statements were swift. Ethiopia's immediate neighbors Eritrea, Djibouti, and Somalia promptly and vehemently rejected Abiy's demands. Despite the later softening of rhetoric by the Ethiopian government, these events revealed geopolitical tensions in the region.

The pronouncements of Ethiopia's Prime Minister, Dr. Ahmed Abiy, demanding access to the sea, not only stirred unrest on a regional level but also found concerning resonance within Ethiopian society. Particularly, the reactions of some Ethiopian intellectuals to Abiy's demands cast a shadow over societal debates in the country. The public support for Abiy's demands by certain Ethiopian intellectuals illustrates how deeply ingrained historical and perceived legitimate claims are in the societal perception. These intellectual circles embraced Abiy's statement with approval and embellished it with the conviction that Ethiopia has a historical and legitimate right to access the sea.

Discussions within Ethiopian society underscore that the issue of access to the sea is not only political but is also, by some factions, instrumentalized as ostensibly identity-affirming. Historical narratives are mobilized to legitimize Abiy's demands, raising concerns as this development has the potential to further strain relations with immediate neighbors.

Prime Minister Abiy, as well as the majority of Ethiopian intellectuals, often rely on international law to provide a legal basis for the claim to sea access. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea establishes clear principles for sea access for landlocked states. Article 3 of the convention emphasizes that landlocked states should be granted free transit through the territory of coastal states based on reciprocity. While the term "free transit" underscores the importance of freedom of movement, it does not prescribe direct access to the sea. It is crucial to note that Article 3 speaks of "free transit" to the sea, not direct "access to the sea." This subtle difference holds significant meaning, as international law sets clear guidelines that must be carefully interpreted.

A comparison with Bolivia's case illustrates this: After the peace treaty of 1904 with Chile, Bolivia was denied direct access to the Pacific, becoming a landlocked state. Despite Bolivia's attempts in recent years to renegotiate sea access, the International Court of Justice in The Hague ruled in 2018 that Chile was not obligated to negotiate sea access with Bolivia. This judgment was based on the 1904 decision, thus confirming existing boundaries.

The two South American countries Bolivia and Chile on a map (2)

At the beginning of the new year in 2024, the Ethiopian government made headlines by signing a Memorandum of Understanding with the self-declared Republic of Somaliland. Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed and Somaliland's President Muse Bihi Abdi signed the declaration of intent, granting Ethiopia access to the port of Berbera on the Gulf of Aden and a leased military base. Although the exact text of the agreement was not disclosed, President Muse Bihi Abdi stated that it includes leasing over 19 kilometers of sea access around Berbera to the Ethiopian Navy for 50 years. In return, Somaliland not only receives official recognition from the Ethiopian government but also participation in the state-owned airline, Ethiopian Airlines.

This agreement sparked outrage in Somalia, with its government rejecting it as "illegitimate" and deeming it a threat to stability and peace in the region. As a first step, Somalia immediately recalled its ambassador from Addis Ababa. In a stern statement after an emergency meeting chaired by Prime Minister Hamza Abdi Barre, the Somali government declared the Memorandum of Understanding and the cooperation agreement as "null and void."

The signing of the Memorandum of Understanding between Prime Minister Dr. Abiy Ahmed and President Muse Bihi Abdi of Somaliland (3)

The Somali government views the agreement as a clear violation of its sovereignty, freedom, and unity. President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud denounced the agreement as unacceptable for Somalia's interests. Diplomatic tensions between Ethiopia, Somaliland, and Somalia have entered a new chapter, and the international community will closely observe how the situation unfolds.

Somalia's map in the Horn of Africa (4)

Internationally, Ethiopia's move has faced strong criticism and resistance. The African Union and the United States have called for calm, especially urging Ethiopia to respect Somalia's sovereignty and territorial integrity. In a statement, the European Union emphasized the importance of "respecting the unity, sovereignty, and territorial integrity of the Federal Republic of Somalia in accordance with its constitution, the charters of the African Union, and the United Nations." On January 3, Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi had a telephone conversation with the Somali President, affirming Egypt's support for Somalia's security and stability.

While Eritrea has not officially commented on Ethiopia's actions, the visit of the Somali President to Eritrea immediately after the declaration of intent indicates that the Eritrean government stands on Somalia's side. The Eritrean government makes no secret that Somalia's state and territorial integrity hold great strategic importance. For this reason, Eritrea has militarily trained over 10,000 Somali soldiers in Eritrea in recent months.

The precarious situation in the Horn of Africa highlights the fragility of the overall situation in this region. Tensions between Somalia and Ethiopia carry the risk of escalating into an open conflict rapidly. Given these challenges, it is hopeful that Ethiopia refrains from its previous aggressive stance and instead seeks dialogue with its neighbors.

The Horn of Africa (5)

Constructive dialogue and diplomatic negotiations are crucial to prevent escalation. The international community could play a supportive role by advocating for peaceful solutions and pushing for de-escalation of tensions. It is of great importance that the involved parties resolve their differences through talks and negotiations to prevent further worsening of the situation.

The consequences of an armed conflict in this already fragile region would be devastating. An open war would not only have severe effects on the countries involved but could also lead to a regional crisis with global consequences. Therefore, it is of utmost importance that all actors act prudently and work towards a peaceful solution.

The international community, especially organizations like the United Nations and the African Union, should intensify their efforts to promote mediation and dialogue. Only through a cooperative approach of all parties involved can a sustainable solution be found for the existing challenges in the Horn of Africa.