ROME — The grandeur of the Italia Africa Summit unfolded in Rome on Monday, January 29, 2024, as leaders from across Africa gathered to explore collaborative opportunities and discuss Italy’s expansive development plan for the continent. A noteworthy participant in this event is Eritrea, marking the culmination of a remarkable year of diplomatic engagements that began with the country’s pivotal decision to rejoin the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) in June.
Eritrea’s involvement in the Italia Africa Summit appears to be part of a carefully orchestrated series of international participations, showcasing the nation’s newfound commitment to global cooperation. This momentum commenced when President Isaias Afwerki visited the People’s Republic of China in May and participated in the Russia Africa Summit in July of the previous year, indicating the nation’s willingness to engage with diverse partners on the global stage. The subsequent attendance at the 15th BRICS Summit in South Africa in August further underscored Eritrea’s desire to align itself with emerging economic powerhouses.
A significant stride in Eritrea’s diplomatic resurgence occurred with the decision to rejoin IGAD in June, after a 16-year hiatus. This move underscored Eritrea’s dedication to regional collaboration and signaled a renewed commitment to addressing shared challenges in the Horn of Africa. The subsequent engagement in the Saudi Africa Summit in November further reinforced Eritrea’s commitment to fostering economic initiatives for regional stability.
Now, with Eritrea’s participation in the Italia Africa Summit, the nation stands at the forefront of yet another international gathering, solidifying its place on the global diplomatic map. The Italia Africa Summit, emphasizing Italy’s development plan named after Enrico Mattei, aligns with Eritrea’s commitment to non-predatory and equal collaboration. Italian officials have outlined pilot projects spanning education, healthcare, water, sanitation, agriculture, and infrastructure, offering Eritrea another platform to contribute positively on critical regional and global issues.
Eritrea’s consistent participation in such high-profile events reflects a strategic and multifaceted approach to international relations. By actively involving Eritrea in forums like the Russia Africa Summit, 15th BRICS Summit, Saudi Africa Summit, and now the Italia Africa Summit, the nation is positioning itself as a proactive and constructive participant in global affairs.
As Eritrea navigates this diplomatic journey, the cumulative impact of its engagements can be seen as a comprehensive strategy to foster economic growth, address regional challenges, and reshape its image on the global stage. The progressive participation in a variety of summits demonstrates Eritrea’s commitment to being an active player in regional and international affairs, signaling a positive evolution in the nation’s diplomatic approach.
In a significant shift, the U.S. Integrated Country Strategy, released on November 17, 2023, reflects a more positive tone towards Eritrea compared to its 2022 counterpart. The document reveals a heightened eagerness of the U.S. government to engage with Eritrea and support its efforts in the region. This change in attitude aligns with the broader international acknowledgment of Eritrea’s diplomatic strides.
The report, serving as a testament to the evolving dynamics of international relations, acknowledges Eritrea’s significance and potential contributions to regional issues. Notably, the U.S. government’s positive tone is observed alongside Eritrea’s decision to rejoin IGAD, showcasing a convergence of efforts for regional stability and collaboration.
In conclusion, the Italia Africa Summit stands as a compelling testament to the culmination of Eritrea’s dynamic and fruitful engagement on the global stage throughout the past year. Eritrea’s active participation in this prestigious summit, strategically woven into a series of significant international events, and underscored by the backdrop of an increasingly positive U.S. attitude, not only underscores the nation’s unwavering commitment to fostering positive collaboration but also positions Eritrea as an emerging developing country whose voice resonates powerfully on the international stage.
Eritrea’s strategic sequence of engagements, ranging from President Isaias Afwerki’s visit to the People’s Republic of China to its involvement in the Russia Africa Summit, 15th BRICS Summit, and the Saudi Africa Summit, all contribute to a narrative of proactive and constructive participation in global affairs. These deliberate steps highlight Eritrea’s commitment to forging meaningful connections, fostering economic growth, and addressing regional challenges in a multifaceted and comprehensive manner.
Crucially, against the backdrop of a more favorable tone in the U.S. Integrated Country Strategy released on November 17, 2023, compared to its 2022 counterpart, Eritrea’s diplomatic strides are increasingly recognized and embraced on the international stage. This positive shift in the U.S. attitude aligns harmoniously with the broader global acknowledgment of Eritrea’s dedication to regional stability and collaboration.
The Italia Africa Summit, with its emphasis on Italy’s Enrico Mattei development plan, serves as a pivotal platform for Eritrea to showcase its commitment to non-predatory and equal collaboration. As Italian officials outline ambitious pilot projects spanning education, healthcare, water, sanitation, agriculture, and infrastructure, Eritrea finds itself not merely as a participant but as an active contributor to critical regional and global issues.
In essence, Eritrea’s presence and active involvement in the Italia Africa Summit encapsulate a narrative of diplomatic evolution, economic promise, and international cooperation. The nation’s strides underscore a positive trajectory that positions Eritrea as an emerging developing country with a distinctive voice and a notable presence on the ever-evolving global diplomatic landscape.
Rising Cycling Sensation Biniam Girmay Secures a Spot Among New African Magazine’s 100 Most Influential Africans of 2023
New African Magazine has unveiled its prestigious annual listing of the 100 Most Influential Africans of 2023, recognizing individuals who have made outstanding contributions across various fields. Among the notable figures featured in the list is the talented cyclist Biniam Girmay.
Biniam Girmay, hailing from Eritrea, has emerged as a rising star in the world of sports. Known for his exceptional cycling prowess, Girmay has garnered attention and acclaim for his remarkable achievements on the international stage. As a representative of the sports category in the 100 Most Influential Africans of 2023, Girmay stands alongside other sports personalities who have left an indelible mark in their respective disciplines.
Girmay’s inclusion in the list reflects not only his individual achievements but also the growing influence of African athletes on the global sports scene. His dedication, skill, and determination have not only propelled him to success but have also inspired aspiring athletes across the continent.
The 100 Most Influential Africans of 2023 highlights the diverse accomplishments of individuals from politics, business, science, academia, environmental advocacy, media, creative arts, and sports. This special edition of New African Magazine serves as a comprehensive overview of the remarkable lives and achievements of the selected individuals, providing readers with insights and inspiration.
The list showcases the vibrancy and resilience of Africa, celebrating those who have made significant strides in their respective fields, including the inspiring Biniam Girmay.
Kampala, Uganda – January 22, 2024: In a statement delivered at the Third South Summit in Kampala, Uganda, Mr. Osman Saleh, the Foreign Minister of the State of Eritrea, congratulated the Republic of Uganda for assuming the Chairmanship of the Group of 77 and China. He commended Cuba for its exemplary leadership as the outgoing Chair and emphasized the need for genuine cooperation and partnership within the Global South.
Highlighting the interconnected challenges faced by member states, Mr. Saleh underscored the threats posed by unprovoked wars, geopolitical tensions, climate calamities, and public health pandemics. He expressed concern that despite halfway through the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, many countries in the Global South, particularly in Africa, continue to face poverty and stagnant socio-economic conditions.
Drawing attention to Eritrea’s own challenges arising from a thirty-year war for independence and subsequent conflicts, Mr. Saleh emphasized the impact of UN Security Council sanctions and unilateral coercive measures on the country’s development. Despite these challenges, he highlighted Eritrea’s resilience in rehabilitating its economy through a development strategy focused on social justice and partnership.
The Foreign Minister called for an end to coercive unilateral measures imposed for political purposes, urging solidarity among member states to terminate such actions. He also advocated for the reform of the international financial architecture to address the needs of developing countries.
Mr. Saleh cautioned against normative pledges that list false hopes, urging realistic and achievable programs of action in future summits. He emphasized the importance of sincere cooperation and solidarity within the Group of 77 and China and the wider UN membership to address global crises and ensure sustainable development.
In his concluding remarks, Mr. Saleh strongly called for an immediate end to the war on the Palestinian civilian population and public institutions. He asserted that the inalienable rights and aspirations of the Palestinian people should be fully respected, emphasizing their right to self-determination and the need for peace in the region.
The statement by Mr. Osman Saleh at the Third South Summit resonates as a call for unity, cooperation, and solidarity to overcome the challenges faced by the Global South and advance towards sustainable development.
Since its inception in 1963, the Organization of African Unity (OAU) and its successor, the African Union (AU), have been hosted by Ethiopia. Emperor Haile Selassie of Ethiopia was its first OAU chairman. Among the major pillars of the African Union’s mission is safeguarding the sovereignty and territorial integrity of member states. Affirming commitments to its objectives, in its Cairo Declaration of Article 2 of resolution 16(1), the OAU pledged the independent African states to respect their inherited colonial borders. Through the Cairo Declaration, the OAU asserted that colonial borders be a sacrosanct boundary of African countries. In its effort to promote peace and security throughout the continent, the African Union established the Peace and Security Council in December 2003. The specific goal of the Peace and Security Council (PSC) is the “prevention, management, and resolution of conflicts.” In line with the above agreements and objectives of the African Union, we will see if Ethiopia deserves to continue hosting the African Union.
ETHIOPIA IS A THREAT TO REGIONAL PEACE.
Somalia:
Contrary to the objectives of the African Union, Ethiopia has been a source of instability in the Horn of Africa region. Following the 1977–1978 border war with Somalia, Ethiopia worked hard to make Somalia a failed state for three decades. In 2006, when Somalis started to organize themselves under the Union of Islamic Courts and began to bring normalcy to Somalia, Ethiopia invaded Somalia. The invasion of Somalia by Ethiopia created Al-Shabaab. In the pretext of fighting Al-Shabaab, Ethiopia is still in Somalia. According to the United Nations monitoring group report, Ethiopia, coupled with Yemen, is a major source of arms and logistics for Al-Shabaab.
As a continuation of its persistent effort to disremember Somalia, recently Ethiopia has signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the breakaway unrecognized Somaliland. The MOU states that, in exchange for a share in Ethiopian Airlines and recognition of Somaliland as an independent country, Ethiopia will get a 20 km seacoast for building a naval base and commercial port. Such an agreement has all signs that indicate Ethiopia wants Somalia to remain a failed state.
Here is why:
The MOU does not involve the Government of the Federal Republic of Somalia. Signing an agreement with Somaliland, which the world recognizes as part of Somalia, is in contravention of the African Union’s commitment to respect the territorial integrity and sovereignty of a member nation Somalia. If Ethiopia wanted to get a seacoast from Somalia, it should have negotiated with the Federal Government of the Republic of Somalia.
Ethiopia is taking advantage of a neighboring country that is going through multiple challenges. Recently Somalia has been showing progress especially in its security sector. Neighboring countries like Eritrea have trained future Somalian Navy, Airforce, and Mechanized units. Such an effort to reconstitute Somalia did not bode well with Ethiopia. That is why Ethiopia is rushing to derail the effort to bring Somalia back from the Abyss.
The MOU could antagonize Ethiopia with China, Turkey, Spain, and other countries that have similar secessionist problems. In the case of China, a major lender to Ethiopia, the recognition of Somaliland could pave the way for Taiwan to be recognized by the United States and some countries in Europe. Accordingly, China is expected to oppose the possible recognition of Somaliland by Ethiopia or any other country.
The MOU does not have economic benefits to Ethiopia. The straight-line distance between Addis Ababa to Lughaya, Somaliland is 930 km. To build a road, a commercial port, and a naval base in Lughaya, Ethiopia will need billions of dollars that it does not have. Moreover, Ethiopia must pay an annual lease to Somaliland calculated based on an average of what Djibouti gets from leasing its land to foreign countries that have bases in Djibouti. For instance, the US base in Djibouti is 500 acres or 2.2 square km. and it pays $60 million a year. You can imagine how much Ethiopia needs to pay for the 20-kilometer seacoast. Even if Ethiopia pays half of what the USA pays to Djibouti, it is going to be a significant amount of money. All this money will be expended to show the world that Ethiopia has a navy on a leased base in Somaliland.
The MOU is a danger to Ethiopia itself. Ethiopia is currently fighting with an Oromo separatist group, and the Tigrayans have harbored their long-held interest to separate from Ethiopia. Thus, the recognition of Somaliland by Ethiopia could open a floodgate for other countries including Somalia to recognize and support Ethiopian secessionist groups.
Eritrea:
After being colonized by Italy for 50 years (1889-1941) and ten years (1941-1951) under the British Interim Administration, the United Nations forced Eritrea to be federated with Ethiopia in 1952. In 1962, Ethiopia’s Emperor Haile Selassie unilaterally dissolved the Federation and annexed Eritrea, triggering a 30-year armed struggle in Eritrea. Eritrea, which had a distinct flag, parliament, and national boundaries based on the 1900, 1902, and 1908 colonial agreements between Ethiopia and Italy, was turned into an administrative region of Ethiopia. Although the annexation of Eritrea happened two years before the 1964 Cairo declaration, it was a clear indication that Ethiopia had not been committed to peace and security in Africa. After 30 years of war and destruction, the Eritrean People’s Liberation Front (EPLF) completely liberated Eritrea in 1991. Through the UN and the AU monitored referendum, Eritrea became an independent country on May 24, 1993. Again, in violation of the 1964 Cairo declaration, in 1998 Ethiopia claimed the Badme region of Eritrea and conducted a two-year devastating war against Eritrea. In 2002, the Eritrea and Ethiopia boundary commission based on the colonial agreements of 1900, 1902, and 1908 declared Badme was an Eritrean territory. Ethiopia rejected the ruling and occupied Badme and other Eritrean territories for twenty years. As a continuation of the Ethiopian leader’s act of undermining colonial boundaries recently, the current Prime Minister of Ethiopia Dr. Abiy Ahmed attempted to replace the 1964 Cairo declaration with Ethnic-based boundaries. He argued that because the Afar Ethnic group lives in both Eritrea and Ethiopia, the Ethiopian Afars should have a say on the Eritrean Red Sea. He continued to say because Somalis live in both Ethiopia and Somalia the Ethiopian Somalis should have a say on the Indian Ocean. In violation of the 1964 OAU declaration, he claimed to have a historical right to own a port and corridor to the sea. These statements clearly indicate that Ethiopia is not serious about the 1964 Cairo declaration and the 1982 UN convention or Law of the Sea.
Sudan:
Ethiopia’s continuous border conflict with Sudan in the Alfashaga region also indicates Ethiopia’s lack of commitment to settle international border problems in line with the 1964 Cairo Declaration. When the Tigray war started, Sudan reclaimed what it called land that was occupied by Ethiopia. The border problem between Sudan and Ethiopia is a dormant conflict that could erupt at any time. Also, recently, some news has been circulating that Ethiopia has become the United Arab Emirates’ weapon transshipment destination to Sudan’s reengage general Mohammad Hamdan Dagalo aka “Hemedti”. Again, such interference in the affairs of a sovereign nation is another evidence that Ethiopia is a destabilizing factor in the Horn of Africa.
ETHIOPIA HAS A LONG HISTORY OF VIOLENT REGIME CHANGES AND PERSISTENT CONFLICTS:
Focusing on the history of modern Ethiopia, Emperor Haile Selassie, the first OAU chairman, was overthrown in a violent military coup by a Marxist–Leninist junta, the Derg. On the morning of 23 November 1974, the Derg executed 54 Haile Selassie’s Ministers, and six were killed in a shootout with the executioners. Haile Selassie was assassinated on 27 August 1975 by the then Ethiopian Military Junta. The catastrophic famine of 1983–1985 was what brought the Derg junta government the most international attention. Mengistu’s government is estimated to be responsible for the deaths of 500,000 to 2,000,000 Ethiopians, mostly during the 1983–1985 famine in Ethiopia and close to 750,000 people due to the red terror execution of civilians. Consistent with what the Derg military Junta did to Haile Selassie, after waging a war for 17 years, the Tigray Liberation Front (TPLF) toppled the Derg Marxist Leninist Junta in 1991. Although the TPLF is credited with what resembles an economic change in Ethiopia, the ethnic-based federalism system it established continues to be a time bomb in Ethiopia. Ethnic conflicts in Ethiopia are believed to have killed close to two million and displaced five million Ethiopians. The Oromo and Amhara youth uprising toppled the Tigray liberation front-led government in 2018 and brought the current Prime Minister, Dr. Abiy Ahmed, to power. Although in the beginning, the transition of power seemed peaceful, it was followed by a deadly conflict between the Ethiopian Federal Government and the TPLF. The conflict resulted in the death of close to two million people in Tigray, Amhara, and Afar and the widespread destruction of property and infrastructure. Regardless of the ongoing wars in Amhara and Oromo, recently the Prime Minister of Ethiopia Dr. Abiy Ahmed made a dangerous speech to his parliament that could destabilize the whole Horn of Africa region. Ethiopian leaders continue to have a strong appetite for conflict and they do not seem to survive without it. In the meantime, people in Tigray and Amhara are dying of hunger, and the federal government is warning the state governments not to say anything about it. The Abiy government does not want anything that interferes with his hot propaganda topic that Ethiopia got access to the sea. The news has become a staple of state-controlled activists, Radio and TV, and it will continue for months to come.
CONCLUSION:
The saddest part of the story is a leader, Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed, whom Ethiopians and people of the neighboring countries hoped would change the trajectory of war and conflicts in Ethiopia and received a noble prize, has become the prime instigator of war in Ethiopia. On top of the ongoing wars in Amhara and Oromo and the dormant deadly conflict in Tigray, currently, Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed is eying an invasion of neighboring countries, especially Somalia and Eritrea. Therefore, Ethiopia’s continuous disregard for the 1964 Cairo declaration on colonial boundaries and its persistent internal conflicts do not reflect the values of the African Union. In fact, the Ethiopian utter disregard for the African Union’s declarations and agreements is making the African Union weaker and partial. The recent threat of the Prime Minister on neighboring countries and its MOU with the unrecognized breakaway state of Somalia should be a warning bell to the African Union. If Ethiopia continues to undermine the African Union’s declarations and agreements, it may be disqualifying itself from continuing to be the host of the African Union. It is time for the AU and its member states to send a strong warning to Ethiopia. If not, AU will be irrelevant.
In a calibrated diplomatic response to the evolving political dynamics in the Horn of Africa, President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud embarked on a two-day working visit to Eritrea from January 8 to 10, 2024. This visit unfolds against a backdrop of regional complexities, notably the recently inked Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between Ethiopia and Somaliland on January 1, 2024, prompting varied diplomatic responses.
Background: Somalia, Somaliland, and Ethiopia
The genesis of the Somaliland issue traces back to the early 1990s, marked by its declaration of independence following the collapse of the Somali state. While Somaliland maintains a degree of autonomy, its sovereignty lacks international recognition. The recent Ethiopia-Somaliland MOU introduces an additional layer of intricacy to the regional landscape, fostering diplomatic tensions.
Analysts’ Perspectives and Regional Ramifications
Analysts contend that Ethiopia’s endorsement of the MOU violates the charters of the African Union (AU) and the United Nations (UN). In response, Somalia nullified the MOU, reinforced by the Somalian president signing a law. Numerous regional countries have reiterated their support for Somalia’s territorial integrity.
GERD and Regional Implications
The GERD, a significant hydropower project on the Blue Nile River initiated by Ethiopia, stands as a source of regional tensions. Egypt and Sudan express apprehensions about potential impacts on water resources. Ongoing diplomatic unrest adds complexity to the GERD issue, heightening concerns about Egypt leveraging the situation to bolster its opposition.
Moreover, the GERD matter carries implications for regional stability, potentially escalating geopolitical tensions. The intricate negotiations and power dynamics surrounding the dam project are interwoven with broader regional geopolitics.
Ethiopian Internal Challenges
Internally, Ethiopia grapples with a myriad of challenges, including the ongoing conflict in the Amhara region and the Oromia conflict. These conflicts, coupled with the impact of drought and ethnic tensions, amplify the overall complexity of the regional dynamics. The Amhara region conflict and the Oromia conflict lead to displacement, human rights concerns, and internal cohesion strains.
Eritrea’s Strategic Calculus
In this intricate scenario, Eritrea’s role assumes added significance. The recent diplomatic engagement between Eritrea and Somalia during President Mohamud’s visit from January 8-10, 2024, can be perceived as an opportunity for Eritrea to strategically position itself, especially in relation to Ethiopia. Relations between Eritrea and Ethiopia have been strained since the cessation of hostilities between the Ethiopian federal government and the TPLF in November 2022.
As the Government of Eritrea announces its intention to issue comprehensive statements in the near future, the international community eagerly anticipates a nuanced understanding of the specific diplomatic agenda discussed during the visit. These unfolding developments present a measured narrative of diplomatic maneuvers in the Horn of Africa, where cooperation and dialogue are explored as potential instruments to navigate regional realignment.
Amidst these geopolitical intricacies, the Eritrea-Somalia diplomatic engagement from January 8-10, 2024, stands as a testament to the strategic considerations at play, offering insight into the delicate balance of regional alliances and the pursuit of stability amidst evolving challenges.
Comparing a Nobel Peace Prize laureate Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed and Benito Mussolini could be inappropriate and would be considered like awarding that Prize to the later. What a horror! Yet, the covetous reasonings presented in October and November speech by PM Abiy to possess neighbor’s port in the Red Sea ‘by peace or by force’ have curious similarities to those presented by Mussolini when preparing to invade Ethiopia in 1935.
Mussolini’s white man’s burden
Mussolini and his Fascists “nuclear” reason to invade Ethiopia was to abolish slavery.(1)
For about a century until the end of the second world war, a persistent and insistent call mainly by the United Kingdom to abolish slavery placed Abyssinia on the spotlight and left an indelible stigma on the country.2 While the scourge was prohibited in many countries in name only, and while worst inhumane arm and leg amputation was taking place by “civilized colonizing Europeans”, the Belgian Leopold II for example, the two independent (non-colonized) African states, Abyssinia and Liberia alone carried the “torch” of Slave-States in Africa. Ironically, the white man’s burden was considered as a saviour from slavery.
Slavery, slave hunting, and slave transit plagued Abyssinia for millennia. It was the most visible aspect of life in the country so much so that starting in the 19th century almost every message from Europe and every European messenger sent to Ethiopia demanded the abolishment of slavery.3 Every treaty Ethiopia made with the big European nations had to contain a promise to abolish slavery. To be allowed to the League of Nations membership, Ras Teferi had to promulgate edicts to abolish it and promises to continue doing. Despite previous reservations, Italy agreed and voted for Ethiopia to be a member of the League in 1923 in the hope of convincing it to be an Italian protectorate. A couple years later, however, Italy under the same Mussolini who agreed for Ethiopia’s membership, started working against, to kick it out of the League accusing it of slavery.1 The witch hunt begun. Mussolini found in slavery an alibi to invade and colonize the country. PM Abiy Ahmed’s 21st Century version of “slavery” by using hunger as an alibi to possess a sea outlet that belong to his neighbors is the ultimate sinisterism that is too eerily sickening but must be contemplated here for all the world to see and comprehend.
Hunger, Abiy Ahmed’s Caricatural Burden
Next to slavery, famine was another Abyssinian plague since millennia. The northeastern Africa starting from Tanzania north to Egypt are breeding grounds for the most gregarious swarm of insect, and since biblical times the people there were periodically devastated by it. Famine and hunger cause by locust invasion, disease pestilence, the pernicious internecine war, and the lack of ingenuity and endeavour to harness the hardy environment left the people to their sort. Their only hope was stretching their hands to the skies. For the people of the region like the Abyssinians, every good, bad or ugly was attributed to God. Not celebrating as it deserves Saint Gabriel or Saint Mary Day that happens to fall on the day or the week prior to the fall of the swarms of locust was the perfect explanation for the devastation that ensued. Calamity was considered as the wrath of God.4
Now, the PM of Ethiopia, Abiy Ahmed, is telling the world that the cause of all problems in his country is the wrath of not having a port. In no uncertain terms, PM Abiy Ahmed warned, if the fast-growing population of his country gets hungry tomorrow, it will be the fault of not having access to the Sea.5,6 A flagrant logical fallacy. Resource-wise, Ethiopia is one of the richest countries in Africa, capable of feeding its people and beyond. Incidentally, PM Abiy never stops boasting of his country’s wealth and capabilities, but when it comes to possessing what is not his, he is capable of declaring hunger and unleash millions of hungry Ethiopians to the neighborhood as he unambiguously declared that 5 million Ethiopians could migrate in search of food to each neighboring country.
Fabricating Story and History
Mussolini’s Fascists went as far as fabricating slavery stories and compiling documents containing unverifiable slave trade stories to nail and over-nail the coffin of accusations.7 In a similar manner, it was curious to see PM Abiy, during his October parliamentary presentation pointing to Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) on a map of Africa implying it acquired ocean access after decolonization.5 This gave an idea for several Ethiopian scholars to invent history that never happened saying Republic of Congo (RC) gave DRC an outlet to the ocean through the principle of give and take.8,9
For various reasons, the people living in the coastal areas have their own countries and boundaries that were shaped more than a century ago in the same manner Modern Abyssinia (Ethiopia) was enlarged more than twice its size and shaped by the fate of history, war, and colonialism. The scramble for Africa, left no no-man’s land in Africa. It is worth reminding PM Abiy, there is no Antarctica in East Africa to go and grab freely a no-man’s port. Even in Antarctica, there is an international agreement that regulates the possession of a land for research purposes. The reason for the promulgation of the “United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea” was that there is no coast and port that is available for landlocked countries to be grabbed. So where does this delusion come from?
Delusions of Grandeur
Mussolini’s and his Fascist party were trying hard to mimic the Roman empire. Their characteristic insignia, the Roman Fasces, and their salutation stretching the right arm attest to that without the need for elaboration.10 Like Mussolini’s renamed Italy, Italian Empire, alluding to the roman empire after his invasion of Ethiopia, PM Abiy talked of the glories of Axumite civilization and alluded to Blue Nile and the Red Sea as being Ethiopian by declaring they are the life and death of Ethiopians. The problem of delusional expansionists is the expansion of their discourse going beyond space and time. They present what happened more than a thousand years back as if it happened yesterday and they consider themselves as the sole inheritors of glorious time and blood descendants of the glorious leaders. They try to act in the same manner as those ancient leaders. More interestingly, in so doing, these expansionists instinctively behave in the same manner.
Furthermore, after trying to exploit Axumite civilization, PM Abiy jumped more than a thousand years to 19th century to highlight the callous Ras Alula to claim possession of a Red Sea.5 Alula was pitiless, who murdered Eritreans especially those around Keren and western lowlands. He administered Mereb-Mlash (name for central part of Eritrea) for Emperor Yohannes IV, collecting tributes and looting in the name of chasing outlaws. He was also a military leader who defeated the Italians at Dogali, but with no vision to continue chasing them beyond Massawa despite his earlier boasting saying, “I will not go away until my horse drunk from the Red Sea.” This is what is recorded him saying in his conversation with father Duflot, when he was fighting the Egyptians a decade earlier, where he didn’t go anywhere beyond Gura’e at that time.11 This phrase could have been modified by PM Abiy when he quoted Alula as saying, “the Red Sea is the natural boundary of Ethiopia.” Megalomania elevates a boasting warlord to inspirational level. Why is Alula considered a murderer so hated in Eritrea? Here is an extract from Andrew Haggard, a colonel who accompanied Vice Admiral Hewitt in his mediation between Egyptians and Yohannes IV. Haggard was travelling from around Cheren eastward to Senhit in 1884 when he noted this.12
“Presently we came upon the traces of an Abyssinian raid, for Ras Alula had been recently over the border, and when he made a raid, it was on the system of the old English and Scottish Border raids. He burned, scattered, ravished, and destroyed, drove off the cattle and the women, and left a fertile country a desert behind him. Where we now were he had completely wrecked a caravan and killed a good many people. The debris was still scattered along the road for miles rags, paper, broken bottles, boxes, bones, every imaginable thing, strewn about in every direction.”
Economic Woes and Revenge
Beyond false alibi and megalomania, there were other common reasons for Mussolini’s and Abiy’s fantasy. In fact, analysts say the reason for using such fallacies is to cover the real reasons that for both were interestingly the same. One of these reasons was the economic woes that both faced. In Mussolini’s case, Italy was coming out victorious of the first world war, but with ~600,000 deaths, deception for not getting the lands that was promised to her, economic crisis, devaluation of its money and unemployment that persisted for years.13 Invading Ethiopia was seen bringing economic benefit as well as scoring diplomatic success in front of Italian European counterparts.
Similarly, PM Abiy’s Ethiopia just came out of the Tigray war with so many youngsters’ deaths, destitution and billions of dollars spent on the war and on showy state buildings and parks. The wrong allocation and misplaced priorities sent Ethiopian economy sliding freely down to arrive at payment default very recently. PM Abiy wants to get a Red Sea port to cover his mishandlings and economic woes. It is like the Amharic proverb አይጥ በበላ ዳዋ ተመታ (The weed pays for what the rat devastated). PM Abiy’s daring aggressive talk on its neighbors, particularly Eritrea, was also considered as an invasive diplomatic offence that tried to cover Ethiopia’s frustration of not being included in the Red Sea Forum organization.
The other reason for Mussolini attack on Ethiopia was the need of revenge. In his speech justifying the invasion of Abyssinia in October 1935, he said “we have been patient with Ethiopia for forty years”, clearly referring to the defeat of Italy by Abyssinia in 1896 at Adwa.13 Similarly, Abiy’s insistent reminder in his November speech that Ethiopia has never been defeated was a bold flagrant denial for its defeat by Mussolini in 1935 and by the Eritrean Freedom Fighters in 1991. Could this self-inflicting defense be a cover up for malicious vengeful intentions? Indeed, it looks like, unless it is also another way of denying the independence of Eritrea by wishfully considering it as Ethiopian and claim Red Sea in such overt self-dupery.
More curiously, when Mussolini planned his invasion of Ethiopia, king of Italy Emmanuel III was against it. Over a century later, in an eerily similar sentiment, based on her various public discourse, The Ethiopian president Sahlework Zewde appears to be clearly against the ongoing internal war in Ethiopia and the planning of external war by PM Abiy Ahmed.
Mussolini succeeded invading Ethiopia because of tacit silence of certain European countries and the inability of the League of Nations to defend its principles among others. History has shown us where such transgressions ended. PM Abiy Ahmed recent aggressive stance is not going anywhere either. No amount of false narrative, propaganda, machination is going to help him secure a sea outlet that he owns. More importantly, the methods he is using to obtain that is as destructive as that instigated by Mussolini.
PM Abiy subduing of TPLF left him emboldened to do the same with Fano as he is now trying to do the same with a neighboring country to the north, which has Greek Mythology written all over it. Consider this: When the Titans and Giants were defeated, Zeus was crowned the god of the earth; Hades got his wish of becoming the god of the underworld; Poseidon the god of the sea.14 What PM Abiy is trying to become is the god of the Horn of Africa, the god of the underworld, and the god of the Red Sea, all rolled into one.
Beyond mythology, however, the reality is this: That Ethiopia’s economic difficulties are neither the wrath of God, nor the mythological gods of the Red Sea, nor that of the underworld. It is the self-inflicting wrath molded in the old mindset of the feudal times where invade, defeat and spoils are the leading principles. Where modernity is manifested solely in the showy buildings and boasting economic growth spelled not to reflect the reality, but to cover the forest of poverty. PM Abiy in one of his discourses had, in passing, mentioned (rather questioned) why the countries of east Africa cannot form a union to manage rivers and the Red Sea. It was a great idea, but such monumental change cannot be attempted for the sake of Ethiopia, and not to please or cajole Abiy Ahmed because he is threatening the region to get a sea outlet by hook or by crook. Countries are sovereign, and decisions for sovereignty or forming a union like that of Europe is also a sovereign decision of every sovereign country.
This article was drafted before the January-1st 2024 Ethiopia-Somaliland memorandum of understanding (MoU) for Ethiopia to obtain a leased sea outlet in exchange for Somaliland’s recognition as a country and shares in the Ethiopian Airlines. The article was not modified following the MoU news, because the central theme it treated was PM Ahmed’s aggressive and very offensive approach in a manner that would automatically block any possible conversation with Eritrea in particular. This posture is still persistent despite PM Abiy unapologetic attempt to reword his “outlet by hook or by crook” stance and speech in October/November 2023. It is even more curious that following the MoU agreement with Somaliland, PM Abiy and his dignitaries congratulating each other of obtaining outlet to the Red Sea instead of the Gulf of Aden. The fixation on Red Sea exposes the goal of grandiose ambition more than the economic question. It is also a tell tell sign of wanting a victory by any means possible over the Red Sea for the realization of Abiy’s October overambitious assertion saying Red Sea is the life and death of Ethiopia. Red Sea if the life of all the countries that surround it, including Ethiopia and the world. It never is the death of any people. It could be the end of unreasonable hegemonic overambitious leaders who risk placing the people in pernicious warfare.
Reference
1 – Mussolini over Africa. Ridley F A. Wishart books Ltd. 1935
2 – Colonial Powers and Ethiopian Frontiers 1880–1884: Eds Sven Rubenson, Amsalu Aklilu, Shiferaw Bekele, and Samuel Rubenson. Lund University Press: Lund, 2021.
3 – Slavery in Abyssinia. Noel-Buxton L., 1932. 11(4), pp.512-526.
4 – The history of famine and pestilence in Ethiopia prior to the Founding of Gondar. Pankhurst R. 1979. The journal of Ethiopian Studies 10(2).
5 – https://youtu.be/MPOdp4s4XXE
6 – https://youtu.be/TwwyIQ12q6o?si=wSlRqXGkHHgv4g9p
7 – Memoradium of the Italian Government on Ethiopia: ~1935 differently dated collection of documents by Italia.
8 – https://www.eritreadigest.com/pm-abiy-co-bullying-belaboring-big-lying/ Originally Published at Awate.com in November 2023
9 – https://youtu.be/uFrGILLKzJc?si=zedS0CBxR6Q2wU8I
10 – Mussolini’s Gladius: The Double-Edged Sword of Antiquity in Fascist Italy. Schrader, K.W., 2016.
11 – Ras Alula and the scramble for Africa: a political biography: Ethiopia & Eritrea, 1875-1897.
Haggai E. 1996 Red Sea press.
12 – Under crescent and star. Haggard A., 1895. Blackwood.
13 – https://mrcatelli.weebly.com/uploads/5/6/5/7/56571255/mussolini-ethiopia_speech.pdf
14 – Ancient Greek Beliefs. Westmoreland P.L., 2007. Lee and Vance Publishing Co.
In 2016, the Eritrean government made a draconian decision to combat inflation by introducing new regulations on currency control. The measure targeted large sums of Nakfas circulating outside the formal economy, rendering them virtually worthless. Additionally, the central bank appreciated the currency by implementing a fixed exchange rate against foreign currencies to address inflation resulting from weak exports and expensive import costs. The introduction of new 50 and 100 Nakfa bills and regulations on money transfer and withdrawal mechanisms, allowing people to withdraw only 5000 Nakfas per month unless necessary, had disastrous effects on the domestic market and production capacity. This led to economic stagnation, loss of competitiveness, and the emergence of a coupon economy.
States typically adopt either market-based or command-based economic systems. Market-based economies, also known as free market economies, are self-regulated, responding to consumer demand for goods production and distribution. Conversely, command-based economies are regulated by a government body determining the delivered goods, their quantities, and prices. In the modern world, few economies are purely market-based or command-based. However, the Eritrean government adheres to a command-based economy, controlling production levels, pricing, and the distribution of goods and services. Over the last 23 years, the government aggressively banned almost all private sector businesses, bringing them under complete control of the party and military. Strict governmental control, lack of legal frameworks to protect businesses, and restricted access to foreign currency make private investment in Eritrea challenging, time-consuming, and financially risky, resulting in a significant decline in the country’s economic development and living standards.
It is essential to recognize that currency appreciation can reduce inflation by lowering import prices, benefiting households, especially in countries like Eritrea, heavily reliant on imported consumer goods. However, currency appreciation significantly impacts the country’s global market competitiveness, making exports more expensive. Consequently, Eritrea faces economic challenges due to the adverse effects on competition.
In conclusion, Eritrea possesses the potential for economic development, and the government can take several steps to achieve this goal. Investing in education is crucial to enhancing the workforce’s skills, ultimately benefiting the nation’s economy. The policies of currency appreciation, fixed exchange rates, and a state- and party-controlled economy have not led to the anticipated prosperity and economic development. Therefore, a gradual depreciation of the local currency could enhance the competitiveness of local products in the export market and improve the nation’s trade deficit over time. The government must also undertake significant reforms in the banking sector, promoting legal and unrestricted circulation of money, digitalization, and liberalization of the banking and financial sector. This would create a secure environment for local and diaspora Eritreans to invest, with laws protecting investors, introducing labor policies, strict anti-corruption measures, and facilitating business to attract foreign direct investment. Additionally, promoting the free movement of people and goods can enhance the nation’s competitiveness in the global market and attract more investments. The government must take decisive action in these areas to foster economic growth and improve the people’s living standards.
The Red Sea stands as a crucial focal point in global security policy, acting as a strategic and economic conduit connecting three continents. Investments from Gulf states are reshaping the geopolitical landscape on both shores of the Red Sea, offering opportunities while carrying inherent risks. Delving into the varying diplomatic and military strengths among regional countries proves to be a fascinating study. While some nations, notably the UAE, exhibit shrewd strategies, others like Saudi Arabia have faced challenges in forging effective relationships with their neighbors. The Saudi monarchy historically leaned on immense wealth to build alliances, but recent years have witnessed a shift toward more authentic engagement. Nonetheless, Saudi Arabia grapples with building trust due in part to past support for religious fundamentalist groups.
Understanding the Red Sea’s Significance
The Red Sea, historically underestimated, stands as a vital waterway dividing the Middle East and Africa. Its strategic importance has been evident across centuries, facilitating the movement of goods like silk and spices from the East to European and African markets. People from opposite sides of the basin engaged in significant migrations, shaping intercommunal exchanges. The region’s dynamics saw shifts with the discovery of petroleum and the emergence of new Arab states, driving migration towards the oil-rich Gulf states.
Recognition of the Red Sea’s strategic value by the British and French fueled their colonial ambitions and control over trade routes to the East. Their involvement led to establishing colonies and ports along the Red Sea coast. The Cold War further highlighted the sea’s significance, aiming to counter the USSR’s influence on Arab countries, particularly Egypt’s control of the Suez Canal, a critical gateway to the Red Sea.
In the post-Cold War era, the Red Sea’s importance surged as a conduit for global trade, linking three continents. However, any conflict or instability in the region profoundly impacts the market, as evidenced by past events like the Israel-Arab wars, Suez Canal blockages, and the Yemen conflict. Recent events, such as Houthi attacks in response to Israeli actions in Gaza, further underscore the sea’s influence on international trade.
Gulf States’ Influence in the Red Sea Region
Gulf states, with considerable resources, assert their presence in the Horn of Africa like never before. Their economic and military investments are rapidly altering geopolitical dynamics on both sides of the Red Sea, merging two previously distinct regions. While this presents opportunities for development and integration, it also poses significant risks, particularly for fragile African states on the Red Sea’s western shores.
Interestingly, no regional organization effectively addresses the security challenges in the Horn and the Red Sea. The African Union and Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) cover parts of the region but lack comprehensive representation, while the Arab League’s influence remains limited. This void has prompted the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) to take the lead in interventions, using financial clout rather than multilateral diplomacy to garner African countries’ support.
UAE’s Regional Engagement
The UAE’s policies and engagements in the Red Sea Basin, despite not being a member, have been notably active. Direct investments, financial ventures, and support for proxy conflicts have significantly influenced the region’s geopolitics. Its intensified interest, especially post the Yemen crisis in 2015, led to active military involvement, establishing bases and operations in Yemen’s southern region. However, subsequent withdrawals caused friction with allies like Saudi Arabia, highlighting the need for diplomatic resolutions.
The UAE’s involvement in destabilizing Sudan through support for the Rapid Support Force (RSF) and intervention in Ethiopia’s Northern Tigray region garnered international criticism. Moreover, its strategic moves, including port construction in Somaliland without central government consultation, raised concerns about regional stability.
Critics and analysts suggest the UAE’s assertive port-building policy aims to counter China’s growing interest in Eritrean ports for its Belt and Road initiatives. This competition for trade routes highlights the UAE’s aspirations to influence maritime trade, potentially impacting income through UAE ports.
Saudi Arabia’s Strategic Engagements
Saudi Arabia’s active involvement in the Red Sea region dates to the 1960s, engaging in Yemen’s conflict and supporting anti-communist efforts. Over time, it invested in curbing Israel’s influence in the area, collaborating with regional powers to establish Arab dominance over the Red Sea.
However, its propagation of Wahhabism, ostensibly to combat communism, inadvertently destabilized regions in Somalia, Sudan, Yemen, and parts of Kenya and Ethiopia, contrary to fostering peace.
In recent years, Saudi Arabia shifted focus to build diplomatic ties in the region. Initiatives like the Red Sea Council and efforts to resolve Sudan’s conflict showcase attempts at regional cooperation. The Kingdom’s role in advocating for lifting sanctions against Eritrea and facilitating peace deals reflects its commitment to conflict resolution.
Conclusion
The Red Sea’s elevation as a strategic priority has garnered global attention, emphasizing its historical, economic, and security significance. However, the competition for influence between the UAE and Saudi Arabia intensifies, impacting African countries and potentially destabilizing an already fragile region. Both countries’ divisive policies and support for various groups amplify internal conflicts and challenge state institutions’ stability.
While Gulf investments offer opportunities for infrastructure development and economic growth in African states, effective management and regional diplomacy are crucial. Coordination between Gulf and African nations is pivotal to ensuring mutual benefits and averting exacerbation of existing security challenges in the region.
In his recent interview with a YouTube channel called “Axumite Media”, General Yohannes Gebremeskel intentionally tried to misinform the public using dubious claims on several issues. For those who do not know General Yohannes, he is a retired General of the Tigray Peoples Liberation Force (TPLF). During the 2018-2020 Tigray war, he was appointed by the Prosperity Party to serve as the security chief of the Tigray region. Although most of his interviews are filled with false claims, in this article, we will focus only on two of them.
COMPARING THE SIZE OF EPLF’S MECHANIZED UNITS WITH THE SIZE OF TPLF’S INFANTRY ARMY.
To set the record straight Eritrean People’s Liberation Front’s (EPLF) support to the TPLF during the 1989-1991 march to Addis Ababa included High-Ranking war planners like General Ramadan Awiliyay, Commando units, and major Mechanized personnel. To make it clearer except for the commando units that were led by Wedi Berhe, EPLF’s support to TPLF during the 1989-1991 March to Addis Ababa was mechanized. As General Yohannes knows, Mechanized units require less personnel than infantry. For instance, a tank carries a crew of four: commander, gunner, driver, and loader. EPLF’s mechanized units that supported the TPLF had more personnel than General Yohannes described in his interview. But for the sake of convenience let’s assume his estimate of 400 mechanized army personnel was true. If you divide 400 personnel by four, the EPLF personnel that was supporting the TPLF army could operate about 100 tanks, including anti-airplane guns. Imagine how significant the contribution of such highly skilled EPLF’s Mechanized Army to the TPLF’s pure infantry Army. My advice to General Yohannes is he should have listened to the interview by late Zerezghi Dawit who commanded one of the three EPLF mechanized units. His unit was the one that captured the Arat Kilo palace in Addis Ababa. Please listen to his interview below. You will be surprised by his memory and informative description of the events.
HIS FALSE CLAIM ABOUT TPLF’S ARMY’S KILLING, THEFT, RAPE, AND DESTRUCTION DURING THE 1998-2000 BORDER WAR WITH ERITREA.
General Yohannes toiled to minimize the TPLF’s Army’s civilian killing, theft of public and private property, rape, and wanton destruction of infrastructure during the 1998-2000 border war. He may have forgotten it, but we would like to remind him that he would never get his bloody hands cleaned through false claims. In addition to the widespread rape, killing, and wanton looting of private property, here is a sample list of Eritrean private and public institutions that were purposely destroyed by the TPLF Army.
Hirgigo power plant.
Senafe Hospital
Senafe telecommunications building.
The Belew Kelew historical monument.
Barentu Hospital.
Berentu Gashsettit hotel.
Alighider Cotton Ginning Plant
Shambuko Maryters cemetery.
Looted close to half a million cattle and sold them in Tigray cattle markets.
Looted large-size irrigation infrastructure and generators.
The above-listed sample private and public Eritrean institutions were not destroyed during an exchange of gunfire. They were purposely demolished by powerful dynamite. Below are a few pictures of some of the buildings destroyed by the TPLF army during the 1998-2000 border war.
A lie is TPLF’s modus operandi and General Yohannes may have tried to cover the sun with his lies. Fortunately, the evidence of the destruction, looting, theft, and rape that his army incurred during the 1998-2000 border war is still fresh in our minds. It would have been appropriate for him to apologize but that is not possible from a blood-thirsty war monger. The point is he should know that regardless of the injustices Eritreans suffered under backward Ethiopian successive rulers they will always get up and punch back. What goes around comes around.
Doha, Expo 2023: Eritrea has unveiled its dazzling pavilion at the International Horticultural Expo, transforming the spotlight onto its rich natural landscapes, diverse culture, and burgeoning business prospects. The inauguration ceremony held on Monday highlighted Eritrea’s commitment to sustainability and its pivotal role in the Horn of Africa.
The pavilion stands as a testament to Eritrea’s emerging economic stature, showcasing its environmental initiatives and efforts towards fostering a green economy. Offering a captivating glimpse into the country’s cultural heritage, the exhibit beckons visitors to explore Eritrea’s strategic position in the region and its promising avenues for investment and trade.
The event witnessed the esteemed presence of Eritrean Ambassador to Qatar, Ali Ibrahim Ahmed, along with HE Expo 2023 Doha Commissioner General, Ambassador Bader bin Omar al-Dafa, and Expo 2023 Doha Secretary-General Eng. Mohamed Ali al-Khouri. Diplomatic representatives and the Eritrean community in Qatar added fervor to the ceremony, signifying the collective enthusiasm for fostering global connections.
In his address, Ambassador Ali Ibrahim Ahmed commended Qatar’s exemplary efforts in hosting a spectacular international expo. He underscored Eritrea’s dedication to advancing agricultural and industrial sectors through the adoption of smart technologies, aiming to enhance the quality of life for its citizens.
Highlighting the expo’s significance, Ambassador al-Dafa emphasized the platform’s potential to strengthen partnerships, urging collaborations between Eritrea and various participating nations, financial institutions, and investment funds. The expo, he noted, presents a diverse array of opportunities for mutual growth and development.
Eritrea’s participation underscores the country’s commitment to exploring and seizing opportunities for global cooperation, establishing itself as a beacon of potential in Africa. With its vibrant display at Expo 2023, Eritrea invites the world to discover its untapped potential in economic opportunities, artistic expressions, cultural heritage, and breathtaking natural beauty.
