Ethiopia’s potential conflict with Eritrea stems from historical ethnic fragmentation and the authoritative regime of Abiy Ahmed. His pursuit of war could serve as a strategic move to consolidate power amidst internal dissent, despite the devastating consequences for regional stability. The Tigray War highlights the dire humanitarian crisis while revealing deep-rooted political vulnerabilities in both nations. A renewed focus on diplomatic engagement is essential to avert further chaos in the Horn of Africa.
In Ethiopia, the descent towards conflict with Eritrea is alarming, exacerbated by ethno-political fragmentation. The current regime’s rhetoric echoes Haile Selassie’s imperial ambitions, indicating a potential for renewed hostilities. Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed’s authoritarian rule faces existential threats from ethnic divisions, doing little to unite the nation historically fragmented along ethnic lines. Recent propaganda falsely attributes Ethiopia’s ethnic strife to the past three decades of federalism, ignoring its long-standing divisions.
The looming war with Eritrea presents a strategic opportunity for Abiy to secure his grip on power and deflect internal dissent toward external conflict. His authoritarian approach undermines any legitimate claims to unity, as the prospect of war grows more tangible amid rising dissatisfaction from his Oromo base. This potential confrontation acts as a rallying point, allowing him to suppress opponents under the guise of national security while struggling to present a unified military against a well-equipped Eritrea.
The outcome of a war in the Horn of Africa would not only aggravate existing tensions but could also ignite regional chaos, affecting countries like Sudan and South Sudan, both already embroiled in internal conflicts. Eritrea, though autocratic and stable, stands at risk if provoked; its response could involve deeper regional entanglements, impacting global stakeholders.
Within this backdrop, the Tigray War underscores Abiy’s and Eritrea’s regimes’ brutal strategies to eliminate internal threats, leading to a tragic humanitarian crisis in Tigray. The intentional siege tactics employed during the conflict serve to maintain their power while decimating the local population. Despite the appalling humanitarian toll, the conflict solidified their respective regimes but did not resolve the fundamental instability pervading the region.
The Pretoria peace agreement of late 2022 marked a semblance of cessation in the Tigray conflict but did not address the underlying political vulnerabilities, which Abiy still seeks to neutralize. The tenuous peace fails to eliminate the Tigray Defense Forces, leaving a wounded but resistant entity that remains a challenge to Abiy’s authority.
As the situation persists, it becomes increasingly evident that Eritrea’s role in the region is deeply intertwined with Abiy’s plight. The partnership serves primarily to safeguard their individual political futures, perpetuating ethnic antagonism where unity once existed. This precarious bond raises serious doubts about the genuine intentions of both leaders and reflects a broader strategy aimed at self-preservation rather than national integrity.
Looking forward, change may likely emerge from within Eritrea as the youth revolutionize the military structure, potentially undermining the established hierarchy favoring the status quo. Junior officers could challenge the entrenched leadership, pushing against the historical norms upheld by existing power dynamics that only benefit a select few.
Ultimately, without active intervention, the situation is poised for escalation, with dire consequences waiting on the horizon. A potential conflict between these two nations could further destabilize an already fragile region, obscuring the realities of internal governance failures behind a veneer of populist nationalism.
The potential for conflict between Ethiopia and Eritrea presents urgent regional implications. With Ethiopia’s internal ethnic strife and Abiy Ahmed’s authoritarian regime at play, diplomatic efforts are crucial to prevent an escalation into war. The legacies of past conflicts and authoritarian governance prompt considerations about the fragility of peace and the path towards lasting stability. Abiy and Afewerki’s machinations suggest that their regimes will prioritize survival over stability, igniting a new cycle of violence at the expense of the Eritrean and Ethiopian populations.
Original Source: moderndiplomacy.eu
