Horn Perspectives: @horn_outlook
Thread on @AbiyAhmedAli lecture about the Red Sea:
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1713 ... 17171.html
In his 45-minute theatrical speech aired yesterday, PM Abiy argued that Ethiopia has a historical and economic right to access the Red Sea and suggested re-federation or a land swap with Eritrea as a means to achieve it.
His lecture was irresponsible, riddled with historical inaccuracies, and filled with half-baked arguments. He evoked the history of Axum and Emperor
Haile Selassie to make a historical claim and suggest that Ethiopia’s access to the sea once made it a world-class power.
My natural reaction was, ‘
So what?’ The once world-class Austrian Empire had access to the sea, but modern-day Austria is landlocked. The great Mali Empire was on the coast, but Mali has to rely on the seaports of neighbors to engage in global trade.
A side note: The history of Axum belongs to the people of the region, not only to Ethiopia. And, his argument about the ‘
legendary’ Haile Selassie era willfully ignores an important fact-Eritreans saw it as an occupation and were waging a liberation war.
However, the central point is modern state system in Africa is based on the agreement that borders inherited from colonialism should not be changed. A smart move for our forefathers to avoid deadly border conflicts that will upend the continent. rb.gy/dx3t6
The border between Eritrea & Ethiopia is one of the most clearly demarcated borders in Africa, if not in the world. Any claim, even if in words, contradicts the AU and UN Charters; which hold sovereignty as sacrosanct. It is an affront to Pan-Africanism.
His claim of access to the sea based on cultural ties, is flawed and dangerous. To begin with, all African countries that are landlocked have ethnic ties with their neighboring countries, but it doesn’t grant them the right to claim a piece of another country’s coastline.
For example, Niger and Nigeria are often described as cousins in West Africa due to their very close historical ties and deep tribal links (both are the home of Hausa people). This tribal link, however, doesn’t give Niger the right to claim a piece of Nigeria’s coast. This is the case with all landlocked countries and is no a ground for territorial claim.
The population aspect of his argument failed to mention that Ethiopia has 8 ports in neighboring countries, many within 500km of its major cities and industries. This significantly reduces transport costs, a luxury not many countries enjoy.
For example, Kazakhstan is 3750 km away from the sea and Afghanistan, Chad, Niger, Zambia, and Zimbabwe are over 2000 km from the nearest sea. Uzbekistan is double-landlocked, as all its neighbors are landlocked.
The question that always bugs me is: don’t the Ethiopian political elite learn from history—a very recent one, for that matter? Their methods and rhetoric about Eritrea are eerily similar, yet every time they expect different results.
In matters pertaining to sovereignty, there is nothing called ‘
let’s just talk about it.’ It’s like someone saying,
I have a legitimate claim over your spouse. I’m not saying I will act on it, but let’s talk about it.
Does that make any sense? I don’t think so.
Such rhetoric will only lead to further anxiety in the region, reduce the willingness of states to give up some of their sovereignty for regional cooperation, and create explosive tensions that could lead to a major war in the region,l. The results of which, only God knows.
Ethiopian political leaders and the intelligentsia should not jump on the bandwagon, but set the record straight—call for respect for international law and good neighborliness. The region will suffer, and I doubt Ethiopia will remain one if it undertakes such an adventure.
Please learn from history. The Eritrean people cherish their independence. In the past seven decades, Ethiopian leaders who tried to occupy Eritrea have never lived to tell their story.