New Dynamics in the Horn

 Amen Teferi

Egypt has very recently talked to all of Ethiopia’s neighbors individually. It has invited President Salva Kiir of South Sudan, Omar Guelleh of Djibouti, Isayas Afeworki of Eritrea and the Sudanese foreign Minister to Cairo and president Al-Sisi had flown to Uganda to confer with president Musevini.

No doubt, this development can affect the political-strategic nuance of the region. To that extent, the rising insecurity and instability in the Horn of Africa would really trigger serious concern for those who would be directly affected by the eventuality of the strained political and diplomatic ramification observed in the bilateral and multilateral relation of countries in the Horn and in the middle-east.

As we chart the way ahead, the domestic political ripple and the new development in the Horn of Africa would be a big test for Ethiopia. The desolate leadership in Asmara is isolated from the international community and thus eager to clinch partnership with anyone that shows it a smiling face and offers some help in destabilizing Ethiopia.

We know that Eritrea is hosting a UAE naval facility and it has allowed its air space to be used in the war on Yemen. It has even sent its troops to Yemen allying with a block that it had been previously disdaining. By the decision to collaborate with the wealthy GCC in their war on Yemen, Eritrea has unequivocally side with a pro American unipolar coalition in order to receive money and fuel and to have the possibility of having relief from the sanction made UNSC. Now being “under the protective wing of the GCC,” some observers say, Asmara might feel encouraged to provoke Ethiopia and this situation holds out the threat of spilling over into armed violence in the future. Therefore, what has been transpiring lately in each of the Horn of Africa states must be evaluated through the tenets of our foreign policy.

In my view, the Horn of Africa has remained calm in the last two decades mainly because Ethiopia has pursued a foreign policy that helped the region as a whole to transform. However, according Andrew korybko this situation seems to be changing. In this regard, korybko said the following:

The northeastern reaches of the African continent have been maligned in the Western imagination as a place of dire suffering, war, and famine, but somewhat surprisingly, the region had remained relatively stable over the past decade, barring of course a few exceptions. All of that now seems ready to be reversed, however, with destabilizing events returning as the regional norm. Whereas the previous ten years of moderate stability and growth can be attributed to China’s positive involvement in the Horn, the forthcoming years of uncertainty are directly linked to the US and Saudi Arabia’s efforts to dislodge China from the region and bring it closer to the unipolar fold. As a result, it can objectively be proclaimed that the New Cold War between the unipolar and multipolar blocs has officially penetrated this part of Africa.

 (THE DESTABILIZATIONS IN DJIBOUTI AND ETHIOPIA ARE BEING EXPLOITED AGAINST CHINA, 2016)

Touching upon the grim prospect that follows from the latest development, Andrew korybko has also noted that “it looks probable that Ethiopia could become a continental leader if it continues along its state-driven development trajectory.” However, if anything goes wrong in the region Ethiopia would be the first to suffer the consequences. However, we can be reassured when we try to compose ourselves and see things critically based on tents of our foreign policy.

The fundamental paradigm shift one can easily pointed out from the current foreign policy of Ethiopia is its proclivity towards the internal political harmony as a means to ensure its peace and national security rather than fumbling about to deal with isolated deeds of its perceived or real enemies who might conspire against it. In my view this is an astute policy that would possibly fend off any external threats Ethiopia may face in the volatile region of the Horn of Africa. The EFDR foreign policy would clearly indicates that Ethiopia has relieved itself from the pestering effects of a siege mentality that had deposed the previous regimes to be paranoid based on a wrong assessment or belief that other hostile countries are conspiring against the country.

Freeing itself from imagined or real threats that incarcerate by fear of attack by external hostile forces, Ethiopia has adopted a new foreign policy that adopts an inward looking perspective and that tries to move with the time. And take my word for it and be rest assured that countries that are hovering around the Horn of Africa would not pose any real danger to our national security if we manage to cope with our internal political discord.    

According to some local and external observers, Ethiopia seems to be doing nothing being oblivious of the endangering maneuver of the power politics of the Gulf States that would possibly put Ethiopia’s national security at risk. If Ethiopia continues to remain idle as such in the face of the ongoing stern political and military ramifications without taking the necessary precautionary measures that counterbalance the mug’s game that involve these hostile Gulf Countries on one hand and Iran on the other, it will suffer the consequences.

But according to our foreign policy, there is no more important issue to Ethiopia’s domestic stability than the arrangement of its internal affairs. If it can reduce its internal anti-systemic threats that regularly conspire against our federal democratic establishment by ensuring and consolidating the democratic governance, no single terrorist group or conspiracy of “rogue state” would be strong enough to destabilize Ethiopia. This is my take.

Therefore, in assessing the state of Ethiopia’s strategic stability one must focus on the internal political situation. Anti-systemic groups who may threaten the stability of our federal democratic system solely feed on the dissatisfaction of the public that arise from lack of good governance and anti-democratic proclivity of government officials. 

While I believe that it is sensible to think in terms of the new scenario -owing to the siege mentality that Eritrea has adopted and accordingly acted over the past two decades- I would strongly believe the ball is in our hand. The most important factor that determines the outcome of any possible war of aggression that Eritrea may launch against Ethiopia is its internal political stability. 

The utmost hate the regime in Asmara harbors on Ethiopia might once again lead the leadership to miscalculate and may launch an open aggression. Nonetheless, if Eritrea decides to launch an aggression for the second time, Ethiopia will respond, as the late PM Meles has once said, in a manner that would make sure that Eritrea won’t have a third chance. If Eritrea decides on its own to go to war with Ethiopia or is emboldened to do so by the new allies, it will likely bring itself into the fray that would speed up its demise. If Ethiopia does all its “homework,” then it will meet any case and would surly fend off any threats.  

In a nut shell, the recent Saudi moves in Africa shows its interest to take a leadership role in African-Arab joint actions and also its desire to counter some of the progress Iran has made in recent years in the Horn of Africa. Given its tensions with Lebanon and Egypt, Saudi Arabia simply wants to diversify its allies in the Horn and wanted to achieve food security by expanding its agricultural projects in countries with abundant water and land resources –be it in the Nile Basin region or elsewhere. 

“Cairo continues to commit to a quiet diplomacy and contents itself with messages stressing the importance of the Egyptian role in many areas of Africa. Yet for many observers of the African-Arab scene, the lack of unified Arab vision toward Africa will turn the African continent into a field for Middle Eastern conflict — whether among Arab countries, or between Arab countries led by Saudi Arabia on one hand and Iran and Turkey on the other.

Ethiopia Can Meet the Case

Amen Teferi

Egypt has very recently talked to all of Ethiopia’s neighbors individually. It has invited President Salva Kiir of South Sudan, Omar Guelleh of Djibouti, Isayas Afeworki of Eritrea and the Sudanese foreign Minister to Cairo and president Al-Sisi had flown to Uganda to confer with president Musevini.

No doubt, this development can affect the political-strategic nuance of the region. To that extent, the rising insecurity and instability in the Horn of Africa would really trigger serious concern for those who would be directly affected by the eventuality of the strained political and diplomatic ramification observed in the bilateral and multilateral relation of countries in the Horn and in the middle-east.

As we chart the way ahead, the domestic political ripple and the new development in the Horn of Africa would be a big test for Ethiopia. The desolate leadership in Asmara is isolated from the international community and thus eager to clinch partnership with anyone that shows it a smiling face and offers some help in destabilizing Ethiopia.

We know that Eritrea is hosting a UAE naval facility and it has allowed its air space to be used in the war on Yemen. It has even sent its troops to Yemen allying with a block that it had been previously disdaining. By the decision to collaborate with the wealthy GCC in their war on Yemen, Eritrea has unequivocally side with a pro American unipolar coalition in order to receive money and fuel and to have the possibility of having relief from the sanction made UNSC. Now being “under the protective wing of the GCC,” some observers say, Asmara might feel encouraged to provoke Ethiopia and this situation holds out the threat of spilling over into armed violence in the future. Therefore, what has been transpiring lately in each of the Horn of Africa states must be evaluated through the tenets of our foreign policy.

In my view, the Horn of Africa has remained calm in the last two decades mainly because Ethiopia has pursued a foreign policy that helped the region as a whole to transform. However, according Andrew korybko this situation seems to be changing. In this regard, korybko said the following:

The northeastern reaches of the African continent have been maligned in the Western imagination as a place of dire suffering, war, and famine, but somewhat surprisingly, the region had remained relatively stable over the past decade, barring of course a few exceptions. All of that now seems ready to be reversed, however, with destabilizing events returning as the regional norm. Whereas the previous ten years of moderate stability and growth can be attributed to China’s positive involvement in the Horn, the forthcoming years of uncertainty are directly linked to the US and Saudi Arabia’s efforts to dislodge China from the region and bring it closer to the unipolar fold. As a result, it can objectively be proclaimed that the New Cold War between the unipolar and multipolar blocs has officially penetrated this part of Africa.

 (THE DESTABILIZATIONS IN DJIBOUTI AND ETHIOPIA ARE BEING EXPLOITED AGAINST CHINA, 2016)

Touching upon the grim prospect that follows from the latest development, Andrew korybko has also noted that “it looks probable that Ethiopia could become a continental leader if it continues along its state-driven development trajectory.” However, if anything goes wrong in the region Ethiopia would be the first to suffer the consequences. However, we can be reassured when we try to compose ourselves and see things critically based on tents of our foreign policy.

The fundamental paradigm shift one can easily pointed out from the current foreign policy of Ethiopia is its proclivity towards the internal political harmony as a means to ensure its peace and national security rather than fumbling about to deal with isolated deeds of its perceived or real enemies who might conspire against it. In my view this is an astute policy that would possibly fend off any external threats Ethiopia may face in the volatile region of the Horn of Africa. The EFDR foreign policy would clearly indicates that Ethiopia has relieved itself from the pestering effects of a siege mentality that had deposed the previous regimes to be paranoid based on a wrong assessment or belief that other hostile countries are conspiring against the country.

Freeing itself from imagined or real threats that incarcerate by fear of attack by external hostile forces, Ethiopia has adopted a new foreign policy that adopts an inward looking perspective and that tries to move with the time. And take my word for it and be rest assured that countries that are hovering around the Horn of Africa would not pose any real danger to our national security if we manage to cope with our internal political discord.    

According to some local and external observers, Ethiopia seems to be doing nothing being oblivious of the endangering maneuver of the power politics of the Gulf States that would possibly put Ethiopia’s national security at risk. If Ethiopia continues to remain idle as such in the face of the ongoing stern political and military ramifications without taking the necessary precautionary measures that counterbalance the mug’s game that involve these hostile Gulf Countries on one hand and Iran on the other, it will suffer the consequences.

But according to our foreign policy, there is no more important issue to Ethiopia’s domestic stability than the arrangement of its internal affairs. If it can reduce its internal anti-systemic threats that regularly conspire against our federal democratic establishment by ensuring and consolidating the democratic governance, no single terrorist group or conspiracy of “rogue state” would be strong enough to destabilize Ethiopia. This is my take.

Therefore, in assessing the state of Ethiopia’s strategic stability one must focus on the internal political situation. Anti-systemic groups who may threaten the stability of our federal democratic system solely feed on the dissatisfaction of the public that arise from lack of good governance and anti-democratic proclivity of government officials. 

While I believe that it is sensible to think in terms of the new scenario -owing to the siege mentality that Eritrea has adopted and accordingly acted over the past two decades- I would strongly believe the ball is in our hand. The most important factor that determines the outcome of any possible war of aggression that Eritrea may launch against Ethiopia is its internal political stability. 

The utmost hate the regime in Asmara harbors on Ethiopia might once again lead the leadership to miscalculate and may launch an open aggression. Nonetheless, if Eritrea decides to launch an aggression for the second time, Ethiopia will respond, as the late PM Meles has once said, in a manner that would make sure that Eritrea won’t have a third chance. If Eritrea decides on its own to go to war with Ethiopia or is emboldened to do so by the new allies, it will likely bring itself into the fray that would speed up its demise. If Ethiopia does all its “homework,” then it will meet any case and would surly fend off any threats.  

In a nut shell, the recent Saudi moves in Africa shows its interest to take a leadership role in African-Arab joint actions and also its desire to counter some of the progress Iran has made in recent years in the Horn of Africa. Given its tensions with Lebanon and Egypt, Saudi Arabia simply wants to diversify its allies in the Horn and wanted to achieve food security by expanding its agricultural projects in countries with abundant water and land resources –be it in the Nile Basin region or elsewhere. 

“Cairo continues to commit to a quiet diplomacy and contents itself with messages stressing the importance of the Egyptian role in many areas of Africa. Yet for many observers of the African-Arab scene, the lack of unified Arab vision toward Africa will turn the African continent into a field for Middle Eastern conflict — whether among Arab countries, or between Arab countries led by Saudi Arabia on one hand and Iran and Turkey on the other.

“Good Bye Lenin”

Amen Teferi

Some zealot Egyptians have found their old fashioned ideas to be absolutely indelible. This unalterable notion reminds me of the story in the film Good Bye Lenin! The film tells us about an East Berlin mother who had a heart attack and falls into a coma. When she revives, many months later, the Berlin Wall has fallen and East Germany is history. The children want to bring her back to their apartment but the doctors are reluctant to let her leave the hospital, as any shock could trigger another infarction. The children promise to provide as unthreatening an environment as possible; they conspire to prevent their mother, who was content under the communist regime, from learning about its demise. They go to increasing lengths to establish and maintain this conceit; they remove their new furniture and return their apartment to the way it once was, search the city for the old brand of store she loved and have a friend produce news programs that purport to be from the now defunct German Democratic Republic.

Once, by mistake, real television news fills the screen and the mother watches old clips of the Berlin Wall being breached. She becomes agitated, but is reassured by her children that while this is true, it is Westerners who have broken through the Wall to seek asylum in the East. Suitably reassured, the mother insists that it is their patriotic duty to take in some Western refugees. Word about the make-believe apartment gets around, and elderly people, unable to adapt to change, come around to enjoy its anachronistic ambience and reinforce one another’s nostalgia for the old life. However, their rosy reminiscences bear no relationship to the fact on the ground.

But we have an opposite story with Sudan. I still remember the jovial mood when the last delegation of the Sudanese public diplomacy had met with PM Hailemariam Desalegn. The Sudanese public diplomacy had gone back home wrapping up its stay in Ethiopia with a lively discussion that was graced by the presence of His Excellency Hailemariam Desalegn.

Hailemariam Desalegn has exchanged views with members of the Sudanese delegation in a convention particularly marked with a jovial mood. His speech was inspiring and embedded with remarks that that could easily forge trust between the two sides.

As we have seen in the footage televised by the Ethiopian Broadcasting Corporation (EBC), the meeting was now and then energized by the crack up of laughter the PM had skillfully created as he expounded on the prospect of the strong relationship Ethiopia and Sudan has established. His speech and mannerism was capable of sending a clear message to his Sudanese audience that his government is candidly honest in its engagement with the lower riparian state to forge a win-win situation in the utilization of the Nile River.

In fact, he was so frank and honest with his audience. The remarks he made, in my view, would easily reflect the just position of his government in the utilization of the Nile River. As it appears to me, the room of the meeting is filled with a breeze of brotherhood that would herald the dawn of a new chapter in the century-old relationship of the two countries. I have witnessed a new spirit boldly asserting itself as confrontational attitude that had been lingering for so long among the countries in the Horn gives way to cooperation.

The PM has asserted the strong relationship of the two people using an excellent metaphor that has spurred a kind of excitement among his Sudanese audience. He said, “If 75 % of the human body is water, then water circulating in the veins of the Ethiopian and Sudanese people is water drawn from the Nile River. Allah has given us this water presaging a kind of division of labor and according to his design, Ethiopia ought to utilize this water for the generation of hydro-electric power and Sudan for irrigation.”

Recapitulating the historic ties of the two people and mentioning the indispensable support Sudan had rendered to freedom fighters in their fight against the dictatorial regime of the Derg, Hailemariam commended the current shape of the relationship of the two countries.

He also said, “Sudan and Ethiopia are anchor states to the region of the Horn of Africa” declaring that the GERD is nothing but a project that would serve the two countries to consolidate their relationship.

In my view, the future is promising. Gone are the days when the heart and mind of the two people are incarcerated in fear and suspicion. Gone are the days when the two countries are engaged in the business of destabilizing each another’s government by supporting insurgents. The notorious attitudes of the past regimes have now given ways to constructive engagement that would promote the strategic interests of the two nations. In the past, fear and mistrust had incapacitated their vision and subverted the huge potential of forging excellent cooperation.

Now the leaders of the two neighboring countries have committed themselves to build an unprecedented economic, diplomatic and political cooperation between the two sisterly countries. As they become willing to appreciate each other’s interests and concern, the general condition for cooperation will eventually improved in an increasing manner.

As Hailemariam Desalgn has underscored the cordial relationship of the two countries will have huge impact on the entire region. The cooperation the two countries have established is meant to promote economic integration, while envisaging a political integration in the long term.

The development exhibited in the relationship of the two countries can represent the changing nature of the politics in the Horn of Africa. As the premier has noted their relationship would ensure the peace and security of the Horn as it allows them to make strong alliance in the fight against terrorism.

Beggaring one’s neighbor was a finely developed political art in the Horn of Africa. Unlike the present, Sudanese regional policy during the 1990s was characterized by regional aggression (exporting political Islam) that has ended up antagonizing it with all its neighbors.

Sudan under NIF was exacerbating the chronic problems of the Horn by its aggressive foreign policy that was designed to spread political Islam to the farther corner of the region. This has alerted the government in the region to engage in covert and overt move to contain or remove the government in Khartoum.

Hence, it had fragmented the regional diplomatic landscape and weakened the regional organization IGAD by further complicating the civil wars both in the South Sudan and Somalia and disrupted the search for peace.

In the past, the Ethiopian government like its neighbors was unable to identify where its true national interest lays visa vise its neighbors. In fact, all countries in the region were oblivious of the economic dimensions of peace and security in the Horn. The diverse complexity and incompatibility of the political system in the region has therefore become venue for regional conflict. Hence, the Ethiopian government has devised a foreign policy that is prefigured as solution to the historical contradiction that deposed the Horn as the most fragile crisis region of the world. The policy aims at transforming the longstanding confrontational attitude into cooperation.

Now, Ethiopia does not export conflicts in the Horn. The internal and external policies that it has adopted have enabled her to dispel intensive intra and inter-state conflicts. This largely explains the cordial relationship Ethiopia is now enjoying with Sudan and other countries in the Horn. These changes have transformed the longstanding inter-state rivalry and politics of destabilization that has been assumed as the main characteristic of the Horn. Overcoming its defects, Ethiopia has managed to pursue realist foreign policy that has served her as a means to catalyze peace in the region. Egypt ought to do the same to be able to say “Good Bye Lenin!”