Trump Needs to Close the Deal in the Horn of Africa

A lasting peace between Ethiopia and Eritrea would be an enormous strategic win for the West.

The United States has plenty of strategic reasons to immediately invest diplomatic capital in the rapidly thawing relations between Ethiopia and Eritrea. It’s a historic opportunity that, if it continues heading in the right direction, promises fewer refugees for the West, more stability in the Horn of Africa region, and a potential new ally for the Trump administration in Eritrea, assuming it changes some of its behavior.

I was in Eritrea a few weeks ago for my day job looking at why so many people are fleeing to Europe and other parts of Africa. These root causes of migration are underresearched and often misunderstood, even more so in countries such as Eritrea that few have ever studied. Eritrea has a recognizably bad track record on human rights, a recognizably bad track record on democracy, and a recognizably bad track record on forcing people to leave and become refugees. It has earned its reputation, though there may now be an unprecedented opening for reform.

While in Eritrea’s capital, Asmara, I met with several senior Eritrean officials and senior diplomats from Western countries. By chance, I witnessed President Isaias Afwerki’s speech on Martyrs’ Day. The president’s speech called for a peace delegation to Ethiopia — a breakthrough in light of the two nations’ 20-year conflict. Less than a week later, and for the first time in 20 years, an Eritrean delegation, led by Foreign Minister Osman Saleh, was welcomed into Addis Ababa. After talks with the delegation in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia’s prime minister arrived in Asmara in the last couple of days for a historic meeting with Isaias at which they declared the war to be over.

Clearly, this is a rapidly moving situation. Though remarkable progress has already been made, U.S. diplomacy will be needed to definitively end the 20-year Ethiopia-Eritrea frozen conflict.

Though remarkable progress has already been made, U.S. diplomacy will be needed to definitively end the 20-year Ethiopia-Eritrea frozen conflict.

 Ending this conflict would strengthen Ethiopia’s new political leadership and create the conditions necessary for an end to Eritrea’s indefinite national service — along with Eritrea’s other human rights violations, which are a major driver of migration by the tens of thousands to other countries in Africa and to Europe.

There are many benefits to achieving a peace deal. First, such an agreement would create a new economic dynamic in the Horn of Africa, especially if Ethiopia were then able to use Eritrea’s two ports at Massawa and Assab. Eritrea would connect to an economy nearly 25 times its size. Second, ending this conflict could open the door to political liberalization in Eritrea. Eritrea uses the conflict with Ethiopia as an excuse for not making any government reforms. Third, a peace deal would open a new dynamic in the dysfunctional and tension-ridden Horn of Africa. It is true that Eritrea has supported bad actors in its neighborhood. If Eritrea had peace with Ethiopia, it would feel more secure and Eritrea would be less prone to causing trouble in the region and more likely to reduce tensions. Fourth, if the United States and Eritrea had a new relationship, Eritrea could be our Plan B African military base, as Djibouti is getting a little too friendly with China.

The first thing to know about Eritrea is that it nearly didn’t exist. The United Kingdom and the United States — through the United Nations — proposed merging the former Italian colony with Ethiopia in the early 1950s. Eritreans disagreed with this solution, fought a 30-year war against Ethiopia and won independence in 1991. During its struggle, Eritrea had no reliable friends. The current Eritrean leadership is made up of the former military leaders who led the country to its independence.

Eritrea has had tense relations with the West. In the early 1990s, the Clinton administration provided financial aid and military assistance to the country. Less than a decade later, the United States ended those relations and suspended the sale of weapons to Eritrea when war broke out in 1998. The Bush administration had serious concerns in the mid-2000s that Eritrea was providing sanctuary to al-Shabab terrorists, which led to the imposition of an arms embargo in 2009. The Obama administration signed an executive order in 2009 with a series of financial sanctions against Eritrea for its failure to address human trafficking.

I asked senior leaders in Eritrea if they see al-Shabab as a terrorist group, and all of them agreed that it is. It is important to note that Eritrea has been deemed al-Shabab-free for more than six years, according to outside monitors known as the Somalia Eritrea Monitoring Group. Given that this is the case, this would be a moment to revisit the sanctions on Eritrea and consider removing them.

Even if Eritrea has rid itself of its ties to the worst terrorist groups, it remains true that Eritrea has a persistently bad record as a human rights violator.

Even if Eritrea has rid itself of its ties to the worst terrorist groups, it remains true that Eritrea has a persistently bad record as a human rights violator.

 According to a 2018 Human Rights Watch report, “Eritrea remains a one-man dictatorship under President Isaias Afewerki, now in his 26th year in power. It has no legislature, no independent civil society organizations or media outlets, and no independent judiciary. The government restricts religious freedoms, banning all but four groups.”

Eritrea also has had tense relations with most of its neighbors. Its worst relations are with Ethiopia, which it has fought two wars against in the last 50 years. The latest Eritrea-Ethiopia war was fought over lingering border disputes and lasted from 1998 to 2000, continuing to cause conflict between the two countries to this day. This war was notorious for being one of the deadliest wars in Africa, killing some 90,000 people.

At the end of hostilities, a peace agreement was put together in Algeria. The border dispute was taken to border experts, and the countries agreed to accept the findings of those experts. The final conclusion was in Eritrea’s favor, but Ethiopia refused to accept the findings. In other words, Eritrea largely won the diplomatic and political war, but Ethiopia continues to hold the disputed territory, including the small village of Badme. This week, Ethiopia said it will return Badme and help end the war.

article published in foreignpolicy.com on July 12, 2018.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s