On January 1, a controversial memorandum of understanding (MOU) was signed between Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed and Somaliland’s President Muse Bihi Abdi, a breakaway region of Somalia.
The deal reportedly gives landlocked Ethiopia 20km of coastal land to set up a naval base and the right to build a commercial port. In response, Ethiopia said it plans to recognize Somaliland as an independent country and will be the first country to do so.
Ethiopian leaders said the move was aimed at correcting a “historic mistake” of not having access to the sea. But Somalia bears no responsibility for this supposed historical injustice. After Eritrea gained independence in 1993 after 30 years of war, Ethiopia lost its coastline. Furthermore, Ethiopia’s argument that it needs access to the sea to grow its economy conveniently ignores the fact that since becoming a landlocked country, its economy has grown the fastest on the continent.
Addis Ababa’s actions now threaten to spark a new war in East Africa. Unless the power of reason permeates Ethiopia’s leaders, the entire region could be drawn into conflict.
two hopeless leaders
No matter how you look at it, this provocative move is rooted in deep internal crises facing the leaders of both Ethiopia and Somaliland. Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed, the 2019 Nobel Peace Prize winner, rules a volatile Ethiopia grappling with widespread ethnic conflict and an escalating armed rebellion.
The Ethiopian government, emerging from a devastating civil war in the Tigray region, is facing a new pogrom by Amhara and Oromo rebels challenging the authorities in Addis Ababa.
Ethiopia is in a precarious position regionally. The détente with Eritrea is crumbling as mutual tensions between Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed and Eritrean President Isaias Afwerki intensify. Tensions with Egypt over the Renaissance Dam are reaching a boiling point after Cairo recently withdrew his representatives from negotiations over how to share the waters of the Nile. Relations with neighboring Sudan have not been at their best since December, when Prime Minister Abiy welcomed on a red carpet the leader of the Sudan Emergency Support Force, a staunch enemy of Sudan’s governing Sovereign Council.
Economically, Ethiopia faces severe financial burdens. The government failed to pay $33 million in interest on international bonds last month and has struggled in recent years to maintain enough hard currency, restricting the movement of U.S. dollars out of the country. The official exchange rate is significantly lower than the black market exchange rate and is a reliable indicator of a serious economic crisis.
For Abdi, leader of Somaliland, the breakaway region of Somalia, the situation is equally dire on the domestic front. Last year, he lost about a third of his former “British Somaliland” territory to SSC-Khaatumo, a regional administration recognized by Somalia’s federal government.
Other communities, especially in the Awdar area, are also starting to emerge from the Memorandum of Understanding with Ethiopia. Last week, Somaliland’s defense minister, who hails from the same region, resigned in protest of the memorandum.
In addition, President Abdi’s five-year term expired more than a year ago. The unelected senator, known as ‘Gurti’, has had his term extended by two years over the objections of the Somaliland opposition in the elected lower house of regional parliaments.
The MOU is therefore widely seen in Ethiopia and Somaliland as a desperate attempt by the leaders to divert attention from serious problems at home. But the global and domestic reactions have been surprisingly swift and consistent.
diplomatic pushback
The MOU elicited a swift and unanimous international response, affirming the inviolability of Somalia’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. Major global and regional powers, including the African Union, Arab League, Organization of Islamic Cooperation, European Union, China, the United Kingdom, and the United States, have taken a firm stance against Ethiopia’s violation of Somalia’s sovereignty.
China’s strong reaction is particularly significant given Somaliland’s relationship with Taiwan and Somalia’s historic support for the “one China” policy. Russia, on the other hand, has remained silent, perhaps seeing it as an opportunity to advance its strategic interests in the region.
On the African front, Ethiopia could become isolated if it moves forward with recognition of Somaliland, violating the African Union’s founding principle of protecting the territorial integrity of its member states.
Ethiopia’s reckless actions could lead to a movement to relocate the AU headquarters from Addis Ababa, making it essentially unfit to host a federation based on respect for the sovereignty of all member states. Furthermore, the majority of AU member states are opposed on principle and politically to recognizing separatist movements, saying it would open a nest of worms across the continent.
local interests
The memorandum threatens to reignite historic hostilities between Ethiopia and Somalia. The two countries have a history of conflict, most notably the 1977-1978 war, and the 1,600 km (994 miles) border between Somalia and Ethiopia remains officially disputed. This latest move by Ethiopia is the most serious violation of Somalia’s sovereignty and territorial integrity since independence in 1960.
If Ethiopia moves forward with establishing a naval base in Somaliland, Somalia’s strategic response will be multifaceted and equally dramatic. Among the proportional countermeasures that Somalia might take, it would almost immediately sever diplomatic relations, expel all Ethiopian troops from Somalia, and halt virtually all commercial transactions. This could include banning Ethiopian Airlines from using Somali airspace. This would almost certainly cripple Africa’s largest airline and Ethiopia’s biggest source of foreign exchange.
Additionally, Somalia may seek to enter into strategic defense agreements with Egypt, Eritrea, and other countries as part of a long-term territorial fortification strategy. Such a move would be unacceptable to Ethiopia, and the resulting escalation could spark a regional conflagration in the Horn of Africa, already one of the world’s most volatile regions.
Perhaps more ominously for regional stability, Ethiopia’s actions could radicalize tens of thousands of Somali youth already enraged by what they see as a historical enemy dismantling their country. be.
Coincidentally, it was Ethiopia’s invasion of Somalia from 2006 to 2008 that gave birth to Al-Shabaab, Africa’s most violent extremist group today. This MOU will be the most poignant recruiting tool for violent extremist groups and recovery movements.
De-escalation options
In signing this MOU with Somaliland, Ethiopia is betting on the rules-based international order, weakened by the wars in Ukraine and Gaza. However, the response from Somalia and around the world has been robust and reflects strong support for Somalia’s sovereignty.
Rather than proceed down this dangerous path, Ethiopia should follow the Djibouti-Ethiopia model and work directly with the Federal Government of Somalia to discuss cooperation agreements, including the use of existing Somali ports. This approach will further contribute to regional stability and respect for Somalia’s sovereignty, unity and territorial integrity.
Somalia has repeatedly affirmed its intention to work constructively with Ethiopia on a mutually beneficial trade agreement that includes the use of its ports by its larger southern neighbor. And Ethiopia has a lot to offer Somalia, including cheap electricity and transportation and logistics hubs.
However, the path taken by Addis Ababa under this memorandum is certain to have mutually destructive consequences for both countries. The only difference is that Somalia, better than most countries in the world, knows how to survive and even thrive under total state failure. Ethiopia, on the other hand, would not be able to cope with the resulting conflagration.
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the editorial stance of Al Jazeera.