OP-ED Editorial

Ethiopia’s Red Sea Discourse: Between Strategic Reality and Rhetorical Contempt

Posted on: 2025-10-29 20:09:12

Share: Facebook | Twitter | Whatsapp | Linkedin

---

Recent remarks by Eritrean Information Minister Yemane G. Meskel, dismissing Ethiopia’s renewed discussion over access to the Red Sea as a “hallucination syndrome,” have reignited a long-simmering regional debate. His comments, laced with sarcasm and historical allusions to colonial arrogance, accused Ethiopia’s leadership of justifying expansionist ambitions under the guise of population pressure and strategic necessity.

The controversy goes far beyond a social media exchange. It exposes the fragile equilibrium of trust and dialogue in the Horn of Africa — a region where geography, history, and politics remain tightly intertwined. Ethiopia’s search for access to the sea is neither new nor whimsical; it is an enduring national question born of geography and necessity. Since the loss of its coastline following Eritrea’s independence in 1993, Ethiopia has navigated landlocked constraints through Djibouti’s ports, accounting for more than 95 percent of its trade. Yet, as population growth accelerates and economic ambitions expand, the conversation around alternative maritime access has resurfaced with renewed urgency.

Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed’s government has consistently framed the issue within the language of dialogue and mutual benefit, not conquest. Ethiopia, officials argue, seeks cooperative arrangements that would ensure long-term stability and shared prosperity across the Red Sea corridor. To interpret this discourse as aggression is to misunderstand both its intent and its context. In today’s interconnected regional economy, cooperation — not isolation — defines resilience.

Eritrea, on the other hand, views Ethiopia’s narrative with suspicion, seeing in it echoes of historical dominance. Its leadership frames the conversation as a veiled threat to sovereignty, invoking colonial analogies to underline perceived moral high ground. Such rhetoric may resonate domestically, but it risks deepening mistrust between two neighbours whose peace remains critical to the region’s stability.

The deeper question, however, is whether political actors in both countries are prepared to rise above emotion and history to confront pragmatic realities. The Red Sea is not merely a matter of geography; it is a lifeline of trade, security, and interdependence for all states in the Horn. The challenge, therefore, lies in transforming mutual suspicion into a framework for regional dialogue that recognises shared interests rather than zero-sum fears.

Ridicule and sarcasm may energise online audiences, but they do little to advance constructive diplomacy. Ethiopia’s strategic concerns deserve sober engagement; Eritrea’s sovereignty merits equal respect. The alternative to dialogue is not stability, but stagnation — and the Horn of Africa can ill afford another generation trapped in the politics of grievance.

In the end, wisdom demands conversation, not confrontation. The Red Sea should unite, not divide. Statesmanship, not scorn, must guide the region’s course.