The Horn of Africa, a region marked by persistent instability and complex challenges, plays a critical role in international trade and security. Geostrategically, it has become a focal point for great power rivalries and regional disputes. Given this context, U.S. policy Advisors must adopt a nuanced foreign policy approach toward the region, emphasizing a comprehensive understanding of the region’s historical, cultural, and political complexities. A balanced strategy should integrate informed perspectives, avoid overgeneralizations, and prioritize collaboration with regional partners to address shared challenges. Simplistic analyses and misrepresentations risk not only ineffective policies but also long-term damage to U.S. credibility and strategic interests.
Eritrea, a small nation in the Horn of Africa, illustrates how foreign policy advisors often rely on oversimplifications and stereotypes, which obscure the complex political dynamics essential for crafting effective foreign policy strategies. For example, labeling it as “North Korea of Africa” is a simplistic and emotive rhetorical device that lacks substance and does not contribute to meaningful dialogue or a nuanced understanding of the complex issue at hand. Similarly, accusing Eritrea of being a state sponsor of terrorism without formal designation by either the United States or the United Nations is a counterproductive approach that undermines credibility and fails to foster constructive foreign policy discourse. Furthermore, while criticisms of governance and calls for political reforms may be valid, labeling the country as purely authoritarian or demanding immediate implementation of Western-style democracy often oversimplifies the situation and fails to capture its complex realities.
It is unsurprising that Western nations frequently encounter difficulties comprehending the persistent failures of their efforts to influence Eritrea. To truly comprehend the nation, it is essential to delve into its historical roots, which have deeply ingrained a strong mistrust of foreign powers. Furthermore, recognizing the urgent necessity to address its national security concerns is equally essential.
Eritrea’s difficult relationship with foreign powers is rooted in its traumatic history of external interference and exploitation. Its people endured over 50 years of Italian colonization, which included systemic racial segregation, discrimination, and exploitation of the local population, more than a decade of British administration, and an annexation by Ethiopia, followed by three decades of territorial occupation. This painful history was further exacerbated by a prolonged struggle for independence, during which foreign meddling and repeated betrayals played a significant role.
Moreover, following its independence, the nation frequently encountered a lack of international support on critical matters. For example, in 2002, when the UN-sponsored Boundary Commission issued its “final and binding” ruling awarding the disputed territory of Badme to Eritrea, the international community failed to fulfill its role as a guarantor of the agreements, showing indifference and neglect in enforcing compliance with the decision. Additionally, the imposition of sweeping international sanctions has severely damaged the nation’s economy, leaving its population in a state of struggle to recover. In response to these challenges, the nation has been compelled to adopt a policy of self-reliance, striving to rebuild and sustain itself despite the overwhelming external pressures it faces.
Moreover, Western nations also seem to often fail to recognize and appreciate the challenges in balancing the need for political reform with the imperative of safeguarding national security and ensuring the delivery of basic goods and services to the population. When facing existential threats, national survival tends to take precedence over political reforms. Sovereignty must be a nation’s highest priority because without full control over its own affairs, any political reform is meaningless, as it would be vulnerable to external manipulation and incapable of truly reflecting the people’s will.
With a rapidly growing population of over 120 million and a growing economy, Ethiopia’s strategic ambition for maritime access and historical claims to Eritrean coastal territories challenge Eritrea’s independence and territorial integrity. Despite assurances of peaceful intent, Ethiopia’s military capabilities and pursuit of sea access fuel concerns over potential future conflicts. Additionally, the historical enmity and border disputes with the Tigray region in Ethiopia pose a significant threat to Eritrea. It is, therefore, reasonable to conclude that Eritrea’s sovereignty faces an ongoing threat from Ethiopia. Regardless of whether this threat is real or merely perceived, it is substantial enough to warrant the implementation of measures to mitigate its potential impact if it were to arise.
Therefore, it can be readily asserted that the persistent threat from its neighbor, mistrust of outsiders, and emphasis on self-reliance shape the nation’s decision-making framework and underscore the critical importance of prioritizing national defense. This has led to compulsory military service and a relatively large army to protect its hard-earned independence and sovereignty. As evidenced by its relative stability—standing apart from its turbulent neighbors, such as Ethiopia, which is grappling with fragile unity; Sudan, which is embroiled in a protracted civil war; Somalia, which is engaged in a long-standing conflict against al-Shabab; and Yemen, which is plagued by the Al Houthi insurgency—Eritrea remains an outlier in the region and has largely avoided such turmoil. It goes without saying that the nation’s government may justifiably view its system of governance as crucial for ensuring national security and fostering development.
It is hard to argue the fact that Eritrea plays a positive role in the region, leveraging its domestic stability to spearhead diplomatic initiatives aimed at fostering collaborative relationships with neighboring countries. These initiatives strengthen regional ties, promote harmony, and nurture a climate of mutual understanding and peace. In October 2024, Eritrea, Somalia, and Egypt held a trilateral meeting, that was called and hosted by Eritrea, to strengthen regional cooperation. Eritrea has also supported Somalia’s National Army with training assistance, a contribution acknowledged by Somalia’s president as vital for regional stability.
Although Eritrea has significant potential to contribute positively to regional stability, misguided policy recommendations persist in shaping foreign policy discussions. These flawed approaches risk undermining the progress needed to build effective United States foreign relations. For instance, some of the recent policy recommendations to the incoming Trump administration include calls for U.S. Department of the Treasury to tighten sanctions, for U.S. State Department to undermine its partnerships with other nations, and for the U.S. Congress to authorize funding to support regime change.
The proposal for increased sanctions overlooks their ineffectiveness and the disproportionate harm they inflict on civilians. Sanctions often exacerbate economic instability, leading to increased poverty and hardship, which can drive higher rates of emigration and contribute to refugee and migration crises as individuals seek better opportunities or escape deteriorating conditions.
Moreover, pressuring nations to sever ties with Eritrea overlooks the region’s complex geopolitical landscape. Such an approach risks pushing Eritrea closer to non-Western powers. Currently, very few nations have influence on Eritrea and probably none are from the West. Diplomatic initiatives that foster collaboration with the West and the neighboring countries, particularly with Ethiopia, would be a better policy recommendation.
Regime change efforts have often proven ineffective, as they frequently result in prolonged civil wars, weakened state institutions, and unintended humanitarian crises, as seen in Iraq, Libya, and Afghanistan. It also undermines Eritrean sovereignty and the right of its people to shape their own political future. Such actions also exacerbate Eritrea’s long-standing distrust of foreign interference, fueling resentment and deepening animosity between local population and the United States. U.S. can work towards a more constructive relationship with Eritrea by acknowledging its historical context, respecting its sovereignty, acknowledging its legitimate security concerns, and focusing on mutual interests.
In conclusion, Eritrea, often misunderstood and labeled negatively, plays a pivotal role in maintaining stability within the Horn of Africa. Its intricate history, geopolitical dynamics, and security challenges necessitate a nuanced approach to comprehending its actions and policies. Flawed policy recommendations, such as regime change or imposing sanctions, could further exacerbate regional instability and impede progress toward peace and development. A meticulously balanced strategy, which aligns strategic interests with ethical engagement, offers significant potential advantages for Eritrea, the wider Horn of Africa, and the United States. As the Horn of Africa’s geopolitical landscape undergoes continuous evolution, Eritrea’s potential as a partner in regional stability should not be overlooked.
